Homosexuality is detrimental and ultimately destructive

[spragger]

Here's some food for thought...

Some states in the US had anti-miscegenation laws on the books as recently as 1967. The rhetoric behind anti-miscegenation laws was similar to the rhetoric we're hearing about gay marriage, that it's supposedly unnatural, against God's will, and detrimental to society and the institution of marriage....

And don't forget how integration was all going to make us communists. Now it's allowing gay marriage that is going to make us all socialists. Everybody run for your lives! :roll:

[Terrie]

See, I always forget about her until she pops back up with yet another thread titled "I understand now". And I should remember her since she has sent me several horrible offensive messages. LOL. She is the one who wanted praise for smiling at somebody who might have been gay, right?

Yep, that would be her. I suppose smiling at someone who might be gay is a step above spitting on someone you know is gay, but it's hardly a grand achievement. It's like saying "Today, I didn't kill anyone. Where's my pat on the back?"

[formergothardite]

Here's some food for thought...

Some states in the US had anti-miscegenation laws on the books as recently as 1967. The rhetoric behind anti-miscegenation laws was similar to the rhetoric we're hearing about gay marriage, that it's supposedly unnatural, against God's will, and detrimental to society and the institution of marriage....

And look how far we have come! So I do have some hope that in 40 years or so people would be shocked at someone entering a discussion to claim that gay marriage shouldn't be legal. And I also hope that at that point the idea of using history as a good excuse to discriminate against women will be as frowned upon as much as doing that to justify discriminating against black people is now.

[Witsec1]

True I did delete the original post last night. It had personal information about my mom and I regret posting it. I don't want her life to be mocked on a forum because I was stupid to write anything about her or my father.

The irony is that if you had just deleted the part about your parents being divorced I don't think I would have noticed. But you deleted the whole thing, even the bit I quoted. Which still makes no sense. And I think you missed the point about why gay marriage was being compared to remarriage after divorce. It wasn't to mock people who have divorced and remarried.

[shesinsane]

I wonder why is Kirk allowed to get away with his comments?

Because he's a has-been trying to get attention by saying something controversial. He's not any sort of leader, so he's not representing anyone but himself. He's not working, so he can't be mistaken for representing the views of his movie/tv series, and it's likely his blatant homophobia will keep him from being considered for any roles that could launch his comeback.

Ok, maybe he speaks for his family, but that's it. It's not like he's got advertisers to lose or producers to piss off.

[thoughtful]

Because he's a has-been trying to get attention by saying something controversial. He's not any sort of leader, so he's not representing anyone but himself. He's not working, so he can't be mistaken for representing the views of his movie/tv series, and it's likely his blatant homophobia will keep him from being considered for any roles that could launch his comeback.

Ok, maybe he speaks for his family, but that's it. It's not like he's got advertisers to lose or producers to piss off.

Actually, he is working, but he is working for people who believe the same nasty nonsense he does.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0131647/

[shesinsane]

Actually, he is working, but he is working for people who believe the same nasty nonsense he does.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0131647/

Alright, so the people he works for agree with him, and he's too insignficant for the rest of us to care about. That's why he's getting a pass.

[CC3]

The irony is that if you had just deleted the part about your parents being divorced I don't think I would have noticed. But you deleted the whole thing, even the bit I quoted. Which still makes no sense. And I think you missed the point about why gay marriage was being compared to remarriage after divorce. It wasn't to mock people who have divorced and remarried.

I understand the point. You were not the only one who made the comparison of remarried divorced people and gay marriage. I objected to Raging w R using the my mother in his/her postings.

edited for clarity

[formergothardite]

Are you ever going to answer any of the othe questions?

[Witsec7]

CC3, you posted that each of your parents were married and divorced and that they were both on #3. There is also the wayback machine, cause the internetz never forget. Most of us can accept that your life was marked by multiple parental divorces. Your posts speak to that. But, TBS, has no bearing on your admittedly hypocritical views on gay marriage, even if you had gay parents.

Again I'll ask, what impact has gay marriage had upon your own marriage. Its certainly a question I've asked at least eleventy times without an answer.

[lilwriter85]

Actually, he is working, but he is working for people who believe the same nasty nonsense he does.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0131647/

Yup that is what he is doing and he will probably do for th rest of his life. Kirk probably won't work on any mainstream TV show or movie again. He has a lot of enemies in Hollywood.

[formergothardite]

CC3, you posted that each of your parents were married and divorced and that they were both on #3. There is also the wayback machine, cause the internetz never forget. Most of us can accept that your life was marked by multiple parental divorces. Your posts speak to that. But, TBS, has no bearing on your admittedly hypocritical views on gay marriage, even if you had gay parents.

Again I'll ask, what impact has gay marriage had upon your own marriage. Its certainly a question I've asked at least eleventy times without an answer.

She wrote this as a reply a couple pages back, which, I'm going to sound dumb here, but what program is she talking about?

I was asked how gay marriages affect me personally. Other than paying toward entitlement programs, I don't see how gay marriage would affect me.

[formergothardite]

From what I'm getting here CC3, it is all about God and following the Bible with you, until you don't happen to like what the Bible says and you think God messed up, then it's okay to just drop it and do what you want. So why doesn't this apply to gay people? Why are we supposed to obey the Bible in that aspect, but not in the divorce aspect?

[Witsec7]

She wrote this as a reply a couple pages back, which, I'm going to sound dumb here, but what program is she talking about?

I was asked how gay marriages affect me personally. Other than paying toward entitlement programs, I don't see how gay marriage would affect me.

I don't consider that an answer until she gets specific and identifies these 'entitlement' programs.

[formergothardite]

See, I thought everyone else knew what the entitlement programs were. LOL. Yeah, she needs to be more specific, but answering questions honestly seems to be an issue with her.

[freejoytoo]

I hate Piers Morgan SO much.

[CC3]

I really wish conservatives, etc. could just be okay with the idea that they are going to be uncomfortable at times with things that are not familiar to them. They automatically go to the response that if they do not agree, do not live their lives that way, then the other person who does is doing something immoral. They are acting out of fear, which leads to hate and bigotry.

I grew up in a very small town with all white and (supposedly) straight people. When I moved I was really freaked out by things, but I was okay with that. And I am an example of somebody who was truly homophobic--not in a hateful way at all, or even judgmental--I just felt very nervous and panicky around gay people, and it is because I had not yet recognized or accepted that I am gay. It really just never occurred to me that I could be. I just grew up in a bubble where everybody went to a Baptist church, was straight, and white. I look back on it and laugh because as soon as I realized it, all of the anxiety I had around gay people completely disappeared. It took me only a few months to realize interracial relationships were not uncommon. It was never a moral issue, just fear of the unknown.

I think that is what is going on with CC3. She is used to being around divorced people, so she can see them as real people, and have compassion for them. This is why it's a shame that more people are not out, or don't feel safe living openly. I think there is just something in the fundie brain that does not allow for things that are "other." Am I going to excuse them for their behavior? HELL NO. A lot of them are very intelligent, and there is no excuse for the way they are trying to impose their personal agenda on my civil rights. I do hold out hope that we will win out in the long run. (Maybe I'm too optimistic?)

When all is said and done on this thread, I think this is the real problem. In order for you to win, someone needs to lose.

The following link states my beliefs much clearer than I have done last night.

http://www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/homosex.htm

One other issue bothers me about FJ threads. Here I used the bold key to answer a particular sentence but I left the quote intact for context. But when sentences are piecemealed out, the original context is lost. I have done this myself thinking I was saving space, but it really can be hard to follow chopped up paragraphs.

formergothardite, I don't know what questions you are talking about.

[emmiedahl]

When all is said and done on this thread, I think this is the real problem. In order for you to win, someone needs to lose.

The following link states my beliefs much clearer than I have done last night.

http://www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/homosex.htm

One other issue bothers me about FJ threads. Here I used the bold key to answer a particular sentence but I left the quote intact for context. But when sentences are piecemealed out, the original context is lost. I have done this myself thinking I was saving space, but it really can be hard to follow chopped up paragraphs.

formergothardite, I don't know what questions you are talking about.

But that's the thing CC3: you don't lose. No one loses anything. Even you have noted that gay marriage does not affect you. You lose nothing except the right to meddle in other people's love lives, and that is not really a loss if you are not already doing so.

eta: I think it is interesting that your link talks about Paul more than Jesus. Also, that Jesus is rather misquoted. Are you Christian or Paulian?

[Witsec7]

I was asked how gay marriages affect me personally. Other than paying toward entitlement programs, I don't see how gay marriage would affect me.

Several of us have asked what specific entitlement programs you refer to in the above quote. You are being a total asshat and purposely obtuse to continue to avoid answering the question.

As to your linkydink. I'm an adult with expectations, if you want to explain your POV and use a link to support it fine. But to ask us to accept someone else's writings as your own opinion is insulting.

[Witsec1]

When all is said and done on this thread, I think this is the real problem. In order for you to win, someone needs to lose.

The following link states my beliefs much clearer than I have done last night.

http://www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/homosex.htm

One other issue bothers me about FJ threads. Here I used the bold key to answer a particular sentence but I left the quote intact for context. But when sentences are piecemealed out, the original context is lost. I have done this myself thinking I was saving space, but it really can be hard to follow chopped up paragraphs.

formergothardite, I don't know what questions you are talking about.

OK, I bolded the sentence I wanted to address. Who loses when gay marriage is outlawed? Gay people who can't have all the benefits of a marriage relationship with the person they love. The loved ones and relatives of gay people, who want the best for them. And so on. Who loses when gay marriage is legal? That is the question we're asking. The only answer you have so far provided is something vague about "benefits" you will be forced to pay for. Can you be more specific?

[CC3]

Several of us have asked what specific entitlement programs you refer to in the above quote. You are being a total asshat and purposely obtuse to continue to avoid answering the question.

As to your linkydink. I'm an adult with expectations, if you want to explain your POV and use a link to support it fine. But to ask us to accept someone else's writings as your own opinion is insulting.

I don't think it's insulting. I really don't have time to write a paper for this discussion. If you want to read the link, fine. I personally agree with what is written there and don't feel the need to reinvent the wheel for you.

[Witsec1]

About your link: that's just fine. You still get to believe that, and preach it, and not allow gay people to be married in your church. You can still say man-woman marriage is the only "real" model, and the only one that makes sense for you spiritually. None of that can be changed by a law. The government cannot interfere in religious observance. I totally support freedom of religion and conscience, if the government wants to dictate what you can believe or persecute you for your religious beliefs, I will defend you.

So, how do you lose if gay marriage is legal?

[emmiedahl]

So you believe that Paul is more important than Christ?

[Witsec7]

I don't think it's insulting. I really don't have time to write a paper for this discussion. If you want to read the link, fine. I personally agree with what is written there and don't feel the need to reinvent the wheel for you.

Entitlements obtuse one, answer the fucking question.

[CC3]

So you believe that Paul is more important than Christ?

Of course not.