Anti-Gay Marriage Constitutional Amendments?

[NeoZeedeater]

You see, even if you are a relegion minor, which again I have much respect for, you're still on the outside looking in. I, on the other hand, am inside looking around.

With regards to opinions on religion in general, I would trust the person who has studied as many world religions as possible yet practices none of them. Most that practice a religion are going to believe theirs is the single correct one so there is little chance of them viewing religion in general from an objective point of view.

[Frogacuda]

So, my initial comment stands. Compared to myown, you really do have little and poor knowledge of what it is Christianity is all about.

Except that wasn't your initial comment. You said I had "extremely limited and downright poor knowledge of all things relegious" which is a load of shit. I never said I know more about Christianity than you. I would never make such a stupid claim. But I do have well rounded knowledge of religion in general, and I'm not ignorant to the teachings of Christianity. Don't write me off as some cynical smart-ass who scoffs at religion, because it is FAR from the truth. I have a great deal of respect for religion and I consider it very important, and I actively persue religious learning.

Incedentally, I've studied nearly all of the relegions you have, but unlike you, I don't pretend to know as much about them as someone who devoutly practices them.

When have I ever pretended to know more about any religion than someone who practices? I just claimed to be less than ignorant.

You don't seem to do this, at least in so far as you've been interacting with Christians here at TNL.

Bear in mind I say alot of things for the sake of debate that I don't neccessarily agree with, because it's regarding a point that I find contentious. i.e. I mean it as an objection, not an answer. (I'm a philosophy major, btw... debate goes hand in hand with that).

Even in this thread I added the disclaimer to my post that I don't consider what I said an attack on christianity, but a defense of science. You are not a scientist (nor do I claim to be) and all the bible in the world doesn't make you any more qualified with regard to your objection to natrual selection posted in this thread. That's what I was trying to drive home. Not debunking creationism. I have no intrest in debunking creationism. I just wanted to contest the notion that randomness is a neccessary component of the scientific account of the universe. It's not. And accepting that it's not doesn't threaten Christian doctrine in any way.

Keep in mind we both have our biases, as you have a particular aversion to Christianity, while I have a particular aversion to secular philosophy.

I have no such aversion. Perhaps you're confusing my rants against the religious right as attacks on the religious aspect. They're not. They're attacks on the political aspect.

And when you say you have an aversion to secular philosophy, do you mean the sum total of philosophy independant of the church, or do you mean the contemporary philosophy of secularity? Because I find an aversion to the former, which includes all of logic, debate, ethical theory, political philosophy, etc to be somewhat worrysome... I wouldn't even know how to begin debating with someone who didn't beleive in the ability to conclude things through reason alone.

[bbobb]

No, no confusion. It's definitely you.

Studying about relegion in a academic environment is hardly "studying relegion," though admitting your relegion minor has garnered a bit more respect from myself. And though you are correct that we've never debated on the topic of anything at all, let alone creationism, that doesn't mean I am wholely unaware of the majority of posts you've made addressing this topic. I've read them, and I've chosen not to respond to them. I am well aware of certain misconceptions you've cited, as well as a general misunderstanding of what Christianity is, and what Christians believe.

I, myself, am an ordained Reverand (I've been mentioning this one a lot recently, but it seems as though not as many people on these here forums know this as I had initially expected), and so feel confident in my ability to comment correctly on this matter. You see, even if you are a relegion minor, which again I have much respect for, you're still on the outside looking in. I, on the other hand, am inside looking around. I stand a much better chance, when the same item is given to both of us to examine, of gaining a correct insight and understanding, and subsequent teaching, on the topic, because not only am I observing it with a profound knowledge and insight into Christianity, but I am able to rationally and reasonably understand the motivations behind such beliefs, as I am a part of the Christian culture.

Keep in mind we both have our biases, as you have a particular aversion to Christianity, while I have a particular aversion to secular philosophy.

So, my initial comment stands. Compared to myown, you really do have little and poor knowledge of what it is Christianity is all about. I'm sorry if this offends you, but that's just the way it is. And I still doubt you are aware of "most" of the arguments that Christians adhere to.

Incedentally, I've studied nearly all of the relegions you have, but unlike you, I don't pretend to know as much about them as someone who devoutly practices them. I know I have much more to learn from someone of any particular faith than any given scholar or professor, and as such, I understand my information may very well be incomplete, or totally incorrect for that matter. To this end, I discuss my knowledge with members of any given faith when given the chance, totally expecting for my information to change and morph into a more correct, more clear view of their faith. You don't seem to do this, at least in so far as you've been interacting with Christians here at TNL.

I was going to go into a long winded rant about this, but then I see Frog did a decent job of it. So I'm just going to go with STFU.

[g0zen]

There you go. Do you, perhaps, see it now?? I chose my bolding carefully to help in the process... That's the constitution g0zen is going by...

Am I a communist or a witch? Because you seem equally ready to burn me at the stake for not sharing your views on religion or how to interpret the First Amendment. I'm glad you're just a zealot on a message board and not someone with social or political influence.

[Master of 7s]

Not to agree with master of 7s or anything but the bad treatment of african americans in the past is abused in current gay politics. Yes, both deserve to have rights, the same as any other person alive, but it really feels that some groups are only using the history of slavery and the hard work of african americans to gain equality, for it's shock value.

It is wrong to use the pain of another group to get what you want. When you do that you are using it as a tool and devalueing everything that group went through.

Gay people deserve equal rights because of the logic of it, not because someone else who didn't have rights got hanged and forced into a life of slavery. One does not make the other wrong, logic makes both wrong.

You said exactly what I was trying to get across Iron Plant. Thank you, at least there is ONE critical thinker in this thread.

And I like someone to point where I said gays shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else. I wholeheartedly stood in agreement with the idea that the government should take itself out of the whole process of marriage and leave it with the church where it belongs.

[DOVESKI]

Jesus never mentioned homosexuality. I mean, really.

[Master of 7s]

Boo fucking hoo.

So just because your parents and grandparents were discriminated against, you think it gives you the right to discriminate against another group of people?

...what I'm talking about is how my grandparents' struggle for equality is being used as a damn leveraging tool to push some fucking political agenda while completely disregarding the pain, suffering, and emotional baggage that came along with it..

READING COMPREHENSION GET!!!

I'd rather sound like an insensitive idiot than a hypocritical bigot.

Yeah, my best friend is gay, my homegirl is gay and I frequently visit two dearly loved gay family friends and I'm a hypocritical bigot. OK. Judge much based on nothing do you?

You should probably bitch and moan less and attempt to justify your argument that blacks should be more equal than gays more.

That was never my argument, that's what you came up with in your head. Try actually READING what I wrote next time. I said the struggle is not the same and shouldn't be compared not that one was inherently better than the other.

[g0zen]

I don't think the gay rights and black rights movements have much in common, only the prejudice and arguments made against them. If you can't see parallels between the arguments for segregation and prohibiting gay marriage, then you don't know enough about the issue.

[burgundy]

(to Master of 7s) You have a point about that last line. That said, you haven't explained just why the two struggles are so different as to be incomparable. The movement for racial equality is about as much of a "fucking political agenda" as the movement for sexual orientation equality.

I don't think the gay rights and black rights movements have much in common, only the prejudice and arguments made against them. If you can't see parallels between the arguments for segregation and prohibiting gay marriage, then you don't know enough about the issue.

Are they different in the details? Sure.

Are they both about minorities that are treated unequally and unfairly under the law? Absolutely.

Gays don't need to sit in at soup kitchens and boycott buses to make the comparison.

[Master of 7s]

If you understand the pain of discrimination then you should more easily empathise with another minority being discriminated against. Otherwise, it makes YOUR discrimination worse because it shows you only care about discrimination when it's target at people you identify with and therefore you're a self-serving bigot.

I DO empathize, that's why so many of the people I love are gay.

Aparthied banned the marriage of two responsible adults simply because they produced different amounts of melanin, how is that different to banning the marriage of two responsible adults simply because they have the same set of chromosome 23?

There is no difference, I thought that was obvious. The United States government outlawed marriage between certain types of adults not to long ago and now Bush is trying to pull the same bullshit using God as an excuse. I never said I agreed with it, I said that the government needs to take God's name out of the whole process and just deal with the legal aspect of marriage and leave the rest to the churches. Ultimately that is all this is about anyway. Gays gaining the same legal rights as partners that any married heterosexual couple gained by saying "I DO". I have no problem with this. Just keep God's name out of it.

You believe that everyone is equal (different but deserves equal rights) or not. Decide, or fuck off and shut up.

I have decided.

I decided the day my best friend told me he prefers dudes and I said "...................Ok, whatever. We're still friends."

I decided whenever I lovingly embrace my gay family friend and his lover as brothers and fellow human beings.

I decided whenever I console my homegirl because her girlfriend is being a prissy bitch.

You don't know me or what I am to a lot people whom I love and whom love me. So you are in no position to judge me. Now kindly shut up.