Originally posted by Lord UrizenFirst I want to say that you sound very intelligent and rational the way you debate. I feel that i might find much success in learning and debating with a person like yourself......
I never forgot. I am aware how Christians were thrown into the Lions during Roman times, how Saint Joan of Arc was burnt alive at the stake, how Christians in China are like...woah...outlawed.
NO one should be punished or oppressed for thier Faith. Everyone has the right to beleive whatever they want...i really hate debating religion for the most part because it in itself, in my opinion, is truly subjective and there's no winning when it comes to "whose religion or beleif is right or wrong"
However, despite your beleifs, you, myself, or anyone else do not have the right to impede on the freedoms and civil rights of other people.
Question I must ask you. I asked someone else *punker* but he declined to answer out of his anger, possible frustration, and possibly he just didnt know how to answer it....here it goes.
If with a simple command you could permanately ban gay marriage. would you do so ?
Well, I'm not sure what this has to do with the topic at hand, but ok. I'm uncomfortable with dictatorial fiats, but I would vote for such a ban. Although, what I really see it as is simply defining marriage. A marriage is a union of a man and a woman (and I think that gays have the right to find such a union if they want to, I just kinda doubt that they desire that). "Gay marriage" in my mind just isn't marriage. If two people want to live together that's up to them, if they want to do other things - their choice. Basically I think it's every persons choice if they want to go to hell or not. I'm just saying let's not call a cow a horse; a cow is a cow and a horse is a horse.
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I understand, btu remember. Atheism was not acceptable at that time. You HAD to beleive in God and go by religion over all, whether you were a common person or even President. He had no choice but to include religion as a way to sway people.I'm sure he did beleive in a Supreme Being, but he did not think that it should dominate the way you think. Watch History Channel and try to catch that free mason topic, they discuss both GW and Benjamin Franklyn. It's not an issue of right or wrong for me, its just very interesting, and i thnk its a mind opener in many ways.
Atheism wasn't really rejected, it just wasn't really contemplated back then. The atheist line of thought didn't really start to pick up steam until Darwin published his book in the 1850's. Even then it was pretty slow going until the past century.
Freemasons are an interesting group. they have little to do with religion at all, in fact there are freemasons of just about every religion.
Washington left us little of his own religious views, some people think he was an episcopalian, some think he was a deist. But from a few of his writings, I do think he was religious in some way. Here's a quote from the farewell address: "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports."
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Personally I hope there is a Heaven, and you made a very good argument about it.I consider myself either Agnostic or a "Universal" Christian....those are the Christians who beleive that every1 goes to Heaven, or atleast that most people do, and do not truly beleive in Hell for anyone.
Remember this: I grew up Christian, i am very familiar with the Bible. I am very familiar with Catholicism and Evangelicalism. For many a reason I have turned away from organized religion. I did not 100% abandoned my Faith in God or any supreme being, i ONLY call upon him or her when someone i love is in danger. Other than that, i personally have no need for a god. I don't feel I need a god to feel better about myself, I love myself enough, i don't need one to help me make any choices, i beleive in my right to make my own mistakes, successes and failures.......
The Bible and any religion in general is too limitted for me. I dislike limits. I feel the only limit should be DO NOT HARM ANOTHER PERSON....
to me harm comes in 3 forms: Murder, Torture, and Control...
those 3 aspects of behavior to me are TRUE sin......everything else we do is a mistake of human character.
Thanks, that really is what I think heaven is all about. The more we can recieve the more we will, we just have to be ready for it.
Well, I guess it's like they say, "there are no atheists in the foxholes". We all hope there is something bigger when we, or loved ones are in trouble.
As for your views on sin, pretty consistent with the 10 commandments. The last six pretty much deal exclusively with that.
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Yes, but over all Faith is the beleif in something that you are not totally sure of. It's the beleif in God even though he may not be there, in this case. It's fine to have that. By all means stick with your Faith.But you cannot call it "Faith" if you KNOW that God is real and that the Bible is 100% correct. If you TRULY KNOW this , then its not Faith. It's KNOWLEDGE.
That would be like saying "I have Faith that the Earth is round", or "I have Faith that 10 + 10 = 20"......If you ABSOLUTELY KNOW something to be true, you don't need Faith to back your knowledge up.
Take care man
right, and I would rather have knowledge than faith. But in my view, faith is subject to knowledge. To put in scientific language - Faith is to knowledge what a hypothesis is to obervations. We might not know perfectly, but we have some idea of what should be.
Originally posted by docb77
Well, I'm not sure what this has to do with the topic at hand, but ok. I'm uncomfortable with dictatorial fiats, but I would vote for such a ban. Although, what I really see it as is simply defining marriage. A marriage is a union of a man and a woman (and I think that gays have the right to find such a union if they want to, I just kinda doubt that they desire that). "Gay marriage" in my mind just isn't marriage. If two people want to live together that's up to them, if they want to do other things - their choice. Basically I think it's every persons choice if they want to go to hell or not. I'm just saying let's not call a cow a horse; a cow is a cow and a horse is a horse.
Okay...let me enlighten you a little bit.
I am bisexual. I know what's its like to be attracted to both men and women. You say you don't think gays want to really be married in the long run.
BIG MISTAKE you are making. you are going by the stereotype of gays, that whole permiscuity deal, and its an UNFAIR and incorrect stereotype.
You don't like people stereotyping Christians correct? then please dont do the same to gays.
You really have no idea about this do you? You must have never been acquainted with a gay person then.
Gays and Lesbians are capable of loving each other the same way you heteros are.
There are gay people who would die for his or her lover.
I have been STRONGLY in love with another man....you have no idea. Two years ago to be exact. Nothing ever happened, it didnt work out, but even until this day i feel that love...its fading yes...but i was heartbroken. I felt like killing myself almost. I really did love him. But I'm a guy you say....so what. I happen to be attracted to other men as well. I have had crushes on women, but they were never as strong.
I loved this guy more than i ever loved anyone. I'm not obsessed...ive let him go. But if he ever came back into my life....i duno how i would react. I have never liked anyone that much. I would remain with him for the rest of my life if i had the chance, no lie.
My freind, you are SEVERELY mistaken in your idea of gay people. PLEASE get to know a few gay people before you belive something like that. Its unfair that you could think that.
On top of that if you would vote for the ban, then no matter how you see it....you are limitting the freedom of many people, and who are you to do that? What gives you the right to ruin the happiness someone else might have ? That is a violation of FREE WILL and civil rights in general.
Explain to me how you could do that to someone without remourse? Take away thier privelage ????????
Originally posted by docb77
As far as what religion or the bible has done to improve the world... Have you studied history at all? The world before Abraham pretty much sucked. Slavery bigtime worse than anything we've had in america. Human sacrifice, usually slaves and children. Superstitions, ignorance, power being held only by a few, and no upward mobility. People worshipped statues for crying out loud.
Umm...ummm...
First, chnages in slavery were due towards shifting social policy. American slaves were mostyl agricultural slaves. Their lives would have likely been the same as agricultural slaves in the bible. Slaves for manual labor are different. Chirstians still execute people. Today, its just your superstitions, ignorance, and power held only by a few. And UPWARD MOBILITY???? Have you studied serfdom? How about mideval religous theory. It was all about keeping people down. Things like capitalism, communism, and beauraccracy create upward mobility. Religion should have nothing to do with social standing.
And you worship an invisible being and believe a fictional book is true. Thats as rediculous if not moreso than worshipping statues. Many christians pray to a cross. Is this not the same?
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Okay...let me enlighten you a little bit.I am bisexual. I know what's its like to be attracted to both men and women. You say you don't think gays want to really be married in the long run.
BIG MISTAKE you are making. you are going by the stereotype of gays, that whole permiscuity deal, and its an UNFAIR and incorrect stereotype.
You don't like people stereotyping Christians correct? then please dont do the same to gays.
You really have no idea about this do you? You must have never been acquainted with a gay person then.
Gays and Lesbians are capable of loving each other the same way you heteros are.
There are gay people who would die for his or her lover.
I have been STRONGLY in love with another man....you have no idea. Two years ago to be exact. Nothing ever happened, it didnt work out, but even until this day i feel that love...its fading yes...but i was heartbroken. I felt like killing myself almost. I really did love him. But I'm a guy you say....so what. I happen to be attracted to other men as well. I have had crushes on women, but they were never as strong.
I loved this guy more than i ever loved anyone. I'm not obsessed...ive let him go. But if he ever came back into my life....i duno how i would react. I have never liked anyone that much. I would remain with him for the rest of my life if i had the chance, no lie.
My freind, you are SEVERELY mistaken in your idea of gay people. PLEASE get to know a few gay people before you belive something like that. Its unfair that you could think that.
On top of that if you would vote for the ban, then no matter how you see it....you are limitting the freedom of many people, and who are you to do that? What gives you the right to ruin the happiness someone else might have ? That is a violation of FREE WILL and civil rights in general.
Explain to me how you could do that to someone without remourse? Take away thier privelage ????????
OK, I think you misunderstood something I said. I never said that they didn't want to commit to other people. What I said is that I don't see that commitment as a marriage. I see marriage as being between a man and a woman. My parenthetical coment was just to say that a gay or lesbian would probably not be interested in a commited relationship with a person of the opposite gender. But they do have the right to it if they ever chose to make use of it.
I have had gay friends, and they knew that I didn't approve of their lifestyle, but we still got along just fine.
All I'm saying is you can't call something that isn't marriage a marriage. The states that are making civil unions an option - that's fine. Marriage should be more than just a tax shelter with civil benefits anyways.
I guess my horse and cow analogy kinda sucked let me try another one. In jewlery you've got diamonds and you've got cubic zirconium. They look almost identical, but it would be incorrect to call the cubic zirconium a diamond. The diamond is made of carbon, the cubic zirconia isn't. just like the marriage is between two people of the opposite sex, while a gay relationship isn't. They look similar, but they aren't the same thing.
That analogy was even worse.
You are promoting a "seperate but equal" ordeal.
They used to do that to blacks. They used to ban blacks from marrying each other, than ban blacks from marrying whites.
You think doing the same to gay people is any different ?
and the CONCEPT and TRADITION of marriage is more important that the happiness of a large number of people ?
Your basically saying that marriage, a non living thing, is more important and unworthy for gay people to have, just because your bias makes you see something else.
Beleive what you want...however, what gives you the RIGHT to bar two gay people from getting married? You never actually answered the question.
Originally posted by docb77
Well, I'm not sure what this has to do with the topic at hand, but ok. I'm uncomfortable with dictatorial fiats, but I would vote for such a ban. Although, what I really see it as is simply defining marriage. A marriage is a union of a man and a woman (and I think that gays have the right to find such a union if they want to, I just kinda doubt that they desire that). "Gay marriage" in my mind just isn't marriage. If two people want to live together that's up to them, if they want to do other things - their choice. Basically I think it's every persons choice if they want to go to hell or not. I'm just saying let's not call a cow a horse; a cow is a cow and a horse is a horse.
Sorry for dp, but I had to respond.
Maybe you don't know what cows and horses are?
Like Urizen, you should get to know some homosexuals before you pass judgements on their opinions.
Many of the arguments you said Christians also used against interracial marrages and against balcks in the US. YOu just haven't had people with moral sense help you out yet.
Gay marriage is NOT a religious issue. There are two type of marriages, religious and civil. THe relgious ceremony is preformed by a priest and is only important to the couple persoanally. Civil marriages involve getting a marriage liscence and validate your marriage in the state and federal government.
Now, gay couples don't give a damn what churches do. THe main problem here is that many gay couples do not have equal rights, even though they have equal relationships (steady, living together, children) to stiaght couples.
Because they don't have a civil marriage, they lack certain rights. They lack hospital visitation rights, they lack tax rights, they lack joint property rights, they lack shared custody rights.
Now, are you an AMERICAN? Because Americans believe in equal justice under the law. Is this equal? NO! its not and its discriminatory. Churches can do whatever the hell they wish. The most important thing is they need the smae civil marrage that stright couples get.
And as a side note, (as Urizen mentioned) its called LOVE. Maybe if you get out in the world someday and open your eyes, you'll see that your opinion is UNAMERICAN and persoanlly, INHUMAN.
Originally posted by docb77
I guess my horse and cow analogy kinda sucked let me try another one. In jewlery you've got diamonds and you've got cubic zirconium. They look almost identical, but it would be incorrect to call the cubic zirconium a diamond. The diamond is made of carbon, the cubic zirconia isn't. just like the marriage is between two people of the opposite sex, while a gay relationship isn't. They look similar, but they aren't the same thing.
heres some equations:
1 human = 1 human
1 human + 1 human = 1 relationship/marriage
can 1 human + 1 human equal anything other thatn 1 marriage?
If it does, you're discriminitory and believe that all men are not created equal.
I will post my response in this thread:
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=351938&highlight=gay+marriage
OK, the response is here:
Originally posted by debbiejo
Only according to the Bible......Now god being all loving certainly would make sure we had many sources along with a loud voice to make sure we would know the true religion....Since god HAS NOT, then either A. He doesn't care, or B. It doesn't matter or C. He's a nasty masochist who plays with us for his entertainment just to throw us in hell...
* the Bible is known all over the world, translated in various languages and dialects you can understand, we also have the technology to look up for the original versions in Hebrew and Greek languages, what more could you ask for? seems to me, you gotta go and read the Bible first before blaming God to be uncaring and a nasty masochist... 😕
Originally posted by peejaydThis is the original.
* the Bible is known all over the world, translated in various languages and dialects you can understand, we also have the technology to look up for the original versions in Hebrew and Greek languages, what more could you ask for? seems to me, you gotta go and read the Bible first before blaming God to be uncaring and a nasty masochist... 😕
http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible2.htm
As for the original Greek, there is none....the Greek we have today is actually translated from Latin, the language of the Roman Catholic church which translated back to Greek.....Now the Vatican swears it HAS the originals, but then never ever show, displays, or proves that it does. Irenaeus also wrote what Christianity did not include, and in this way Christianity became an orthodox faith.
Originally posted by debbiejo
This is the original.http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible2.htm
As for the original Greek, there is none....the Greek we have today is actually translated from Latin, the language of the Roman Catholic church which translated back to Greek.....Now the Vatican swears it HAS the originals, but then never ever show, displays, or proves that it does. Irenaeus also wrote what Christianity did not include, and in this way Christianity became an orthodox faith.
Actually since the bible wasn't even a discrete book until about 300 AD. we have bits and pieces of a lot of stuff. I read that the earliest fragment was a piece of a verse from John that dated to the 2nd century. And while the originals of the new testament were mostly greek, some were actually aramaic (Mark I think, could be wrong there). We don't have any of the originals, but a few fragments have been found that do predate the organization of the Catholic church(late 4th century)