Is Same-Sex Marriage A Civil Right?

Like it or not, the founders of our nation were, by and large, followers of the Christion faith. The Idea of homosex were so removed from their way of thinking it never even came up as a topic worth responding to.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that it was so 'taboo' it was not even a thought to be delt with. It was then, and is now, a perverse way of life. Not worthy to be mentioned in our quest for freedom from the Throne of England.

Yes, just like its your right to worship a god and go to church.

Just like it is your right to marry, it is their right too.

You can't decide who is worthy of their civil rights based upon your religion. That is unconstitutional.

From the title of this topic, & the post of themax & Jankinonya, I can only imagine what kind of worms Bill has released now.

quote:

You can't decide who is worthy of their civil rights based upon your religion. That is unconstitutional.

Now there we agree Jank. See, not all religious people are so bad.

While I agree that same sex marriage was not condoned by law, it was only because it was so rare and never once came to be an issue in the forming of our Nation.

Perhaps I should just put it this way and be done with it.
Our Lord put, on this earth, man and woman. They were to be multiply this earth.
The way I see it is that anything other than a man and a women being together is an abomination to God.

So just count me in as one who sees man with man, and woman with women as a sin in the eyes of our Lord.

Just bank on it, and my belief on this matter will never change. Homosexuality is wrong in my eyes. And that is one subject that I will not debate on. End of discussion.

themax,

I am not asking you to like homosexuality or to condone same sex marriage. I am just saying that they have the same rights you do.

When someone tells me that they believe something to be a sin I have no problem with that. What they can't do is make it a illegal for everyone else. In other words stay straight and you will be fine. Surly your god will not judge you by others actions.

quote:

Originally posted by semiannualchick:
From the title of this topic, & the post of themax & Jankinonya, I can only imagine what kind of worms Bill has released now.

I was not surprised to see that once again Bill brought up homosexuality. He seems to be obsessed with it.

Max, the Lord has told us that it is a sin not to honor our fathers and mothers too, but we don't make a law about it. You are free to disrespect them all you want, and you won't be arrested. And I for one, will not judge you for it. It is up to God to judge you.

I feel the same way about gays. The Bible says it is wrong, but I also know that people are BORN that way. They have just as much trouble denying their sexuality as teenagers do. When you see a pregnant 15 year old, do you think she should be arrested? Of course not. Both the teenagers and the homosexuals may have sinned, but I will certainly not be the one to cast the first stone.

Many people want it both ways but only when it suites their way and their opinions. What I mean by that is they want to separate anything related to Church from the Government whether it be a plaque, of the 10 Commandments, on a wall of a court house or a Christmas display. Come to Marriage though and they want the government to be able to tell the Church what it must accept and approve of.

Marriage is defined in the Scriptures as between a man and woman and the Bible is also well clear on how it views love and sex between same sex partners. That said I truly believe that the Government should never be in a position to dictate to a pastor or Church who they must marry as that is up to the respective Church. There are some radical, liberal, Churches that have no problem Marrying same sex partners and that's up to the Church.

I have my own opinions but that's me. I do though feel that in a free society, as America is, where the Government is separate from the Church then Civil Unions should be allowed if the majority of the people vote to approve of such. For a judge though to set aside a legitimate election, as was done in California, is wrong. If a government does allow same sex unions then that is what they should be ... NOT Marriages as marriage is a religious institution as well as one recognized by the government. If people want same rights, which should be allowed by law, then it should be done in terms not addressed and reserved to the Bible and religion as marriage is.

I doubt I have worded that right but while I'm against it personally if the majority of people in a free society vote to allow same rights and civil unions then so be it by government. Don't call it marriage though and do not force churches and preachers to perform it unless their Church approves of it or they have no problems with it.

Ours (Christians), according to Scripture, is not to dictate God's laws or Judgment to others and force our way upon others but ours is to watch over our own house and as parishioners of our own Church keep our own Church according to how we view and interpret God's laws to be.

That said as free citizens ours is also the obligation to vote according to our own convictions and the result of a fair and honest, free, election should be honored in a free democratic society. I don't like our current leaders but they were elected and therefore are our legitimate accepted government so I will respect them for that reason. I feel the same applies to same sex unions.

quote:

Ours (Christians), according to Scripture, is not to dictate God's laws or Judgment to others and force our way upon others but ours is to watch over our own house and as parishioners of our own Church keep our own Church according to how we view and interpret God's laws to be.

Can I get a big blue glittery AMEN!

Agreed, ONO.

A civil union with legal rights for the partners works for me.

Yes, as a Christian, I could never be so cruel to anybody that I would deny them the right to see someone they love who is in intensive care at a hospital. That is one of the things gays are trying to secure for themselves.

And they should have that right as well as the beneficiary of insurance policies and be designated as the next of kin just like a heterosexual couple.

Big Blue Glittery!

Where does he get that thing? LOL.


A M E N!!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
I feel the same way about gays. The Bible says it is wrong, but I also know that people are BORN that way.

Hi O,

Do you have ANY proof that people are born gay? Please show us your proof.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Yes, just like its your right to worship a god and go to church. Just like it is your right to marry, it is their right too.

Hi Jan,

Yes, they have the same rights you and I. They have the right to marry and to even have children -- the same as you and I.

Today, we all can marry. But, we cannot marry children, we cannot marry our pet sheep, we cannot marry five spouses -- and we cannot marry a person of the same sex. We all have that same right under the law.

So, what's the problem?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill, you are confusing religion with law.

You can have a man and a woman marry as in the Bible, but man's laws can allow for a same sex union.

You don't have to like or accept it, but if it becomes law, it's law.

quote:

Originally posted by b50m:
Bill, you are confusing religion with law.

You can have a man and a woman marry as in the Bible, but man's laws can allow for a same sex union.

You don't have to like or accept it, but if it becomes law, it's law.

BUT, IF WE VOTE THE LIBERALS OUT - WE WILL NOT HAVE THAT PROBLEM!
DON'T FORGET TO VOTE!

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
I feel the same way about gays. The Bible says it is wrong, but I also know that people are BORN that way.

Hi O,

Do you have ANY proof that people are born gay? Please show us your proof.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill, when was it exactly that you CHOSE to be heterosexual? You've said yourself that people are "wired" one way or the other.

Have a blissed day.

I've said time and again, apparently to deaf ears - gays are NOT asking for "special rights". My partner and I, who are been together longer than most straight couples we know, do not have the same legal rights as married couples. This includes insurance benefits, tax considerations, etc. We just want the same legal rights as other married couples.

quote:

Originally posted by David L.:
I've said time and again, apparently to deaf ears - gays are NOT asking for "special rights". My partner and I, who are been together longer than most straight couples we know, do not have the same legal rights as married couples.

Hi David,

YES YOU DO! Just like me, you have the right to marry ANY woman who will have you. But, today, you cannot marry a man, nor can you marry a child, nor can you marry a sheep, nor can you have five spouses.

So, you and I have exactly the same rights. However, what you are asking for is a "special right" to do what our laws say you cannot do.

Hey, the pedophile has the same complaint! The bigamist has the same complaint. Farmer John and his sheep have the same complaint.

What is that complaint? We want to be given a "special law" -- we want to live in our own special set of rules.

So, do it! Just don't call it marriage.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi David,

YES YOU DO! Just like me, you have the right to marry ANY woman who will have you.

no they don't, because they aren't allowed to marry the adult human that they choose to.


personally , as long as no one wants to gay marry me, i don't give a monkey purple bottom what the gay people do.

bill, if you arent' gay, i don't see why you care so much?
will they go to hell? maybe. will them getting married and going to hell send you to hell?
only if you are messing around with one of them on the sly....
... so if you aren't, you don't have anythign vested in this issue.

you aren't gay, so you can't get gay married.

you arn't a woman, so you can't get breast augmentation either, .. so i really dont' care what you think abotu a boobjob anymore than i care about your thoughts on gay marriage.

this is just one mroe chance where you once again brng up another re-hashsed subject so you cna continute to spew bile and call it truth amd the word of the lord.

and you stoop to the silly with trying to equate gay marraige with beastiality ( typical fundy trick, and they can't even see how stupid it makes them look) and pedophilia and other such things already against the law.

two adult humans is the discussion. not sheep, not children. adult humans are bared from being married to the adult human of their choice, and you say they have the same rights we do.

what staggers my mind is that you probably believe that. you probably don't see anythign wrong with the idea. it makes sense to you...

' i picked the woman i wanted to marry, other men can pick the woman they want to marry. that's fair'.

lets change all pronouns to the words 'adult person.'

i picked the adult person i wanted to marry. so that adult person cna pick the adult person they want to marry.

how about that? looks good to me.

what's wrong with those words bill? anything? they seem completly fair to me.. they specify adult, which blocks pedophiles.. it specifies person, which prevents beastiality...

so we good?

ok.. someone call the press, we have the new law hammered out.
unless... unless brother bill can show us how this law isn't .. fair and equal?

can you bill?
show me.

/plays jeopardy music

Thanks thenagel, You saved me from having to explain to him the difference between humans and animals. Seems pretty obvious to most of us, but to Bill he seems to get confused on those points.

When he equates homosexuality to bestiality and pedophilia it just highlights his sick and confused mind.

Bill, please try and leave children out of this discussion. It has absolutely nothing to do with same sex marriage. Unless you want to talk about homosexuals rights to adopt children. However what you are suggesting is making me sick.

quote:

Originally posted by gbrk:
Many people want it both ways but only when it suites their way and their opinions. What I mean by that is they want to separate anything related to Church from the Government whether it be a plaque, of the 10 Commandments, on a wall of a court house or a Christmas display. Come to Marriage though and they want the government to be able to tell the Church what it must accept and approve of.

Actually, I think that most people who want religion kept out of our government and also agree with the rights of individuals to engage in same sex marriage are speaking to the same thing. As for wanting the church to approve of it, well that is something totally different. I for one could care less what your church or any other religion believes to be a sin. You don't have to accept it as a personal choice, just don't try and tell others that they can't based on your religious beliefs.

quote:

Originally posted by themax:
Perhaps I should just put it this way and be done with it.
Our Lord put, on this earth, man and woman. They were to be multiply this earth.
The way I see it is that anything other than a man and a women being together is an abomination to God.
.

then by that logic, it should be legal to marry your sister since the poopulation could not have increased if some mixing didn't go on. by your logic plural marraiges oughta be legal too since the bible is filled with authorizations directly from the lord godamighty Himself that men could kidnap virgins from conquered tribes and take them as their own. so are you in favor of plural marraiges?

quote:

Originally posted by David L.:
I've said time and again, apparently to deaf ears - gays are NOT asking for "special rights". My partner and I, who are been together longer than most straight couples we know, do not have the same legal rights as married couples. This includes insurance benefits, tax considerations, etc. We just want the same legal rights as other married couples.

dave dave dave. sorry but the bible says you must love someone else. sorry that ol yahweh made you who you are but you arejust gonna have to change so that the billy gees of the world will stop poking their noses into your sex lives. after all your sex life and who youcshoose to love are OUR business. WE get to decide that not you.

so for your and my sake, just stop loving the person you are with and start loving someone else. its as simple as that buddy.

quote:

Originally posted by semiannualchick:
From the title of this topic, & the post of themax & Jankinonya, I can only imagine what kind of worms Bill has released now.

quote:

Originally posted by Jankinonya:
I was not surprised to see that once again Bill brought up homosexuality. He seems to be obsessed with it.

And anyone that is catholic.

quote:

you arn't a woman, so you can't get breast augmentation either, ..

Ever saw Marilyn Manson in the past?

quote:

Originally posted by semiannualchick:

quote:

Originally posted by semiannualchick:
From the title of this topic, & the post of themax & Jankinonya, I can only imagine what kind of worms Bill has released now.

quote:

Originally posted by Jankinonya:
I was not surprised to see that once again Bill brought up homosexuality. He seems to be obsessed with it.

And anyone that is catholic.

jankoff,

I'm catholic I and don't support homos. Is that what you meant?

Child,

I don't care if you are catholic or not. I don't care if you support homosexuals.

Just don't stick your nose in the sexual lives of consenting adults and you will be fine. Don't try and stop those individuals that want to be married to the same sex from having the right to do so.

That is what I meant. Are we clear?

Do you agree with Bills view of the catholic church?

quote:

Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Thanks thenagel, You saved me from having to explain to him the difference between humans and animals. Seems pretty obvious to most of us, but to Bill he seems to get confused on those points.

When he equates homosexuality to bestiality and pedophilia it just highlights his sick and confused mind.

Bill, please try and leave children out of this discussion. It has absolutely nothing to do with same sex marriage. Unless you want to talk about homosexuals rights to adopt children. However what you are suggesting is making me sick.

i think it's really a subconcious cry from bill's soul, telling us he really wants to have sex with underage animals.

quote:

Originally posted by b50m:

quote:

you arn't a woman, so you can't get breast augmentation either, ..

Ever saw Marilyn Manson in the past?

Lol.. nah.. there is a rich guy that lost a bet and had the silicone implants put it..

anyone can get implants, but it doesn't mean they have boobs

if that's all it took, one quick surgury from now, and i'd never get off the sofa again

Bill, because I actually read all of your very long posts, I now ask you to read ALL of this very long and well documented post from Wikipedia. And PLEASE don't say Wiki is not a valid source! YOU have used articles from Wiki to back your assertions on several occasions too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...d_sexual_orientation

Thank you.

number of tiems Bill has posted on "gay" stuff: 187.

number of times he's posted on "homosexual" topics: 210.

knock knock! i know youre in there. come out of that closet bill!

I'm gonna play the part of the Atheist here!!! YAY!! Jank, Slim and company should love me after this one!!!

Let's remove God from this equation for a moment shall we?? ONLY SCIENCE!!! Now... remember, I am an atheist right now... I don't believe in god at all... he is a sky fairy who is a creation of man.... all things came from nothingness, and then randomness poked his head in a mixed everything up, and POOF!! it has all turned out perfectly... remember... I AM AN ANTHEIST!!!

Now... Going on pure SCIENTIFIC FACT... The ONLY possible sexual partner for a human male is a human female, and the ONLY sexual partner for a human female is a human male. No way, no how can anyone scientifically condone the union of 2 men or 2 women in a sexual act.... That's pure anatomy... NO GOD!! HE DOESNT EXIST, MORALS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT... just so we are clear once again that I'm am a science lovin atheist.... Only anatomically speaking, man goes with woman, and woman goes with man... same gender relations spits in the face of scientific facts.

Well Peter,

Being a lesbian myself;

I can see where the flicking of the guinea horn could be a source of entertainment for two females but the male on male uhh uh …..hold it a sec; that ain’t normal.

David my advice: try a female. I don’t think you will be disappointed.

quote:

Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Child,

I don't care if you are catholic or not. I don't care if you support homosexuals.

Just don't stick your nose in the sexual lives of consenting adults and you will be fine. Don't try and stop those individuals that want to be married to the same sex from having the right to do so.

That is what I meant. Are we clear?

Do you agree with Bills view of the catholic church?

jank,

Sorry, simi said that not you.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
Let's remove God from this equation for a moment shall we?? ONLY SCIENCE!!! Now... remember, I am an atheist right now... I don't believe in god at all... he is a sky fairy who is a creation of man.... all things came from nothingness, and then randomness poked his head in a mixed everything up, and POOF!! it has all turned out perfectly... remember... I AM AN ANTHEIST!!!

well ill be, he is capable of rational thought. thats promising there partner . . . i mean friend!

quote:

Now... Going on pure SCIENTIFIC FACT... The ONLY possible sexual partner for a human male is a human female, and the ONLY sexual partner for a human female is a human male. No way, no how can anyone scientifically condone the union of 2 men or 2 women in a sexual act.... That's pure anatomy... NO GOD!! HE DOESNT EXIST, MORALS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT... just so we are clear once again that I'm am a science lovin atheist.... Only anatomically speaking, man goes with woman, and woman goes with man... same gender relations spits in the face of scientific facts.

well, biologically speaking you are right, partner (umm, you know what i mean). two sexes are necessary for sexual reproduction. big duh. but from an evil-lutionary standpoint, homoism makes a lot of sense. having an extra person sticking around to nurture and care for young, help with preparing food, make the male happy seems to be good for familial stability. that's what SCIENCE says is the evolutionary reason that homoism exists in virtually all higher aminals.

quote:

Originally posted by Unobtanium:

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
Let's remove God from this equation for a moment shall we?? ONLY SCIENCE!!! Now... remember, I am an atheist right now... I don't believe in god at all... he is a sky fairy who is a creation of man.... all things came from nothingness, and then randomness poked his head in a mixed everything up, and POOF!! it has all turned out perfectly... remember... I AM AN ANTHEIST!!!

well ill be, he is capable of rational thought. thats promising there partner . . . i mean friend!

quote:

Now... Going on pure SCIENTIFIC FACT... The ONLY possible sexual partner for a human male is a human female, and the ONLY sexual partner for a human female is a human male. No way, no how can anyone scientifically condone the union of 2 men or 2 women in a sexual act.... That's pure anatomy... NO GOD!! HE DOESNT EXIST, MORALS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT... just so we are clear once again that I'm am a science lovin atheist.... Only anatomically speaking, man goes with woman, and woman goes with man... same gender relations spits in the face of scientific facts.

well, biologically speaking you are right, partner (umm, you know what i mean). two sexes are necessary for sexual reproduction. big duh. but from an evil-lutionary standpoint, homoism makes a lot of sense. having an extra person sticking around to nurture and care for young, help with preparing food, make the male happy seems to be good for familial stability. that's what SCIENCE says is the evolutionary reason that homoism exists in virtually all higher aminals.

Soooooooo... let me get this straight.... not only is homosexuality ok scientifically, but all married couples should bring in someone else to help stabilize the family situation??? LOL.... MAN.. Ya'll got an answer for everything right??? I mean, obviously science contradicts homosexuality, HOWEVER... Both science lovin atheists and homosexuals primarily reside in the leftist leaning liberal progressive area of politics and can't be at each others throats.

If I didn't think I'd get banned from the Times Daily forums, I'd simply have a little anatomy test right here so everyone, including you, could understand the simplicity of what my post meant.... I don't think, however, that I need to get that elementary with it.

MEN GO WITH WOMEN... WOMEN GO WITH MEN!!!
It's so obvious... so simple... common sense... LOGICAL PROGRESSION OF THOUGHT leads everyone to the right answer here.... The fact that we argue about such idiotic things shows that we are DEVOLVING as a human race....... NEVER... could I ever have imagined that common sense would be so lacking in society today that we can't figure out who we are supposed to have sex with..... geez folks.... they used to say we only used 10% of our brains... not being able to figure this one out shows we may only use 2%.

quote:

Originally posted by buffalo:
Well Peter,

Being a lesbian myself;

I can see where the flicking of the guinea horn could be a source of entertainment for two females but the male on male uhh uh …..hold it a sec; that ain’t normal.

David my advice: try a female. I don’t think you will be disappointed.

....uh.... wow.... I have no response to that one.... LOL... and yes David... her advice is good advice!!

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
Bill, because I actually read all of your very long posts, I now ask you to read ALL of this very long and well documented post from Wikipedia. And PLEASE don't say Wiki is not a valid source! YOU have used articles from Wiki to back your assertions on several occasions too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...d_sexual_orientation

Thank you.

Hi O,

Reading your article I find this:

Biology and sexual orientation is the subject of research into the role of biology in the development of human sexual orientation. No simple, single cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated, but research suggests that it is by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences, with biological factors involving a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment. Biological factors which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual orientation include genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure.

What I find here is a lot of "could be" - "would be" - "should be" -- and a wee bit of "may be" thrown in as a clincher. But, what I DO NOT see here is ANY proof of a "gay gene."

Yes, the Gay Activists and their strange bedfellows will give us a lot of "MAY BE" -- but, zero proof. They are telling us what they WISH to be true; but, no actual proof.

So, if it flies your kite -- go for it!

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill, you were given an article a few months ago showing genetic studies of 40 men showing a gene that all shared to be the 'gay' gene.

You also have been given psychological studies of children as young as three showing homosexual tendencies.

Now, you can pretend none of that exist and go with 'they want to be that way', or you can open your mind and go with the possibility of a genetic cause.

It's your call.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
MEN GO WITH WOMEN... WOMEN GO WITH MEN!!!.

really? gosh. thanks.

im curious, "PETER" (an apt name, btw): do you perform anyhing other than missionary position? you ever let the woman on top? That's not natural.

you ever put your lips on a woman down "there"? NOT NATURAL! that is not what lips are for!

do you ever let the woman put her lips on your private area? NOT NATURAL! that is not what a throat is for!

you ever masturbate? NOT NATURAL! that is not what a hand is for!

have you ever asked a woman if she likes her belly button licked? from the inside? NOT NATURAL!

yes, anal sex grosses me out no matter the sex but who am i or YOU to poke your nose into that? (ewww)

yes all if this is unnatural . . . . yet completely natural. and, yes, for the record, i do all this (except for the anal) as often as possible.

im asking you this assuming you've even had some sex.

so who are you to say what is "natural" or not PETER?

Bill, like you, I have a PERSONAL relationship with Jesus. The difference between me and you is that I believe OTHER people's relationship with God is also personal.

To me, if something is personal, it is no one else's business. If someone is doing something to harm others (murder, stealing, drunk driving, etc.) then we have civil laws to deal with it.

If someone is doing something that does no harm to others, whether it be a sin in God's eyes or not, it is between them and God. It is none of my business. God will judge them. I will not.

B does have a point. I'm sure Bill didn't read the whole article I posted.

I'd like to ask Bill what he thinks of that woman(?) who was in the Olympics a few years ago. As far as I know, they still, even after genetic testing, have not determined if this person is male or female.

Yes, my Friends,

I have reported Unobtanium to the TD Mods -- for civil discussions do not have to become crude. While we all are not Christians on the Religion Forum; I do believe we all respect family values and want to see this forum stay family friendly -- and not sink into the gutter as did another forum where many TD banned people went to vent their pent up vulgarity.

Possibly Unobtanium can join them on that forum and leave the TD Forums family friendly and not crude, lewd, and street talk.

Just a thought. Anyone else care to share your thoughts on this to the Mods?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill, you reported what he posted?

I was not offended by any of it. I have seen far worse than that.

My earliest memories of attraction were toward men, I've never been attracted to women sexually. There were no incidents in my childhood that "turned me gay" as Bill would have you believe. My family had the average all-American cookie-cutter image and nothing in my upbringing would suggest otherwise. I do know that there were at least 2 men back in my family line who were probably gay. I do think genetics is involved.

As for as reproduction, I don't believe that all people are put here to do that. What about people who cannot have children because of infertility? Should they be shunned as well?

Now to get back on topic:



Posted 22 September 2010 03:24 PM Hide Post
Bill, you were given an article a few months ago showing genetic studies of 40 men showing a gene that all shared to be the 'gay' gene.

You also have been given psychological studies of children as young as three showing homosexual tendencies.

Now, you can pretend none of that exist and go with 'they want to be that way', or you can open your mind and go with the possibility of a genetic cause.

It's your call.

Surely Bill G. is not looking for scientific evidence for being gay? He has no respect for science as shown in his posts regarding the age of the earth.

I guess he just goes with whatever theory justifies his beliefs.

I would say you are right, David.

There is none so blind as he who will not see.

quote:

Just a thought. Anyone else care to share your thoughts on this to the Mods

Why? we are all grown ups.
We don't need our conversations tempered... nothing offensive. He made his point.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Yes, my Friends,

I have reported Unobtanium to the TD Mods -- for civil discussions do not have to become crude.

Bill

what an obscenely dishonest view!

YOU sir are the one who seems to constantly bring up GAY SEX in your discussions. i used very family friendly words and tried not to go into details.

you didn't address any of the points i made. just who the heck are you to decide what it "normal" or not? how is it that you can stick your nose into the sex lives of other consenting adults yet refuse to talk about your own abnormal abhorrent behavior that is almost certainly just as "unnatural" as any sort of gay sex.

have you ever had anal sex bill? have you ever performed cunnilingus or had fellatio? if you want to talk about it then TALK ABOUT IT

so get off your high hose you judgmental old nosebag. if you don't like discussing GAY SEX then stop bringing up topics concerning GAY SEX.

oh and hey david? before i get banned, i'm sorry for the crap you must constantly have to put up with from a bunch of loudmouth busybodies who insist that your way of loving is not natural and thus entirely their business to instruct you exactly how you are permitted to love.

its such a ridiculous, stupid and yes OBSCENE violation of human rights that its hard to keep my cool. you've done an excellent job of defending you stance even though you should not have defend squat to penis heads like bill gray.

ooooh. i said a bad word again. i think i said "anal" earlier. suicide post! ban me! come on, do it!

bannnn meeeeeeeeee!

quote:

Originally posted by vplee123:

quote:

Just a thought. Anyone else care to share your thoughts on this to the Mods

Why? we are all grown ups.
We don't need our conversations tempered... nothing offensive. He made his point.

I do too need banning! I said "anal" in a discussion about "unnatural" sex! i have sinned before the eyes of the mods and th most holy of holy men bill gray! I deserve my punishment! please, dear mods, ban me before i am compelled to even THINK about bill gray having sex with anything! no matter what picture i envision, it is an ABOMINATION UNTO MINE EYES!

oh god, i just envisinoed bill gay having gay sex with carrot top! rip my eyes from their sockets!

bannn meeeeee please!

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
Bill, like you, I have a PERSONAL relationship with Jesus. The difference between me and you is that I believe OTHER people's relationship with God is also personal.

To me, if something is personal, it is no one else's business. If someone is doing something to harm others (murder, stealing, drunk driving, etc.) then we have civil laws to deal with it.

If someone is doing something that does no harm to others, whether it be a sin in God's eyes or not, it is between them and God. It is none of my business. God will judge them. I will not.

Hi O,

To side step the clutter which has already infested this discussion; take a look at the new discussion titled "Should We Leave Our Christian Coat In The Closet During The Week?"

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Wow... I leave for a couple of hours and BOOM!! I miss all the action!! lol

I did think you entered into details that probably wouldve best been left to the imagination, but I wouldtve reported you for it. And whereas I appreciate you letting us in on your sexual exploits, I'd rather not do the same if you don't mind. lol

But, I will say, if you see the Biblical definition of sex or the scientific definition of it, it is obvious that it is natural only when a male and female of the same species enters into it.

Leviticus Chapter 18
22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable

23 "Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is perversion.

Now, where as much of Leviticus is speaking to rules to follow so that one is not "unclean", those are primarily pertaining to the health of the overall group... Don't touch something or eat something that could make you sick, thus you spread it to the group.
However, in chapter 18, these are "perversions" of things that are blessings if done right. Things that God finds "detestable". Can you imagine what Moses was thinking when he gets told by God to pass the message along that men can't be hookin up with men... then God says... oh yeah, and animals... No hookin up with animals either.... and yes.. UNFORTUNATELY I do have to make sure ya'll know it's wrong. LOL

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
Bill, like you, I have a PERSONAL relationship with Jesus. The difference between me and you is that I believe OTHER people's relationship with God is also personal.

To me, if something is personal, it is no one else's business. If someone is doing something to harm others (murder, stealing, drunk driving, etc.) then we have civil laws to deal with it.

If someone is doing something that does no harm to others, whether it be a sin in God's eyes or not, it is between them and God. It is none of my business. God will judge them. I will not.

Hi O,

To side step the clutter which has already infested this discussion; take a look at the new discussion titled "Should We Leave Our Christian Coat In The Closet During The Week?"

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

oh goody! yet another GAY SEX discussion!

quote:

Leviticus Chapter 18
22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable

23 "Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is perversion.

and tell us, peter, according to the bible what is the punishment for committing those abominations? do you agree with that punishment?

Heh..Unob... *laughing pretty hysterically*

"nosebag." I LIKE that one! Can I swipe it for my own personal use?


AAaannnnd BeeG is going off on the gay people again.... PROceed. I think BeeG seriously needs to come out of the closet, eh?

quote:

"nosebag." I LIKE that one! Can I swipe it for my own personal use?

hell no. thats copyrighted material. if i see you with a bumper sticker attesting to such i shall sue you for all you are worth!

Seeing you didn't read the whole article, Bill, allow me to post a small part of it here.

Gay men report, on an average, slightly longer and thicker penises than non-gay men.[48]
Gay men and straight women have, on average, equally proportioned brain hemispheres. Lesbian women and straight men have, on average, slightly larger right brain hemispheres.[49]
The VIP SCN nucleus of the hypothalamus is larger in men than in women, and larger in gay men than in heterosexual men.[50]
The average size of the INAH-3 in the brains of gay men is approximately the same size as INAH 3 in women, which is significantly smaller, and the cells more densely packed, than in heterosexual men's brains.[28]
The anterior commissure is larger in women than men and was reported to be larger in gay men than in non-gay men,[27] but a subsequent study found no such difference.[51]
Gay men's brains respond differently to fluoxetine, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.[52]
The functioning of the inner ear and the central auditory system in lesbians and bisexual women are more like the functional properties found in men than in non-gay women (the researchers argued this finding was consistent with the prenatal hormonal theory of sexual orientation).[53]
The suprachiasmatic nucleus was found by Swaab and Hopffman to be larger in gay men than in non-gay men,[54] the suprachiasmatic nucleus is also known to be larger in men than in women.[55]
The startle response (eyeblink following a loud sound) is similarly masculinized in lesbians and bisexual women.[56]
Gay and non-gay people emit different underarm odors.[57]
Gay and non-gay people's brains respond differently to two human sex pheromones (AND, found in male armpit secretions, and EST, found in female urine).[24][58][59]
One region of the brain (amygdala) is more active in gay men than non-gay men when exposed to sexually arousing material.[60]
Finger length ratios between the index and ring fingers may be different between non-gay and lesbian women.[53][61][62][63][64][65]
Gay men and lesbians are significantly more likely to be left-handed or ambidextrous than non-gay men and women;[66][67][68] Simon LeVay argues that because "[h]and preference is observable before birth[69]... [t]he observation of increased non-right-handness in gay people is therefore consistent with the idea that sexual orientation is influenced by prenatal processes," perhaps heredity.[28]
A study of 50 gay men found 23% had counterclockwise hair whirl, as opposed to 8% in the general population. This may correlate with left-handedness.[70]
Gay men have increased ridge density in the fingerprints on their left thumbs and pinkies.[70]
Length of limbs and hands of gay men is smaller compared to height than the general population, but only among white men.[70]

This shows that although there hasn't been a "gay gene" discovered yet, (although there have been several genetic markers found that indicate there is a genetic cause), people ARE born that way.

But by now, the point of this discussion has changed. Once again, Bill Gray has shown his true colors. He is hurtful and hateful. He is NOT behaving like a Christian!

SO, O NO, DID YOU FIND YOUR "GAY GENE" IN THERE -- OR DARWIN'S "MISSING LINK"?

Still refuse to read it, huh Bill? Here's some more:

A recent study suggests linkage between a mother's genetic make-up and homosexuality of her sons. Women have two X chromosomes, one of which is "switched off". The inactivation of the X chromosome occurs randomly throughout the embryo, resulting in cells that are mosaic with respect to which chromosome is active. In some cases though, it appears that this switching off can occur in a non-random fashion. Bocklandt et al. (2006) reported that, in mothers of homosexual men, the number of women with extreme skewing of X chromosome inactivation is significantly higher than in mothers without gay sons. Thirteen percent of mothers with one gay son, and 23% of mothers with two gay sons showed extreme skewing, compared to 4% percent of mothers without gay sons.[18]

Now, you can read it and admit that it has validity, or you can read it and deny it has validity which would only show that YOU have a low intelligence level, or you can REFUSE to read it and CONTINUE to show that you have a low MATURITY level. Those are your choices, Bill.

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
Still refuse to read it, huh Bill? Here's some more:

A recent study suggests linkage between a mother's genetic make-up and homosexuality of her sons. Women have two X chromosomes, one of which is "switched off".

Hi O,

The operative word is SUGGESTS -- as in "May be" or "Could be" or "Will be if."

Yep, those are truly FACTUAL statements!

Boy, you Liberals sure go out of your way to prove the Bible and God wrong -- don't you?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

quote:

Boy, you Liberals sure go out of your way to prove the Bible and God wrong -- don't you?

No Bill, but you sure do go out of your way to wriggle away from the truth!

OKAY! O NO! - I WILL ADMIT IT, "I CANNOT SPIT AS FAR AS YOU!"

Getting a bit redundant now, sonny boy. This is the second time within a minute or so you have posted the same dumb comment and hideous cartoon. You can't prove your point so you resort to childish, meaningless nothings. What a pitiful excuse for a human being you are. And you're not ashamed to show the world how foolish you are! Once again, I feel sorry for your wife!

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Rielly:

Soooooooo... let me get this straight.... not only is homosexuality ok scientifically, but all married couples should bring in someone else to help stabilize the family situation???

sure, as long as she's hot

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
Seeing you didn't read the whole article, Bill, allow me to post a small part of it here.

Gay men report, on an average, slightly longer and thicker penises than non-gay men.[48]
!

OMG i'm gaaaaay!

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
I'm gonna play the part of the Atheist here!!! YAY!! Jank, Slim and company should love me after this one!!!

Let's remove God from this equation for a moment shall we?? ONLY SCIENCE!!! Now... remember, I am an atheist right now... I don't believe in god at all... he is a sky fairy who is a creation of man.... all things came from nothingness, and then randomness poked his head in a mixed everything up, and POOF!! it has all turned out perfectly... remember... I AM AN ANTHEIST!!!

Now... Going on pure SCIENTIFIC FACT... The ONLY possible sexual partner for a human male is a human female, and the ONLY sexual partner for a human female is a human male. No way, no how can anyone scientifically condone the union of 2 men or 2 women in a sexual act.... That's pure anatomy... NO GOD!! HE DOESNT EXIST, MORALS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT... just so we are clear once again that I'm am a science lovin atheist.... Only anatomically speaking, man goes with woman, and woman goes with man... same gender relations spits in the face of scientific facts.

Same gender relations happen all the time in nature. That is a scientific fact.

To be a true science lovin atheist you have to actually understand the science you are talking about. Sorry you failed.

quote:

Originally posted by Unobtanium:

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
Seeing you didn't read the whole article, Bill, allow me to post a small part of it here.

Gay men report, on an average, slightly longer and thicker penises than non-gay men.[48]
!

OMG i'm gaaaaay!

HAHAHAHAHAHA I wonder if now Peter and Bill will start bragging about what small penises they have just to prove they are not gay!

come on guys...what are you packing?

Careful Jank, you will be reported to the hall monitor.

quote:

Originally posted by Unobtanium:

quote:

Leviticus Chapter 18
22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable

23 "Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is perversion.

and tell us, peter, according to the bible what is the punishment for committing those abominations? do you agree with that punishment?

Yep.. just the same as all other sins. Eternal separation from God without repentence, and acceptance of Jesus Christ as your lord and savior.

As for earthly punishment, the only capital offense consistenly mentioned in the Bible punishable by death is murder... though I wish we could add rapists and child molestors.

quote:

Originally posted by Jankinonya:

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
I'm gonna play the part of the Atheist here!!! YAY!! Jank, Slim and company should love me after this one!!!

Let's remove God from this equation for a moment shall we?? ONLY SCIENCE!!! Now... remember, I am an atheist right now... I don't believe in god at all... he is a sky fairy who is a creation of man.... all things came from nothingness, and then randomness poked his head in a mixed everything up, and POOF!! it has all turned out perfectly... remember... I AM AN ANTHEIST!!!

Now... Going on pure SCIENTIFIC FACT... The ONLY possible sexual partner for a human male is a human female, and the ONLY sexual partner for a human female is a human male. No way, no how can anyone scientifically condone the union of 2 men or 2 women in a sexual act.... That's pure anatomy... NO GOD!! HE DOESNT EXIST, MORALS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT... just so we are clear once again that I'm am a science lovin atheist.... Only anatomically speaking, man goes with woman, and woman goes with man... same gender relations spits in the face of scientific facts.

Same gender relations happen all the time in nature. That is a scientific fact.

To be a true science lovin atheist you have to actually understand the science you are talking about. Sorry you failed.

See there you go... comparing humans to wild animals again... It really hurts you cred to do such a ridiculous thing. See, though you havent come up with a scientific reason for the fact that we are above the animals, you should still know that whether we came from ooze, or created by God, WE ARE NOT ON THE LEVEL OF ANIMALS!!!

Animals are drivin purely by instinct without the reasoning ability to comprehend consequences to their actions. WE ARE HUMANS and are supposed to be able to weigh our instints with a common sense, rational, logical progression of thought, to make the obvious correct choice.

To repeat .... WE ARE NOT WILD ANIMALS!!! IS EVERYONE UNDERSTANDING THAT ONE? It would help if folks could grasp that one. When a monkey in the wild comes walking out of a porta-pottie bucklin his belt, or a lion designs a building, or an elephant starts a construction company to build that building, or a spider paints the next 'Mona Lisa'.... then please... DROP THE IDIOTIC COMPARISONS OF HUMANS TO ANIMALS!!! hahaha...

Goodness... that is the weakest, most pathetic arguement possible to defend your position on this topic.

O No!
Great stats on the brain of gay folks... now, what would you say if I posted stats that looked very similar to that about serial adulterers, serial fornicators, alcoholics, drug addicts, child molestors, rapists, and serial killers. Would you say are ok because they were "born that way"?

None of that is a scape goat for chosing the things you do. Homosexuality is NOT SPECIAL!!! You can't use "born that way" to say it's a moral activity, but ignore the "born that way" for any other activity. It is either a blanket immunity for ALL HUMAN ACTIVITY, or we all have different makeup, but chose the lives we lead. Can't be a mixture of both.

As I just said in the other thread, gays are not harming anyone. Why are you so concerned about what people do in the privacy of their own homes? I would be willing to bet that some of the people you know and love are gay. If you found out, would you stop loving them? Why? They have never hurt you or anyone else.

And as far as animals exhibiting homosexual behavior, you can rail all you want about humans being different, but it DOES show that even human beings can indeed be born that way.

quote:

Originally posted by O No!:
As I just said in the other thread, gays are not harming anyone. Why are you so concerned about what people do in the privacy of their own homes? I would be willing to bet that some of the people you know and love are gay. If you found out, would you stop loving them? Why? They have never hurt you or anyone else.

And as far as animals exhibiting homosexual behavior, you can rail all you want about humans being different, but it DOES show that even human beings can indeed be born that way.

OH GOOD LORD!!!! MALE ANIMALS MOUNT OTHER MALE ANIMALS TO ASSURT DOMINANCE!!! THERE... FOR PETE'S SAKE PEOPLE!!! Would you be ok if men walked around mounting other men out in public??? What do you think if you see someone droppin a deuce on the sidewalk??? WE ARE NOT FREAKIN ANIMALS!!! Please.. i beg you folks... it is so moronic to compare us to animals... except for folks in prison and homeless people.... that was a mean joke and I apoligize. That would only be ok to say if I were Daniel Tosh.

And I know gay people... worked with a gay guy for 5 years.. Awesome guy, fun to hang out with, and a laugh riot!!! We never talked about it... but if asked, I'd be honest. I don't care what anybody does, but that doesnt change the fact of the matter.

Oh, and I responded on that other thread about the "not harming anyone" thing.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter Rielly:

quote:

Originally posted by Unobtanium:

quote:

Leviticus Chapter 18
22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable

23 "Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is perversion.

and tell us, peter, according to the bible what is the punishment for committing those abominations? do you agree with that punishment?

the only capital offense consistenly mentioned in the Bible punishable by death is murder... though I wish we could add rapists and child molestors.

umm, the punishment is death, peter.

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." Leviticus 20:13

dont any of you ever read the bible?


so do you jsut pick and choose what verses of the bible you want to enforce? if so, how do you insist that leviticus is correct about homoism being wrong yet deny what your invisible man says is punishment?

quote:

it is so moronic to compare us to animals

we are animals, dummy.

quote:

we are animals, dummy.

HAHAHAHAHA!!! That sentence is the definition of irony..... LMAO!!

Peter, in the order of the world, we are either animals or plants.

I don't have leaves, do you?

He just might be. From where I sit he's making himself look like a blooming...oh never mind.

quote:

Yes, they have the same rights you and I. They have the right to marry and to even have children -- the same as you and I.

Today, we all can marry. But, we cannot marry children, we cannot marry our pet sheep, we cannot marry five spouses -- and we cannot marry a person of the same sex. We all have that same right under the law.

So, what's the problem?

I want to make sure I understand you correctly. You're ok with the government deciding who can and can't get married? If the government only permitted people to marry within their race, would you defend that by saying "everyone has the same right to marry a person of the opposite sex and the same race, so anyone who wants to do something else wants a 'special right?'"

quote:

Originally posted by dolemitejb:

quote:

Yes, they have the same rights you and I. They have the right to marry and to even have children -- the same as you and I.

Today, we all can marry. But, we cannot marry children, we cannot marry our pet sheep, we cannot marry five spouses -- and we cannot marry a person of the same sex. We all have that same right under the law.

So, what's the problem?

I want to make sure I understand you correctly. You're ok with the government deciding who can and can't get married? If the government only permitted people to marry within their race, would you defend that by saying "everyone has the same right to marry a person of the opposite sex and the same race, so anyone who wants to do something else wants a 'special right?'"

Hi Dole,

The precedence for marriage between one man and one woman was set some 6000 or so years ago. It is well defined in the Bible and has been the guideline for family planning for those over 6000 years -- and has been the law in America for over 200 years.

So, I will go with the precedence which has been set. And, I will stay with the Biblical form of marriage. It has worked well for these many millennia -- so, why fool with success?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by b50m:
Peter, in the order of the world, we are either animals or plants.

I don't have leaves, do you?

The fact that you folks have such a hard time distinguishing between the two things I'm speaking of is startin to make me wonder if Coco the monkey hasnt figured out how to type.... amazing... truely amazing.

quote:

The precedence for marriage between one man and one woman was set some 6000 or so years ago. It is well defined in the Bible and has been the guideline for family planning for those over 6000 years -- and has been the law in America for over 200 years.

So, I will go with the precedence which has been set. And, I will stay with the Biblical form of marriage. It has worked well for these many millennia -- so, why fool with success?

You are free to believe what ever you want. I'm asking if you would maintain your "homosexuals are free to marry the opposite sex just like heterosexuals" argument if the law said people of different races couldn't marry.

quote:

Originally posted by Unobtanium:

quote:

it is so moronic to compare us to animals

we are animals, dummy.

Unobrain,

Just a suggestion here. Lol from the Skeptic reading room.


now?
4. Offer to donate computer equipment, software, or other useful stuff to skeptical organizations.
“In kind” donations of this sort are often tax deductible.
Only donate used equipment if it is usable. Many organizations are burdened with obsolete equipment


LINK FOR DUMMIES

Actually, Peter, It's KOKO the gorilla.

quote:

Originally posted by David L.:
Surely Bill G. is not looking for scientific evidence for being gay? He has no respect for science as shown in his posts regarding the age of the earth.

I guess he just goes with whatever theory justifies his beliefs.

That would be the literal, unerring interpretation of the Bible. Or as Bill reads it, Jesus love me, but he hates your guts.

His is in fact looking for scientific evidence, and when he finds some that disproves his world view, he denies it, distorts it, or lies about it.

quote:

Originally posted by b50m:
Actually, Peter, It's KOKO the gorilla.

Not on Seinfeld it's not... remember.... George wants his nickname to be "T-Bone", but someone else gets it first, then George gets tagged by his boss as CoCo the monkey... though you could be right about the K's... lol