Tolerance issues!

[Amber Williams]

The issue of gay marraige to me is like a kids clubhouse with a big "no gurlz allowed" sign yet the kids inside are so busy trying to keep others out that they dont realize their club is rotting apart at the nails. And yet despite that, the ones outside still want to be part of the clubhouse.

[Stygian]

The issue of gay marraige to me is like a kids clubhouse with a big "no gurlz allowed" sign yet the kids inside are so busy trying to keep others out that they dont realize their club is rotting apart at the nails. And yet despite that, the ones outside still want to be part of the clubhouse.

A very fitting metaphor in a way, though really not when you think about the legal implications of marriage. But it does beg the question; why the hell do we marry in the first place?

[Zina]

Matrimony is the seventh Sacrament. It is a sign of the union between Christ and the Church. The efficient cause of Matrimony is the mutual consent expressed in words effective in the present by the parties.

Matrimony has a threefold good. The first is the birth of children and the educating of them to the worship of God. The second is that fidelity which one must render to the other; and the third is that it is a Sacrament, or, in other words, the indivisibility of Matrimony which shows forth the indivisible union of Christ and His Church.

Ahem. Aren't we as a planet overpopulated? By not legalizing gay marriage, we are annexing the one group of people who will never have a kid on their own. Legalizing it makes room for adoption and solves at least a small part of our planet's overpopulation problem.

Not really.
And lesbians can have children through artificial insemination, and gay men can do the same thing by having a female friend carry their child.
These are things that gay couples are doing right now, as well as adoption. Making gay marriage legal is going to do nothing to change the population.

[Brunhidden]

also of note- matrimony was not a sacrament until quite late into the history of the church.

if you look deeper into the churches history you will find at times that priests promoted prostitution for the sake of a healthy marriage, at other times they were against marriage altogether, often owned brothels, and one of the popes had thirteen children in addition to the command of a standing army


a little bit of research will often crumble the common defenses in these 'god hates gays' arguments, for example the very few passages in the bible even related to homosexuality are dubious- several of them do in fact disapprove of homosexual intercourse, but the particular instances are disapproving of the fact it was prostitution and did not seem to care the gender of those involved. and of course the ever so fun Leviticus- sure he stated homosexuality was an abomination unto god, but he said the same of ground beef, garden vegetables, rabbits, rocks of certain colors, and a mere page or two later he went at length as to the proper way to beat your wife and who you can and cannot hold as a slave

some, to defend the bible, state that much of what was stated then no longer applies because the world has changed. if this is true, and i am not allowed to enslave any wandering Hittites i happen to find, perhaps the times have changed enough for homosexuality to be acceptable? after all, the bible prohibits lending money at interest, and the catholic church has more money in banks then any five major corporations you could name, its in their best interest to say the times have changed

however it still saddens me to think thousands who claim to follow a book that says 'love thy brother as you love thyself' and 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone' will use that same book and claim it gives them the right to spew toxic amounts of bigotry and hate

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

...

You constantly surprise, and please, me, Brunhidden. I know you're well educated, and yet it surprises me when you come up with interesting bits like this.

I think it's a sad commentary on my state of mind, really. :-/


Do carry on, though. Please.

[Gabi]

So wait... you people are saying non-Christians shouldn't get married? That's absurd, since marriage has existed long before Christianity was created. Long before Jesus was born, for that matter.

Note: here gay couples are allowed to get married but they're not allowed to adopt children. Funny it's the other way around in the USA.

[superluser]

also of note- matrimony was not a sacrament until quite late into the history of the church.

Since the 13th century, yes.

However, it's clear that it was considered a sacred religious something since the time of Jesus.

if you look deeper into the churches history you will find at times that priests promoted prostitution for the sake of a healthy marriage, at other times they were against marriage altogether

I'm having trouble coming up with primary sources for this.  Can you help?

(I'll grant that the Church has been fairly corrupt at times and don't doubt the bit about owning brothels or the corrupt popes)

the very few passages in the bible even related to homosexuality are dubious- several of them do in fact disapprove of homosexual intercourse, but the particular instances are disapproving of the fact it was prostitution and did not seem to care the gender of those involved.

I'm wracking my brain for these examples.  There are a few famous examples of declaring homosexuality an abomination, and there are a few famous examples of declaring temple prostitution an abomination, but I don't recall temple prostitution being equated with homosexuality.  It's certainly possible, since it's been a while since I read the Torah.

At any rate... well, I'll save that for the next part.

and of course the ever so fun Leviticus- sure he stated homosexuality was an abomination unto god, but he said the same of ground beef, garden vegetables, rabbits, rocks of certain colors, and a mere page or two later he went at length as to the proper way to beat your wife and who you can and cannot hold as a slave

I'm pretty sure that all vegetables, properly harvested, are kosher.  You can buy kosher ground beef here, and if I'm not mistaken, the colored rocks bit was something about the priestly garments and the tent for the Ark of the Covenant.

At any rate, eating shellfish is every bit as evil as hot man-on-man sex, according to the Hebrew Bible.

The reason for this is that what God was intending to rule out the practices of the people the Israelites were replacing (by the sword, yes), and thus to prevent them from becoming one people who did not worship Him.  So the condemnation is for the reason that the previous culture did it, not because it's inherently wrong.

the catholic church has more money in banks then any five major corporations you could name, its in their best interest to say the times have changed

While the total assets of the Church are difficult to discern, the highest estimate I've seen is $100B, which is fairly paltry in comparison to ExxonMobil, total assets $242B.

Incidentally, this particular anti-Catholic argument is pretty storied by now and a brief Google search should provide all the information you need to debunk it.

however it still saddens me to think thousands who claim to follow a book that says 'love thy brother as you love thyself' and 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone' will use that same book and claim it gives them the right to spew toxic amounts of bigotry and hate

Amen to that.

So wait... you people are saying non-Christians shouldn't get married? That's absurd, since marriage has existed long before Christianity was created. Long before Jesus was born, for that matter.

I once got into an amazing argument with someone over this exact point.  Since Jesus was eternally begotten of the Father, He's been around since before any of those religions, and thus the sacrament of marriage has been around since the beginning of time.  He misphrased the next question, and suddenly I realized that the debate had suddenly become circular, and that neither of us would ever have to address the other's arguments.

It was really funny.  I'll see if I can find it.

[Gabi]

Ok, so people who, like me, do not believe that Jesus existed before he was conceived, shouldn't be allowed to get married? This is about as ridiculous as religious bigotry gets. People were getting married long before Christians existed. You have no right to take that away from us because your church has decided to claim it as their own.

[superluser]

Ok, so people who, like me, do not believe that Jesus existed before he was conceived, shouldn't be allowed to get married?

No, I'm just saying that it was a fun argument.  I actually agreed with him, but the fact that he didn't ask the proper question meant that the argument would be more interesting if I responded that way.

The people on that list are known to be *extremely* pedantic, and arguments there can get pretty brutal in that respect.

[Gabi]

Ah. Ok, then. I say let the Christian church decide what the Christian church will do, and the state do their own thing without interference. If the church does not want to allow gay couples a religious ceremony, that's up to them. Just like other religions can decide who can take part in each of their ceremonies. But marriage as a legal institution is none of their business.

[Vidar]

Ah. Ok, then. I say let the Christian church decide what the Christian church will do, and the state do their own thing without interference. If the church does not want to allow gay couples a religious ceremony, that's up to them. Just like other religions can decide who can take part in each of their ceremonies. But marriage as a legal institution is none of their business.

It seems that most people on this board largely agree with this statement. It makes me wonder how prop 8 got a favourable vote in the first place. Is this forum filled with exceptionally tolerant and open-minded people, or is california filled with exceptionally small-minded bigots and homophobes, or is something else going on?

[Ryudo Lee]

I think Vidar hit the nail on the head.

[Suwako]

Ah. Ok, then. I say let the Christian church decide what the Christian church will do, and the state do their own thing without interference. If the church does not want to allow gay couples a religious ceremony, that's up to them. Just like other religions can decide who can take part in each of their ceremonies. But marriage as a legal institution is none of their business.

It seems that most people on this board largely agree with this statement. It makes me wonder how prop 8 got a favourable vote in the first place. Is this forum filled with exceptionally tolerant and open-minded people, or is California filled with exceptionally small-minded bigots and homophobes, or is something else going on?

One must note that America is a very 'right' (conservative) nation when compared to the rest of the world. Even with Obama ( who has been called communist, talk about having a small world view. )  at the handle it is still very right compared to European nations.  Which often means that 'freedom of speech' is held more dear than life itself, Calfifornia is although I heard mostly liberal seemingly very 'right' in how they think of people who have a different gender preference.

The Netherlands has their own local bigot here who has been rewarded a price for being a hatefu,l hate spreading, word spewing idiot. ( Geert Wilders ) Oh, and his party is 'Party of (the) freedom' I don't know what his standing is on gay marriage but I guess it is .... you know. He hates foreigners so much >.>

[superluser]

is california filled with exceptionally small-minded bigots and homophobes, or is something else going on?

My question is who in their right minds sets up a constitutional amendment process that only requires a simple majority?

One must note that America is a very 'right' (conservative) nation when compared to the rest of the world.

That's right.  I'd love to see a real European socialist leader on the Daily Show describing what he really thinks of Obama ``the socialist.''

For a few reasons, I nominate Tiny Cox.

[Reese Tora]

Is california filled with exceptionally small-minded bigots and homophobes, or is something else going on?

Filled with small minded fence sitters who fell victim to the propaganda of the small minded bigots, rather.

Case in point, my dad is normally a very tolerant guy, but he is against gay marriage because he actually believes that sanctity of marriage bologna.

[Brunhidden]

Case in point, my dad is normally a very tolerant guy, but he is against gay marriage because he actually believes that sanctity of marriage bologna.

Hare or Zedd getting married, in my opinion, respects the sanctity of marriage a whole lot more then Britney Spears

[TheDXM]

My diagnosis is still that it's pure homophobia. America hasn't matured enough to get past it yet, so it would seem.

I personally think that Prop 8 was totally unconstitutional for many reasons, the most pertinent of which: One, being that it violated the equal opportunity of rights for a minority based on discrimination, and two being that it was essentially an amendment that enabled ex post facto laws.

It will come in time though. America has moved more and more towards tolerance and even equality as time has gone on. The best example of that being the status of ethnic prejudice and racism which has become less and less of an issue.

[Mao]

Interesting where this topic has gone given that it had originally been a post about how my workplace was ultra-conservative and that I would get in trouble for a mildly nsfw pic because it might offend someone.

On the issue of Gay Marriage though:  I don't personally see the problem with any of the solutions as long as the benefits are the same.  Call it a civil union or whatever.  Equality, to me at least, is the only issue that really needs to be addressed there.  Even then it's only equality in the eyes of the law.  Religions will always do their own things and to expect otherwise is just crazy.  One religion doesn't view a couple as married?  Fine.  Plenty of other religions/belief sets out there that might better suit the groups involved.  Marriage is not a strictly Christian concept (as I believe has been pointed out) and so feel free to look around.  Again, as long as the law sees it as the same thing in the end, who cares?  When the law doesn't see it as the same thing, then it's the onus of the people to either change it or themselves, or move somewhere that is slightly more open to their views.

Yeesh.  Next thing you know the religions will start warring with one another over definitions of marriage, god(s), and how one should go about their lives... oh wait.

[Alondro]

Australia seems to be on the verge of passing a bill that will demand the filtering of their entire Internet for anything adult-rated and block it.

Even an evil Conservative hate-monger like me thinks this is stupid

Now THAT'S extreme right-wingism!

[Sunblink]

It seems that most people on this board largely agree with this statement. It makes me wonder how prop 8 got a favourable vote in the first place. Is this forum filled with exceptionally tolerant and open-minded people, or is california filled with exceptionally small-minded bigots and homophobes, or is something else going on?

Don't get me started on the Proposition 8 thing. It absolutely amazed me - on a sickened level - to see a bunch of soulless homophobes crawling out of the woodwork for the purpose of shooting down the only opportunity god knows how many gay couples had to get married.

I'd like to think, though, that you're on the money with the forum thing. Different communities have different opinions, I think. I noticed that AOL News's community is pretty chock full of people with extremely, extremely, extremely fundamentalist viewpoints. (I want to troll that place so bad. ) Case in point: the comments section regarding the recent debacle with the Muslim family being kicked off the airliner.

Case in point, my dad is normally a very tolerant guy, but he is against gay marriage because he actually believes that sanctity of marriage bologna.

Weirdly, my dad's sort of the opposite. I don't really know about his views on homosexuality in general, but he voted "no" on the Marriage Protection Act, supports gay couples getting benefits, and Proposition 8 made him feel ill.

I love my dad.

Australia seems to be on the verge of passing a bill that will demand the filtering of their entire Internet for anything adult-rated and block it.

Even an evil Conservative hate-monger like me thinks this is stupid

Now THAT'S extreme right-wingism!

WHAT

[thegayhare]

and now to lighten the mood some what... Prop 8 the musical

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5-fZKg4Uj4

[Paladin Sheppard]

Yea I had hoped you guys would miss the idiocy that my government is capable of....I voted for the other guy too in 07 but he also apparently had this on the cards but only as an idea not as a policy....

[superluser]

I've made this suggestion elsewhere, but if you're really interested in the culture wars, listen to this:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97998654&ps=cprs

It's by one of the founders of the religious right, who has left the movement and is now a very vocal critic of it.

(Interestingly, he wrote in McCain in `00 and `04, but voted for Obama in `08)

[Lisky]

ehh, with the tolerance issues, look at stem cell research, also a huge issue... has the potential to cure hundreds of millions people, yet at the same time, a few close minded bigots are blocking it's research in the US, well, until jan 20th rolls around

[Vidar]

ehh, with the tolerance issues, look at stem cell research, also a huge issue... has the potential to cure hundreds of millions people, yet at the same time, a few close minded bigots are blocking it's research in the US, well, until jan 20th rolls around

The stem cell research thing is also blocked by religious groups who claim that life begins at conception, and actually think the bible says so, even when it doesn't. The bible actually defines life as breath, so biblically speaking a child is not alive until it is born. In reality things are rather more complex, though there is a point in the development of a fetus where brain functions begin, and many countries put the limit for abortions at that point, but I digress.

Stem cell research could save a lot of people in the near future, if research could be done, and the best stem cells are embryonic stem cells.
Even with the limits placed on research today, medical science has done some pretty amazing things, like regrowing a man's upper jaw bone (which he lost due to cancer). Imagine what could be done if proper research could be done. In time we might be able to regrow (parts of) organs from peoples own cells, with all the benefits thereof.

It rather pisses me off that some people would stifle progress with nothing but their own preconceived notions about what they think their holy book says, and they can't even be arsed to get that right either.

[Lisky]

haha, that just brought to mind an incident at a football game in november... it was hilarious, and if i ever see this guy again, i'm buying him a drink...

Soo, we're waiting to get into the stadium with all the other students, it's a huge line, as you'd expect, and there's this guy preaching atop a wooden crate, clean cut, pretty short, and he's shouting something along the lines of "you are about to engage in four hours of sin, are you going to repent after wards for four hours to make up for the sinning you are about to do?"  soo, the guy in front of me shouts back "hey, two things, where in the bible does it say that football is a sin, or anything we're doing here for that matter, and secondly, i want you to show me where it says in that bible your holding that for second we sin, we're supposed to spend an equal time repenting for sinning"
the bible thumper gives him a confused look, and shouts "my mother gave me this bible, and it's very dear to me" soo, the guy in front of me says "look, you can hold onto it, it won't even leave your hands, just show me where it says that football is a sin, and repentance means equal time repenting as sinning"
the bible thumper's reply "you are a blasphemer, and sinner, begone heathen so i can teach the lords will to those who will listen"

i just look back on that day and laugh

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

Pigskin, dear fellow. Leviticus states that the pig is an unclean animal, and that no part of it should be touched by god-fearing men.

One presumes that this also includes women, although I will grant that the relevant section doesn't seem to mention women, but does mention that the "cleaners" are allowed to touch pigs, and other unclean animals, if only to get them off the street.

I'm working from memory, here, but this gives you enough to look up the details...

[Lisky]

according to Leviticus i have not only earned myself a personal place in hell but have probably entered the ranks of demon-hood if his claims on what constitutes a sin are taken literally...

be that as it may, the NCAA uses footballs that aren't actually leather, but a man-made polymer that allows better control of the ball and makes it easier to catch, particularity in the rain (which this season seemed to happen a lot)

[superluser]

The stem cell research thing is also blocked by religious groups who claim that life begins at conception, and actually think the bible says so, even when it doesn't.

The Bible does a pretty good job of looking like it says that life begins at conception:

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations. (Jer 1:5)

For it was you who formed my inward parts; you knit me together in my mother's womb. (Ps 139:13)

In days past, the Catholic Church held onto the concept of foetus animatus (living fetus) and foetus inanimatus (not yet living fetus).  Modern science has largely removed the distinction between the two states, and so the Church has declared that there is no such thing as foetus inanimatus.

Stem cell research could save a lot of people in the near future, if research could be done, and the best stem cells are embryonic stem cells.

I don't know that you can really call them the best.  It's anticipated that they will provide more beneficial results than adult stem cells, but we're talking apples and oranges.

In any case, skin cells can be reprogrammed to do the same things as embryonic stem cells, so it's probable that the issue will be mooted soon.

[LionHeart]

Australia seems to be on the verge of passing a bill that will demand the filtering of their entire Internet for anything adult-rated and block it.

Even an evil Conservative hate-monger like me thinks this is stupid

Now THAT'S extreme right-wingism!

User Friendly points out the flaw in this plan.