Need help arguing against a gay marriage ban

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by DavidMn

That's too bad. The more the merrier I say!

And people sure as hell would dress better

[markolas]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, it is not a personal thing to you or anyone. I am just citing to facts. And, please do not misunderstand me like I think Deanna and others did. I think religion is a great thing that does great things. I just think the powers to be in almost all organized religion use that true and real great thing as a tool to gain power and then misuse it. Certainly, the Catholic Church has done that with the ped. tragedy. I mean they knew these people were hurting kids and just shuffled them off to another Parish when caught. Then, when called out for that, they equated peds. with gay people because they knew a very significant number of people think all gay people are peds., which no data supports and they knew that. Does that mean all of the Catholic Church is a 100% bad organization? Of course not. I personally think the Church is a wonderful but very flawed and archaic organization as the facts indicate almost all organized religions are. So, what I do is take the good and leave the bad and also try to change the bad in whatever small way I can. But and again, this is not a personal attack on anyone's private religious beliefs unless those beliefs are along the lines of the Church did nothing wrong in the ped. scandals, which I then only point out is factually incorrect. I also think religion is a highly emotional topic for people because their lives are so emotionally involved in organized religion in one way or another and they see that belief crushed by stunts like this. I mean it is a little hard not to call Jerry Fallwell and his ilk prikcs because they are so full of hate and that pulpit hatred hurts people.

I hope that made sense and again, I am just noting facts.

Well, I just kind of object to the idea that religion in general is this horrible thing, and the religions that aren't are these aberrations. But I guess since I'm a practitioner of one of those "rogue" religions you mentioned, I would have that opinion.

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

And people sure as hell would dress better

Maybe there'd even be hope for me...

[markolas]

Originally Posted by snowman

From the beginning of time...if gay marriages were the norm...we wouldn't be here, skippy

Don't call me skippy, asshole.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by snowman

My intensions in responding to this thread were to look at this controversial issue in an evolutionary sense- not to bash gays.

I did not take it that way and merely pointed out why you conclusion was flawed. Again, you do not have to be married to procreate. To me, marriage is about the love, the bond, etc.

[amber]

Originally Posted by markolas

Well, I just kind of object to the idea that religion in general is this horrible thing, and the religions that aren't are these aberrations. But I guess since I'm a practitioner of one of those "rogue" religions you mentioned, I would have that opinion.

Aren't there few enough of the awesome religions to technically classify them as aberrations? I can only think of...2-3 awesome ones.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by markolas

Well, I just kind of object to the idea that religion in general is this horrible thing, and the religions that aren't are these aberrations. But I guess since I'm a practitioner of one of those "rogue" religions you mentioned, I would have that opinion.

Again, organized religion, not religion itself, is the bad thing that hurts people.

Regarding your religion, to wit:

There are many schools, sects and subsects of Buddhism. As with Christianity, no consensus exists within Buddhism about gay and lesbian relationships. Buddhism is most concerned with whether an action is helpful and based on good intentions. This differs from Christianity which often evaluates an action, based on whether it is good or evil; positive or sinful according to a system of morality.

Apparently, the Buddha did not leave any teachings on homosexual orientation or homosexual behavior. He strongly encouraged his followers to "be a lamp onto yourself" -- to examine and test the truth of religious teachings before accepting them.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_budd.htm

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by amber

Aren't there few enough of the awesome religions to technically classify them as aberrations? I can only think of...2-3 awesome ones.

That cite I posted above goes into that. It should also be noted that even within the Christian Faiths, some sects "allow" it, a la the Episcopal Church.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by DavidMn

Maybe there'd even be hope for me...

Well, the road would be hard and the work long, but you'd make it

[markolas]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Again, organized religion, not religion itself, is the bad thing that hurts people.

I don't think all organized religion is bad and hurts people.

[markolas]

Originally Posted by amber

Aren't there few enough of the awesome religions to technically classify them as aberrations? I can only think of...2-3 awesome ones.

How are you defining "awesome"? And aren't there only 5 or 6 world religions to begin with?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by markolas

I don't think all organized religion is bad and hurts people.

The facts do not support you. All the ones I know of , save some sects and perhaps the Buds., of have and continue to do so. But and again, these same organizations do a tremendous amout of good as well. Does that outweigh the bad - who can say.

[amber]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

That cite I posted above goes into that. It should also be noted that even within the Christian Faiths, some sects "allow" it, a la the Episcopal Church.

Yes, I was thinking of mentioning the sects - but according to my math, the ratio of "cool" ones (and the criteria isn't solely whether they accept homosexuals or not) to not cool ones would still be such that the cool ones could be defined as "aberrent". And perhaps I could give extra "bad" points to some of the middle eastern religious practices/beliefs?

I'll go read your link. That was a good description of the distinctions b/t Christian ity and Buddhism, BTW.

[snowman]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I did not take it that way and merely pointed out why you conclusion was flawed. Again, you do not have to be married to procreate. To me, marriage is about the love, the bond, etc.

Marriage obviously does include love, the bond, etc. But in it's bare essence-the main purpose for the institution of marriage is to unite two people who have the capability of propagating offspring. Through the millenium, this allows the species to survive. Gay marriage, does not allow this, because two people of the same sex cannot have children of their own.

No, you don't need to be married to have kids, but you have to be of the opposite sex.

[DavidMn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, the road would be hard and the work long, but you'd make it

Thank you. I think when I win th powerball, I'll put you on the payroll as my fasion consultant. Lova ya.