And the Old Testament was written between 1600-1200 BC. Correct me if Im wrong, but that's at least 190 years after marriage (1790BC). There are no facts in there, just opinion. It was wrote by a man who was not raised by a same sex couple (at least not that he mentions) and gives no links or information on the research he wrote. That also is a completely different debate, that's a debate on if a same sex couple should be allowed to raise a kid (of course they should), and not a debate on marriage.
Umm....I knew Gregory House is a character from a TV show A lot of things written in the Bible are fiction too though right?
I know you knew that, only joking. There is a lot of fictional things in the bible if you don't believe Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I already said Adam and Eve started 3-4000 BC. Best way to stop children from being raised in gay marriage households is to not allow gay marriage. In a perfect world I am completely for a civil union with all the benefits. But it's not a perfect world we have to think about discrimination, lawsuits, kids, divorce, and the next generation. Yeah gay marriage sounds like a freedom now, but in 50 years we will look back at what we did to our country and regret it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Straight people don't discrimination, file lawsuits, raise messed up kids, divorce, and screw things up for the next generation? What made up world do you live in man? Gay people make up what was said a few pages back, 3%? Was more then 3% are divorcing, raising criminals, filing law suits, and participating in some form of discrimination. So how in the world can you blame them for that? That's such a weak argument, and again, most is just speculation! Its opinion. Also, this so called Adam and Eve are again, not fact. They are fiction at this point, no proof of their existence. Other then a website to order adult objects of course. Oh, and that's again using religion in your debate. So AGAIN, can you give me a good reason without religion or opinion?
It is also a fact that marriage has always been the union of a man and a woman, no matter the religion, culture or what have you. To redefine marriage is no less ridiculous as to rename a cat a dog.
You try disprove my religion, I defend, then you say I can't use religion? I wasn't using religion to make my point I was defending my religion since you keep saying things about it that aren't true. It may only be 3% but it will grow now and that means more kids raised by gay couples, more divorces than now, more lawsuits than now, more people on welfare, more kids growing up having a father figure or mother figure in their lives. We already have enough of those problems in this country, why add do it? I'm sick of paying the bill for the mistakes this country has made, I believe it's time to start going down the right road again. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_same-sex_unions Plenty of history of same sex marriages/unions/relationships. And even if that's all false (its wiki, so Ill assume the worse), how does that make a difference? We should withhold rights because you don't want to add a small thing to the definition of the word? Science proves and changes things all the time. We call a tomato a vegetable but its proven its a fruit right? My point is, you can call it what you want, but the fact remains. Call a tomato what you want, call a gay marriage a union or whatever else you want, its still the same as any other marriage. You can pick apart my tomato argument, Im working so cant put 100% into it, but its as strong as the cat/dog one you used. And honestly, if science finds out cats are actually in fact part of the K9 family, they will change cat to dog. You might chose to be stubborn and ignore it, but if its fact, you cant argue with fact.
We have all had some good points but I think we are starting to go in circles, so I am going to put this topic to rest in my thread. We all have our thoughts and opinions which is great, however I don't see anyone changing theirs. I enjoyed debating with you guys and I'm glad we kept it civil. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I said you cant use religion when you used the old testament argument, which led to your Adam and Eve comment. You can not use religion when it comes to making laws. Separation of church and state. You can defend your religion all you want, but it does not change fact, and you havent given any. And again, that's all speculation and opinion. You do not know any of that will happen. Don't get me wrong, of course the number of divorce will go up, but Im sure not the percent. People are still people, gay or not. And straight people will still make up the majority of all that you listed...by a TON! Yes, including children growing up without a father or mother, because guess what, straight people divorce, and drag their kids with them. I know many who don't know one parent or the other, because of divorce. Straight divorce. These issues are not only for gay, and you have no proof or facts to back up that due to gay marriage, any of these numbers will rise. You just think they might.
Ok one last post, we do know that the number of children growing up without a mother/father figure will go up. I believe that is a crucial part of childhood and will have lasting effects. I think we can all agree on that. With that I am officially done nice debating gentleman (and ladies if any participated ) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Again, you believe. No facts behind it. And no I do not agree to that. I only happen to know 1 person raised by same sex parents, and she is a wonderful young lady (19 I believe) who speaks extremely highly of her fathers. And I think its wrong and dangerous to just assume that 2 parents of the same sex can not raise a child well. Its also wrong to assume that in many of those cases, they wont be an opposite sex parent in the mix. Very often to 2 lesbian women have a baby, or babies, with a gay couple. If anything, that child is now better off then we were, they have 4 parents to learn from!
I get a chuckle out of this thread. It's like watching a dog chase it's tail. Is homosexuality sin in my eyes? Yes. But so is the pride that I bring before God every day. If we are relying on the Government to be our moral compass, God help us indeed. If we as Christians concentrated on loving people the way God wants us to instead of outlawing behaviors that we don't like, the world would be a much better place. Oh, and Hooker and MnMoose need to get a room
Dang you Fitz! I was supposed to be done with this thread! Oooooo Hooker Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Like watching a dog chase his tail"... Couldn't have said it better myself! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
From Bill of Rights-Church and State: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The US Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment as if it requires this "wall of separation" between church and state. It not only prohibits any government from adopting a particular denomination or religion as official, but requires government to avoid excessive involvement in religion. Has nothing to do with voting!!! In 1779, Thomas Jefferson was concerned about the power of the Church of England within Virginia. He felt a guarantee of religious freedom was the best guarantee that America would avoid the religious intolerance and religiously inspired bloodshed that had marked much of the history of Europe. He wrote an Act for Establishing Religious Freedom; after a long battle, it became law in Virginia on 1786-JAN-16. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was based in part on that act. It was actually written to keep the State out of the Church, it keeps the powers at be from saying that one religion is the only religion. Now that we have that straight!
