2
   

Homosexual Marriage defeated by WIDE Margins

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 03:41 pm
In a letter to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse on June 26, 1822, Jefferson outlined his creed.

There is only God, and he is perfect

There is a future state of rewards and punishments.

That to love God with all your heart and thy neighbor as thyself is the sum or religion.

source
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 03:44 pm
au1929 wrote:
Mcg wrote
Quote:
The problem with non-religious people is they are under the impression, that based upon their beliefs, they have the right to dictate to everyone else.


Apparently you don't understand the difference between allowing people the freedom of action and mandating thou shall not.
If we allow people the freedom of action they can participate or not as they see fit. On the other hand if we legislate against freedom of action there is no choice.
Do you see and understand the difference. Freedom of choice is the way of tolerance and the religious view is as always intolerant.


Where is the line drawn though au1929? Where does the delimitation of personal choice vs community standards exist? The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 03:46 pm
ahhhh, one of my favourites, Benjamin
a believer in God, but not so much in religion
<nodding in agreement>


Quote:
"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches."
--Benjamin Franklin, _Poor_Richard_, 1758

Quote:
"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."

--Benjamin Franklin, _Poor_Richard_, 1758

Quote:
"I cannot conceive otherwise than that He, the Infinite Father, expects or requires no worship or praise from us, but that He is even infinitely above it."
-- Benjamin Franklin, _Articles_Of_Belief_and_Acts_of_Religion_, Nov.20, 1728

Quote:
"I wish it (Christianity) were more productive of good works ... I mean real good works ... not holy day keeping, sermon-hearing ... or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and compliments despised by wise men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity."

-- Benjamin Franklin , _Works_ Vol.VII, p.75

Quote:
"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects of Christianity, we shall find few that have not in turns been persecutors and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution on the Roman church, but preactied i on the Puritans. They found it wrong in Bishops, but fell into the practice both here (England) and in New England"
--Benjamin Franklin, _Poor_Richard_, 1758

Quote:
"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one."
-- Benjamin Franklin, _2000_Years_of_Disbelief_ by James A. Haught


Quote:
"Religion I found to be without any tendency to inspire, promote, or confirm morality, serves principally to divide us and make us unfriendly to one another."
--Benjamin Franklin
0 Replies
 
cannistershot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 03:47 pm
au1929 wrote:
Mcg wrote
Quote:
The problem with non-religious people is they are under the impression, that based upon their beliefs, they have the right to dictate to everyone else.


Apparently you don't understand the difference between allowing people the freedom of action and mandating thou shall not.
If we allow people the freedom of action they can participate or not as they see fit. On the other hand if we legislate against freedom of action there is no choice.
Do you see and understand the difference. Freedom of choice is the way of tolerance and the religious view is as always intolerant.



But again, grouping all religious people into one group and saying that all of their views are intolerant is tolerant?
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 03:47 pm
McGentrix wrote:
In a letter to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse on June 26, 1822, Jefferson outlined his creed.

There is only God, and he is perfect

There is a future state of rewards and punishments.

That to love God with all your heart and thy neighbor as thyself is the sum or religion.

source


unless he's one of those damn queers right? you forgot that part...
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 03:48 pm
MgC
What need is being satisfied by not allowing Gay Marriage. The need to impose your religious beliefs on others I suppose.
0 Replies
 
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 03:48 pm
I doubt that God is mentioned in every document written by the founding fathers as a matter of fact:

The Constitution does not once mention "God".

http://www.foundingfathers.info/documents/constitution.html

Neither does the Bill of Rights

http://www.foundingfathers.info/documents/billrights.html

I have read through several of the various Federalist Papers and have not seen the word God

http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/fedindex.htm
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 03:55 pm
Quote:
MgC
What need is being satisfied by not allowing Gay Marriage. The need to impose your religious beliefs on others I suppose.


People don't want to admit that America is a secular nation, is all...

Here's the thing: Majority rule invariably breeds minority oppression. One cannot consistently run the policies of a country on majority rule without extremely pissing off the minority who is left, and that's no way to govern.

The solution? To be extra careful in the application of laws and governance to be sensitive to the needs of the minority. In this case, the majority of Americans call themselves Christian (though they never act or vote like it); therefore, extra care has to be taken to leave Christianity out of governance in order to accurately represent our society.

This applies to morals, as well; the bible cannot be used as a foundation for the formation of laws based upon morals in our secular society.

Therefore; any law seeking to limit homosexuality (and banning homosexuals from enjoying common human rights is limiting, don't kid yourself) is supporting the majority's desire to oppress the minority (homosexuals), in almost every case based upon religious beliefs/learned beliefs and very rarely upon facts, should not be tolerated if we wish to call ourselves a secular society.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cannistershot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 03:59 pm
Maybe some of us don't want to be known as "secular" Wordly rather than Godly is not my choice. So explain the difference between you pushing that on me and me pushing against gay marriage?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 04:00 pm
MgC wrote.
Quote:
In a letter to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse on June 26, 1822, Jefferson outlined his creed.

There is only God, and he is perfect

There is a future state of rewards and punishments.

That to love God with all your heart and they neighbor as thyself is the sum or religion.

Jefferson spoke only of God not any specific religion. In fact he said the love of God and thy neighbor is religion.
God or the supreme being if he exists is religion neutral
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 04:03 pm
Quote:
Maybe some of us don't want to be known as "secular" Wordly rather than Godly is not my choice. So explain the difference between you pushing that on me and me pushing against gay marriage?


Because ATLANTA is in AMERICA, and America was designed to be a secular, non-religiously governed country. If you consider yourself to be American, you support a secular country. Simple as that.


As your people are fond of saying: If you don't like it, feel free to get the hell out. Normally I'd encourage you to try to change it, but not this time; the last thing the world needs is another idiotically-ran theocracy out there....

Noone is pushing the enlightened and open-minded atmosphere that has brought about America's success on you. If you wish to go back to living in a close-minded, contradictory society without the freedom to think and say what you wish, go ahead and go somewhere else and pray to your god for divine inspiration if you like. Feel free to take the president with you, he'd probably feel a lot more comforatable....

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cannistershot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 04:11 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:
Maybe some of us don't want to be known as "secular" Wordly rather than Godly is not my choice. So explain the difference between you pushing that on me and me pushing against gay marriage?


Because ATLANTA is in AMERICA, and America was designed to be a secular, non-religiously governed country. If you consider yourself to be American, you support a secular country. Simple as that.


As your people are fond of saying: If you don't like it, feel free to get the hell out. Normally I'd encourage you to try to change it, but not this time; the last thing the world needs is another idiotically-ran theocracy out there....

Noone is pushing the enlightened and open-minded atmosphere that has brought about America's success on you. If you wish to go back to living in a close-minded, contradictory society without the freedom to think and say what you wish, go ahead and go somewhere else and pray to your god for divine inspiration if you like. Feel free to take the president with you, he'd probably feel a lot more comforatable....

Cycloptichorn


Sometimes I would disagree about Atlanta being part of America Laughing But still why is pushing for one thing or another any different from the other? Why is pushing for gay marriage better than pushing against it? BTW I never said which side I stand on you just clumped me into the group since I am republican and christian.
Thanks for the offer to leave, but I'll stay. America is the greatest country on earth! It gives us both the freedom to feel and talk about issues that would have you killed in other places.
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 04:19 pm
McGentrix wrote:
When has that happened?


Quote:
House Passes Pledge Protection Act
By Melanie Hunter
CNSNews.com Deputy Managing Editor
September 23, 2004

(CNSNews.com) - In a vote of 247 to 173, the House Thursday passed a bill that would prevent all courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, from ruling on whether the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance case violate the Constitution.

The Pledge Protection Act, H.R. 2028, was sponsored by Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.).



House Passes Pledge Protection Act


McG do you really see nothing wrong with amending the constitution to [limit rights? Maybe we should begin a new section of the Constitution and call it the Bill of Unrights.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 04:19 pm
Quote:
Sometimes I would disagree about Atlanta being part of America But still why is pushing for one thing or another any different from the other? Why is pushing for gay marriage better than pushing against it? BTW I never said which side I stand on you just clumped me into the group since I am republican and christian.
Thanks for the offer to leave, but I'll stay. America is the greatest country on earth! It gives us both the freedom to feel and talk about issues that would have you killed in other places.


You can't love America and seek to limit people's rights because they are different than you.

America is about inclusiveness, not about shutting out people who are different. To deny happiness to a significant portion of your population is to deny them as countrymen.

Just because you have silly religious superstitions built upon two thousand years of rape, murder, and idiocy, doesn't mean that modern-day people should be denied the right to happiness; the fact that they make you uncomfortable indicates a problem with you, not with them.

Quote:
Why is pushing for gay marriage better than pushing against it?


Because giving rights to people is better than taking them away, period. I would challenge you to find instances in history where limiting people's rights has resulted in a better society.

The typical answer to this is 'they aren't limited, they could marry someone of the opposite sex blah blah blah...' is bullsh*t and you know it, so don't even bring it up. This situation is analagous to the civil rights movement; it has become clear that we need to make changes to include ALL members of our society, not just the Christian ones.

I leave you with a quote from George Washington:

Quote:
The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.


Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 04:37 pm
cannistershot wrote
Quote:
Maybe some of us don't want to be known as "secular" Wordly rather than Godly is not my choice. So explain the difference between you pushing that on me and me pushing against gay marriage
?

This nation from it's beginning has been a secular society. If you are not satisfied with the arrangement might I respectfully suggest a trip to Iran.
In addition If you cannot see the difference between to allow and to deny I can't help you.
0 Replies
 
cannistershot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 06:43 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:
Sometimes I would disagree about Atlanta being part of America But still why is pushing for one thing or another any different from the other? Why is pushing for gay marriage better than pushing against it? BTW I never said which side I stand on you just clumped me into the group since I am republican and christian.
Thanks for the offer to leave, but I'll stay. America is the greatest country on earth! It gives us both the freedom to feel and talk about issues that would have you killed in other places.


You can't love America and seek to limit people's rights because they are different than you.

America is about inclusiveness, not about shutting out people who are different. To deny happiness to a significant portion of your population is to deny them as countrymen.

Just because you have silly religious superstitions built upon two thousand years of rape, murder, and idiocy, doesn't mean that modern-day people should be denied the right to happiness; the fact that they make you uncomfortable indicates a problem with you, not with them.

Quote:
Why is pushing for gay marriage better than pushing against it?


Because giving rights to people is better than taking them away, period. I would challenge you to find instances in history where limiting people's rights has resulted in a better society.

The typical answer to this is 'they aren't limited, they could marry someone of the opposite sex blah blah blah...' is bullsh*t and you know it, so don't even bring it up. This situation is analagous to the civil rights movement; it has become clear that we need to make changes to include ALL members of our society, not just the Christian ones.

I leave you with a quote from George Washington:

Quote:
The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.


Cycloptichorn



I'm glad to see your example of open-minded tolerance about religion, thank you.
0 Replies
 
cannistershot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 06:44 pm
au1929 wrote:
cannistershot wrote
Quote:
Maybe some of us don't want to be known as "secular" Wordly rather than Godly is not my choice. So explain the difference between you pushing that on me and me pushing against gay marriage
?

This nation from it's beginning has been a secular society. If you are not satisfied with the arrangement might I respectfully suggest a trip to Iran.
In addition If you cannot see the difference between to allow and to deny I can't help you.[/quot


Type a complete sentence and I might respond.
0 Replies
 
cannistershot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 06:48 pm
Tocqueville.... "Americas passion for equality tends to elevate the humble to the rank of the great but also impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level."
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 07:20 pm
Quote:
I'm glad to see your example of open-minded tolerance about religion, thank you.


Hey! I never tried to pass legislation based upon the way I feel about your lifestyle!

I'm asking for tolerance, not for you to feel a certain way about gays or not. You can hate them for all I care. Just quit discriminating against them.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cannistershot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Nov, 2004 07:26 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:
I'm glad to see your example of open-minded tolerance about religion, thank you.


Hey! I never tried to pass legislation based upon the way I feel about your lifestyle!

I'm asking for tolerance, not for you to feel a certain way about gays or not. You can hate them for all I care. Just quit discriminating against them.

Cycloptichorn



Oh but you are. I don't hate anyone, you seem to have a knack for trying to put words in my mouth. I tolerate gay men and women, I have 2 gay women that work for me, one is a great employee (I won't lie about the other). I or no one else here discriminates against either. They both have insurance for themselves and their partners and the same benefits that I do.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New York New York! - Discussion by jcboy
Prop 8? - Discussion by majikal
Gay Marriage - Discussion by blatham
Gay Marriage -- An Old Post Revisited - Discussion by pavarasra
Who doesn't back gay marriage? - Question by The Pentacle Queen
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 02:40:04