The anti-gay marriage movement IS homophobic

I believe homosexuals are equal under the law.

In that case, I expect that you support the idea of allowing Gays to marry, correct?

No. I do not support the idea.

This is logically inconstent with your statemtent that you believe in equal rights under the law for all people. Are you aware of this?

Like, who cares if it is logically consistent or not? I believe homosexuality is wrong. Period. I would abstain from voting so I would not be discriminating in any way. Period. That is my right. That is the way I choose to exercise it. You are the one that is pushing me to see it "your" way as right and mine is wrong IMO.

You can't have your cake and eat it, too; either you are for discrimination against gays, or against it. If you are against it, you have a duty to vote equal rights for them the same way that our ancestors voted equal rights for you.

Yep. And I also have the right to not vote if I don't want to. So do you. I will not vote for something I think is wrong.

Oh really? Ok, try this one on for size, why dontcha? You are either for God or against God. True or false? So, no middle ground, huh? I can't just abstain from voting because if I voted my conscience then I would be discriminating? If I don't vote I am discriminating because I am not supporting it? Sorry, not buying that a bit.

It doesn't matter if you don't 'buy' it, the logical error remains the same. You have the certain rights today, including the right to vote, because people in the past worked hard in order to make sure that everyone had equal rights under the law, including those groups who are minorities or unpopular in America. Standing by and claiming no responsibility for the maintenance of the status quo is a false position; you have a responsibility as a citizen of the US to uphold the principles of the Constitution of the US, namely, to uphold the principles of equality for all people. You dodge that responsibility in order to uphold your religious beliefs, but your religion should have nothing to do with what is right and wrong for America; we are a secular nation.

It's called a right to vote. It's not called YOU MUST VOTE. Show me where it says I cannot consider my religious beliefs when I vote or that I cannot abstain.

Your 'either for or against god' example is a poor dichotomy that has nothing to do with the current conversation whatsoever; you are comparing a situation with empirical evidence to one without any possibility of empirical evidence.

Whatever.

Saying that you would 'abstain from voting' is essentially the same as a vote for the status quo, namely, discrimination.

I know. I know. Unless I agree with you and vote for this I am blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.......

Right. And until I agree with you and others and vote for it I am a bigot or homophobe. Well, at least you are more honest than some of the others. You make it very clear that I am wrong unless I think the way you do about this.

Straw men, all of them. I never said any of those things that you have said. I never called you a bigot or a homophobe. I have not seen you display this behavior. I'm not sure why you would accuse me of such a thing in the middle of a rational discussion. Others may have done so, but that is no excuse for accusing me of having done so, thank you very much.

I never said you did actually call me these things. I believe your behavior has made it clear. If I'm wrong, then I apologize.

I am asking you to explain the logical inconsistencies with your position. It is not wrong, nor an insult, to ask someone to explain their logic.

I have explained my position numerous times. It hasn't changed since the last time. I am sorry if you do not understand it.

Your religious beliefs really have nothing to do with this question, by the way; I have no doubt that you believe Satanic Worship and Paganism are wrong as well, but would you support a ban on certain people's religious beliefs? Would you not vote to lift such a ban if it existed? Because that would be a decidedly UnAmerican position to take, given the history of the nation.

Actually, I beleived homosexuality was wrong before I became a Christian. And tell you what, you answer my question about being for or against God and no middle of the road and I will answer this question of yours.

You can do much better than that.

This is not an answer to any of my questions. In fact, I would say that this response is typical of someone who does not have an adequate answer for the questions, because it exposes the hollowness of the position.

As they are simple questions, I will write them again for clarity's sake:

Would you support a ban on certain religious beliefs that the Bible says are wrong?

I would abstain.

Would you vote to remove such a ban if it already existed?

I would abstain.

You have to be able to take a step back from your beliefs about what is right and wrong for you, and consider what is right and wrong for the Country.

Like duh! You're not listening! I said I would abstain. You just won't be satisfied until I see it your way, admit it.

I won't be satisfied until you explain your logical inconsistencies. That is all. I'm not asking you to agree with me that all people are equal; I'm asking you to explain how you can believe that all people are equal while believing that Homosexuals are not equal. Not taking action to correct a logical problem, be it with life or the law, is the same as tacitly admitting that you don't care if your position is illogical.

I have not said one single time they are not equal. You are putting words in my mouth if you think I have. I never said homosexuals were not equal. NOT ONE TIME! Right , again, either I believe your way or I am wrong.

Perhaps we can keep this discussion civil and not accuse each other of things, do you think so?

I am not trying to accuse you at all. I don't like doing that. I, am, however; getting frustrated. I have adjusted my position on this issue so as to not discriminate and it's not good enough. Why? Why can't we just agree to disagree?

Cycloptichorn

I prefer the childish ideal that the world was black and white, that one was either correct or incorrect, etc.

It's too bad we don't live in that reality. Life would be so much easier.


Essentially, you see marriage as sacred, a commitment between God and a couple who truly believe they can share life wholly and purely (and probably a few other adjectives I'm to young to fathom) for the rest of their lives, until death do they part. A homosexual couple, as their practicing the actions preferred to them by their sexuality is renounced by the Bible, should not be allowed said sanctity.

Very well. This is soley a religious stand-point. For legalities, such as those rights granted to a married couple (i.e. tax deduction, can not testify spouse's words or actions in a court of law, etc.), to be granted to a homosexual couple is within your liking, ne?

Joefromchicago,

Let me rephrase that: They should be equal under the law.

It is wrong to discriminate against anyone for what they are, who they are, or what they believe.

As far as those quotes go, they are part of a conversation we were having about this very subject.

I have explained my position. I have adjusted my position so as to not discriminate in any way. Why isn't that enough? Must I change to accepting homosexuality as ok?

My point is this, I have been told that if I voted no I am denying someone's rights. I am no longer voting no. Now, why can't you answer a simple question?

Quote:

It is wrong to discriminate against anyone for what they are, who they are, or what they believe.

Okay, you have basically said two things that are contradictory, essentially making you a hypocrite.

1. You think that it is wrong to discriminate ("for what they are, who they are, or what they believe").
2. You think that gay people should not be able to marry.

Why is it contradictory?
It's clear: You simply CANNOT believe both at the same time.

What is it now?

You just can't let me have my beliefs and me let you have yours? You won't be satisfied until I agree with you 100%?

You just can't understand it, can you? You just can't understand how I can feel something is wrong but not discriminate against someone because of it.

I don't mean to be rude but, you know what, that's your problem, not mine.

I haven't said gay people should not be able to marry so that makes your whole argument moot. Nor has MommaAngel. But if they marry they have to follow the same rules as everybody else. How is that contradictory?

Like, who cares if it is logically consistent or not?

Quote:

You just can't let me have my beliefs and me let you have yours? You won't be satisfied until I agree with you 100%?

You just can't understand it, can you? You just can't understand how I can feel something is wrong but not discriminate against someone because of it.

I don't mean to be rude but, you know what, that's your problem, not mine.

It's your problem for your faults. You can't not discriminate and not support gay rights.

You say you are antidiscirmination. Hypocrite

I don't care about what you think as much as you are sincere about what you think.

And so far, you haven't been sincere. You haven't been telling us all of what you think. Because you certainly can't believe in both at the same time.

Opposing gay rights and discrimination are the same thing. There's no other way around it.

I most certainly can believe in both at the same time. I am doing it quite well thank you very much. You, however, do not seem to understand that I can do it. You seem to think that unless I go out there and vote yes for this that I am being discriminatory. Well, hate to tell you, but too bad for you.

I will not vote for something I believe is wrong. By abstaining I am not actively agreeing or disagreeing with the proposed law. Now, if you can't grasp that, well, I'm sorry. But, that's just the way it is. So, I suggest you put on your big girl/big boy panties and deal with it.

Setanta is correct. You have done nothing to counter his arguments whatsoever, only roll your eyes and make derisive noises.

I already told Setanta that I had probably stated that incorrectly. And I tried to explain what I really meant so I didn't see a need to go through it again. C'mon guys! Takes the points when they are given to you!

This, in your response to me,

Quote:
Like, who cares if it is logically consistent or not?


shows that, if this is the attitude that you hold, you really aren't qualified to discuss the issue.

Sorry, but that made me really laugh. Oh, so if I don't discuss this issue according to your standards then I am not qualified? Is that what you are saying?

I wouldn't dream of telling you how to vote, or what to believe in; but don't come here claiming to be non-discriminatory, because you are. You are hiding behind semantics to support a position of discrimination. I'm not judging that (as you said, it is God that judges in the end, not man) but your logical inconsistancies prevent your argument from having any weight, and show a good example of why Religion should not be a part of policy formation.

Pot meet kettle meet pot meet kettle. It's a discussion. Words get batted around. Thing is, you seem to take this like it's some life and death thing and I'm just having a discussion.

You might not be telling me how to vote but you sure as heck are telling me I am wrong, aren't you? If you think just because I think something is wrong that makes me guilty of discrimination then I submit to you there's not a person in this world that isn't guilty of the same thing. How about you? Huh? Anybody out there you think is doing something wrong? Besides me that is. :wink:

Thing is, I respect your right to think what you want to think. You obviously don't respect mine because you keep telling me I am wrong.

Cycloptichorn

Sorry, but that made me really laugh. Oh, so if I don't discuss this issue according to your standards then I am not qualified? Is that what you are saying?