4
   

Gay marriage debate centers on history vs. change

 
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Feb, 2006 11:50 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
No problem with that, Mesquite. None whatsoever. But honestly, I get it the first time. So everytime I have this discussion with a different person I don't feel it's necessary for you or others to constantly remind me of how you feel I am wrong or my opinion stinks to high heaven. If you think it stinks, put a clothespin on your nose and ignore it.

Nope, when somebody is stinking up the place I think the polite thing to do is let them know they have a problem. Just because you are unable to understand the extent of the stink is no reason for me to ignore the problem.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Feb, 2006 11:53 pm
Mesquite,

Well, the way I see it is you have your opinion and I have mine. I don't choose to berate you for yours. You, however, seem to think because I don't agree with you on this issue that I am wrong and am therefore stinking up the place. I can agree to just disagree. Why can't you?

I'd be very happy to buy you that clothespin. I'd even spring for a gas mask. :wink:
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 12:13 am
Nope, it's not about you so why don't you get over it. It is about a percentage of our population, many of which have families that are not being given legal access to the full benefits of our society because they are different from the majority.

Earlier you said the the www.GodHatesShrimp.com website was ridiculous. Now that was ridiculous.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 12:21 am
You know Mesquite, I keep telling you and others it is not about me it is about the issue. But everytime someone seems to think they can give me a hard time because they don't like the way I believe and they make some nasty remark to me then they make it about me.

I wasn't even having the conversation with you. So, why did you feel it so necessary to get in there and take a poke at me because you don't like what I believe?

Why do you think it's ok for you to decide who is right and wrong in this but God forbid me or anyone that disagrees with you and others tries to explain our views? Then it becomes about someone imposing their beliefs on you. Rolling Eyes

Put on your big boy panties and grow up. It's a discussion. You, me, and everyone else has a right to freedom of speech and to what they believe. If you don't like me because of what I believe well, so be it. I used to have respect for you because you didn't find it necessary to berate others for their differing beliefs. Makes me wonder what happened to you.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 07:48 am
Someone had their asparagus today....
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 09:45 am
BBB
Why are some people compelled to try to dominate a thread with which they disagree in an attempt to divert and destroy it?

I choose to ignore the person that does this and hope others will not let this thread be diverted.

The issue is whether or not tradition is the best basis for establishing social constraints. Several posters have given good examples of traditions that were rightly overturned to provide life equity. What I find interesting is that so many of those discrimination traditions were religious taboos. Once science provided alternatives to myth and tradition, many social taboos were ended. Some, but not all, which is the topic of this thread.

BBB
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 11:05 am
BBB
We are having a similar discussion on another thread. Should boys be circumsized? Is it based on ancient tradition or a medical health necessity?

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=69626&highlight=

BBB
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 01:00 pm
Probably for the same danged reason that others think they can tell another person they think their opinion stinks, etc.

Probably for the same danged reason you think it's ok to post pictures of someone in a public forum when you had no permission to do so.

Probably because they have the same right to freedom of speech as you and everyone else does.

Probably because they have feelings too and they can get ticked off at being lambasted for their beliefs and they might just feel like lashing back a bit.

Probably because it's in a friggin response to what someone has either said to them or about them.

Probably because, like Setanta, has told me, there should be no special pleading and if someone wants to comment on something they have every right to do so.

Did that answer your question fully BBB or would you like me to explain it further?

So, I guess this means you won't go along with just IGNORING me and not referring to me in any way and then I would do the same? Uh, fine. I get the picture. But, as for me, I'm done with you. No more mention of you, no reading your posts, no posting in a thread you start, NADA. But, at least now you know how I feel. >>>CLICK>>>
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 01:02 pm
Re: BBB
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
Why are some people compelled to try to dominate a thread with which they disagree in an attempt to divert and destroy it?

I choose to ignore the person that does this and hope others will not let this thread be diverted.

The issue is whether or not tradition is the best basis for establishing social constraints. Several posters have given good examples of traditions that were rightly overturned to provide life equity. What I find interesting is that so many of those discrimination traditions were religious taboos. Once science provided alternatives to myth and tradition, many social taboos were ended. Some, but not all, which is the topic of this thread.

BBB


I'm sorry to point this out BBB but this post is not really ignoring anything. Rather it is an open display of ignorance. No offence intended but it seems if you are going to ignore something there shouldn't be any need to announce it. Unless of course your intent is to hurt them.

Just a thought...
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 01:24 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
J_B Wrote:

Quote:
Good luck, DrewDad. I had this very same conversation with MA and it goes nowhere. Pissing in the wind is right, Dys.

First of all, I am sorry it seems like I took so long to answer this but actually I answered it earlier. I think I hit the wrong button and made it a thread or something but it somehow got erased. The moderators told me it was accidentally erased or something. I'm still confused. But, thought I'd try to reconstruct what I had answered earlier.

J_B, the statement you made to DrewDad starting off this post is one of the reasons I am rather hesistant to have this conversation with anyone else. It seems you have already decided that I am completely in error here and why waste your time or something? Hey, that's ok. We just see things a bit differently.


Momma, let's say you know someone who, for religious reasons, thinks women should be subservient to their husbands. Women are not equal to men because that's what his religious tradition holds. Let's imagine a situation such as what is considered tradition in many parts of the Arab world. Women have always been subservient to men there. If given the opportunity to vote on a law to give women equal standing to their husbands, should an individual abstain from voting because of their traditions or should an individual vote to give women an opportunity to express themselves as equal partners under the law?

I really don't see how you can quite equate these the way you do because in my case, I don't believe slavery was right and I do not believe bashing women because they are women is right either. So, of course, I would be right there in the front lines to try to rectify this. However, I do feel that homosexuality is wrong. Now, that's what I believe. You and others don't agree, I understand that. But, I have to live with my choices in this life. I choose the things I advocate actively for or not or against or not. That's everyone's right.

I have stated many times my view on this had changed to one that I could live with to where I would not be trying to deny someone's rights if I abstain from voting (supposing I got to vote.) Well, it seems that is not good enough for you or some others. Well, I am sorry. That's the way it is. I am not giving you a hard time because you feel the way you do about this issue and that's because it is your right to believe what you believe. I find it so ironic that those that would champion someone's rights will come so very close to not allowing someone else their right to exercise their decision as they see fit, which is exactly what you do when you make your choices.


You asked me how abstaining is an affront. Refusing to undo a wrong does not make it right. Is it right to watch a kid being bullied and not stepping in to do something about it ? Was it right for segregation laws to exist even after slavery was banned. Inaction does not excuse duplicity whether it's a child being bullied, a woman without rights, a race being discriminated against, or a citizen being denied civil liberties based on their sexual preference.

Well, if it is an affront to you or anyone else because I would not physically go down and vote yes for this issue if I had the opportunity to do so but would abstain instead, don't know what to tell you. Now, if I were to walk around carrying signs that say "God hates fags" or I signed up for that God Hates Fags website or anything, yeah, I could see being giving a hard time for it and quite frankly, I would deserve it. However, I don't hate people because they are homosexual. I don't believe God hates them either, J_B.

Now, if you or anybody else doesn't like that, I'm sorry. But that's how I feel. That's the truth about the situation for me. I do not harbor any harsh feelings about anyone disagreeing with me because of it. And quite frankly, I am getting a little tired of being told (either directly or implied) at how wrong I am for my views and in order for me to be right and thereby ok, I must change my view to that of yours and others.



How many people thought that equality for blacks was wrong before it became law? How many people thought that women weren't smart/capable/equal enough to vote or have equal pay for equal work before it became law? If the laws aren't changed then the opinions behind them don't change either. Your opinion will probably never change. You've told me in other threads that the only impact legalized same-sex marriage would have on you personally would be to expose you to something you find distasteful. There are many people who mistakenly share your opinion, MA. It's the next generation and the one after that who will wonder what was wrong with us to have denied people their civil liberties simply based on sexual preferences. It's our generation who see the benefit of women's rights. It's today's younger generations who see the benefit of anti-discrimination laws. It's tomorrow's generations that will see the benefit of all Americans given the same civil rights, but only if we pass the laws first.

This is the legal forum. I'm not sure of this and maybe some of the attorneys present know for sure, but it is my understanding that no courts have ruled against same-sex marriage. In fact, I believe that all recent cases have gone the other way, stating that laws prohibiting same-sex marriage are unconstitutional. Some states have passed constitutional amendments explicitly defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

Getting back to my very first post on this thread before you started making this thread about you and your opinions, if more states begin to follow Massachusetts in allowing same-sex marriage, then eventually those states who have passed amendments banning it will be pressured to come on board as well.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 01:24 pm
<taking notes on how to throw a hissy fit...>


Is there any argument for preventing gay marriage that does not rely on historical or religious reasoning?
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 01:53 pm
J_B,

You have a right to your views. I have a right to mine. I can agree to disagree on this issue with you. So, guess we are both peeing in the wind. :wink: But just a thought though, perhaps if some would stop trying to tell me I am wrong and they are right and feel they must point it out to me so often, I might not think this might be about me at all? It becomes about me when comments such as:


....mistakenly share your opinion. (Which to me, is saying you are right and me them are all wrong.)

....before you started making this thread about you and your opinions. (Which to me, is saying it's a discussion but don't respond to posts with my opinion on the issue, but you can respond or post with your opinion.)

If it becomes legal then it is legal. That just means it is legal. It doesn't mean I have to agree with it or you or anyone else. I am I'm just sayin..............


DrewDad,

I held the belief that homosexuality was wrong long before I ever became a Christian and it had absolutely nothing to do with religion. I don't mean to offend anyone here, but the thought of two men or two women together having sex makes me physically ill.

Now, I realize there is more to this issue than just sex, but my point is, not everyone thinks it is wrong due to religious beliefs. And I do not discriminate and say things like homosexuals should stay out of the public eye as with displaying physical afffection. I think that everyone, straight, gay, whatever, should keep their public physical affections discrete. I don't have problems with handholding, little kisses, etc., but I think things like buttgrabbing and tongue kissing in public is taking it a bit past common courtesy no matter what their sexual orientation.

And hissy fit? Nah. No where near a hissy fit from me. I can throw one though! :wink:
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 01:57 pm
There were lots of people who became physically ill at the thought of a black man and a white woman together.

Does that make them right?
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 01:59 pm
Momma, everyone is entitled to their opinion but that doesn't make it just or right.

We're racial bigots entitled to be bigots? They had the right, but were they right?

We're the majority of men who felt that women could never make a responsible decision and should therefore be denied the vote entitled to their opinions? They had the right, but were they right?

If a kid is being harassed by a bully, are you entitled to stay out of the fight and go on your way? You have the right, but are you right?


Just because you have a right, doesn't make it right to deny it to someone else.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 02:04 pm
Do YOU have to be right on this issue? I don't. I may think I am but I am more than willing to admit I don't have the definitive answer. I made an adjustment to my way of thinking on this. Because I could see your point of view I came to the best decision for me and my conscience and what I felt was fair for ALL.

I agree to disagree on this issue with you. Why can't YOU?
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 02:28 pm
Oh, I'm happy to disagree. :-) It's just, as I've said before, that I think "agree to disagree" can be a cop-out.

Abby: Dogs are reptiles.

Ben: No they're not, they're mammals.

Abby: I'm telling you, they're reptiles.

Ben: But they're not! See? (Points to website that lists "dogs" under "mammals").

Abby: I don't care what it says, I know what I think, and dogs are reptiles.

Ben: That doesn't make any sense!

Abby: Can't we just agree to disagree?

Obviously I think I'm right -- that's why I think what I think. Shocked There is no shame in that. I just try to make sure I can support what I think is right -- and if I can't, I second-guess myself and if I absolutely can't, I change what I think. Because it's, ya know, not right after all.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 02:43 pm
Will someone turn off the Narcissistic Bigot Show?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 02:46 pm
Lash wrote:
Will someone turn off the Narcissistic Bigot Show?

I'm only moderately narcissistic.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 02:47 pm
When you are a bigot, let me know. I want pictures.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Feb, 2006 02:51 pm
well I also am a moderate bigot. Someone once said "moderation in all things" but someone else once said "too much of a good thing is wonderful" I get confused sometimes. When I get confused the man with the smiley face shows up explaining "This jackets a little tight but you'll feel fine, soon." He says he's from the government and he's here to help me.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/18/2021 at 11:06:16