Skip to comments.
Help! (Teen losing debates on gay marriage)
Posted on 12/01/2003 8:29:13 PM PST by panther33
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 521-540 next last
Thanks in advance!
God bless,
panther33
Age 16
1
posted on
12/01/2003 8:29:14 PM PST
by
panther33
To: panther33
I think to deny them is discrimination. But I am one of the few who voice this on this forum.
2
posted on
12/01/2003 8:31:15 PM PST
by
farmfriend
( Isaiah 55:10,11)
To: panther33
The states essentially have the right to legislate marriage contracts however they see fit. Marriage is not a natural right but rather a civil institution like granting the power of attorney, guardianship, or incorporating a business.
3
posted on
12/01/2003 8:33:03 PM PST
by
Bogey78O
(No! Don't throw me in the briar patch!!!!!)
To: panther33
4
posted on
12/01/2003 8:33:18 PM PST
by
yevgenie
To: panther33
5
posted on
12/01/2003 8:33:59 PM PST
by
yevgenie
To: panther33
More where these came from:
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
1660 The marriage covenant, by which a man and a woman form with each other an intimate communion of life and love, has been founded and endowed with its own special laws by the Creator. By its very nature it is ordered to the good of the couple, as well as to the generation and education of children. Christ the Lord raised marriage between the baptized to the dignity of a sacrament (cf. CIC, can. 1055 § 1; cf. GS 48 § 1).
|
1625 The parties to a marriage covenant are a baptized man and woman, free to contract marriage, who freely express their consent; "to be free" means: - not being under constraint; - not impeded by any natural or ecclesiastical law.
|
6
posted on
12/01/2003 8:34:43 PM PST
by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: panther33
The constitution does not "grant" anybody anything. But then you knew that.
7
posted on
12/01/2003 8:35:01 PM PST
by
Spruce
To: panther33
8
posted on
12/01/2003 8:35:08 PM PST
by
Kay Soze
(Liberal Homosexuals kill more people than Global Warming, SUVs’, Firearms & Terrorism combined.)
To: panther33
Just to further the debate, as I mentioned to my college-age daughter this weekend when she raised the topic with me, remove for a moment the Biblical position on the subject, and consider only the scientific aspects: if a species practiced homosexuality and the majority in the species accepted the practice, what would the odds be for the longterm viability of the species?
Does this not conflict with a basic rule of nature? Does this not conflict with the very law of survival?
9
posted on
12/01/2003 8:36:00 PM PST
by
Chummy
(Billary in Baghdad was for Political Purposes)
To: farmfriend
You are not the only one. I could care less whether gay people get married. It doesn't affect me and my life. If a person doesn't like gay marriage then don't have one.
10
posted on
12/01/2003 8:36:37 PM PST
by
cyborg
(mutt-american)
To: All
JESUS DEFINES MARRIAGE: "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore, they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." -from THE BIBLE: Matthew 19:4-6
International Healing Foundation
11
posted on
12/01/2003 8:36:50 PM PST
by
Cindy
To: panther33
There isn't the slightest doubt in my mind that the Bible finds homosexuality to be a highly immoral practice. However, when I am arguing with atheists or followers of other religions, especially over a political issues, it seems to be virtually impossible to quote the Bible in any way. If they don't believe in the Book, how can I use it in my argument? Simply, you can't. If you can use the Bible to demand that society behave in a particular way; then the Koran may be used for exactly the same purpose. Please consider the following:
Amendment I
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.
Simply stated, the bible holds no more, nor any less authority in the case of law than Wiccan, Buddist, Islamic, Satanic or any other religous practice. None, nada, zero, zip.
While the bible is God's word; and Christianity is the true way to salvation, we each are put on earth to make choices. Some of us will chose wisely and be rewarded for our decisions. Others will chose poorly and have eternity to consider the consequences of thier decisions. But, we all have these choices to make for ourselves.
12
posted on
12/01/2003 8:39:03 PM PST
by
Hodar
(With Rights, comes Responsibilities. Don't assume one, without assuming the other.)
To: cyborg
If churches want to deny them marriage, I have no problem with that. I have a hard time with Uncle Sam, federal or state, drawing distinctions.
13
posted on
12/01/2003 8:39:06 PM PST
by
farmfriend
( Isaiah 55:10,11)
To: panther33
I am consequently faced with a perplexing dilemma: to argue a moral issue without injecting religion. Male homosexuality is defined by a pathogenic (disease producing) behavior; anal sex. Anal sex damages tissue and spreads disease.
Anal sex is a bad idea for anyone, including heterosexual couples, but it is the act which defines male homosexuals.
I do not need to quote the Bible to convince people that consumating your marriage by getting poo poo on your pee pee is a bad idea.
To: panther33
As a proud Christian, I believe whole-heartedly in the Bible. There isn't the slightest doubt in my mind that the Bible finds homosexuality to be a highly immoral practice. However, when I am arguing with atheists or followers of other religions, especially over a political issues, it seems to be virtually impossible to quote the Bible in any way. If they don't believe in the Book, how can I use it in my argument? Easy find a totally different argument that does not rely on the Bible. Even better use arguments based on social sciences, medicine, etc. You should be able to find good material from solid conservative social scientists like Charles Murray.
15
posted on
12/01/2003 8:41:22 PM PST
by
Paleo Conservative
(Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
To: panther33
16
posted on
12/01/2003 8:41:54 PM PST
by
Kay Soze
(Liberal Homosexuals kill more people than Global Warming, SUVs’, Firearms & Terrorism combined.)
To: panther33
I recommend reading everything you can get your hands on by Robert Bork. His essays in
The New Criterion were particularly penetrating.
Here is a suggestion: put the onus on the other debater to formulate a principle out of the concept you can't legislate morality. You should be able to pick apart any edifice he constructs because it is an empty concept.
Another suggestion: marriage has existed as the union of one man, one woman for thousands of years. The states passed legal statutes about an existing institition. Who has decided that the public should assert their dominance over tradition?
To: farmfriend
- The Tenth Amendment essentially gives states any right not expressed in the Constitution. Does this mean that it is up to each individual state to decide whether or not to allow gay marriages?I have to disagree with you. The Constitution is quite explicit. Any right not covered in the Constitution is guaranteed to the states. The men who wrote the document were peers of the state legislators that passed sodomy laws. And the laws were not challenged for constitutionality. They were accepted as standard and good laws
18
posted on
12/01/2003 8:42:19 PM PST
by
billbears
(Deo Vindice)
To: farmfriend
Yup...if a church doesn't want to marry someone, then fine. I do make distinctions between civil marriage and religious marriage myself.
19
posted on
12/01/2003 8:42:37 PM PST
by
cyborg
(mutt-american)
To: Cindy
20
posted on
12/01/2003 8:44:09 PM PST
by
RandallFlagg
("There are worse things than crucifixion...There are teeth.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 521-540 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson