Homosexual Marriage

[Dirty Name]

Quote by: RickSP Spare me your illiteracy DN. Againstthewind posted a specific reference to Leviticus and I responded specifically to Leviticus.

Of course you did. Because that's the only thing you CAN respond with.

Too bad for you the Bible still calls homosexuality wrong in the New Testament, whereas many of the Laws of Moses that gays are so happy to point at were rendered obsolete and thus do not apply.

You just aren't going to win on the argument that "the Bible condones things that are morally reprehensible today, so we shouldn't listen to the Bible when it condemns homsexuality" - unless you want to appeal to ignorance (which isn't always a bad strategy, but it IS a logical fallacy).

[Dirty Name]

Quote by: Zinkovich Incorrect. Homosexual couples are not recognized by our government, thus creating issues with visitation rights, inheritance, insurance, and healthcare that I have witnessed with my partner and his friends firsthand.

Are you suggesting that there is no remedy available for you in each of those "hardships" you listed?

Quote by: Zinkovich A homosexual household must have a great deal more money to subsist than a heterosexual one.

I'm calling B.S. here. Prove it. And while you're at it, define "a great deal more money."

I think that statement is totally full of crap.

[Jack]

Too bad for you the Bible still calls homosexuality wrong in the New Testament, whereas all of the Laws of Moses that gays are so happy to point at are now obsolete and thus do not apply.

And gay atheists as well as many gay theists don't accept Biblical attitudes as the basis for any law. Too much nitpicking over which O.T. passages Christians want to apply and which they choose to ignore.

[Jack]

I'm calling B.S. here. Prove it. And while you're at it, define "a great deal more money." I think that statement is totally full of crap.

No matter what happens politically and legally on the gay marriage issue, one thing is clear: It's great for the wedding business. The surge in gay unions — and media coverage of the controversy — has sent thousands of wedding planners into a swoon over the prospect of tapping a huge new market: 16.5 million gay men and lesbians, with a total buying power of $450 billion. "The economy is flat, so couples are delaying their weddings, plus there's a lot more competition among planners," says Richard Martel, president of the 20,000-member Association of Wedding Professionals International. Only 1% of marrying couples use planners, "so we're targeting a very small population. Any business is good business." Indeed, a survey of his members found that only a handful of 1,500 respondents declared opposition to gay weddings. Even in politically conservative Orange County, Calif., gay-friendly wedding planner Nancy Levy has been deluged with calls from gay couples. She says only three of the 45 vendors she works with — such as florists, photographers and caterers — refused to do a gay wedding. "Everybody knows this is where the money is, because gays generally have more disposable income," says Levy, co-owner of Wedding Town USA, whose business partner, Unitarian minister Deb Gordon, officiates at gay weddings. The two planned a dozen gay nuptials in the last year, have another five coming up and are organizing three gay wedding expos around the state over the next year. "I talked to one of my vendors — very Republican, wears (President) Bush buttons and bumper stickers — and he said, 'And you think I was going to say no? People are people.' It's amazing," says Levy. Some in the wedding business saw the potential of the same-sex market way before the gay marriage issue exploded. OutVite.com, an online company that sells custom-designed invitations for same-sex weddings, was launched last year. Company president Micah Chase says same-sex couples tend to have smaller orders (50 to 75 invitations, compared with 150 for straight couples) but spend more ($385 on average vs. $260). Chase has seen dramatic growth since January: "I would have been happy with five orders a week, but we're getting about five orders a day." Gretchen Hamm of Dallas sells gay-themed wedding products on her Web sites twobrides.com and twogrooms.com. She started the sites four years ago when she couldn't find gay-themed items for her daughter's wedding. Sales doubled in 2003 and are on track to double this year, she says. "There has been a shift in consciousness in the community — there's more impatience now," says Hamm. Many of her clients have been together for decades but were inspired by recent events to have a ceremony. "People say, 'We don't have to wait for it to be legal, we can have a ceremony that honors our commitment now.' " There also are new wedding-planning portal sites such as PrideBride.com, founded by Canadians Rita Leonard and Paula Rutledge of Winnipeg, aimed at helping same-sex couples around the world do it "their" way. Some couples, says Leonard, "get hung up on having to do it like a straight wedding, but we say we're different for a reason, so you can do your wedding different." Such things as food and flowers will be the same in any wedding. But many same-sex couples want to keep their money in their community, so they seek out gay-owned vendors. Emily Sherwood, 46, will marry her partner of 22 years, Ruth Davidson, 45, in a small wedding in their Lynn, Mass., home on Saturday. One of her main concerns was finding gay-friendly vendors. "I wanted to be sure of getting a friendly reception." "There is a lot more emphasis on the actual ceremony, religious or not," Kingsdorf says. "They want to acknowledge the obstacles they've overcome and to recognize the people who were there for them."

USATODAY.com - Much ado about gay commitment ceremonies

On the other hand:

In 2003 a paper by Nathan Berg & Donald Lien on Measuring the Effect of Sexual Orientation on Income: Evidence of Discrimination? (PDF) suggested that gay men in the US earn 22% less than similarly qualified men of the heterosexual persuasion, in contrast to lesbians (who on average earn 30% more than straight women). That was consistent with the 2001 study by Dan Black, Hoda Makar, Seth Sanders & Lowell Taylor on The Effects of Sexual Orientation on Earnings (PDF) and the 2005 Selling Us Short: How Social Security Privatization Will Affect Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Americans report (PDF), which comments that LGBT Americans, on average, have lower incomes than their heterosexual counterparts, which translates into lower Social Security benefits when they retire. In addition, same-sex couples are not eligible for Social Security's spousal and survivor benefits provisions, making the LGBT community disproportionately vulnerable ... There is a widespread myth that gay people are economically advantaged compared to heterosexuals. U.S. Census data and other national surveys indicate the opposite. In fact, gay and bisexual men earn anywhere from 13 percent to 32 percent less than heterosexual men Berg & Lien problematically ask whether gay men "settle for earning less" because in the absence of children they can "actively choose leisure over income and savings", whereas high earnings among lesbians might be attributable to employer perceptions that they will not stop working at any point in their careers to raise children, so that "making one's lesbian status public may be an especially credible signal of loyalty or workforce attachment".

Internet Demographics profile: GLBT

It seems the jury's still out on whether gays have more disposable income in general. Perhaps those who plan on getting married are just better at budgeting for that.

[Gabe2007]

Quote by: italiangm I don't know why the bible is even being raised in a debate about gay marriage. As long as the state has its grubby fat fingers in the marriage business, then the bible has no place in this discussion unless we're talking about a church marriage. And please don't waste our time with the bible as the basis of our legal system. We have a secular government, so come up with a secular argument for marriage. Bible quotes mean nothing here.

-The Bible means everything here...
-there is only a debate Because of the Bible objection to such a deplorable action...
-where do you think a gay marriage is going to be held...certainly not in a synagogue..or even a mosque (because commands to kill gays)

and tell how the US is secular...many of our laws and traditions are christian related, so how are you going to sit there and say that we are a secular people...

[Gabe2007]

Quote by: againstthewind Homosexuals already have legal rights by our government

if they have their right, then why the hell are they bitching about getting new ones?

Nobody is saying they can't be gay! they can be gay all they want to but don't force your disgusting actions upon everybody (especially 3rd graders in public schools) and don't expect everybody to accept this supposed "lifestyle"!

[italiangm]

Quote by: Gabe2007 -The Bible means everything here... -there is only a debate Because of the Bible objection to such a deplorable action...

Not according to Dirty Name. All of his arguments (whether valid or not) have been secular. Read up on them and learn.

Quote by: Gabe2007 -where do you think a gay marriage is going to be held...certainly not in a synagogue..or even a mosque (because commands to kill gays)

In the US and many other countries, there are civil marriages. You get a license, you go to a public official who certifies the marriage, then you're done. No church needed.

Quote by: Gabe2007 and tell how the US is secular...many of our laws and traditions are christian related, so how are you going to sit there and say that we are a secular people...

You are free to practice your religion, however you are not free to impose your religious belief as law. Many laws that have a historical basis in religion have been repealed, frequently because they cite religious beliefs as the reason for their existence.

[Jack]

if they have their right, then why the hell are they bitching about getting new ones?

Not "new" ones, the same ones straights enjoy. From the article I posted above:

same-sex couples are not eligible for Social Security's spousal and survivor benefits provisions

Hypocrisy is amusing. If we dare say on this forum that Christians, who believe and speak to a person no one else can see, are exhibiting signs of mental instability, we're roundly denounced. "You can't say that about Christians." Yet when religious straights blather about gays being "morally reprehensible" and "disgusting", you don't see gays getting all upset and defending themselves against such nonsensical accusations. We know those are just the results of an indoctrination many of us have managed to educate ourselves away from. Another fine example of Christian thinking, another good reason to disdain their opinions and attitudes.

[Dirty Name]

Quote by: Isherwood Another fine example of Christian thinking, another good reason to disdain their opinions and attitudes.

What, exactly, are you talking about here? At the risk of derailing our discussion, I think you're EXTREMELY guilty of stereotyping all Christians with your ill-informed remarks.

Like all foolish stereotypes, you are taking the Jesus Camp depiction of Christians and applying them to all Christians, and quite frankly, most Christians aren't like that in the least.

Please spare me the constant denigration of Christianity in this forum - not only is it just plain wrong and misinformed, it's insulting and bigoted.

And speaking of bigotry - a charge I've been accused of repeatedly on these forums - I'd like to take a moment and point out a glaring difference.

In my secular argument against gay marriage, I am repeatedly accused of bigotry, and yet nowhere does my argument stereotype or disparage homosexuals in any way. Thus, the accusations of bigotry are, at best, inferred by the accuser.

On the other hand, Isherwood (a MODERATOR on Volconvo, no less) overtly disparages the attitudes and opinions of Christians, which is OBVIOUS bigotry.

This place is becoming a joke.

[againstthewind]

Quote by: Isherwood Hypocrisy is amusing. If we dare say on this forum that Christians, who believe and speak to a person no one else can see, are exhibiting signs of mental instability, we're roundly denounced. "You can't say that about Christians." Yet when religious straights blather about gays being "morally reprehensible" and "disgusting", you don't see gays getting all upset and defending themselves against such nonsensical accusations. We know those are just the results of an indoctrination many of us have managed to educate ourselves away from. Another fine example of Christian thinking, another good reason to disdain their opinions and attitudes.

Your problem is simply this: You are what you throw at others, this is a disturbing post against a group you claim are being exclusive, but not only are Christians exclusive (Jesus being the door into heaven) but you have to understand that Christians aren't the only religious group that claim exclusivity, such as Islam. Biblical Christianity says that homosexuality is wrong and so does Islam. I wonder: did you condemn the hangings of the Iranian homosexuals? There is a big difference and between hating homosexuality and homosexuals. I hate homosexuality but I love homosexuals because I am commanded by Christ to love them, but I can't celebrate or say that it is right by any means.

That statements is bigoted as you claim Christians are

[CoffeeSaint]

Quote by: Dirty Name What, exactly, are you talking about here? At the risk of derailing our discussion, I think you're EXTREMELY guilty of stereotyping all Christians with your ill-informed remarks. Like all foolish stereotypes, you are taking the Jesus Camp depiction of Christians and applying them to all Christians, and quite frankly, most Christians aren't like that in the least. Please spare me the constant denigration of Christianity in this forum - not only is it just plain wrong and misinformed, it's insulting and bigoted. And speaking of bigotry - a charge I've been accused of repeatedly on these forums - I'd like to take a moment and point out a glaring difference. In my secular argument against gay marriage, I am repeatedly accused of bigotry, and yet nowhere does my argument stereotype or disparage homosexuals in any way. Thus, the accusations of bigotry are, at best, inferred by the accuser. On the other hand, Isherwood (a MODERATOR on Volconvo, no less) overtly disparages the attitudes and opinions of Christians, which is OBVIOUS bigotry. This place is becoming a joke.

You got my proof yet, Dirty Name? Or are you still dodging me in order to badger and harass other posters?

[Jack]

Quote by: Dirty Name What, exactly, are you talking about here?

If you'd read my post you'd know I was talking about the pejorative terms you both used to describe homosexuality, and by extension, gays themselves:

Quote by: Isherwood when religious straights blather about gays being "morally reprehensible" and "disgusting"

And just as I predicted, you both think that some religion is exempt from criticism.

Quote by: Dirty Name Please spare me the constant denigration of Christianity in this forum - not only is it just plain wrong and misinformed, it's insulting and bigoted.

I said Christians believe in and talk to a man who no one else can see. Do you deny that?

Quote by: Dirty Name nowhere does my argument stereotype or disparage homosexuals in any way

Quote by: Dirty Name Too bad for you the Bible still calls homosexuality wrong in the New Testament

I may not care what the Bible says about anything, but that comment is indeed disparaging to Christian gays, of which there are quite a few. I can't say why, but there are.

Quote by: Dirty Name On the other hand, Isherwood (a MODERATOR on Volconvo, no less) overtly disparages the attitudes and opinions of Christians, which is OBVIOUS bigotry.

You guys do love to throw the moderation thing in, don't you? Sorry, but it's totally irrelevant to the discussion. My objection to Christianity, indeed to all religion, is very similar to your attitudes toward homosexuality. I consider it a choice people make that's a force of division and hatred in the world. I'm no bigot, I just don't like or believe in religion. It's odd you don't consider disapproving of gays as bigotry, but disapproving of Christianity as bigotry. I gather we'll never agree as to what constitutes bigotry.

Quote by: againstthewind You are what you throw at others

Heh, I haven't heard that one since grade school.

Quote by: againstthewind this is a disturbing post against a group you claim are being exclusive, but not only are Christians exclusive (Jesus being the door into heaven) but you have to understand that Christians aren't the only religious group that claim exclusivity, such as Islam.

I agree. Both are exclusive and outdated.

Quote by: againstthewind did you condemn the hangings of the Iranian homosexuals?

Absolutely. And the killing of Matthew Shepard by young men motivated by their religious upbringing to hate faggots.

Quote by: againstthewind I hate homosexuality but I love homosexuals because I am commanded by Christ to love them

True love comes from the heart (speaking metaphorically). You cannot be commanded to love. And "Hate the sin, love the sinner" was spoken by Mahatma Gandhi, not Jesus and not a Christian.

[Scoobydoo]

in regards to some comments above, that homosexuals should have the same exact rights as heterosexuals, in regard to marriage, I dont believe that's true. One doesnt get rights simply by demanding it, it doesnt fit the context or definition of marriage. marriage is a man+woman. I have nothing against homosexuals at all but 2 men or 2 women does not = marriage.
The best thing I can liken it to is my teenager felt she should be able to drive at 11 yrs old, she simply didnt understand why she could not, when other larger adult like people could. The reason was not 'well, she should, because it's her right too, if it's adults rights, then it's hers too" that wasnt the answer. The answer was she cant drive because she is not 16. Its not prejudiced, it is what it is.
If a 72 yr old person insisted on being allowed to join the girl scout club, would that be prejudiced to say no?
Or I a man wanted to join a ladies mother's day tea party, and be honored teh same along with the moms there? Would that be prejudiced to turn him down?
I know this will be ripped into by some, but it's my opinion, that one can't always say prejudice is the cause, OR that we can have a right by demanding it

[Dirty Name]

I may not care what the Bible says about anything, but that comment is indeed disparaging to Christian gays, of which there are quite a few. I can't say why, but there are.

I didn't make the statement, it appears in the Bible and I merely referenced it. And you already know I don't base my argument on it, so why are you crying about it?

I consider it a choice people make that's a force of division and hatred in the world.

This is probably fodder for a different thread, but I challenge you to demonstrate that mainstream Christianity is a force for division and hatred in the world. I contend that if practiced correctly, it's completely the opposite.

You tend to disagree because you view the refusal to condone homosexuality as "hatred" of homosexuals themselves, which is patently untrue.

It's odd you don't consider disapproving of gays as bigotry, but disapproving of Christianity as bigotry.

You can disapprove Christianity all you want. But claiming you view the thoughts and attitudes of Christians with disdain is literally open bigotry - that is, unless you don't know the meaning of the word disdain:

dis·dain /dɪsˈdeɪn, dɪˈsteɪn/
–verb (used with object)
1. to look upon or treat with contempt; despise; scorn.
2. to think unworthy of notice, response, etc.; consider beneath oneself: to disdain replying to an insult.
–noun
3. a feeling of contempt for anything regarded as unworthy; haughty contempt; scorn.

Again, my argument makes no moral judgement, and certainly doesn't call for one to view homosexuals or their behavior with "disdain."

[againstthewind]

Love the sinner and hate the sin is vital to Christian belief. In Ephesians 6:10-20 and most notably verse 11 he tells us that we don't fight against people or flesh and blood, but principalities and spiritual wickedness in high places or heavenly realms and this Earth is a chess board with two sides, God's and the devil's.

Christians fight against the devil and the devil can use people to do his will as God can use people voluntarily to do his will. The devil uses nonbelief to advance his kingdom and sin period advances his kingdom of darkness. Homosexuality is one of those very things as well as a host of many other sins by those who haven't repented of them and accepted him as Lord and subjected their will to him

So, I don't strive against homosexuals, for they are the means in which the devil uses, but I will speak out against homosexuality because it is morally wrong and homosexuals are not a legitimate minority by the way and as a black man, I am offended.

[italiangm]

(Non-secular comments snipped)

Quote by: againstthewind .... but I will speak out against homosexuality because it is morally wrong and homosexuals are not a legitimate minority by the way and as a black man, I am offended.

Awwww. You poor thing.

As a homosexual man -- and part of legitimate minority -- I'm offended that parts of my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness are trampled on by moralizing bigots.

[Marilyn Monroe]

[quote=Isherwood;376469]

I said Christians believe in and talk to a man who no one else can see. Do you deny that?

They see Him in others.

You guys do love to throw the moderation thing in, don't you? Sorry, but it's totally irrelevant to the discussion. My objection to Christianity, indeed to all religion, is very similar to your attitudes toward homosexuality. I consider it a choice people make that's a force of division and hatred in the world. I'm no bigot, I just don't like or believe in religion. It's odd you don't consider disapproving of gays as bigotry, but disapproving of Christianity as bigotry. I gather we'll never agree as to what constitutes bigotry.

Religion also brings people together. and probably has a lot to do with how great man has become. It's possible we'd still be cavemen without it.

Absolutely. And the killing of Matthew Shepard by young men motivated by their religious upbringing to hate faggots.

We don't know what their motivation was, but it surely wasn't religion.

True love comes from the heart (speaking metaphorically). You cannot be commanded to love. And "Hate the sin, love the sinner" was spoken by Mahatma Gandhi, not Jesus and not a Christian.

Actually St. Augustine said something very similar long before Ghandi.

“That is, he should not hate the man because of the fault, nor should he love the fault because of the man; rather, he should hate the fault but love the man. And when the fault has been healed there will remain only what he ought to love, and nothing that he ought to hate” (City of God, 14.6). “No sinner, precisely as sinner, is to be loved; and every human being, precisely as human, is to be loved on God’s account, God though on his own. And if God is to be loved more than any human being, we all ought to love God more than ourselves” (De Doctrina Christiana, 1.27.28).

[againstthewind]

Quote by: Scoobydoo in regards to some comments above, that homosexuals should have the same exact rights as heterosexuals, in regard to marriage, I dont believe that's true. One doesnt get rights simply by demanding it, it doesnt fit the context or definition of marriage. marriage is a man+woman. I have nothing against homosexuals at all but 2 men or 2 women does not = marriage. The best thing I can liken it to is my teenager felt she should be able to drive at 11 yrs old, she simply didnt understand why she could not, when other larger adult like people could. The reason was not 'well, she should, because it's her right too, if it's adults rights, then it's hers too" that wasnt the answer. The answer was she cant drive because she is not 16. Its not prejudiced, it is what it is. If a 72 yr old person insisted on being allowed to join the girl scout club, would that be prejudiced to say no? Or I a man wanted to join a ladies mother's day tea party, and be honored teh same along with the moms there? Would that be prejudiced to turn him down? I know this will be ripped into by some, but it's my opinion, that one can't always say prejudice is the cause, OR that we can have a right by demanding it

If anyone rips into this, they must not get the point. I must admit this is a well reasoned argument for traditional marriage.

[againstthewind]

I like your post, thanks for sharing it with us Marilyn Monroe