"LGBT RIGHTS"

[laura_charlotte]

There's a reason i don't reply to your posts on my threads, and it's not because you identify yourself as an atheist. Your basic comprehension is extremely questionable.

Stand up and tell people it's wrong and that they should change their ways. Don't say, "You're wrong, therefore I'm going to do everything in my power to take away your rights."

That is absolutely no where near what i meant nor what i said. Secondly, 'take your rights' is completely subjective, there's a reason people who practice homosexuality don't have many rights. Lastly, you think i'm going to live in a world where like some noise making fool i'm going to 'stand up and tell people it's wrong and they should change their ways'? The level of stupidity in this statement is ridiculous. People change the world not by talking, but by action, by deed. The best place to start is through inspiration of the gospel and from there it follows.

any religion that must be forced through government means is too incompetent to stand on its own.

Let me teach you something about Christianity. It's not interested in being governed by man and the only thing that is far too incompetent to stand on its own is atheism. To go through a God given life without our creator and following His will for us, is not only a concept that can't stand on its own but will get you and other non believers absolutely no where in eternal life.

 

[Percepi]

That is absolutely no where near what i meant nor what i said. Secondly, 'take your rights' is completely subjective, there's a reason people who practice homosexuality don't have many rights. Lastly, you think i'm going to live in a world where like some noise making fool i'm going to 'stand up and tell people it's wrong and they should change their ways'? The level of stupidity in this statement is ridiculous. People change the world not by talking, but by action, by deed. The best place to start is through inspiration of the gospel and from there it follows.

Forcing people to abide by your views is as inspirational as breaking a person's legs until they announce Christ as their savior. It's not inspiration if it's being forced.

The reason homosexuals have fewer rights is because homosexuality is considered a sin. There is literally zero reason outside of religion why homosexuality should be banned or that homosexuals should have less rights. If you believe we should have religious freedom, then you need to accept that homosexuality is optional even if you believe it's wrong. If you believe there shouldn't be any religious freedom, you're no better than the Islamic State forcing their religion on their citizens.

Let me teach you something about Christianity. It's not interested in being governed by man and the only thing that is far too incompetent to stand on its own is atheism. To go through a God given life without our creator and following His will for us, is not only a concept that can't stand on its own but will get you and other non believers absolutely no where in eternal life.

Christianity is something one has to conclude themselves. It is not something that should be forced upon anyone.

It doesn't matter if you believe atheism and/or other religions are wrong or impractical, you have to let people live according to how they want to live as long as they aren't infringing on your rights. If you don't like the idea of two people getting married who are the same sex, too bad. It's their life and you need to just accept that they're living in sin. You're allowed to tell these people they're going to burn in hell for all eternity and that they disgust you. You're allowed to teach people that homosexuality is a sin. You're allowed to scoff gay marriage as a governmental union the same way you would an atheist marriage while telling everyone it's not a marriage in God's eyes.

I believe churches and pastors should be allowed to choose who they wed or not. If a church doesn't want to wed homosexuals, I believe that is their right. But if a church is okay with wedding homosexuals or if people want to get married through the state, that's their choice.

You need to distinguish between morals and ethics. Just because you personally don't accept something doesn't mean you have to force others to abide by your morals. I personally find drinking alcohol to be a waste of time, money, energy, and often intelligence. I think it's stupid. But I believe alcohol consumption is a personal choice and that I shouldn't be able to force my views on other people.

You can support gay rights without endorsing gay behavior in the same way you can support a person's rights to own a gun even if you don't personally like guns. Or you can support a person's right to listen to deathmetal even if you feel deathmetal is absolutely horrendous. You can support a person's right to read Twilight while recommending every person and their mother avoid the book like the plague.

 

[laura_charlotte]

Forcing people to abide by your views is as inspirational as breaking a person's legs until they announce Christ as their savior. It's not inspiration if it's being forced.

Again, you fail basic comprehension. There is absolutely nothing i have said about 'force'. Inspiration isn't force at all, saying that i don't believe in just 'talking' and prefer 'doing' to inspire action is completely independent of force.


As i've read your reply to my posts over this year, i haven't replied due to the reason i find myself experiencing now. Basic meaning is completely lost on you. So while i waste time writing up posts to define and illustrate what i actually meant to bring you back to point a to understand, no actual constructive debate and learning has developed, because you have to be brought back to the original meaning from the long tangent you've gone on that has absolutely nothing to do with my original meaning.


I am going to be going back to the my original practice, and i'm not going to bother with the rest of the post. I would sincerely encourage you to go back to school whether it's formal or informal to learn about basic english comprehension, grammar, spelling and how to write properly - basic literacy through to linguistics would be beneficial for you.

 

[Percepi]

Again, you fail basic comprehension. There is absolutely nothing i have said about 'force'. Inspiration isn't force at all, saying that i don't believe in just 'talking' and prefer 'doing' to inspire action is completely independent of force.

What do you mean by "doing" then? Keep in mind, my response is aimed at those who wish to outlaw gay marriage and to prevent gays from having the same rights as everyone else. It wasn't directed at your opening statement. I apologize if you thought that was the case.

I am going to be going back to the my original practice, and i'm not going to bother with the rest of the post. I would sincerely encourage you to go back to school whether it's formal or informal to learn about basic english comprehension, grammar, spelling and how to write properly - basic literacy through to linguistics would be beneficial for you.

I feel my grammar and spelling, though not perfect, are at least on par with most of the posts on this website. I'm also very meticulous with my posts so that they're as clear and concise as possible as to avoid linguistic misunderstandings. However, they still do happen from time to time and I believe this is the case with my previous post as well.

My response wasn't aimed at you, but those who feel homosexuals don't deserve equal rights.

 

[Gadget]

It's the entire 'union' as a concept that is the issue on the table. The whole nature of homosexuality is completely wrong whether it's acted on or not, whether it's thoughts, feelings and actions. What business is homosexuality of christians? When you need to be taught to turn your lives over to God and to learn the ways of Jesus, when your sin is a constant the world, of course we're going to stand up and do something about it.

Wow... Just wow. Okay im going to start calling you people out on this stuff. Since you are convinced that homosexuality is unnatural. (not of nature) please provide your proof. I promise you homosexuality is natural. (of nature) based on the multiple species that engage in it. Shoot right now there is a wildlife research team trying ti figure out why bull seals are raping male emperior penguins before eating them.also it is scientificalky documented that an over populated species will dawn homosexual traits until the population is reduced. So whats your proof? Please i am currious how humans are the standard of "narural"

So its " natural for a man to own his wife and sell his daughters into slavery to be a cocubin? Please tell me what other natural species does that. Hate to brake it to you but man hasnt been "natural" since the fall.

Also who "have too" be taught to turn our lives over? If someone wants to be saved then you have a point as it fits gossiple. But not everyone is a christian or wants to be. See there is this thing called " free will" which means we can choose Jesus or not and *gasp* some have decided not too. Finally. I dont know the how your government was set up but over here it was set up as a democrosy. (we can debate if it now or not later) not a theocracy. So people are welcome to have any belief they want. Shoot why do you think pastapharians are becoming popular?

The point is you xan hold your beliefs and we may even agree on some of them. But i dont have a right to push my faith on you.

 

[laura_charlotte]

I pray that any person who is affected by these kinds of thoughts and negative influences turns to God for healing and redemption.

 

[Human]

I pray that any person who is affected by these kinds of thoughts and negative influences turns to God for healing and redemption.

I find this quite ironic, since your rendering of 'God's word' (homosexuality is repugnant, gays are unnatural, attack attack attack) is the kind of rendering most likely to make gay people reject biblical philosophy to begin with.

 

[kaylagrl]

What is this christian preoccupation with homosexuality?

There wouldnt be a preoccupation with homosexuality except that homosexuality is being promoted so strenuously in society right now.As a Christian we cannot agree it is right so it seems it is always being talked about.

 

[Human]

There wouldnt be a preoccupation with homosexuality except that homosexuality is being promoted so strenuously in society right now.As a Christian we cannot agree it is right so it seems it is always being talked about.

Do you think people are equal? Because if you do, then homosexual people should have the same rights as anyone else.

As well as that, homsexuality is not ''being promoted''. Nobody is walking around saying ''be gay, it comes with great health benefits'' or ''two-for-one on bed buddys of the same sex!!'' No. What is being promoted is equal rights for people regardless of their sex, age, colour or faith. Do you agree that equal rights for all groups is right? Because that's what this is all about -- equal rights.

Even if you don't agree with homosexuality as a practice, that's fine, I don't agree with inequality, and because gay people can say what they like about Christians, so you should be able to say what you like about gay people. That said, you should be standing up for their right to be treated as equal human beings, too, because when all is said and done, if it came down to it they'd probably stand up for yours. And so would I.

 

[kaylagrl]

Do you think people are equal? Because if you do, then homosexual people should have the same rights as anyone else.

As well as that, homsexuality is not ''being promoted''. Nobody is walking around saying ''be gay, it comes with great health benefits'' or ''two-for-one on bed buddys of the same sex!!'' No. What is being promoted is equal rights for people regardless of their sex, age, colour or faith. Do you agree that equal rights for all groups is right? Because that's what this is all about -- equal rights.

Even if you don't agree with homosexuality as a practice, that's fine, I don't agree with inequality, and because gay people can say what they like about Christians, so you should be able to say what you like about gay people. That said, you should be standing up for their right to be treated as equal human beings, too, because when all is said and done, if it came down to it they'd probably stand up for yours. And so would I.

Yes I expect equal rights for homosexuals,which they have,the only exception I have is with marriage.I believe a marriage is between a man and a woman and vote accordingly.Eventually it will pass Im sure but I personally disagree with same sex marriage.

 

[laura_charlotte]

Do you think people are equal? Because if you do, then homosexual people should have the same rights as anyone else.

All people are equal. This is distinct from people who struggle and are afflicted with homosexual thoughts, but as for acting on them, be life style or exercising human rights based on these ill notions, that are completely against the bible, this is what i don't support.

 

[Percepi]

Yes I expect equal rights for homosexuals,which they have,the only exception I have is with marriage.I believe a marriage is between a man and a woman and vote accordingly.Eventually it will pass Im sure but I personally disagree with same sex marriage.

Marriage isn't unique to Christianity. Marriage is available to atheists, Hindus, Muslims... anyone.

If two atheists get married, it has literally nothing to do with God. So why can't two people of the same gender get married? This is why the argument that homosexuality is a sin doesn't work. Laws aren't based off of what is and is not a Christian sin, they're based off of other principles.

As for marriage being between one man and one woman, so what? If that's what you believe marriage should be, then you can abide by that rule. But others shouldn't be forced to do the same. Smashing a window and letting the pieces lay on the floor is not art, in my own opinion. But I've seen it in art museums - I just have to deal with it.

I 100% support a church's right to refuse to wed whomever they want. If a church doesn't want to wed homosexuals, that's their decision. If they do, that's also their decision.

Just to put things in perspective. You obviously believe gay sex is also wrong, correct? Sex, like marriage, is supposed to be between one man and one woman, correct? Should gay sex also be outlawed? Because I see no way one can support one, but not the other, using the standard arguments used against marriage.

 

[Human]

All people are equal. This is distinct from people who struggle and are afflicted with homosexual thoughts, but as for acting on them, be life style or exercising human rights based on these ill notions, that are completely against the bible, this is what i don't support.

You don't have to support the practice itself in order to support their legal right to practice it. What a person does with their personal life shouldn't be hindered by secular laws when what they do with their personal life does not infringe on another person's secular rights. If a homosexual person chooses to abide by Christian morality and stop the practice, their decision to do so should also not be hindered by secular laws.

If you are saying that homosexual people shouldn't be allowed to have sex, by secular law, then that is the first step towards infringing on their rights, and by proxy it is the first step to infringement upon your own. If laws are secular, and rights are given by secular law, then there is no difference between saying 'homosexuality should be illegal to practice' and 'Christianity should be illegal to practice'. I, however, disagree with both of those ideas.

 

[kaylagrl]

Marriage isn't unique to Christianity. Marriage is available to atheists, Hindus, Muslims... anyone.

If two atheists get married, it has literally nothing to do with God. So why can't two people of the same gender get married? This is why the argument that homosexuality is a sin doesn't work. Laws aren't based off of what is and is not a Christian sin, they're based off of other principles.

As for marriage being between one man and one woman, so what? If that's what you believe marriage should be, then you can abide by that rule. But others shouldn't be forced to do the same. Smashing a window and letting the pieces lay on the floor is not art, in my own opinion. But I've seen it in art museums - I just have to deal with it.

I 100% support a church's right to refuse to wed whomever they want. If a church doesn't want to wed homosexuals, that's their decision. If they do, that's also their decision.

Just to put things in perspective. You obviously believe gay sex is also wrong, correct? Sex, like marriage, is supposed to be between one man and one woman, correct? Should gay sex also be outlawed? Because I see no way one can support one, but not the other, using the standard arguments used against marriage.

Yes,I believe gay sex is wrong and I dont see it as natural.I vote accordingly.I dont hate anyone,simply dont agree.

 

[Human]

Yes,I believe gay sex is wrong and I dont see it as natural.I vote accordingly.I dont hate anyone,simply dont agree.

So, given the chance, you'd vote to ban gay sex because it's a biblical sin. In that case, wouldn't you have to vote to ban adultery, too? And vote to ban divorce in circumstances where no abuse or unfaithfulness has occured? And vote to ban premarital sex? And vote to ban hatred? And vote to ban anger? And vote to ban jealousy? And vote to ban coveting your neighbour's wife? And vote to ban people who put other God's before the one you believe in? Becauase all those things are sins, too.

 

[kaylagrl]

So, given the chance, you'd vote to ban gay sex because it's a biblical sin. In that case, wouldn't you have to vote to ban adultery, too? And vote to ban divorce in circumstances where no abuse or unfaithfulness has occured? And vote to ban premarital sex? And vote to ban hatred? And vote to ban anger? And vote to ban jealousy? And vote to ban coveting your neighbour's wife? And vote to ban people who put other God's before the one you believe in? Becauase all those things are sins, too.

We're not living in OT times.We're living in grace.So no.

 

[Human]

We're not living in OT times.We're living in grace.So no.

You did say, in response to Percepi's question 'should gay sex be outlawed', that you don't agree gay sex is right and would vote accordingly. You'd actively vote to discriminate against gay people being allowed, by secular (not religious) law, to be able to have sex. And you cite your reasons as 'I don't agree with it'. I assume you don't agree with it because it's sin.

So I'll ask you again, if you were to vote to outlaw gay sex because it's sin, then wouldnt you also have to vote to outlaw anything that's a sin?

 

[Human]

This is why the concept of 'sin' doesn't suffice to create legal parameters. Sin includes anger, hatred, jealousy, envy, spite, arrogance, pride, vanity and many other emotional or cognitive occurences that cannot be enforced by law, simply because we cannot qualify any accusation of any of these occurences and prove that someone is envious, proud or vain etc beyond reasonable doubt.

This is also why we use different parameters (not Christian religious ones) to create laws, and this is why saying 'gay sex should be outlawed, it's a sin', or 'gay marriage should be outlawed, it's a sin', isn't a sufficient and consistent basis to outlaw gay sex or marraige, unless you admit that you'd also have to outlaw things like anger, hatred, envy, spite, arrogance, pride and vanity, which would be ridiculous.

Therefore I'll be the first on the thread to say that the Christian concept of sin does not provide an adeuqate basis for creating laws.

 

[Word_Swordsman]

Legal "equal" rights shouldn't upset Christians or any other group. No legal right for any individual or group ought to be allowed to infringe upon another, diminishing a legal right of another. Forcing one group to participate in the exercise of rights of another is tyrannical.

Freedom of speech is for all in America, but consequences of threatening communications can be costly. If one's form of speech threatens the safety of another, it can't be tolerated.

Religion in America has a special Constitutional right

 

[Human]

Legal "equal" rights shouldn't upset Christians or any other group. No legal right for any individual or group ought to be allowed to infringe upon another, diminishing a legal right of another. Forcing one group to participate in the exercise of rights of another is tyrannical.

Freedom of speech is for all in America, but consequences of threatening communications can be costly. If one's form of speech threatens the safety of another, it can't be tolerated.

Religion in America has a special Constitutional right

Forcing one group to participate in the exercise of rights of another against religious conviction is tyrannical, but forcing a group by legislation to recognize the rights of another when those rights given contradict religious sentiment is not, as long as the rights given to not allow the prior group to disenfranchise or infringe upon the rights of the latter.

It would be tyrannical, for instance, to force Christians to participate in the act of homosexuality, but it would not be tyrannical to enforce legally the right of consenting gay couples to have sex in contradiction to the Christian religious conviction that gay sex is wrong. The same applies in reverse. It would be tyrannical to force gay people to participate in heterosexual intercourse, but it would not be tyrannical to enforce legally the right of consenting straight couples to have sex in contradiction to the personal sexual preferences of gay people.