Gay Marriage: For or Against?

[DarkPacMan77]

exactly, doesnt that prove that being gay isnt allowed?

According to the Bible, yes, but according to many pieces of ancient literature or document of ancient civilization, and even marriage records, no. Gay lifestyle was embraced as a natural occurrence predating Christianity, even though often seen as taboo by many.

-DarkPacMan77-

exactly, doesnt that prove that being gay isnt allowed?

According to the Bible, yes, but according to many pieces of ancient literature or document of ancient civilization, and even marriage records, no. Gay lifestyle was embraced as a natural occurrence predating Christianity, even though often seen as taboo by many.

-DarkPacMan77-

According To Islam, Christianity, Hinduism..

but the fact is that people have different religions that they believe in. so something that may seem wrong to us might be wrong to them. and we have to co-exist.

If you see a Gay person, who doesnt believe in the same religion as you do, then you're better off leaving him alone!

(you-general)

exactly, doesnt that prove that being gay isnt allowed?

No:

I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women. 2 Samuel 1:26 (King James Version)

David referring to his lover Jonathan after his death. David's father was Jesse and Jonathan's father was Saul so they weren't blood brothers. If you think God did not approve then think about why Solomon and eventually Jesus came from the line of David.

@ Tyler I wasn't intending on proving anyone wrong. I had never heard of that and wanted a source is all.

[DarkPacMan77]

I agree 100%, Da Cool Man. The thing I think people have a hard time grasping is that gays who align themselves with any particular religion won't necessarily derive their meaning of "marriage" from the Bible as Christians do. My only reasoning for bringing Christian values up in this thread as opposed to any other religion is that we already know that, predominantly, our forum is made up of Christians and it was Christians I was responding to.

"Marriage" itself, according to the Bible, is clearly corrupt. Marriage in the Bible isn't always depicted as a union of love and courtship between a man and woman although it is depicted that a traditional marriage in the Christian faith should follow that formula (if not merely for reproductive reasons alone). Que posted a video about how "marriage" is depicted in the Bible. This video can be taken offensively, so be warned, but I'll post this video again because it truly exposes some of the grotesque depictions of marriage and relationships in the Bible even though it does it in a particularly forward fashion.

-DarkPacMan77-

Let people do what they want... Tryin to force your views on others is stupid.

Let people do what they want... Tryin to force your views on others is stupid.

seriously..

Also, in my opinion religion is a bunch of sh*t propaganda designed to keep you tied to a certain way of life, and anyone who goes further than taking some life lessons out of religious texts is a completely brainwashed fool.

now that post pretty darn offensive!

I just want to add that the bible is the number one source responsible in modern times for gay bashing.

[DarkPacMan77]

I just want to add that the bible is the number one source responsible in modern times for gay bashing.

And that is equally offensive as SGG's statement on how he feels about religion. It should be offensive for Christians to know that they aren't accepting their brethren as equals regarding marriage, especially because "marriage" itself is a very shaky term to cling to when going by the Bible.

-DarkPacMan77-

Id like to remind every1 that this isnt a thread about Religion!

Sorry about that, sometimes I get caught up in my life goal to piss on religious faith.

[DarkPacMan77]

Id like to remind every1 that this isnt a thread about Religion!

You can't have a thread questioning gay marriage in the United States without drudging up religious concerns. It's impossible. This is, as a matter of fact, a sub-thread, in a sense, for religious values concerning gay marriage. I will admit though, there are various other values concerning gay marriage from other aspects of life that we haven't addressed and that I'd like to.

One such thing that comes to mind is divorce rates. A lot of people try saying that you can't allow gays to marry because then they will divorce a lot and such. I find that kind of... well, in our day and age, practical to assume. I mean, most marriages these days probably fail as it is but I think that it wouldn't harm anything more than typical marriages if gays divorced at even two times the rate of straight couples.

Another issue I can think of involves the states independently. I can imagine many states in their entirety not wanting this to happen, but there are those that do (and have or have tried). The question at hand here relies on just what will happen at the Federal level in Congress in the future which would have the chance to override the states or allow them to continue allowing marriage contracts between gays like before on a state-by-state basis.

-DarkPacMan77-

Id like to remind every1 that this isnt a thread about Religion!

It IS about religion.

The church is the #1 source of resistance to gay marriage. The bible is used to define marriage as a union between man and woman so how can you say this isn't about religion?

So many people have stated they oppose gay marriage because it's against god's will and against the "teachings" of the bible, religion is at the root of this issue!

I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women. 2 Samuel 1:26 (King James Version)

all i have to say bout this, is yeah it could mean what you think and it couldnt. my reasoning being that the words gay and queer meant very different things before it became slang a long time ago. so that phrase could have e verydiff meaning then what you are trying to convey.