Welcome to Gaia! ::

The Republican Guild of Gaia [A Big Tent Republican Guild]

Back to Guilds

A Political-Debate Guild Aimed at Republican Users. 

Tags: republican, conservative, debate, politics, moderate 

Reply The Republican Guild of Gaia
Same-Sex Marriage Goto Page: [] [<<] [<] 1 2 3 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 21 22 23 24 [>] [>>] [»|]

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

Same-sex Marriage?
Yes for Same-sex Marriage
47%
 47%  [ 18 ]
Religion out of the Gov't Civil Unions for All
13%
 13%  [ 5 ]
Same-sex Civil Unions are Okay
7%
 7%  [ 3 ]
No
31%
 31%  [ 12 ]
Total Votes : 38


Drarksupersaiyan

PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 9:58 pm
Rainbowfied Mouse
Drarksupersaiyan
Rainbowfied Mouse
Drarksupersaiyan
I'm just gonna end this debate over gay rights. Back to Soddom and Gomorrah if you read the bible like you say you do when the town was surrounded by the young and old MEN they called out to Lot where are the MEN so we know them carnally. This is the straw that broke the camels back. You studied the bible for so many years apparently and yet you missed when all the homosexuals said to Lot "where are the MEN so we know them carnally". And by the way if you going to use something very holy use it right and not just include the things that make a point look good.

P.S. I have made my point and when judgment come we will see what happens but I have warned you that it will not be a pretty sight.


Apparently you haven't touched a read on my thread. Read it, it might teach you some valuable lessons. It's not a debate if you don't cross-examine my ideas. So either you're completely shocked and cannot argue, so you revert to an argument I already examined, or you just don't care to review the ideas presented. I already argued Sodom and Gomorrah!

You may also want to consider not everyone is Christian, so some people do not give a crap about the Bible, why oppress the atheists with your rulings?


Who said I am pushing this down atheist throats, I don't even know an atheist. I'm using Soddom and Gomorrah as my closing statements and if I didn't read them how would I know that you I said you studied the bible? Stop stating things about me that aren't true. Finally I'm done so don't message me with this the stuff I have ALREADY READ.I'm done with this debate but like I said when the time comes we will see who was right.


You are stating in a political thread many religious ideas! Religion and Politics are separate (Amendment 1.)

If you read my statement, you would have seen the Sodom and Gomorrah section, especially for you!!! biggrin

Show me and I'll read it biggrin  
PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:07 pm
Quote:
Just the fact that our founders wanted to serve GOD in their own way and that's why this nation was founded.


No, the nation was founded because a bunch of colonists were POed about having to pay taxes. A few years after securing independence they then codified an Amendment to the Constitution stipulating that they weren't going to establish an official religion for the country.  

Lord Bitememan
Captain


Drarksupersaiyan

PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:24 pm
Lord Bitememan
Quote:
Just the fact that our founders wanted to serve GOD in their own way and that's why this nation was founded.


No, the nation was founded because a bunch of colonists were POed about having to pay taxes. A few years after securing independence they then codified an Amendment to the Constitution stipulating that they weren't going to establish an official religion for the country.


That was only one factor, the British churches were telling them how to pray and worship AND were taxing them  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:35 am
Quote:
That was only one factor, the British churches were telling them how to pray and worship AND were taxing them


Where the hell are you getting this BS from? The run up to the Revolution had nothing to do with religious issues. It had everything to do with a succession of tax and enforcement acts out of Parliament that agitated the colonies more and more. There was nothing in the way of dictates to the colonies as to religious worship. The only thing even tangentially related was the Quebec act, which established more tolerance for Catholic French Canadians under British rule, but irritated the colonists more because it placed most of the Northwest Territory under the dominion of Quebec, shutting out the land companies. Whoever taught you that religious direction from England had anything to do with it is guilty of educational malpractice.

EDIT: You will note, for example, that nowhere in the Declaration of Independence do the colonists cite the English church among their grievances against the King of England:

Quote:
The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
 

Lord Bitememan
Captain


Rainbowfied Mouse
Vice Captain

6,200 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Forum Junior 100
  • Wall Street 200
PostPosted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 9:39 am
Drarksupersaiyan
Show me and I'll read it biggrin


Sodomites is a term referring to those who participate in sodomy. This term comes from the belief that God destroyed Sodom for being homosexual. However, this is not right. God wanted to destroy the city (Genesis 18:16,) before the angels that were going to be raped came (Genesis 19.) Even if it were the reason, one has no solid evidence to say so, as this would also have been rape and most likely adultery. With two sins dangling there, and one debatable sin, one can not use it as information against homosexuality. This term, however, does not necessarily refer to homosexuals alone, as it could be heterosexuals who partake in sodomy, if this were the correct use of the term.

With all those different translations it's easy to see how unknown the word actually is. Some of the terms apply both to homosexuals and heterosexuals. Adding to the fact that the word homosexual was not created until the mid-1800's, it becomes even more to see as to why the word is unclear.

Quote:
That was only one factor, the British churches were telling them how to pray and worship AND were taxing them


Some of the colonies were formed by religious people (ie; Puritans <- Massachusetts, Quakers <- Pennsylvania)... but they weren't forced into any form of worship, that's the reason they left years before the states became independent... they originally left for religious persecution, then they became independent on a purely political basis!  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:24 am
People can love whomever they want. It's just marriage is between a girl and a boy.  

iFailTaco


Rainbowfied Mouse
Vice Captain

6,200 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Forum Junior 100
  • Wall Street 200
PostPosted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:25 am
Llama Sharts
People can love whomever they want. It's just marriage is between a girl and a boy.


Why can it only be between a girl and boy?  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 11:08 am
Quote:
Some of the colonies were formed by religious people (ie; Puritans <- Massachusetts, Quakers <- Pennsylvania)... but they weren't forced into any form of worship, that's the reason they left years before the states became independent... they originally left for religious persecution, then they became independent on a purely political basis!


And, actually, if you want to get right down to it, the main thrust of Puritan settlement of New England ended when Cromwell rose to power in England, as Puritans then took to regarding America as a backwater to the real events happening in England.

Of course, all of this merely pertains to the north. Colonies from Virginia and south of that were generally founded on that most universal of principles, making money.  

Lord Bitememan
Captain


Fyre in teh Hoal

PostPosted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:19 pm
This is what I have to say...


Okay, I think that gay couples should be able to marry...under certain circumstances.

1. They SHOULD NOT force a pastor to marry them. That is violating freedom of religion.

2. They should be married by a JUSTICE at city hall or in a cheesy Vegas wedding place. This way, they can be married officially and not forcing someone to go against his beliefs.


...There, I said it.
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 6:18 am
Quote:
1. They SHOULD NOT force a pastor to marry them. That is violating freedom of religion.


What if their church recognizes and willingly performs same sex unions?

Quote:
They should be married by a JUSTICE at city hall or in a cheesy Vegas wedding place. This way, they can be married officially and not forcing someone to go against his beliefs.


Same as above.  

Lord Bitememan
Captain


Vasilius Konstantinos

PostPosted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:49 pm
Lord Bitememan
Quote:
1. They SHOULD NOT force a pastor to marry them. That is violating freedom of religion.


What if their church recognizes and willingly performs same sex unions?

Quote:
They should be married by a JUSTICE at city hall or in a cheesy Vegas wedding place. This way, they can be married officially and not forcing someone to go against his beliefs.


Same as above.


The its all good.
I still have an issue with the GOvernment being able to recognize marriages in the first place. Why should they have to? Taxes? We can bypass that if we got down to it.  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:44 am
Quote:
The its all good.
I still have an issue with the GOvernment being able to recognize marriages in the first place. Why should they have to? Taxes? We can bypass that if we got down to it.


And getting government completely out of marriage would be an equitable solution to the matter, and some have actually proposed this idea in the past.  

Lord Bitememan
Captain


Rainbowfied Mouse
Vice Captain

6,200 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Forum Junior 100
  • Wall Street 200
PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 7:22 am
Lord Bitememan
Quote:
The its all good.
I still have an issue with the GOvernment being able to recognize marriages in the first place. Why should they have to? Taxes? We can bypass that if we got down to it.


And getting government completely out of marriage would be an equitable solution to the matter, and some have actually proposed this idea in the past.


I concur, I think civil unions are the way to go. Religions tend to get frilly with the thought of marriage, as a definition it's more along the religious parallels.  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:16 pm
Personally, my religion makes me support gay marriage (though most others of us would disagree). My religion teaches that God is truth, and he made all things as part of truth. So, if you try to be something other than what God made you, or if you try to change the way God made someone by force, then that is a sin. That's why we don't convert people. So, telling gays they can't marry is sort of like telling them they can't be gay. And, if people are born gay, then forcing them not to be is a way of destroying the truth God made. So, BECAUSE of my religion, I think gays should be allowed to marry.  

TammiGirl


Magus Kathrine

PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:00 pm
Well, in case you didn't notice suicide is higher among gay males, along with smoking due to "stress" so it's obvious they know it's wrong, and God can change them if they try. If we encourage same-sex marriage, then we are allowing more gay people to up our suicide rates, and cause more cancer.  
Reply
The Republican Guild of Gaia

Goto Page: [] [<<] [<] 1 2 3 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 21 22 23 24 [>] [>>] [»|]
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum