the incidence of partner swapping in gay relationships is significantly higher due to the sexual nature of gays......Because of their inherent nature, I think letting them get married is a little premature at this time.

Well, at least you admit its "inherent" and part of "nature".

Originally posted by Travh20
the fact that they kicked him out for his opinion says a lot about them

:rolleyes: Trav, they didn't kick him out for his opinion...read the post again.

What? Gay women get aids at a higher percentage than heteo women??? Where did you come up with that? Please explain how that is the case?

Ok, you caught me...:rolleyes:

Gay women are the least likely to contract the aids virus, but that says nothing for the increased likelihood of contracting it by gay men. That was my point.

First of all, if you are using a South Park character as an example of how gay people act, then look at how heterosexuals act

I know, and I thought it was funny.

(REF: Kyle's mom, and Chef...they'll have sex with anyone).

I think you mean Cartman's mom. Kyle is the Jew, and his mom's super fat...

Gay women are the least likely to contract the aids virus, but that says nothing for the increased likelihood of contracting it by gay men. That was my point.

I agree, gay men do contract aids more often, but I believe that your original comment was insinuating that ALL homosexuals are more likely to contract aids. Since you just admited that gay women are less at risk, does that mean your comment of "I think letting them get married is a little premature at this time" does not apply to gay women?

I think you mean Cartman's mom. Kyle is the Jew, and his mom's super fat...

You're right.

She's not fat. She's just big boned! lol

Originally posted by korg
travh, your 2 for 2 with me today. i feel the same way.....i honestly think that this could open things up in schools , and i dont want anyone that my child has to learn from, giving the opinion that this is ok. people must get a different interpretation from soddom and gomorrah. this is an abomination to god, and gays talk like this is ok with god.............its not

I too have to agree with what Korg said. I dont condone gayness at all, i dont like it because the Bible speaks out on it and tells us that it is clearly wrong. I can totally understand when a gay man or woman wants to do what they do and they dont believe in God or the Bible. But it makes me sick to see priests who claim that they serve God to be promoting and even having gay marriages. THAT i cannot stand. I have learned one important thing in my months here on allforums.net: It is hard for A religious person and an atheist to agree with some things because when the religious side shows the Bible as proof against something it is shot down quite quickly. For gays their enemy should be the Bible because it pronounces judgement against them. To think that they use It it justify their actions is ridiculous.

Originally posted by Jwjames111
I too have to agree with what Korg said. I dont condone gayness at all, i dont like it because the Bible speaks out on it and tells us that it is clearly wrong.

First of all the Bible doesn't condemn gayness, it condemns homosexual relations between men. It says absolutely nothing about lesbianism.

Secondly, the bible condemns a great many things that simply don't make sense, and has rules which even most Christians do not follow. Examples would be; planting a field with two different crops, which can be beneficial, and wearing cloth made from linen and wool.

For gays their enemy should be the Bible because it pronounces judgement against them. To think that they use It it justify their actions is ridiculous.

James, my enemy is not a two-thousand year-old book. My enemy is the intolerance, and ignorance that allows people to take a book that contains a great deal of wisdom, and use parts of it to justify their preconceived opinions about gay people.

So, unless you wish to condemn shrimp eaters, farmers, and the pioneers who settled the west in their linsey-woolsey shirts as abominations before god, I suggest you not use the Bible to condemn gays. It's disingenuous at best, hypocrisy at worst, and besides, how would you justify your feelings against lesbians?

how would you justify your feelings against lesbians?
I don't know about Jwjames, but I liked them in double trouble 6. I think we should allow lesbianism to continue being practiced under the condition that takes place in public view only. ***and ONLY if the women are under 120 lbs*** I'd even be in favor of offering them tax breaks for their sacrifices. Hey, I think it's only fair...

prae - lol. You crack me up.

You make fun of me for saying I thought two guys together was hot and you think two women together is hot.

I smell a double standard.

you probably smell yourself, your own double standard I mean

Ok! We're agreed, everyone has a double standard! I for one think that 2 guys or 2 girls making out is hot...

You make fun of me for saying I thought two guys together was hot and you think two women together is hot.

Ok, fine, but you have to know that most women don't feel that way. Typically, my experience has been that they find man on man action repulsive, or at least the girlfriends I've had do. Conversations almost always arise after viewing lesbo porn together...it's just the way it works. :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vilepagan
That may be true, but I think it has a neglible effect on our population growth, and at any rate, no amount of discrimination is going to make gays reproduce.

What % of the population do you say is gay? Do you think that's "negligible"?


I can understand why you say this, but in reality it's not "gay" behavior that spreads STD's it's "unsafe sex" that does. If gays are allowed to form more stable relationships within our society, and these relationships are recognized, then you will see fewer gays who engage in such unsafe practices. Gays are not naturally more promiscuous then heterosexuals, despite the stereotype. It's only because our relationships are not officially recognized that such behavior became acceptable in the gay community. In heterosexual society there are people who engage is high-risk promiscuous sex, and they are ostracized by the rest of heterosexual society to a certain degree, and if homosexual relationships are recognized, you will see the same shift in behavior in gays towards those gays who continue to engage in this kind of behavior.

"Unsafe sex" includes homosexual sex. That's not as bad as "unprotected sex," I'll grant you, but it's less safe than heterosexual sex. And I support ostracizing "unprotected sex" more than I support ostracizing "homosexual sex."

"Unsafe sex" includes homosexual sex. That's not as bad as "unprotected sex," I'll grant you, but it's less safe than heterosexual sex. And I support ostracizing "unprotected sex" more than I support ostracizing "homosexual sex."

Good point...

"Unsafe sex" includes homosexual sex. That's not as bad as "unprotected sex," I'll grant you, but it's less safe than heterosexual sex. And I support ostracizing "unprotected sex" more than I support ostracizing "homosexual sex."

As pointed out before, sex between 2 women is "homosexual sex" and that is safer than sex between 2 heterosexuals. So, you need to rephrase your opinion about "homosexual sex" being "unsafe sex". Now you might be correct in saying that "anal sex" is not as safe as many other types of sex, but what level of safeness does it have to be for you to call it "unsafe"? All sex is "unsafe sex" to some degree and that includes heterosexual sex...so do you support ostracizing heterosexual sex?

Putting aside all the stupid technicalities...

There's more to being homosexual than just the sex. It's love. Why can't people see that? What is so wrong about that? Just because you can't comprehend loving someone of the same sex in a romantic way does not give you the right to beat down those that can and do. Love is not a sin.

First of all Tolerance is a disease, second of all Lesbianism is condemned in Romans, Leviticius, Deteronomy, when it says that homosexuality is wrong it means for both sexes.

If it is a totally acceptable lifestyle then why did the NJ governor resign because he is gay?

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
First of all Tolerance is a disease
Are you insane? Tolerance is joyous, and wonderful.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
If it is a totally acceptable lifestyle then why did the NJ governor resign because he is gay?

He resigned because he had an affair, not because he was gay. It just so happened he had an affair with another man, but it was still because he had an affair. If it were with a women, he would have stepped down, also.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
First of all Tolerance is a disease, second of all Lesbianism is condemned in Romans, Leviticius, Deteronomy, when it says that homosexuality is wrong it means for both sexes.

Tolerance is a disease, is it? I suppose that makes you one of the healthiest people. Personally, I think it's intolerance that's unhealthy.

And I really don't care what the Bible has to say about homosexuality. It's one religion and one religion that I don't practice. So, don't preach to me that we can't love someone of the same sex. Love is not wrong, nor is homosexuality.

Tolerance only applies when both people believe the same thing.

Really I dont give a care about what you think about the Bible, it is the INERRANT, INFALLIBLE, WORD OF GOD. There is truth in there and you just discard it because it does not accept what you believe. If the Bible says that it is wrong, then it is wrong.

Christianity is the only religion where you must trust something other than yourself for eternal life. All others contain what You must do, rather than what has already been done.

Truth is not subjective or is it situational, truth is truth.

Oh maybe you would like the way of the sixties...Peace, Love, Dope!

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
it is the INERRANT, INFALLIBLE, WORD OF GOD.
Great for God. I could give a shit. Christianity is not in the Government we have now. Get that in your thick skull. I’m done with this. I don’t care if the Bible says marriage is only between a man and women. It has nothing to do with our Government and how it works. You are oppressing people’s rights here.

This is one book, and it is not involved in how our Government works and operates. Get it out of my life, and give homosexuals their deserved rights.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
If the Bible says that it is wrong, then it is wrong.
Wonderful, that’s great. I don’t care. The Bible is not in our Government, PERIOD.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
Oh maybe you would like the way of the sixties...Peace, Love, Dope!
Or maybe you would like the sixties, where they oppressed people’s rights in the South...?

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
Tolerance only applies when both people believe the same thing.

Tolerance is a personal choice. If you choose to accept someone else's beliefs, actions or feelings, that is tolerance. You don't have to agree to be tolerant.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
Really I dont give a care about what you think about the Bible, it is the INERRANT, INFALLIBLE, WORD OF GOD. There is truth in there and you just discard it because it does not accept what you believe. If the Bible says that it is wrong, then it is wrong.

It is the word of your god, not mine, therefore you cannot force me or anyone else who believes otherwise to live by his/her so-called word. If the Bible say it is wrong, then the Bible says it is wrong. Just because one document states that something is wrong, does not make it so for every living being on the face of the Earth.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
Christianity is the only religion where you must trust something other than yourself for eternal life. All others contain what You must do, rather than what has already been done.

No, not really. Look into Islam, Judaism and Hinduism for example.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
Truth is not subjective or is it situational, truth is truth.

Don't even get me started on that. Everyone has a different opinion of what is true. No single opinion is the right one.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
Oh maybe you would like the way of the sixties...Peace, Love, Dope!

Peace, Love and Tolerance, rather.

maybe you might wanna take a look at it someday.

I know the bible is not a part of our government, but most of our founders were men of biblical knowledge. We start sessions of congress with prayer, men in government attend bible studies together. We have a chaplin of the House and Senate, the oath of office ends with the words....so help you God.

It might not be a part of daily practice and it might not be a part of your life, but as you are intolerant toward the message it brings, you must need to learn that some people regard it as truthful, Inerrant , and Infallible

I know there is no theocracy.

If you dont want it thats fine, but it is not the thing that is repressing you. God is a loving God.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan

Really I dont give a care about what you think about the Bible, it is the INERRANT, INFALLIBLE, WORD OF GOD. There is truth in there and you just discard it because it does not accept what you believe. If the Bible says that it is wrong, then it is wrong.

If you wish to discuss how "infallible" the bible is I invite you to post in the "biblical accuracy" thread.

The Bible also says it's wrong to eat oysters and shrimp, to wear clothing made from two fibers, and to plant two crops in the same field. Do you believe these things are sins? Do you believe that farmers and textile workers should be punished for their sins?

second of all Lesbianism is condemned in Romans, Leviticius, Deteronomy, when it says that homosexuality is wrong it means for both sexes.


Leviticus condemns homosexuality twice, in 18:22 and 20:13. It's part of the Mosaic law, a long list of foods and acts that were considered unclean, from eating shellfish to cursing your father.

One of the big themes of the New Testament is that Christians are not bound by Mosaic law. If the Bible is infallibly true, then Christians may use their own judgment in choosing whether to follow the Mosaic law, and shouldn't bother about those who choose differently.

In the first chapter of Romans Paul describes people who worship idols instead of God,

"wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness,"

and then turned to homosexuality and a long list of other wrongs running the gamut from murder and deceit to whispering. Why is it that all those who condemn others never quote this passage all the way to its punch line:

"Therefore art thou inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself."

Paul isn't telling this story to condemn the homosexuals: He's condemning the people who condemn the homosexuals.

Read Romans all the way through and its hard to miss Paul's point: He's writing to a group of Jewish Christians who have been criticising gentile Christians for not keeping the Mosaic law, and Paul is telling them, politely but firmly, to knock it off. If the Bible is infallibly true, it's wrong to use Leviticus or the story of Sodom as a basis for condemning homosexuals.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan

the oath of office ends with the words....so help you God.


No..it doesn't.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
maybe you might wanna take a look at it someday.
No thanks, I don’t find religion’s that call my actions, I don’t control, sin.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
I know the bible is not a part of our government, but most of our founders were men of biblical knowledge.
They left the Church of England, to escape Governments who force people to believe in a certain religion. Our country was founded on freedom of religion.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
We start sessions of congress with prayer, men in government attend bible studies together. We have a chaplin of the House and Senate, the oath of office ends with the words....so help you God.
That should all be taken out. It’s wrong, and it is not needed.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
It might not be a part of daily practice and it might not be a part of your life, but as you are intolerant toward the message it brings, you must need to learn that some people regard it as truthful, Inerrant , and Infallible
I respect your beliefs, but I don’t respect it when you are trying to deny me a right, because of ridiculous reasons.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
God is a loving God.

Leviticus 20:13... 13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

I just feel so loved, I just can’t contain my enjoyment!

So we should have a totally secular government that tells us we evolved from apes. Once you take God out of every section of society people will begin to act as if there is no God. Big Problems happen when man is his own god.

Not all of our founders left the church of England.


Why really should you have this right?

Dont get into this Vile I am somewhat of a Theologian. I have also studied Romans all the way through...once you start you cant stop.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
So we should have a totally secular government that tells us we evolved from apes.
We should have a Government that does not endorse any belief in terms of how we got here

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
Once you take God out of every section of society people will begin to act as if there is no God. Big Problems happen when man is his own god.
Most wars throughout history have been because of religion. Ever heard of the Crusades? Kill for God? Yeah, I personally think religion has done a lot more damage then you think. It has divided people, and it has led people to hate each other to such a large extent, blood has been spilt, and is still being spilt.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
Why really should you have this right?
The same reasons you deserve this right. Ever heard of every citizen deserves equal rights…? It’s a hard concept to grasp, I know.

You didnt answer my question, why do you deserve this right?

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
You didnt answer my question, why do you deserve this right?

Conservativeman I’m not interested in playing games. I don’t have to explain to you why I deserve it, because bottom line, I deserve the same rights as you…and it’s just that simple. There is no, if, and, but’s about it. I get equal rights as you in terms of marriage, and I don’t have to explain to you why I personally deserve them, because our Government allows everyone the same rights.

you deserve the right to live, be free, be happy, have a roof and a job, to earn money, to have food to eat and drink, vote, have a roof over your head. You dont need to be married to live free or be happy, you dont need to be married to have a job,or to get food.

Conservativeman marriage is instituted into law. Once it is, everyone deserves the same rules, regulations, and laws to apply to every American. And since marriage is instituted into law, and you have to get it singed in a court of law, every American Couple deserves the right to get their marriage legal in a court of law.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
Dont get into this Vile I am somewhat of a Theologian. I have also studied Romans all the way through...once you start you cant stop.

If you're a theologian you should have no trouble answering my questions...

Really I dont give a care about what you think about the Bible, it is the INERRANT, INFALLIBLE, WORD OF GOD. There is truth in there and you just discard it because it does not accept what you believe. If the Bible says that it is wrong, then it is wrong.

Wow, that is a close minded statement.

So we should have a totally secular government that tells us we evolved from apes. Once you take God out of every section of society people will begin to act as if there is no God.

See, your problem is that you think our government should be the one who teaches us our beliefs. They should not. And no one is taking God out of every section of society. Are you saying that if God is not promoted by our government, then you will no longer believe in him or that churches will not exist?

why do you deserve this right?

Why do you?

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
You didnt answer my question, why do you deserve this right?

Happily, in our society we don't have to convince our government why we deserve rights, the government must have good reasons to deny us rights.

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
You didnt answer my question, why do you deserve this right?

Why shouldn't we?

You didnt answer my question, why do you deserve this right?

Because this is America.

You didnt answer my question, why do you deserve this right?
I think we're missing the point here. Everyone does have the right to marry anyone of the opposite sex they deem fit to. :)
Because this is America.
YES THIS IS!
All joking aside, I personally think that a godless nation wasn't intended by the founding fathers, nor should it be desired by the people who reside here. The message of Christianity is tolerance, but also, and maybe more importantly, morality. I don't think it's good to second-guess a book that was irrefutably infused into the society we, as a country, have founded politically and socially. Morality has no business in business...trust me, I know, I screw people everyday when I sell them shit, but I don't want the government telling me I can't, and they don't. That's part of our constitution, and it's simply the most beautiful gift the free market economy has given us as a country. However, morality has a real needed impact in the society we interact with on an individual basis. Homosexuality is a problem, but maybe, there's an answer...

I'm a big fan of medical science...maybe there's a way to supply homosexual males with large quantities of testosterone to supplement the preponderance of estrogen they already have coursing their veins??? Is it possible to reverse the damage? Just curious...

Originally posted by ConservativeMan
maybe you might wanna take a look at it someday.

And perhaps you should as well.

I know the bible is not a part of our government, but most of our founders were men of biblical knowledge.

Yes most of the founders were men of "biblical knowledge", whatever that means. Some of them were Christians, some of them were Deists, and some of them were Atheists.

We start sessions of congress with prayer,

Unfortunately true.

men in government attend bible studies together.

Again true, but that is only because our current President is a religious zealot who believes God wanted him to become President, and he has surrounded himself with like-minded men.


We have a chaplin of the House and Senate,

A practice that some of the founders disagreed with wholeheartedly.

“The establishment of the chaplainship in Congress is a palpable violation of equal rights as well as of Constitutional principles. "-- James Madison


the oath of office ends with the words....so help you God.

As I said previously, this is simply not true although a lot of people believe it is.

From Article II, Section 1, U.S. Constitution

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

It might not be a part of daily practice and it might not be a part of your life, but as you are intolerant toward the message it brings, you must need to learn that some people regard it as truthful, Inerrant , and Infallible

The fact that some believe that the Bible is truthful, unerring, and infallible, is very nice, and completely irrelevant to the question of whether or not gays should be allowed to marry.

Marriage is not a religious institution, it is a secular right granted by the state. The fact that religious institutions regularly perform marriage ceremonies is only because the religious institutions have been granted that power by the state, which retains sole authority to grant marriage licenses. You may believe that your marriage or other people's marriages are "sanctified" by God, but that sanctification is nothing more than your personal belief, and such sanctification is in no way a requirement for marriage. It is not neccessary for the ceremony to be a religious one, as judges, and even ship captains are allowed to perform the ceremony. In short, your belief that gay marriage goes against God's wishes, has no bearing on the issue of gay marriage.

Homosexuality is a problem, but maybe, there's an answer...

It is? Please tell me what the "problem" is.

Originally posted by The Praetorian

All joking aside, I personally think that a godless nation wasn't intended by the founding fathers, nor should it be desired by the people who reside here.

The founders weren't trying to found a godless nation, just a godless government, and the people should certainly desire that.

The message of Christianity is tolerance, but also, and maybe more importantly, morality. I don't think it's good to second-guess a book that was irrefutably infused into the society we, as a country, have founded politically and socially.

The Bible is not infused in the society as it was conceived by the founders, indeed they went out of their way to try and ensure that the Bible had no place in government.

Morality has no business in business...trust me, I know, I screw people everyday when I sell them shit, but I don't want the government telling me I can't, and they don't. That's part of our constitution, and it's simply the most beautiful gift the free market economy has given us as a country.

I'm sorry praetorian, but that's just a rationalization to keep you from feeling guilty about acting immorally.

However, morality has a real needed impact in the society we interact with on an individual basis. Homosexuality is a problem, but maybe, there's an answer...

I'm a big fan of medical science...maybe there's a way to supply homosexual males with large quantities of testosterone to supplement the preponderance of estrogen they already have coursing their veins??? Is it possible to reverse the damage? Just curious...

Gay people do not have a preponderance of estrogen in their systems, nor are they damaged in any way.

Originally posted by The Praetorian
Homosexuality is a problem, but maybe, there's an answer...

No, the problem is people like you.

Originally posted by The Praetorian
I'm a big fan of medical science...maybe there's a way to supply homosexual males with large quantities of testosterone to supplement the preponderance of estrogen they already have coursing their veins??? Is it possible to reverse the damage? Just curious...

No, homosexuality really hasn't got much to do with testosterone or estrogen, unless a homosexual chooses to take a hormone inducing pill. The science of it doesn't matter, it's that gay people do exist and they won't just be repressed and deny who they are. We need to just let them be who they are.

Marriage is not a religious institution, it is a secular right granted by the state.

Actually, marriage is a sacrament in every form of Christianity. And most forms of Christianity existed long before the United States.

Originally posted by Karankawa
Actually, marriage is a sacrament in every form of Christianity. And most forms of Christianity existed long before the United States.
Marriage is indeed, today, legally granted by the state. You can go down to the courthouse and get a marriage license, no religion involved at all.

Originally posted by Karankawa
Actually, marriage is a sacrament in every form of Christianity. And most forms of Christianity existed long before the United States.

Karankawa, you completely missed the point, or deliberately ignored it.

The state grants marriage licences, not the church. What gays are trying to do is change the legal definition of marriage to include gay marriage, which will have no effect on the church. The marriage ceremony may be a "sacrament" in the Christian church, but Christian marriage is not a requirement under the law, you may be married by a judge, a ship captain, or by anyone else who has the legal authority to do so, granted by the state.

I would also like to point out, since you seem to think it important that Christianity came before the formation of this country, that marriage existed long before the Christian Church. Christians did not invent the idea of marriage, the Christian Church merely usurped it, and now claims that their God "sanctifies" such unions as a way to better control the flock. One can only wonder how the human species survived with all those "unsanctified" marriages that took place before Christianity was invented.

The state grants marriage licences, not the church. What gays are trying to do is change the legal definition of marriage to include gay marriage, which will have no effect on the church. The marriage ceremony may be a "sacrament" in the Christian church, but Christian marriage is not a requirement under the law, you may be married by a judge, a ship captain, or by anyone else who has the legal authority to do so, granted by the state.

Marriage may be based in religion for some, but you know that the state's version of marriage is not about religion when you can go to Las Vegas and get married in a drive-thru or by an Elvis impersonator.