• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Why should Homosexuals be allowed to be married?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

mooncancook

Platinum Member
May 28, 2003
2,848
24
81
It's not a choice, it's not something you can one day decide "Oh, I think I'll be gay now.", it's something you're born as.
Bill Clinton says: "It's not a choice, it's not something I can one day decide 'oh, I think I'll love women now.', it's something I'm born with. I love women, I lust women, I just can't control my lust, so why make a big deal out of my affair with Monica." Don't use excuses for unable to control your lust. heck even marrying and having sex is a choice unless you want to have children.

So instead of buggering each other in secret you think this would encourage your kids to ah heck other kids of the same sex out in the open?
that's not what i'm saying. If stealing is legalizaed, even though morally we know it's wrong, but it's legal, i bet many people will steal. well.. not a good analogy. anyway it leads to the argument of whether you think homosexuality is immoral.
 

Drift3r

Guest
Jun 3, 2003
3,572
0
0
Stealing is a crime ! Being born gay is not my friend. Stop associating gay people with criminals, as it just makes your whole argument seem like an utter homophobe rant. I would also have to agree with Bill here because I know when I was a teenager the 90% of my thoughts in my head were about getting into my fellow female classmates panties. Then again I am glad that I never have been nor will be married because it's just ties you down. If you really love someone enough to get married to them then I hope you made the right choice to at least live with them for a while before you got married. I have seen to many idiots/friends get married and realize that they cannot live in the same house with the person they married. They may have been great together when they were not living side by side in the same home but once they got married and had no more space of their own to escape to it was pretty much all over within 1-3 years !
 

mooncancook

Platinum Member
May 28, 2003
2,848
24
81
If you are straight you are striaght and nothings going to change that, just like if someone is gay/bi they will always stay gay/bi.
well i guess that's most likely correct. but then again... if a young kid is a good and decent kid then he'll stay good and decent no matter what influence he'll face?... not sure about that. and what about poeple who had animal sex? it's not like they are like that for life, and they'll like to marry the animal. probably they are just tempted once or twice.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,408
2
0
Originally posted by: Drift3r
Stealing is a crime ! Being born gay is not my friend. Stop associating gay people with criminals, as it just makes your whole argument seem like an utter homophobe rant. I would also have to agree with Bill here because I know when I was a teenager the 90% of my thoughts in my head were about getting into my fellow female classmates panties. Then again I am glad that I never have been nor will be married because it's just ties you down. If you really love someone enough to get married to them then I hope you made the right choice to at least live with them for a while before you got married. I have seen to many idiots/friends get married and realize that they cannot live in the same house with the person they married. They may have been great together when they were not living side by side in the same home but once they got married and had no more space of their own to escape to it was pretty much all over within 1-3 years !
being born gay? I don't know about this> one of my dad's friends...was a total stud, professional motorcrosser in the 70's, married with 4 kids etc.. just all of a sudden after 25 years of marriage to scrape the whole deal and become involved with some guy.

Not saying some guys ar'nt born gay but I do agree with posters who say it will become more prevlent if you destigmatize it. Learned or born who cares it's thier choice IMO...

Most girls are two drinks away from "expirmenting" too.:p
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,122
3,159
126
Originally posted by: mooncancook
let's put the religious and legal issues aside, do you think allowing same sex marriage can encourage our children to experiment with homosexuality?

by legalizing same sex marriage, it's basically recognizing homosexuality as a normal human nature. To us adults, it may not have much effects, but to young kids and teens in pubity, the effect can be much greater. a straight kid thinking that homo and hetero are both natural might be tempted to try both kinds of relationship. it's like why don't we allow people walking down the street naked or public sex? not that it'll harm someone, it'll corrupt the minds of our children. I certainly don't want those thoughts to be implanted in my kids in the future.

-----
not related to above topic:
imagine in a wedding: "now I pronounce you both husband and...... errr.... husband." well.. doesn't sound like a marriage to me.
Well, some of your concerns are legit, kids may very well experiment or consider homosexuality as an avenue, but like any new thing as it normalizes there would likely be a leveling off. As with every fundamental change in society(womens rights, integration of races, etc) there is always a time of upheaval(sp) where many are concerned with the ramifications, usualy followed by begrudging acceptance, then a state of normality often coupled with a "what were we afraid of".

I often joke, "it all started going downhill when we gave women the right to vote!" even though that was far before my time. Women voting, and other womens rights, really don't seem abnormal to me, but for those who lived during the change it was a big issue. Likewise, the Homosexual issue is quite similar to our time.

Now, I suppose, you'll invoke scripture as being specific on this issue, but for the people of the past they also thought the scripture was specific concerning their issues(women/race). I think the fear is greater than the reality of it all, like Dari, do you imagine people walking down the street having sex along the way?

Even this thing we call "marriage" really is a contrived institution, though I'm not saying people shouldn't marry. To us, marriage is more about the ceremony and public display(at the begining), in former times in some cultures the husband and wife would consumate(sex) their vows in front of the wedding guests! If you pay attention to scripture though you'll find that the very act of sexual intercourse is marriage(aka--no such thing as pre-marital sex, only sex without commitment). Consult the story of Noah and Paul's speaking of sex with Prostitutes.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Legal issues are motivated by moral issues. In order to provide for "gay marriage" it would have to become part of society norm. It has become part of society norm. Gay folks are folks who choose an alternate life style. Remember when "Living together" was outrageous... well I do. And Elvis was sin personified.. and The Doors said the bad word on Ed Sullivan...
It is time to recognize that some folks enjoy life a bit different than others... Remember when they whispered... "she's pregnant and she's not married"... oh no...! "She'll be going to the country till it is born"... gee no abortions... to speak of.. Well Pat Robertson would say we've decayed into a society of moral turds.. some have.. according to his notion of moral but, we are a nation of separate thoughts... religion and state.. We need to recognize this in law.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: daniel1113
In order to be a bigot, I would have to be intolerant of homosexuals.
No, you're a bigot because you hold blindly and intolerantly to a particular creed and because you're narrow-minded. Maybe you should look it up if you don't understand it.

I am not intolerant.
Really? Here's some choice quotes from you: "...I think it is disgusting and wrong..." ... "...same sex couples cannot be married..." ... "Calling a gay or lesbian couple a "family", in my opinion, is the greatest perversion of the purest thing we know." If that's not intolerance, I don't know what is.
Intolerance has become a dirty word. It is not.
I do not tolerate my kids disobeying me. - is that bad?
I do not tolerate employers who don't get me my paycheck on time. - is that bad?
I do not tolerate a computer that is slow. - is that bad?

Tolerance has started to become synomous with total acceptance, but it not. Expressing one's tolerance(or lack of) on issues does not make make them a bigot.
I do not tolerate "gay" TV programming so I choose not to watch.(not that I watch much TV anyway) but that sure doesn't make me a bigot.
What you quoted above is daniel1113's expression of the limit to his tolerance - he tolerates less than you on this issue but that doesn't neccesarily make him a bigot or totally intolerant.
I think that morally, homosexuality is wrong, but I understand that people are going to do what they want to do. I don't have to accept it as a "normal" behavior to be "tolerant." I feel that I am more than tolerant on this issue because I understand that not everyone has the same morals as I, and they will do what they want regardless of my opinion. Again - this doesn't mean I "endorse" it, but rather, I don't feel that it is right and I will express my opinion when appropriate. I won't change a homosexual's behavior by telling them it is morally wrong(IMO;)) so I choose to not engage in direct battle. I will however stand up for my morals and principles when they are encroached upon.

CkG
 

Drift3r

Guest
Jun 3, 2003
3,572
0
0
Originally posted by: mooncancook
If you are straight you are striaght and nothings going to change that, just like if someone is gay/bi they will always stay gay/bi.
well i guess that's most likely correct. but then again... if a young kid is a good and decent kid then he'll stay good and decent no matter what influence he'll face?... not sure about that. and what about poeple who had animal sex? it's not like they are like that for life, and they'll like to marry the animal. probably they are just tempted once or twice.



LoL - You're more influenced by your parents then are by your friends or by watching two strangers make out. It's proven fact that children basically develop a lot of their own parents traits and habits whether they like it or not. I know that as a teenager I vowed never to be like my father yet the older I get the more I realize his influence on me and the habits and traits ( both good and bad ) I acquired from him. I see very little if any of my friends influences in my life has stuck around with me at all. Sure kids my look to their peers for social ques when it comes to dress and socialization but these same kids usually fall back to following the lessons and behaviors taught by their own parents when it comes to major decisions. You are what you are as an adult because you by instinstic ( not by will ) modeled yourself after your parents even if you rebeled from them as a teenager. For some reason it just works out this way, I guess it's part of natures big plan that the fruit does not fall to far from the tree.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,408
2
0
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Legal issues are motivated by moral issues. In order to provide for "gay marriage" it would have to become part of society norm. It has become part of society norm. Gay folks are folks who choose an alternate life style. Remember when "Living together" was outrageous... well I do. And Elvis was sin personified.. and The Doors said the bad word on Ed Sullivan...
It is time to recognize that some folks enjoy life a bit different than others... Remember when they whispered... "she's pregnant and she's not married"... oh no...! "She'll be going to the country till it is born"... gee no abortions... to speak of.. Well Pat Robertson would say we've decayed into a society of moral turds.. some have.. according to his notion of moral but, we are a nation of separate thoughts... religion and state.. We need to recognize this in law.
no R movies are allowed in my house...but I have a stash:p
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Zebo,
no R movies are allowed in my house...but I have a stash
*********

Well... the way movies are rated.. I let the Gkids watch stuff that edifies.. like "saving private ryan" which is R, I think. My stash ... is not in the closet... it is on my shelf... right there... see? Enemy at the Gates, Braveheart, U-571, etc... :D
 

mooncancook

Platinum Member
May 28, 2003
2,848
24
81
but these same kids usually fall back to following the lessons and behaviors taught by their own parents when it comes to major decisions. You are what you are as an adult because you by instinstic ( not by will ) modeled yourself after your parents even if you rebeled from them as a teenager.
makes sense to me because I'm quite like that too. but there are kids who don't have paretns that spend lots time with them and those are more likely to be influenced by peers. anyway according to this pattern you suggested, homosexual parents would have a high likelihood of raising homosexual children, right?

i think our society is too concerned with legal issues and starting to ignore moral issues. Adultery, homosexuality, abortions, prostitution, worshiping money... these become normal and accepted. i don't want my society become like one of the corrupted cities destroyed by God as described in the Bible.. or a moden Babylon.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,137
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Tolerance has started to become synomous with total acceptance, but it not. Expressing one's tolerance(or lack of) on issues does not make make them a bigot.
I do not tolerate "gay" TV programming so I choose not to watch.(not that I watch much TV anyway) but that sure doesn't make me a bigot.
Cad, for someone who likes to argue semantics as much as you do, you would think you would understand the meaning behind these most basic words ... Tolerate: (a) to not interfere with; allow; permit (b) to recognize and respect others' beliefs, practics, etc., without sharing them ... Tolerance: (a) tolerating or being tolerant, esp. of views, beliefs, practices, etc of others that differ from one's own. (b) freedom from bigotry and prejudice. Next up, Bigot: a person who holds blindly and intolerantly to a particular creed, opinion, etc.

So, regardless of what YOU think they mean, they apply quite nicely to Daniel1113's comments in this thread. And others in this thread as well.

Intolerance has become a dirty word. It is not.
I do not tolerate my kids disobeying me. - is that bad?
I do not tolerate employers who don't get me my paycheck on time. - is that bad?
I do not tolerate a computer that is slow. - is that bad?
Your examples of "intolerance" don't work here Cad, I don't think I should have to explain why :)

What you quoted above is daniel1113's expression of the limit to his tolerance - he tolerates less than you on this issue but that doesn't neccesarily make him a bigot or totally intolerant.
Either he's tolerant or he's not. He clearly isn't. Because he's not, he's also a bigot. They sound like bad words, but they're really just words... Nothing to be afraid of.

I think that morally, homosexuality is wrong, but I understand that people are going to do what they want to do. I don't have to accept it as a "normal" behavior to be "tolerant." I feel that I am more than tolerant on this issue because I understand that not everyone has the same morals as I, and they will do what they want regardless of my opinion. Again - this doesn't mean I "endorse" it, but rather, I don't feel that it is right and I will express my opinion when appropriate. I won't change a homosexual's behavior by telling them it is morally wrong(IMO;)) so I choose to not engage in direct battle. I will however stand up for my morals and principles when they are encroached upon.
You're right Cad, there's a difference between "tolerance" and "acceptance" -- however, someone who's tolerant doesn't go around bashing gays, or calling them names, or pounding the desk and asserting that it's "wrong," etc. I would think that would be pretty clear. Maybe not?

As for your "...morals and principals being encroached upon..." - I don't really understand how that could happen unless you were propositioned by a gay man or something. Is that what you're referring to? Because otherwise, I don't see how it can happen.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Tolerance has started to become synomous with total acceptance, but it not. Expressing one's tolerance(or lack of) on issues does not make make them a bigot.
I do not tolerate "gay" TV programming so I choose not to watch.(not that I watch much TV anyway) but that sure doesn't make me a bigot.
Cad, for someone who likes to argue semantics as much as you do, you would think you would understand the meaning behind these most basic words ... Tolerate: (a) to not interfere with; allow; permit (b) to recognize and respect others' beliefs, practics, etc., without sharing them ... Tolerance: (a) tolerating or being tolerant, esp. of views, beliefs, practices, etc of others that differ from one's own. (b) freedom from bigotry and prejudice. Next up, Bigot: a person who holds blindly and intolerantly to a particular creed, opinion, etc.

So, regardless of what YOU think they mean, they apply quite nicely to Daniel1113's comments in this thread. And others in this thread as well.

Intolerance has become a dirty word. It is not.
I do not tolerate my kids disobeying me. - is that bad?
I do not tolerate employers who don't get me my paycheck on time. - is that bad?
I do not tolerate a computer that is slow. - is that bad?
Your examples of "intolerance" don't work here Cad, I don't think I should have to explain why :)

What you quoted above is daniel1113's expression of the limit to his tolerance - he tolerates less than you on this issue but that doesn't neccesarily make him a bigot or totally intolerant.
Either he's tolerant or he's not. He clearly isn't. Because he's not, he's also a bigot. They sound like bad words, but they're really just words... Nothing to be afraid of.

I think that morally, homosexuality is wrong, but I understand that people are going to do what they want to do. I don't have to accept it as a "normal" behavior to be "tolerant." I feel that I am more than tolerant on this issue because I understand that not everyone has the same morals as I, and they will do what they want regardless of my opinion. Again - this doesn't mean I "endorse" it, but rather, I don't feel that it is right and I will express my opinion when appropriate. I won't change a homosexual's behavior by telling them it is morally wrong(IMO;)) so I choose to not engage in direct battle. I will however stand up for my morals and principles when they are encroached upon.
You're right Cad, there's a difference between "tolerance" and "acceptance" -- however, someone who's tolerant doesn't go around bashing gays, or calling them names, or pounding the desk and asserting that it's "wrong," etc. I would think that would be pretty clear. Maybe not?

As for your "...morals and principals being encroached upon..." - I don't really understand how that could happen unless you were propositioned by a gay man or something. Is that what you're referring to? Because otherwise, I don't see how it can happen.
You obviously ignored my point and proceeded to make the same point. Intolerance isn't neccesarily a bad thing. And being intolerant does not automatically make you a bigot. Stating your opinion based on your morals doesn't make you a bigot.
Stating you think homosexuality is wrong is not neccesarily being intolerant nor make you a bigot. Sure you can be intolerant and a bigot when stating your opinion but again, it isn't always the case.

Those definitions you posted do not support painting daniel1113 as a bigot or intolerant and they are not different from "MY" definitions. He said " I see no reason why two men or two women shouldn't be allowed to live together and do what they want." THAT isn't intolerant nor is it bigotted but is infact quite "tolerant"(IMO). He also said that it was his OPINION in the select quotes you pulled. He says they can do what they wish but in his opinion, "marriage" is wrong because <insert his opinion here>. He can't have an opinion and state it? Who is being intolerant now? ;)

The issue is that they want something that was instituted by God, and then recognized by governments. I'd much rather see "marriage" taken out of gov't than see "marriage" lose it's original intent - but again - THAT IS JUST MY OPINION and doesn't mean that I reject(not tolerate) all other opinions(ie. bigotry).;)

Oh, BTW - it takes two to tango on semantics - shall we continue this dance?:p

CkG
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,137
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
You obviously ignored my point and proceeded to make the same point. Intolerance isn't neccesarily a bad thing. And being intolerant does not automatically make you a bigot. Stating your opinion based on your morals doesn't make you a bigot.
Intolerance isn't necessarily a bad thing? Oh please, Cad, it IS when it happens to YOU. You can say that you're not bigots all day long, but as long as you're intolerant and cling blindly to your moralistic "high ground" then you're a bigot. That's pretty much the textbook version. Sorry you don't like hearing it.

Stating you think homosexuality is wrong is not neccesarily being intolerant nor make you a bigot. Sure you can be intolerant and a bigot when stating your opinion but again, it isn't always the case.
Stating that you think homosexuality is wrong is tantamount to intolerance. Not only that, it goes beyond simply stating of opinion. Stating your opinion is just the tip of the iceberg. How about your actions? If you believe so strongly, won't you also take other steps? Vote against it? Act against it? In extreme cases, people even become violent over it.

The issue is that they want something that was instituted by God, and then recognized by governments. I'd much rather see "marriage" taken out of gov't than see "marriage" lose it's original intent - but again - THAT IS JUST MY OPINION and doesn't mean that I reject(not tolerate) all other opinions(ie. bigotry).;)
There you go with God again. Please Cad, we live in a secular society. Nobody has to abide by your particular religious beliefs. Marriage is also a civil union in many states, devoid of religious intent or meaning. Sure, you may bring religion into your marriage, or believe whatever you want (the definition of tolerance), however it's wrong to enforce your particular beliefs on other people and deprive them of a basic right. Yes, the USSC has deemed marriage a "right" under the 14th ammendment. Your idea of "privatizing" marriage is a good one, however. Would you care about this topic so much if government was taken out of the picture? If there was no government endorsement of it?

Oh, BTW - it takes two to tango on semantics - shall we continue this dance?:p
Cha cha cha. :p
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,943
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Tolerance has started to become synomous with total acceptance, but it not. Expressing one's tolerance(or lack of) on issues does not make make them a bigot.
I do not tolerate "gay" TV programming so I choose not to watch.(not that I watch much TV anyway) but that sure doesn't make me a bigot.
Cad, for someone who likes to argue semantics as much as you do, you would think you would understand the meaning behind these most basic words ... Tolerate: (a) to not interfere with; allow; permit (b) to recognize and respect others' beliefs, practics, etc., without sharing them ... Tolerance: (a) tolerating or being tolerant, esp. of views, beliefs, practices, etc of others that differ from one's own. (b) freedom from bigotry and prejudice. Next up, Bigot: a person who holds blindly and intolerantly to a particular creed, opinion, etc.

So, regardless of what YOU think they mean, they apply quite nicely to Daniel1113's comments in this thread. And others in this thread as well.

Intolerance has become a dirty word. It is not.
I do not tolerate my kids disobeying me. - is that bad?
I do not tolerate employers who don't get me my paycheck on time. - is that bad?
I do not tolerate a computer that is slow. - is that bad?
Your examples of "intolerance" don't work here Cad, I don't think I should have to explain why :)

What you quoted above is daniel1113's expression of the limit to his tolerance - he tolerates less than you on this issue but that doesn't neccesarily make him a bigot or totally intolerant.
Either he's tolerant or he's not. He clearly isn't. Because he's not, he's also a bigot. They sound like bad words, but they're really just words... Nothing to be afraid of.

I think that morally, homosexuality is wrong, but I understand that people are going to do what they want to do. I don't have to accept it as a "normal" behavior to be "tolerant." I feel that I am more than tolerant on this issue because I understand that not everyone has the same morals as I, and they will do what they want regardless of my opinion. Again - this doesn't mean I "endorse" it, but rather, I don't feel that it is right and I will express my opinion when appropriate. I won't change a homosexual's behavior by telling them it is morally wrong(IMO;)) so I choose to not engage in direct battle. I will however stand up for my morals and principles when they are encroached upon.
You're right Cad, there's a difference between "tolerance" and "acceptance" -- however, someone who's tolerant doesn't go around bashing gays, or calling them names, or pounding the desk and asserting that it's "wrong," etc. I would think that would be pretty clear. Maybe not?

As for your "...morals and principals being encroached upon..." - I don't really understand how that could happen unless you were propositioned by a gay man or something. Is that what you're referring to? Because otherwise, I don't see how it can happen.
You obviously ignored my point and proceeded to make the same point. Intolerance isn't neccesarily a bad thing. And being intolerant does not automatically make you a bigot. Stating your opinion based on your morals doesn't make you a bigot.
Stating you think homosexuality is wrong is not neccesarily being intolerant nor make you a bigot. Sure you can be intolerant and a bigot when stating your opinion but again, it isn't always the case.

Those definitions you posted do not support painting daniel1113 as a bigot or intolerant and they are not different from "MY" definitions. He said " I see no reason why two men or two women shouldn't be allowed to live together and do what they want." THAT isn't intolerant nor is it bigotted but is infact quite "tolerant"(IMO). He also said that it was his OPINION in the select quotes you pulled. He says they can do what they wish but in his opinion, "marriage" is wrong because <insert his opinion here>. He can't have an opinion and state it? Who is being intolerant now? ;)

The issue is that they want something that was instituted by God, and then recognized by governments. I'd much rather see "marriage" taken out of gov't than see "marriage" lose it's original intent - but again - THAT IS JUST MY OPINION and doesn't mean that I reject(not tolerate) all other opinions(ie. bigotry).;)

Oh, BTW - it takes two to tango on semantics - shall we continue this dance?:p

CkG

I hate to burst your bubble but there are two types of marriage: Legal and religious. They have been nearly identical in the US up until now, however, there is no basis to deny homosexuals the right to marry in the eyes of the law. Sure, a church can say they don't want gays to marry, but a government has no right to.
 

EXman

Lifer
Jul 12, 2001
20,083
15
81
Out side of bigotry I can not think of a reason why they should not be allow to marry. Why is it any of my or your business in the first place?
one man's bigotry is another's morality. Since I am married (to a woman) I'd not want to give gay lover roomates the same rights as me. And it is everyones business as the moral decline of America effects everyone in the long run. This non of my business song and dance will only further Americas problems.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Tolerance has started to become synomous with total acceptance, but it not. Expressing one's tolerance(or lack of) on issues does not make make them a bigot.
I do not tolerate "gay" TV programming so I choose not to watch.(not that I watch much TV anyway) but that sure doesn't make me a bigot.
Cad, for someone who likes to argue semantics as much as you do, you would think you would understand the meaning behind these most basic words ... Tolerate: (a) to not interfere with; allow; permit (b) to recognize and respect others' beliefs, practics, etc., without sharing them ... Tolerance: (a) tolerating or being tolerant, esp. of views, beliefs, practices, etc of others that differ from one's own. (b) freedom from bigotry and prejudice. Next up, Bigot: a person who holds blindly and intolerantly to a particular creed, opinion, etc.

So, regardless of what YOU think they mean, they apply quite nicely to Daniel1113's comments in this thread. And others in this thread as well.

Intolerance has become a dirty word. It is not.
I do not tolerate my kids disobeying me. - is that bad?
I do not tolerate employers who don't get me my paycheck on time. - is that bad?
I do not tolerate a computer that is slow. - is that bad?
Your examples of "intolerance" don't work here Cad, I don't think I should have to explain why :)

What you quoted above is daniel1113's expression of the limit to his tolerance - he tolerates less than you on this issue but that doesn't neccesarily make him a bigot or totally intolerant.
Either he's tolerant or he's not. He clearly isn't. Because he's not, he's also a bigot. They sound like bad words, but they're really just words... Nothing to be afraid of.

I think that morally, homosexuality is wrong, but I understand that people are going to do what they want to do. I don't have to accept it as a "normal" behavior to be "tolerant." I feel that I am more than tolerant on this issue because I understand that not everyone has the same morals as I, and they will do what they want regardless of my opinion. Again - this doesn't mean I "endorse" it, but rather, I don't feel that it is right and I will express my opinion when appropriate. I won't change a homosexual's behavior by telling them it is morally wrong(IMO;)) so I choose to not engage in direct battle. I will however stand up for my morals and principles when they are encroached upon.
You're right Cad, there's a difference between "tolerance" and "acceptance" -- however, someone who's tolerant doesn't go around bashing gays, or calling them names, or pounding the desk and asserting that it's "wrong," etc. I would think that would be pretty clear. Maybe not?

As for your "...morals and principals being encroached upon..." - I don't really understand how that could happen unless you were propositioned by a gay man or something. Is that what you're referring to? Because otherwise, I don't see how it can happen.
You obviously ignored my point and proceeded to make the same point. Intolerance isn't neccesarily a bad thing. And being intolerant does not automatically make you a bigot. Stating your opinion based on your morals doesn't make you a bigot.
Stating you think homosexuality is wrong is not neccesarily being intolerant nor make you a bigot. Sure you can be intolerant and a bigot when stating your opinion but again, it isn't always the case.

Those definitions you posted do not support painting daniel1113 as a bigot or intolerant and they are not different from "MY" definitions. He said " I see no reason why two men or two women shouldn't be allowed to live together and do what they want." THAT isn't intolerant nor is it bigotted but is infact quite "tolerant"(IMO). He also said that it was his OPINION in the select quotes you pulled. He says they can do what they wish but in his opinion, "marriage" is wrong because <insert his opinion here>. He can't have an opinion and state it? Who is being intolerant now? ;)

The issue is that they want something that was instituted by God, and then recognized by governments. I'd much rather see "marriage" taken out of gov't than see "marriage" lose it's original intent - but again - THAT IS JUST MY OPINION and doesn't mean that I reject(not tolerate) all other opinions(ie. bigotry).;)

Oh, BTW - it takes two to tango on semantics - shall we continue this dance?:p

CkG

I hate to burst your bubble but there are two types of marriage: Legal and religious. They have been nearly identical in the US up until now, however, there is no basis to deny homosexuals the right to marry in the eyes of the law. Sure, a church can say they don't want gays to marry, but a government has no right to.
I hate to burst your bubble but where do you think marriage came from? Hint: Not the government;)

DM - So my stating my opinions based on morality is bigotry but you completely dismissing my opinion isn't? Go figure. People who believe in God aren't necessarily bigots. Like I said - I don't give a rats ass what people choose to do, and I'm not on some crusade to make homosexuality illegal. I just don't think that it should be accepted as a "marriage" because marriage was intended by God to be between a man and a woman. I'm sorry that you have been failed by those involved in your life - I hope someday someone with great patience will go out of their way for you. :)

Again, for the last time - having and stating an opinion on the issue of "gay marriage" doesn't make a person a bigot nor intolerant in regards to homosexuality. I believe homosexuality is wrong(morally) but I know people will do what they want to do and I accept the fact that others don't share my views. That IS being tolerant. There is a BIG difference between tolerance and approval.

This is exactly why I hate getting involved in religion and "gay" debates - anyone who is "religious" or doesn't endorse the "gay" side is labeled as a closeminded bigot. I am entitled to my opinions, just as you are to yours, because mine don't match yours doesn't mean that I'm the close minded or bigotted one;)

CkG
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,137
1
0
Originally posted by: EXman
Out side of bigotry I can not think of a reason why they should not be allow to marry. Why is it any of my or your business in the first place?
one man's bigotry is another's morality. Since I am married (to a woman) I'd not want to give gay lover roomates the same rights as me. And it is everyones business as the moral decline of America effects everyone in the long run. This non of my business song and dance will only further Americas problems.
You have a wife AND gay lover roomates? :Q;)
 

daniel1113

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2003
6,448
0
0
If you think CADkindaGUY and I are bigots for not accepting gay marriage, then you are as much of a bigot for not accepting our religion. Oddly enough, that is the exact reason I refuse to be a Democrat. Liberals are extremely one sided and unfair, especially when it comes to religion, family, and race. Either we are both bigots, which I don't believe, or neither of us are bigots. You can't have it any other way.

Also, in case you might have forgotten, I though I would post a snippet from the U.S. Bill of Rights:

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Our country was established with freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. Therefore, we are not a secular nation, as many here have mentioned. We are a nation of diverse religions. That means you can choose to be religious as well as un-religious, and it is prefectly legal.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,137
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUYDM - So my stating my opinions based on morality is bigotry but you completely dismissing my opinion isn't? Go figure. People who believe in God aren't necessarily bigots. Like I said - I don't give a rats ass what people choose to do, and I'm not on some crusade to make homosexuality illegal. I just don't think that it should be accepted as a "marriage" because marriage was intended by God to be between a man and a woman. I'm sorry that you have been failed by those involved in your life - I hope someday someone with great patience will go out of their way for you. :)
I'm not sure what you mean by that. You pretend to know more about me than you do. Hmmm? You're wrong though, the issue isn't reversible because the issue at hand is gay marriage, NOT straight marriage. Nobody's attacking your lifestyle, are they?

Again, for the last time - having and stating an opinion on the issue of "gay marriage" doesn't make a person a bigot nor intolerant in regards to homosexuality. I believe homosexuality is wrong(morally) but I know people will do what they want to do and I accept the fact that others don't share my views. That IS being tolerant. There is a BIG difference between tolerance and approval.
I'm not faulting you for having an opinion Cad. However, this whole topic is about whether a specific segment of society can do what the rest of society can do. The religious stance taken is that this segment of society is not entitled to the same rights or privileges as the rest of us.

This is exactly why I hate getting involved in religion and "gay" debates - anyone who is "religious" or doesn't endorse the "gay" side is labeled as a closeminded bigot. I am entitled to my opinions, just as you are to yours, because mine don't match yours doesn't mean that I'm the close minded or bigotted one;)
It's not so much that your opinions match mine. It's a matter of keeping an open mind about it. I seem to be OK with gays doing whatever they want including marriage, however you seem to draw the line at marriage. You've closed off any further discussion of the matter...
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,137
1
0
Originally posted by: daniel1113
If you think CADkindaGUY and I are bigots for not accepting gay marriage, then you are as much of a bigot for not accepting our religion. Oddly enough, that is the exact reason I refuse to be a Democrat. Liberals are extremely one sided and unfair, especially when it comes to religion, family, and race. Either we are both bigots, which I don't believe, or neither of us are bigots. You can't have it any other way.

Also, in case you might have forgotten, I though I would post a snippet from the U.S. Bill of Rights:

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Our country was established with freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. Therefore, we are not a secular nation, as many here have mentioned. We are a nation of diverse religions. That means you can choose to be religious as well as un-religious, and it is prefectly legal.
Nobody ever said you can't practice your religion. Did they? Nobody ever said you couldn't get married because you're a Christian. Did they?

 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUYDM - So my stating my opinions based on morality is bigotry but you completely dismissing my opinion isn't? Go figure. People who believe in God aren't necessarily bigots. Like I said - I don't give a rats ass what people choose to do, and I'm not on some crusade to make homosexuality illegal. I just don't think that it should be accepted as a "marriage" because marriage was intended by God to be between a man and a woman. I'm sorry that you have been failed by those involved in your life - I hope someday someone with great patience will go out of their way for you. :)
I'm not sure what you mean by that. You pretend to know more about me than you do. Hmmm? You're wrong though, the issue isn't reversible because the issue at hand is gay marriage, NOT straight marriage. Nobody's attacking your lifestyle, are they?

Again, for the last time - having and stating an opinion on the issue of "gay marriage" doesn't make a person a bigot nor intolerant in regards to homosexuality. I believe homosexuality is wrong(morally) but I know people will do what they want to do and I accept the fact that others don't share my views. That IS being tolerant. There is a BIG difference between tolerance and approval.
I'm not faulting you for having an opinion Cad. However, this whole topic is about whether a specific segment of society can do what the rest of society can do. The religious stance taken is that this segment of society is not entitled to the same rights or privileges as the rest of us.

This is exactly why I hate getting involved in religion and "gay" debates - anyone who is "religious" or doesn't endorse the "gay" side is labeled as a closeminded bigot. I am entitled to my opinions, just as you are to yours, because mine don't match yours doesn't mean that I'm the close minded or bigotted one;)
It's not so much that your opinions match mine. It's a matter of keeping an open mind about it. I seem to be OK with gays doing whatever they want including marriage, however you seem to draw the line at marriage. You've closed off any further discussion of the matter...
So I draw a line. And that makes me a bigot?
Your mind is closed as to my position. You seem to think that by me not endorsing "marriage" for homosexuals that I've closed my mind to it. While my OPINION based on my morals is they should not - it doesn't mean that I am not willing to hear the argument for it. There are some issues involved that I could maybe agree with if they were presented the right way but that is up to you and/or the gay activists to bring up if you want to push for special rights.

CkG
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY