Bush wants a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages

Another expression I really hate is 'bleeding hearts'.

'Bleeding hearts' = 'those with caritas (charity, love).

'And the greatest of these is charity'.

See the contradiction here?

Very very odd that you would equate them.

Chris, well spoken post.

I don't hate you either, rather I feel a little sad for you. And frightened. It frightens me to know that their are people in positions of power who think the same way. People who are certain that their view is the one and only 'right' way of doing things. People who, on the one hand give lip service to the human rights given to us by this country, but on the other hand work toward restricting those rights to people who beleive the same things. And then show the arrogance to use their religion to justify it.

I also find it disturbing that you use your military career as a device for having a moral highground for your views. As if that somehow makes your opinions have more weight, more important than someone else. I respect your military career, as well as the courage to keep doing it after being injured so badly. But in no way does that make your opinion stronger or more important than anyone elses. You'll have to go elsewhere for the 'reverence' you feel you desearve.

I guess it breaks down to a basic differnce of opinion. See, me, I feel that people should have a right to live as they will as long as they don't harm others and to have those rights protected and expressed. You seem to feel that only certain groups can have the rights you take for granted. Sure, you say they can live as they want, but can't have the same rights and protections. Why? Cause your choice of deity doens't approve.

I don't hate you for feeling like that, but I do find it sad. Luckily, the freedom to disagree with the religious right is still, for the time being, mine to excercise. After all, 23% of marines would shoot me if things change more to your likeing.

I feel same sex marriages in the legal sense should be allowed. No individual should be restricted to the same rights that others are intitled to, regardless of their sexual preference.

In a religious sense, well it shouldn't be made illegal by any government form because that would be mixing religion and government. Religious same sex mariages are up to the couple to decide if they want to tangle with.

Has anyone pointed out to Bush that this would not keep religion and government seperate and would basicly go against the constitution itself?

Also, isn't incest accepted in some parts of the world/country?

I hope Bush doesn't go through with it as there will be alot of pissed off people. And there is that whole fact that it is exactly the kind of thing the constitution is there to prevent.

There are at least two serious logical errors in this argument. The three things have nothing at all to do with each other. That could arguably fall under the category of the "fallacy of appeal to consequences," it is also probably "fallacy of the complex question," and, maybe, also "fallacy of affirming the consequent."

Seriously, don't compare things that are not all similiar and then claim that they are somehow related. That's bad argument form as well as poor logical deduction.

Incest and beastiality are in no way related, I mean, at all, to gay marriage or gay relationships. One does not follow the other.

Basically you're saying, "I think gay marriage is somehow a sexual abomination, beastiality and incest are also sexual abominations, therefore gay marraige must also be just like beastiality and incest."

you may want to check out:
This List of Logical Fallacies

Zana

Likewise, and that's commendable.

I do want to address the comments made by some of my detractors though...



In this day and age, fear of evolution (yes fear) is completely baffling to me. Evolution is not a theory. It's a fact supported by mountains of evidence. There isn't a single shred of evidence to support creationism except one book... a book that also claims that the sky is an upside down metal bowl with holes cut in it for the water to come through.



This isn't something that's simply a matter of opinion. There's tons of factual documentary evidence that most of the writers of the Constitution were Deists or Atheists, and most were hostile to organized religion... especially Christianity. To believe otherwise is to be wilfully ignorant. I urge you to follow the link that was posted earlier in the thread and read it. It's not made up. It's not a subjective interpretation of vague anecdotal evidence. It's direct quotes from the framers themselves.



Do you know your history at all Christopher? Do you know that "under god" wasn't in the original pledge of allegience? It was added in the 1950's after heavy lobbying by the Knights of Columbus. Not only was it a violation of church state separation (again follow the link and READ it), but it also changed the entire meaning of that sentence in the pledge. The original said "One nation, indivisible." It was written shortly after the civil war. It was talking about succession, not religion. It meant that we would never again be divided by civil war, but would remain one single united nation.



I have great respect for your military service. However, for you to use it to try and bolster the validity of your viewpoint shows incredible disrespect for all the people who served with you who do not share your views. There most certainly are atheists in foxholes... and democrats, and liberals, and gays, and muslims, and jews, and every other kind of person. Bringing your military service into this argument is meaningless and only serves to further illustrate your own biased viewpoint.



You don't really care Christopher. Don't pretend that you do. If you actually did you'd care about the quality of people's lives here on earth, not about wether or not they're going to qualify for the after party. This is the blatant contradiction of religion. You're also once again showing your own bigotry. Do they not count anymore? Of course they do... and so do all the atheists, muslims, gays, agnostics, bisexuals, and everyone else that helped build this country that YOU discount.



And what about all the other people who did just as much who are NOT like you?



"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.

". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind." - John Adams

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." - James Madison

"Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. " - Thomas Paine

""I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State." - Thomas Jefferson

""And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together." - James Madison

"As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." - Treaty with Tripoli, signed by the president and passed unanimously in the congress



You would be wrong.

Wow.

You know, chris nomad, I don't believe in any of the sort of hate-drawing, obnoxious, downright IGNORANT baloney you've come up with. Your Holy Book has no bearing on me, and it had no bearing on the founding fathers of the US.

However, it is your right to free speech, and I cannot squelch that. I will defend the Bill of Rights to my death.

The Constitution was made, I believe, to be expandable in order to grant MORE rights to citizens, rather than take them away. It's followed that kind of path for about 200 years or so, with only a few burps here and there (Prohibition, which restricted alcohol, was repealed about 20 years later, because it just didn't work)

Making a constitutional amendment to ban ANYTHING that people do in their own homes is a dangerous, dangerous thing. If it's a religious argument, it's even more dangerous. What's next? Banning of burkas?

Banning gay marriage should NOT be a Federal decision, no more than REGULAR marriage should be a Federal decision. The constitution, and by extension, our GOVERNMENT, is there to provide us all with protection, and the celebration of our rights as human beings.

This is why the President should never have been elected... he has no idea how the government WORKS. The constitution is NOT a religious pulpet. It lets us *all* speak freely, print our own newspapers, be innocent til proven guilty, and worship whatever the heck we want to. It's what has made our country one of the strongest in all of human history.

Do NOT start a trend taking away anyone's civil liberties.

I leave you all with Amendment Nine of the United States Constitution.

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. "

LF

Chip Midnight, I want to applaud you for your well thought-out responses, research, and analysis.

There! That's what OLD people usually say. It opens the door to other things.



When you say things like this, you are a bigot. When say that someone who is gay shouldn't get married. YOU ARE A BIGOT. Why when I watch tthe news the reporters clamly report both sides. Since when is bigotry acceptable?

I think thats funny when people compare homosexuality to beastiality, necrophelia, incest, child molesters, ect...

I mean how ludicrous can one possibly be, to dilute yourself to such an extreme that a biological trait manifested in the womb before birth is compared with conscious descions of inhuman acts and perversions wherein someone is either forcing themselves on a person/thing, harming a person/thing, or engaging in an act that violates a potential future child by mutated genetics and inbreeding.

Homosexuality needs to stop being equated with sex. The term has nothing to do with sex except containing the word through convenient lettering. It is not a sexual thing, it a predesignated biological trait, just as if someone were to have brown eyes, or red hair, or freckles. Homosexuality huts NO ONE. No one is adversely affected by the fact we live in a world where people ARE DIFFERENT!

Get over yourselves, the world is big enough for all of us, some people are so disgustingly self absorbed they don't think they have to share it.

Right Christopher?

Zana, that is a great site, thanks for posting it. Now I have to study it closely, gotta make sure I don't make any of those mistakes

First of all Christopher, in my experience the median age in SL is quite a bit higher than you will find in most mmog/mmoe. Secondly, you have no clue about our ages, and to somehow insinuate that your age makes your arguments more vaild is just warped. Did age help Strom Thurman become a wise man? IMO no. Did it make him more crafty at hiding his past platforms and ideals? Yes. But hey whatever ya need to get your point across right?
That type of thinking leads right into the flaunting of military service. Does either age or conspicuous service in the armed forces somehow make you more enlightened? Btw, I will not proffer up my respect for your military service as others have done, for myself, your abuse of your service record sickens me and leads me to wonder if it's wholly true. The fact that you were injured multiple times is tainted by your decision to not look at it humbly or to thank your god for sparing your behind, but rather to use it as a grandstand for your political opinions. Sad.

Onto Christiany. In it's most fundamental *pristine* state (unattainable in my mind) the foremost and most fundamental values of Christianity include: turning the other cheek, compassion, forgiveness, doing unto other as you would have done to yourself, etc. It's folks like you that over the ages have used or tried to use it to acheive political results to your liking that have corrupted any chance that set of beleifs holds any real value in practice, other than gross hipocrisy.

Let's stick with arguments related to the issue at hand, not age or military service records. They really have nothing to do with gay marriage.

Even as a crhistian, were all hypocrites in some fashion or another, what do you think church is for? unless your claiming that the christian religion itself is hypocritical then maybe instead of analizing certin aspects about this religion, analize and read it all before you disrespect something that you yourself dont believe in. that itself is hypocrisy. All i know is that their is a God, and that there is a sun, there is a moon, and there is a universe, that one fashion or another had to be created some point in time, aside from God. believe what you want to believe but dont disrespect something that you obviously dont know enough about.... christian...or not.

-Had- to be created? Couldn't have just happened huh?

off topic!

(alert brought to you by the off topic police)

what do you mean "couldnt have just happend" ? EVERYthing has a begining, and an end, unless your outside of time , and in order to be outside of time you have to be the creator of time. something cant just randomly come up out of nothing...its illogical imo. unless your the creator of existence..the very essance of existence.

p.s. - in no way at all am i trying to impose the fact that my religion rules all and everybodies belief. maybe your mind might not see it that way. or im just another "hypocrite"..eh?

/facetiousness off

Firstly, it was in no way regarding all Christians. I illustrated that by using the words *folks like you*.

Secondly, I was not disrespecting Christianity. Accusing me of not knowing what I am talking about is way off base. I am a confirmed Lutheran and took over my mom's Sunday school class for 1.5 years when she fell ill while I was in High School. However, I have had reservations about organized religion for a good part of my adult life. During the last 20 or so years my ideas about religion have changed significantly. Look at the death and strife caused by these groups over the centuries. Why is it everytime one of these groups feels wronged they throw their holy books out the window and start squabbles? Some of which lead to war? War in the name of an unknown, presumably benevolent deity? And they wanna tell us how we should live our lives and what rights certain segments of the populous should receive? That IS hipocracy.

And you are correct, we all either have been, are, or will be some type of hipocrite in our lives, and that is fine, part of human nature I suppose. BUT, when that hipocrisy bleeds over into the political and social arenas it's affecting other peoples lives, and in my book thats just wrong, and flies in the face of all the virtues that organized religion extolls.

Well, I do know there's just no discussing this topic. The religious argument is too circular. The world exists, therefore god has to have created it. No need and no room for any other explanation. In fact other ideas are heresy and god doesn't like heresy.

Makes it all so .... simple doesnt' it? No need to think, no need to explore and delve for answers and mysteries. god did it. Nice and neatly wrapped.

in no way at all does it make it simple, it makes it harder if anything to understand the logic behind the bible. you cant say though that something sprung from nothing...its an oxy moron that lacks comon sense...unless that something was before existence and time and outside of time.

p.s.- its one thing to have logic...its another thing to have faith.

Given a choice between logic and reason on the one side, and blind faith on the other, I'll take logic and reason.

logic and reason can only take you so far. good luck.

You too hehehe and godspeed

thank you

Hmm, so logic is useable when it fits your argument for your beliefs, but you dismiss it when someone else bolsters their assertions with it.?

Ok so I know that this is like adding gas to the fire so I apologize in advance, but I just HAVE to say it.

If a woman today claimed immaculate conception she'd be locked up in the looney bin and her kid would go to "the authorities" (whoever they are).