OT: Proposition 8

[Ehwmatt]

Goes double. People put more money and effort into hatred and opposition in this country than I can even believe, when there are so many other things that matter SO much more. Its fucking sickening.

p.s. when the Roman Catholic church (that I grew up in, btw) stops covering up for their servants of god who are molesting little boys, I'll be happy to listen to their side of this debate. Until then, they can STFU about it.

One of many reasons going to church does nothing for me. Jesus, if the Biblical accounts are accurate, would be downright appalled to see the things that go on even in honest churches.

[Ehwmatt]

Matt, may I ask how old you are? We aren't living in a perfect world and many many "straight" couples live crazy alternative lifestyles
and no one is going in their homes and taking away their rights as parents...

Sure, I'm 22, whatever relevance that has for ya . I don't buy the red herring stuff. Sure, I think if we all had our druthers, we'd like to see kids raised in a two-parent, loving, nurturing, and comfortable (shelter, food etc) environment. I'm sure we'd all like to remove divorce, dysfunction, etc etc. from the equation. Pretty sure we can all agree on that when it comes to raising kids. The point is, I just don't think deliberately placing a child into an extremely nonconventional home (that is what it is...) is something that needs to be on our agenda. That's all.

As all my posts before stated, I have no problem with gays. I've participated in athletics with gays, played music with gays, drank beers with gays, hell, I've even had Thanksgiving dinner with a gay every year since I was 6. Do I say "that's gay" or use "fag" as an insult? Guilty as charged, but hey, that's just the vernacular of my generation. I even slipped up and used "fag" a couple times around my gay teammate, he just laughed it off after I apologized. He understood. That's about as far as my "hate" of gay goes...

[Lula]

Tell me this... why do people single out gays for religious condemnation based on Bible verses, when the same chapter in Deutoronomy that commands us to kill gays also tells us to kill non-virgin brides, adulterers, sorcerers, rebellious children, etc.?

i wonder this as well. good on you and bjg for bringing this into the discussion. if we took the bible literally, very few, if any of us would be here posting. my feeling is if you're going to interpret literally ya gotta do it all the way- none of this pick and choose stuff.

[Ehwmatt]

Tell me this... why do people single out gays for religious condemnation based on Bible verses, when the same chapter in Deutoronomy that commands us to kill gays also tells us to kill non-virgin brides, adulterers, sorcerers, rebellious children, etc.?

i wonder this as well. good on you and bjg for bringing this into the discussion. if we took the bible literally, very few, if any of us would be here posting. my feeling is if you're going to interpret literally ya gotta do it all the way- none of this pick and choose stuff.

Cause people are idiots, that's why. You all know I'm a conservative, but I'm going to call that kinda shit as I see it. It's no different from people on the left who would tell me I hate gays just because I don't want them raising children. As long as both sides continue to speak in gross hyperbole, there will be no discourse worth having in this country.

[Voyager]

Leviticus 20:9: “For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall surely be put to death: He has cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.”

Leviticus 20:10: “And the man that commiteth adultery with another man’s wife...the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.”

Leviticus 20:13: “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.”

Leviticus 20:27: “A man also or a woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones.”

A lot of people say that these laws were abolished when Jesus came. However, Jesus said that is not the case:

Matthew 5:17- “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”

So why are the faithful and obedient Christians not obeying all of these laws? Why do they single out the gays?

[Lula]

Sure, I'm 22, whatever relevance that has for ya . I don't buy the red herring stuff. Sure, I think if we all had our druthers, we'd like to see kids raised in a two-parent, loving, nurturing, and comfortable (shelter, food etc) environment. I'm sure we'd all like to remove divorce, dysfunction, etc etc. from the equation. Pretty sure we can all agree on that when it comes to raising kids. The point is, I just don't think deliberately placing a child into an extremely nonconventional home (that is what it is...) is something that needs to be on our agenda. That's all.

As all my posts before stated, I have no problem with gays. I've participated in athletics with gays, played music with gays, drank beers with gays, hell, I've even had Thanksgiving dinner with a gay every year since I was 6. Do I say "that's gay" or use "fag" as an insult? Guilty as charged, but hey, that's just the vernacular of my generation. I even slipped up and used "fag" a couple times around my gay teammate, he just laughed it off after I apologized. He understood. That's about as far as my "hate" of gay goes...

you, of course, are entitled to your opinion. i do not find a 'gay' household unconventional, not in the least. perhaps geography plays a role, i don't know. i've lived in los angeles all of my life and grew up with different races, religions, and sexual orientations in my community. the differences in people is what makes us great.

as for the teasing stuff- my mom was 43 when she had me and i always heard her referred to as my grandmother. now i have a baby boy and worry he'll grow up with the same. i have a freckled face and was teased to no end in school. kids will tease, that is their nature. a child raised in a loving home is nurtured and develops the ability to weather life's hardships which includes the turmoil of grade school.

[Enigma869]

I just think there are far too many scenarios where living with a gay couple would be very detrimental to a child's mental health. The whispers on the school bus. The taunts on the play ground. The funny looks when they go out for dinner. Even in this era of tolerance and P.C., you're fooling yourself if you don't think some of that shit will go on. You get the idea. I don't think a child should be forced to confront that stuff.

I'm not fooling myself at all. I'm fully cognizant of the taunting that many children do. My wife happens to be a teacher so I see this stuff on a daily basis. Children who taunt other children will do so, regardless of the reason. If their parent(s) happen to be heterosexual, they will find another reason to be a bully. This stuff has been going on for generations, and sexual orientation isn't the reason for it!


John from Boston

[SteveForever]

Matt, may I ask how old you are? We aren't living in a perfect world and many many "straight" couples live crazy alternative lifestyles
and no one is going in their homes and taking away their rights as parents...

Sure, I'm 22, whatever relevance that has for ya . I don't buy the red herring stuff. Sure, I think if we all had our druthers, we'd like to see kids raised in a two-parent, loving, nurturing, and comfortable (shelter, food etc) environment. I'm sure we'd all like to remove divorce, dysfunction, etc etc. from the equation. Pretty sure we can all agree on that when it comes to raising kids. The point is, I just don't think deliberately placing a child into an extremely nonconventional home (that is what it is...) is something that needs to be on our agenda. That's all.

As all my posts before stated, I have no problem with gays. I've participated in athletics with gays, played music with gays, drank beers with gays, hell, I've even had Thanksgiving dinner with a gay every year since I was 6. Do I say "that's gay" or use "fag" as an insult? Guilty as charged, but hey, that's just the vernacular of my generation. I even slipped up and used "fag" a couple times around my gay teammate, he just laughed it off after I apologized. He understood. That's about as far as my "hate" of gay goes...

Okay, I'm glad you can admit your thoughts...that's very healthy. All of us have a little bit of prejudice in us and we need to constantly work on
that struggle. I'm was curious at your age because after seeing what life is about for several years and being a parent myself I can tell you
there are kids out there that need homes- there are no perfect homes.

[Rick]

By the way Rick... good luck on having this not turn into a hateful thread.
But kudos to you for the way you presented your opinion. Very respectful.

I think it's going well so far. I hope we can just keep it up. Good, constructive discussion. I hope people will come away from it with a clearer head and a better understanding of everyone's views and also their fears.

[S2M]

I'm not attackng the original poster, but I don't understand the reason for this thread. It IS gona turn ugly, and it WILL eventually get locked.

[Ehwmatt]

Sure, I'm 22, whatever relevance that has for ya . I don't buy the red herring stuff. Sure, I think if we all had our druthers, we'd like to see kids raised in a two-parent, loving, nurturing, and comfortable (shelter, food etc) environment. I'm sure we'd all like to remove divorce, dysfunction, etc etc. from the equation. Pretty sure we can all agree on that when it comes to raising kids. The point is, I just don't think deliberately placing a child into an extremely nonconventional home (that is what it is...) is something that needs to be on our agenda. That's all.

As all my posts before stated, I have no problem with gays. I've participated in athletics with gays, played music with gays, drank beers with gays, hell, I've even had Thanksgiving dinner with a gay every year since I was 6. Do I say "that's gay" or use "fag" as an insult? Guilty as charged, but hey, that's just the vernacular of my generation. I even slipped up and used "fag" a couple times around my gay teammate, he just laughed it off after I apologized. He understood. That's about as far as my "hate" of gay goes...

you, of course, are entitled to your opinion. i do not find a 'gay' household unconventional, not in the least. perhaps geography plays a role, i don't know. i've lived in los angeles all of my life and grew up with different races, religions, and sexual orientations in my community. the differences in people is what makes us great.

as for the teasing stuff- my mom was 43 when she had me and i always heard her referred to as my grandmother. now i have a baby boy and worry he'll grow up with the same. i have a freckled face and was teased to no end in school. kids will tease, that is their nature. a child raised in a loving home is nurtured and develops the ability to weather life's hardships which includes the turmoil of grade school.

And I'm sure your mom at 43 had the wisdom a younger mother would lack to help you cope

But on the conventional vs unconventional stuff? I'll agree to disagree with ya! I'm a stone's throw from Lakewood, OH which as you may know has one of the densest gay populations. One of my best friends lives there, my dad and I used to go to the record exchange there, lots of night life there now. You see all kinds of stuff in Lakewood if you go to the right places. So it's not like I haven't been around it plenty. It's just personal perception I think.

[Ehwmatt]

I'm not attackng the original poster, but I don't understand the reason for this thread. It IS gona turn ugly, and it WILL eventually get locked.

I don't see anything bad going on. I'm enjoying the debate/various views.

[S2M]

And calling someone prejudice for picking the first choice would be like calling a person who is against murder - prejudice against a muderer.

[Voyager]

I'm not attackng the original poster, but I don't understand the reason for this thread. It IS gona turn ugly, and it WILL eventually get locked.

I don't see anything bad going on. I'm enjoying the debate/various views.

I agree. The only way it would turn ugly is if someone goes into a bigoted rage and destroys it. I think it was reasonable for Rick to expect the members of this forum to discuss this topic in a civil and rational manner. We discussed electing an African American person as President, which could have just as easily turned into a bigotfest. I think we're mature enough to discuss this issue in the same manner.

[treetopovskaya]

when the bible says "death" isn't that meant as they won't have eternal life?

[Enigma869]

I'm not attackng the original poster, but I don't understand the reason for this thread. It IS gona turn ugly, and it WILL eventually get locked.

This isn't Jackass Talk, dude! Drew doesn't lock many threads here. This board polices itself better than ANY board in the history of the internet! People disagree and even call each other rotten names, and somehow it always finds its way back to civility!


John from Boston

[Rick]

I'm not attackng the original poster, but I don't understand the reason for this thread. It IS gona turn ugly, and it WILL eventually get locked.

Kind of for selfish reasons. I really wanted to know what the MR populous had to say about it. I trust and respect the opinion of the people here very much. Even yours.

[Jana]

Ehwmatt, I don't believe you hate gays for one second. But regarding your resistance towards gay parenting, I will respect your views. It's a complicated subject. But you seem like a fairly open-minded person who only disagrees with it from the standpoint of how it would affect the children. But this society is becoming diverse and open-minded in so many ways. It seems like same sex couples who chose to have children or to be foster care parents live in more accepting cities.

But I take issue when you made the comment regarding that you were against it even though they would have a roof over their head and not be in orphanages, even for the most troubled children. It's more than a roof over their head. It's the unconditional love and nurting and support and for many of these damaged children getting them the help they need in order to become productive members of society and able to be good parents themselves. In Florida, after many of these children are bumped from home to home they are considered an adult at 18 and out they go. Hell, I still needed my parents in my twenties through all the mistakes I made and their guidance. I suspect most of them would have rather had loving gay parents than the life they've lead.

Remember, years ago even if people accepted interracial relationships, most people thought it was selfish to have children who would be biracial and subject to ridicule and teasing in school. If people had followed that line of thinking, Barack Obama, Halle Berry, and many people like them would not be here in this world. And I'm sure they didn't have it easy all the time, but I guarantee you they're glad they're here and had great emotional support.

[S2M]

I'm not attackng the original poster, but I don't understand the reason for this thread. It IS gona turn ugly, and it WILL eventually get locked.

This isn't Jackass Talk, dude! Drew doesn't lock many threads here. This board polices itself better than ANY board in the history of the internet! People disagree and even call each other rotten names, and somehow it always finds its way back to civility!


John from Boston

Dude, respect your elders......

[Enigma869]

Dude, respect your elders......

I didn't realize what an old fuck you were


John from Boston

[bluejeangirl76]

The reason people hate gayness is because it is something that is foreign to most people. Because they don't have an attraction to people of the same sex, they see homosexuality as something deviant and evil. This is the same type of bigotry that people have towards interracial marriages. When the community at large becomes opposed to something, the people in the group develop a dislike or even a hatred towards it. This is why different cultures have different religious beliefs. Muslim communities turn out more Muslims... Christian communities turn out more Christians... and bigoted communities turn out more bigots.

Tell me this... why do people single out gays for religious condemnation based on Bible verses, when the same chapter in Deutoronomy that commands us to kill gays also tells us to kill non-virgin brides, adulterers, sorcerers, rebellious children, etc.?

Thank you Voyager. Very well said.

[StevePerryHair]

when the bible says "death" isn't that meant as they won't have eternal life?

Yes, I do believe that is how most christian religions would interpret that.


I attended a what was supposed to be non-denominational bible study once, and yes, that is what many of the evangelical christians teach. The bible study had a lecture with it and she took it a step further to say the bible says that gays can not be forgiven, even if they repent. That it is a "sin" you can not come back from and have eternal life. That was the day I knew I was in the wrong place. I am a Catholic by they way. I attended that study to try to be more open minded about my christianity and it had quite the opposite affect really.

[bluejeangirl76]

By the way Rick... good luck on having this not turn into a hateful thread.
But kudos to you for the way you presented your opinion. Very respectful.

I think it's going well so far. I hope we can just keep it up. Good, constructive discussion.

Going as well as a discussion like this can, yes, I agree... until, I figure, sometime early tomorrow morning... thank heaven I won't be able to hang around to witness it.

[Barb]

We all have the same equal right to marry one person of the opposite sex. Just because some people aren't into that, shouldn't mean marriage is re-defined for that group of people. So this is not an "equal" right, but a special right.

This is the second time CA has voted on this issue, yet the will of the citizens seems to be irrelevant.

I voted no because I really don't care, but what irks me is the inability of people on the left to accept election results. No matter what it is, they protest when they don't get their way or their guy. Only when liberal candidates or props win is the election "fair".

[StevePerryHair]

We all have the same equal right to marry one person of the opposite sex. Just because some people aren't into that, shouldn't mean marriage is re-defined for that group of people. So this is not an "equal" right, but a special right.

This is the second time CA has voted on this issue, yet the will of the citizens seems to be irrelevant.

I voted no because I really don't care, but what irks me is the inability of people on the left to accept election results. No matter what it is, they protest when they don't get their way or their guy. Only when liberal candidates or props win is the election "fair".

Don't assume that everyone who would vote that way is on the "left". That is an unfair assumption.

[Voyager]

I voted no because I really don't care, but what irks me is the inability of people on the left to accept election results. No matter what it is, they protest when they don't get their way or their guy. Only when liberal candidates or props win is the election "fair".

There was a time when the majority of people in the USA would have voted against abolishing slavery... or against equal rights for African Americans. That doesn't mean it was the right thing to do.

[Barb]

We all have the same equal right to marry one person of the opposite sex. Just because some people aren't into that, shouldn't mean marriage is re-defined for that group of people. So this is not an "equal" right, but a special right.

This is the second time CA has voted on this issue, yet the will of the citizens seems to be irrelevant.

I voted no because I really don't care, but what irks me is the inability of people on the left to accept election results. No matter what it is, they protest when they don't get their way or their guy. Only when liberal candidates or props win is the election "fair".

Don't assume that everyone who would vote that way is on the "left". That is an unfair assumption.

I don't, but those that are marching in the streets and protesting pretty much are. As I said, I voted no -- and am in no way on the left.

[Lula]

the issue with prop 8 is it is trying to strip away what the courts have ruled to be a fundamental right. to take away a fundamental right would mean our state constitution would have to be revised and that requires the action of our legislative branch not the voters.

[treetopovskaya]

and what party fought to abolish slavery? }:C)

I voted no because I really don't care, but what irks me is the inability of people on the left to accept election results. No matter what it is, they protest when they don't get their way or their guy. Only when liberal candidates or props win is the election "fair".

There was a time when the majority of people in the USA would have voted against abolishing slavery... or against equal rights for African Americans. That doesn't mean it was the right thing to do.

[treetopovskaya]

i voted no & i dunno where i am. somewhere stuck in the middle. }:C)

We all have the same equal right to marry one person of the opposite sex. Just because some people aren't into that, shouldn't mean marriage is re-defined for that group of people. So this is not an "equal" right, but a special right.

This is the second time CA has voted on this issue, yet the will of the citizens seems to be irrelevant.

I voted no because I really don't care, but what irks me is the inability of people on the left to accept election results. No matter what it is, they protest when they don't get their way or their guy. Only when liberal candidates or props win is the election "fair".

Don't assume that everyone who would vote that way is on the "left". That is an unfair assumption.

I don't, but those that are marching in the streets and protesting pretty much are. As I said, I voted no -- and am in no way on the left.