|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 4:52 pm
in the GD. It's going to be over controversal issues.
Mainly I'm doing this for popularity in the GD, and hopefully attract some attention to the lottery.
I think my firstthread will be over gay rights though. I strongly support gay rights (even though I am not gay) and think the government is wrong for banning gay marriage.
But that's my plan. What do you think?
And just out of curiousity, what is your outlook on gay rights/marriage?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:01 pm
Its stupid for the gov to do that. Though my feelings are strong for the gays, if your soulmate was born into the same sex as you, then yeah, you would like the same sex. (though that it what I think << >> ) I have no problem with them, and I have a friend actually a few that are gay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:02 pm
man + wife = marriage,
Man = male
Wife = female
thats just how it is
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:05 pm
The Constitution garauntees 3 inalienable rights: Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness. If people would be happy gay, they can't take that away. What precedents them to take it away anyways? Is it the bible that says homosexuality is a sin? Well even if it is,there is the seperation of church and state, therefore thegovernment is once again wrong.
I will fight for gay rights in the future. I promise you will see me in the news with petitions to get gay marriage and rights legal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:06 pm
People fear the things that they can not control...or somethin like it. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:17 pm
Phukking Writch The Constitution garauntees 3 inalienable rights: Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness. If people would be happy gay, they can't take that away. What precedents them to take it away anyways? Is it the bible that says homosexuality is a sin? Well even if it is,there is the seperation of church and state, therefore thegovernment is once again wrong. I will fight for gay rights in the future. I promise you will see me in the news with petitions to get gay marriage and rights legal. you said it yourself: separation of church and state... to make gay marriage legal, law would be involved, marriage is in entirety divine and thus, of god, and thus religiously based and backed thus america cannot even use 'pursuit of happiness' to back governing the definition of marriage thus you blow your whole backing up....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:35 pm
Aww Heck Phukking Writch The Constitution garauntees 3 inalienable rights: Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness. If people would be happy gay, they can't take that away. What precedents them to take it away anyways? Is it the bible that says homosexuality is a sin? Well even if it is,there is the seperation of church and state, therefore thegovernment is once again wrong. I will fight for gay rights in the future. I promise you will see me in the news with petitions to get gay marriage and rights legal. you said it yourself: separation of church and state... to make gay marriage legal, law would be involved, marriage is in entirety divine and thus, of god, and thus religiously based and backed thus america cannot even use 'pursuit of happiness' to back governing the definition of marriage thus you blow your whole backing up.... Marriage is not based off of God. Just because it requires a priest, doesn't make it holy in any way. Marriage came about from preserving bloodlines and handling property rights. Most marriages aren't even for love, but for economic purposes. This has nothing to do with gender, or religion. So maybe you should get your facts straight before instantly saying God backs everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:44 pm
Phukking Writch Aww Heck Phukking Writch The Constitution garauntees 3 inalienable rights: Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness. If people would be happy gay, they can't take that away. What precedents them to take it away anyways? Is it the bible that says homosexuality is a sin? Well even if it is,there is the seperation of church and state, therefore thegovernment is once again wrong. I will fight for gay rights in the future. I promise you will see me in the news with petitions to get gay marriage and rights legal. you said it yourself: separation of church and state... to make gay marriage legal, law would be involved, marriage is in entirety divine and thus, of god, and thus religiously based and backed thus america cannot even use 'pursuit of happiness' to back governing the definition of marriage thus you blow your whole backing up.... Marriage is not based off of God. Just because it requires a priest, doesn't make it holy in any way. Marriage came about from preserving bloodlines and handling property rights. Most marriages aren't even for love, but for economic purposes. This has nothing to do with gender, or religion. So maybe you should get your facts straight before instantly saying God backs everything. wow...just wow...however said that black wad of dirty crap leid through their teeth... every definition i've read, even in dictionarys says marriage is a"divine union of man and woman" every definition of divine even in dictionaries is "holy and godly" hmm...so what does that mean eh?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:44 pm
Wow....Al.... simmer down low, your water may boil over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:51 pm
Aww Heck Phukking Writch Aww Heck Phukking Writch The Constitution garauntees 3 inalienable rights: Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness. If people would be happy gay, they can't take that away. What precedents them to take it away anyways? Is it the bible that says homosexuality is a sin? Well even if it is,there is the seperation of church and state, therefore thegovernment is once again wrong. I will fight for gay rights in the future. I promise you will see me in the news with petitions to get gay marriage and rights legal. you said it yourself: separation of church and state... to make gay marriage legal, law would be involved, marriage is in entirety divine and thus, of god, and thus religiously based and backed thus america cannot even use 'pursuit of happiness' to back governing the definition of marriage thus you blow your whole backing up.... Marriage is not based off of God. Just because it requires a priest, doesn't make it holy in any way. Marriage came about from preserving bloodlines and handling property rights. Most marriages aren't even for love, but for economic purposes. This has nothing to do with gender, or religion. So maybe you should get your facts straight before instantly saying God backs everything. wow...just wow...however said that black wad of dirty crap leid through their teeth... every definition i've read, even in dictionarys says marriage is a"divine union of man and woman" every definition of divine even in dictionaries is "holy and godly" hmm...so what does that mean eh? It means the world is too much influenced by religion. Just because marriage in christianity is "divine" does not mean it is for people who are not Christian. And sorry Ra, I'm considering this more of a debate, than an argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:55 pm
Ra is running on low battery and is in a very fool....**y mood (cursing is my vocab...not allowed...so my stars work for me. << >> )lol... so I tend to misread things at the moment.
As for the debate, from what I understand, it has nothing to do with religon. Marrige was for keeping the royal bloodlines strong, proprites (sp?), and treaties. Some were arranged and not for love. So I go with Al's point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:55 pm
Oh yes and let me add that those definitions are of current marriage. I was referring to where it came from. Christianity must have taken it over by thinkingthey could control what gender people must marry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:57 pm
Phukking Writch Aww Heck Phukking Writch Aww Heck Phukking Writch The Constitution garauntees 3 inalienable rights: Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness. If people would be happy gay, they can't take that away. What precedents them to take it away anyways? Is it the bible that says homosexuality is a sin? Well even if it is,there is the seperation of church and state, therefore thegovernment is once again wrong. I will fight for gay rights in the future. I promise you will see me in the news with petitions to get gay marriage and rights legal. you said it yourself: separation of church and state... to make gay marriage legal, law would be involved, marriage is in entirety divine and thus, of god, and thus religiously based and backed thus america cannot even use 'pursuit of happiness' to back governing the definition of marriage thus you blow your whole backing up.... Marriage is not based off of God. Just because it requires a priest, doesn't make it holy in any way. Marriage came about from preserving bloodlines and handling property rights. Most marriages aren't even for love, but for economic purposes. This has nothing to do with gender, or religion. So maybe you should get your facts straight before instantly saying God backs everything. wow...just wow...however said that black wad of dirty crap leid through their teeth... every definition i've read, even in dictionarys says marriage is a"divine union of man and woman" every definition of divine even in dictionaries is "holy and godly" hmm...so what does that mean eh? It means the world is too much influenced by religion. Just because marriage in christianity is "divine" does not mean it is for people who are not Christian. And sorry Ra, I'm considering this more of a debate, than an argument. okay then i'll END this debate YOU said the first thing about church and state separation, ending all your arguemental points NO ONE has said it was the cristian faith that marriage originated from, but you associate it as such...probably because of my sig and side in this "debate" I go by the dictionary definitions, FACTUAL definitions, nothing doing with chruch or legality end debate now.... before you burn in my inferno....which you've lit....after craz enhanced the heat 10x with his dirty PM he sent me ((other words: i'm not in a good mood and i go by facts...your debate is over....))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 5:57 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 6:00 pm
Awesome, after this little run, I feel fired up enough to make the first thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
