California legalizes gay marr... ZOMG!!!! MY EYES!!!!! IT BURNS!!!

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by jammies

I think all men other than myself should be forced into gay marriage, as this would leave the (non-lesbian) female population with me, or nothing.

Yes, yes, most of them WILL probably go with nothing, no need to point that out. Let a man have his dream.

If that's your picture in your avatar, I still don't like your chances.

Originally Posted by Boblobla

I'm against it.

Me, too.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

...I do not understand though how a priest can marry a gay couple, the Bible is pretty black and white when it comes to that issue.

Just guessing, here, but I suspect an officiating clergy over a gay marriage probably recognizes that the Bible is frought with all sorts of cultural baggage, and that subscribing to his/her religion does not require adherence to a literal, "black and white" perception of Scriptural authority.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by jammies

I think all men other than myself should be forced into gay marriage, as this would leave the (non-lesbian) female population with me, or nothing.

Yes, yes, most of them WILL probably go with nothing, no need to point that out. Let a man have his dream.

Or, inspired by the most logical race in the galaxy (the Vulcans), breeding will only be permitted once every seven years. For many of you that will mean much less breeding, for jammies, much much more.

[SteveToms]

Good news, if two guys or two ladies want to marry each other, they should be able too, and now they can.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Just guessing, here, but I suspect an officiating clergy over a gay marriage probably recognizes that the Bible is frought with all sorts of cultural baggage, and that subscribing to his/her religion does not require adherence to a literal, "black and white" perception of Scriptural authority.

That is a pretty slippery slope to travel down though. Just my interpretation. If the big man upstairs hated it enough to destroy two cities and turn anyone who watched him destroy those cities into pillars of salt I don't see him suddenly being okay with it.

[J pold]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

If the big man upstairs hated it enough to destroy two cities and turn anyone who watched him destroy those cities into pillars of salt I don't see him suddenly being okay with it.

This thought to me is far more absurd than the idea of Gay marriage

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by J pold

This thought to me is far more absurd than the idea of Gay marriage

That's fine, I didn't write the book, I was responding to how Text said it could be open to interpretation.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

That is a pretty slippery slope to travel down though. Just my interpretation. If the big man upstairs hated it enough to destroy two cities and turn anyone who watched him destroy those cities into pillars of salt I don't see him suddenly being okay with it.

Hey, if you believe in that then fair enough, but not many people believe that stuff actually happened in reality. We can't base our laws on something that most of us don't believe.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by OilersBaby

Maybe Im too liberal livin in the Bay Area, but I live by the motto "to each their own"

Heheheheheh, I thought you said "to EAT their own".. I mis-read, I swear!

[SteveToms]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Hey, if you believe in that then fair enough, but not many people believe that stuff actually happened in reality. We can't base our laws on something that most of us don't believe.

Exactly.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Hey, if you believe in that then fair enough, but not many people believe that stuff actually happened in reality. We can't base our laws on something that most of us don't believe.

I never said anything about laws. This comment was in the context of a priest marrying a gay couple. They should believe what happens in the bible tbqh.

[Flashpoint]

To me it's a pretty simple equation.

If you don't support gay marriage, then you don't support equal rights. Which really boils down to bigotry. You don't think that law abiding adults in our society should be treated equally under the law, and as such, you are a bigot.

The issue is identical to interracial marriage - 40 years ago people thought that was wrong too. Now if you told someone you didn't think whites should marry blacks because they are different colors, you would be called a racist.

I expect that in 40 years time, our kids will look back at this the same way.

EDIT - this post isn't directed at anyone in particular. It is a general statement for everyone opposed to this legislation.

[Regulator75]

Originally Posted by JBR

In related news...

TSN insider Bob McKenzie reports that Edmonton Oilers GM Kevin Lowe receives, from the majority of his current NHL roster, demands to be traded to L.A., Anaheim or San Jose.

Hilarious. I literally laughed out loud.

[Russic]

Over the years the bible has said a lot of ridiculous things that have changed from straight up fact to interpretation as a result of societal changes. I think there are many priests/ministers/rabbis who feel that the bible speaking out against homosexuality must be looked at differently based on what we now know.

The issue is identical to interracial marriage - 40 years ago people thought that was wrong too. Now if you told someone you didn't think whites should marry blacks because they are different colors, you would be called a racist.

I expect that in 40 years time, our kids will look back at this the same way.

I sincerely hope you're right!

[LChoy]

my $0.02 + 5% GST
Shows like "the bachelor" or "who wants to marry a millionaire" (or even celebrity shot gun marriages) are a greater threats on the scantity of marriage than 2 people who really love another, but happen to be the same sex.

[NSFL]

Originally Posted by jammies

I think all men other than myself should be forced into gay marriage, as this would leave the (non-lesbian) female population with me, or nothing.

Yes, yes, most of them WILL probably go with nothing, no need to point that out. Let a man have his dream.

That won't stop'em from cheating...

[Boblobla]

On a related note:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/06/1....ap/index.html

""Star Trek" star George Takai is ready to "live long and prosper" with his partner of 21 years."

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

To me it's a pretty simple equation.

If you don't support gay marriage, then you don't support equal rights.

How about my equal right to the integrity of the definition of marriage as it has existed for thousands of years?

Which really boils down to bigotry. You don't think that law abiding adults in our society should be treated equally under the law, and as such, you are a bigot.

Don't see how that is bigotry. I don't think gays are evil, wrong, or anything of the sort. I do think, however, that the gay community is really shooting itself in the foot by demanding a change in the definition of marriage as opposed to inventing their own unique word. Obviously there are some conventions of the traditional marriage that do not lend itself to homosexual couples that would otherwise be moot or easily dealt with under a unique term for legally recognized homosexual unions.

The issue is identical to interracial marriage - 40 years ago people thought that was wrong too. Now if you told someone you didn't think whites should marry blacks because they are different colors, you would be called a racist.

While some laws were passed banning this specifically, once those were shot down there was no change needed to the fundamental dynamics of the legal side of marriage.

I expect that in 40 years time, our kids will look back at this the same way.

EDIT - this post isn't directed at anyone in particular. It is a general statement for everyone opposed to this legislation.

I expect in 40 years our kids (especially the gay ones) will look back and say "I can't believe the gay community in 2008 was so selfish as to demand that society bend over backward for them on such an arrogant technicality. What an abuse of civil liberties and freedom of expression it was. Thank god things now are much better."

Who knows, maybe we'd actually see some gay people holding hands in public if they weren't so afraid the local Albertans would lynch them because their brethren in ONT/QUE are putting up a huge (and offensive) stink.

[Boblobla]

Traditional_Ale, exactly what I was thinking but I am too stupid to make words sound good. Thanks.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

To me it's a pretty simple equation.

If you don't support gay marriage, then you don't support equal rights. Which really boils down to bigotry. You don't think that law abiding adults in our society should be treated equally under the law, and as such, you are a bigot.

The issue is identical to interracial marriage - 40 years ago people thought that was wrong too. Now if you told someone you didn't think whites should marry blacks because they are different colors, you would be called a racist.

I expect that in 40 years time, our kids will look back at this the same way.

EDIT - this post isn't directed at anyone in particular. It is a general statement for everyone opposed to this legislation.

I disagree with that. Homosexual and heterosexual couples are not equal, the societal purpose of marriage is to reproduce. Homosexual couples are not able to reproduce. Sure it's possible, but in the same sense its possible for an individual to reproduce - it doesn't have the same value IMHO.

Totally different than interracial couples, race has no relevance regarding reproduction.


I'm not stating I'm for or against gay marriage, but I don't see it as equal.