Banning/Allowing Religious Garbs

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Really, you have? Ok well I can pull up several quotes of yours that say you don't so if you want to play that game.

Could you? I don't remember him saying so.

[peter12]

I am against gay marriage.






Just kidding, calgaryblood.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Could you? I don't remember him saying so.

Here's one of many anti-gay marriage posts by Peter12. If this is freedom in Christianity then I want no part of it.

Originally Posted by peter12

I still do not support gay marriage as it is defined by the courts, or by society. The reasons for it are complex, and it certainly has nothing to do with my love, and desire for our homosexual (and trans) brothers and sisters to express themselves without fear of oppression, harassment, or fear.

I just think that from the standpoint of many pro-SSM activists, what is being defined as marriage is actually not marriage, but something else. As Judge Kennedy described it in his recent majority, it is the right to not die alone. I do think that this is a very powerful sentiment, and one that I can somewhat agree with.

However, my objections, briefly:

1) Marriage defined purely as love between two humans. Marriage is so much more than this, mainly a commitment for the raising of children.
2) The increasing conformity of homosexual life - that is, you can be gay, but we prefer you act straight. This is actually a benefit brought forward by the most conservative of SSM activists, like Andrew Sullivan and Jonathan Raush.
3) The increasing view that gay marriage will change heterosexual marriage. That is, make it more about two autonomous individuals living in a contractual relationship that can have certain clauses that allow for one to opt out. For example, the push by Dan Savage, among others, for monogamist lifestyles.

These are all reasonable objections, and could form the basis for a reasonable debate about the nature of marriage, the individual, love, and any other topics, but has been short-circuited by the courts (acting like poor philosophers), and by increasing social stigma towards anyone questioning SSM.

[peter12]

That's a pretty complicated post.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by peter12

That's a pretty complicated post.

It's actually pretty simple. You just took the longest route to say gay people shouldn't have equal rights.

So say what you were going to say that would have upset me.

[PepsiFree]

If I may: I've had multiple conversations with Peter which have led me to believe his views on gay marriage are as complex as he says, and there is some nuance to them.

I've never had the sense his interest is in the limiting of gay rights.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If I may: I've had multiple conversations with Peter which have led me to believe his views on gay marriage are as complex as he says, and there is some nuance to them.

I've never had the sense his interest is in the limiting of gay rights.

Gay marriage is not complex. You either believe that two people of the same sex can legally get married with every single right as two heterosexual people or you don't. There is no "complex" situation where we need 1000 words and quotes from people who have been dead for 400 years.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
It's also an explicit legal and social arrangement that brings two families together in a joint venture.

How many of you married people had your social circle enlarged by just your spouse? You gained a second set of parents, sisters and brothers-in-law, children, spouses etc... all joined together because of one marriage.

Your responsibilities and obligations increase exponentially - economic productivity increases to meet those obligations, and your personal security is also guaranteed through a strengthened web of family connections.

Most cohabitation is an arrangement of similar intimacy, under the guide of convenience, with a predominant focus on the temporal rather than the permanent. You adopt all of the risks, and gain very few of the benefits.

Nice to see Peter12 argue for the benefits of same-sex marriage. Very refreshing, Peter!

My apologies for quoting my own post, but Peter12 is so close, if he would only believe his own words.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Gay marriage is not complex.

Ok, if you say so.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Gay marriage is not complex. You either believe that two people of the same sex can legally get married with every single right as two heterosexual people or you don't. There is no "complex" situation where we need 1000 words and quotes from people who have been dead for 400 years.

Actually, most of my quotes are from people who have been dead for 1500+ years.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Ok, if you say so.

What are you even arguing? You said you didn't get the sense that Peter12 wasn't all about limiting gay rights. How can you possibly get that sense when the post I quoted literally was against "gay marriage as defined by the courts" is that not an equal right?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
It's also an explicit legal and social arrangement that brings two families together in a joint venture.

How many of you married people had your social circle enlarged by just your spouse? You gained a second set of parents, sisters and brothers-in-law, children, spouses etc... all joined together because of one marriage.

Your responsibilities and obligations increase exponentially - economic productivity increases to meet those obligations, and your personal security is also guaranteed through a strengthened web of family connections.

Most cohabitation is an arrangement of similar intimacy, under the guide of convenience, with a predominant focus on the temporal rather than the permanent. You adopt all of the risks, and gain very few of the benefits.

Nice to see Peter12 argue for the benefits of same-sex marriage. Very refreshing, Peter!

My apologies for quoting my own post, but Peter12 is so close, if he would only believe his own words.

Except that the numbers of homosexuals that get, and remain, married is a tiny percentage of the overall population.

Imagine, a group of people with different priorities.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

What are you even arguing? You said you didn't get the sense that Peter12 wasn't all about limiting gay rights. How can you possibly get that sense when the post I quoted literally was against "gay marriage as defined by the courts" is that not an equal right?

I don't believe in the notion of equal rights. I don't even know what that means. It is an even further abstraction of the already abstract concepts of rights (which I believe exist, but that's because I believe in God).

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by peter12

Actually, most of my quotes are from people who have been dead for 1500+ years.

Jesus said it best regarding gay marriage:

" "

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

What are you even arguing? You said you didn't get the sense that Peter12 wasn't all about limiting gay rights. How can you possibly get that sense when the post I quoted literally was against "gay marriage as defined by the courts" is that not an equal right?

You should read more than the first line. It's a pretty good post. It's more about the definition of marriage in general than it is about the restriction of gay rights.

I'm all for you defending gay rights, however. Go nuts.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You should read more than the first line. It's a pretty good post. It's more about the definition of marriage in general than it is about the restriction of gay rights.

I'm all for you defending gay rights, however. Go nuts.

I did read more than the first line. "The definition of marriage"? What are you even talking about? The definition of marriage is very clear in section 15 of the Canadian charter.

And I disagree it being a good post. It's one of the worst posts this board has seen regarding gay marriage. How you could possibly call a post that wants to restrict gay marriage "good" is beyond me.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

Jesus said it best regarding gay marriage:

" "

Well actually he said:

“that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’a 5and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’b ? 6So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

[peter12]

There is no definition of gay marriage in Section 15.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by peter12

Except that the numbers of homosexuals that get, and remain, married is a tiny percentage of the overall population.

Imagine, a group of people with different priorities.

I am not sure how the number of gay marriages matter as to whether it should be legal for gay marriages to exist. Different priorities? What are you getting at?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

I am not sure how the number of gay marriages matter as to whether it should be legal for gay marriages to exist. Different priorities? What are you getting at?

I've never said that it shouldn't be legal, but that I didn't agree with the perspective taken by our courts or by "society" in general.