North Carolina passes same-sex marriage ban

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Also, I expect that these sorts of Christians feel the way that they do because for most of us, homosexuality is—for lack of a better word—repulsive. I am not opposed to same sex marriage, but the idea creeps me out. When I watch TV or movies with my wife that feature a homosexual embrace, we usually change the channel because we find it awkward. I expect that a high number of people find homosexuality an easy target for their wrath, simply because it is so foreign and incomprehensible to them. Their natural feelings toward it only help to confirm what they "know" from the Bible.

If something makes you uncomfortable/squirm, it sure as hell doesn't make it illegal.

I know people who get ill watching other people eat beef tongue or seafood. I know people who get ill watching an autopsy. Hell, I even know somebody that essentially instapukes at the sight of obese people running/working out at the gym. But last time I checked, those people were also not going out of their way to make those things illegal. That's not even remotely on their radar - it would be irrational, ignorant and indefensible.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by chemgear

But you (or rather "they") don't follow that thought or rationalization through to the end. You can't just go "ergo there must be some other explanation", don't go and follow through on that investigation, give up and just wave your hands and say, yup - I figured it out, high five. Now I can continue to thump the parts I like and continue blindly discriminating with glee.

Who are you kidding? The vast majority of people are prone to act and respond irrationally. Whether we like it or not, most people are not rational: Developing ones rational faculties is difficult, and most people simply do not have the time, nor the inclination to learn, or many have not been properly taught.

But contrary to your "picking and choosing" generalization, there is actually an entire discipline in Evangelical Christian education dedicated to precisely this issue: To creative inventions of reason for the purpose of offering alternative explanations for parts of the Bible that we find repulsive, odd, or downright bizarre. It is called "apologetics", and it churns out an exasperating number of "critical" studies of this and other similar topics. One example of this is the hilarious book by Paul Copan, Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament God

[Ozy_Flame]

Technically, gay men are more macho than straight men because they're far more manly in the literal sense of the word. No women involved.

BTW, I'm sure there are other states that would oppose this kind of legislation. No one should be surprised this is from North Carolina.

[GirlySports]

---

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by chemgear

If something makes you uncomfortable/squirm, it sure as hell doesn't make it illegal...

This is not the argument, and no Christian on the "family values" side of this issue would make such a claim.

My point was that conservative Christians view homosexuality as an abomination based on the strong invectives in the Bible that condemn the practice. Their belief about it is confirmed by their experience—which they assume is normative—and by their own presumed natural discomfort.

Opposition does not stem simply from their feelings, but their feelings have an enormous influence on why they maintain their position on this issue.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/

I always took that as dietary laws because they weren't knowledgeable enough about the dangers of red tide, so they just banned shellfish.

Red tide is also potentially harmful to human health.[5] Humans can become seriously ill from eating oysters and other shellfish contaminated with red tide toxin

The whole thing with a lot of the OT, is that it was written for a primitive society and has little to do with us today. Probably ditto for the NT as well other than the sayings of Jesus which are more timeless.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Not really what I am getting at. I'm suggesting that as a heterosexual male, I can't imagine how I could ever be sexually attracted to another man. In that sense, it is incomprehensible.

Is your capacity for empathy missing or something? It's incomprehensible to me that you can't comprehend how a man could love another man. You know how you love your wife? It'd be exactly like that except instead of your wife being a woman, she'd be a man. How can that be hard to wrap your head around?

[Cheese]

Yup...beacues this is the way its sposed to be...hyuk hyuk hyuk

makes me squirm

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Is your capacity for empathy missing or something? It's incomprehensible to me that you can't comprehend how a man could love another man. You know how you love your wife? It'd be exactly like that except instead of your wife being a woman, she'd be a man. How can that be hard to wrap your head around?

Incomprehensible in the same sense that it is incomprehensible to me how so many people can not only stand to—but love to listen to R & B. I hate it, and I cannot imagine any circumstances under which I would enjoy it. What the hell does this have to do with my sense of empathy?

Is sexual attraction the same as love??

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This is not the argument, and no Christian on the "family values" side of this issue would make such a claim.

My point was that conservative Christians view homosexuality as an abomination based on the strong invectives in the Bible that condemn the practice. Their belief about it is confirmed by their experience—which they assume is normative—and by their own presumed natural discomfort.

Opposition does not stem simply from their feelings, but their feelings have an enormous influence on why they maintain their position on this issue.

I get that they think it's an abomination, but how does it affect them? Are they personally going to go to hell if gays get married?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Cheese

Yup...beacues this is the way its sposed to be...hyuk hyuk hyuk

makes me squirm

There are only 14 kids in that picture:

[Senator Clay Davis]

I really hope eventually all the assbackwards religious American states secede and form their own country where they can complain about Sharia Law while instituting their own Sharia Law. I feel bad for the educated people in those states.

[Lobotroth]

One of my favorite quotes concerning homosexuality:

Well, I say that homosexuality is not just a form of sex, it’s a form of love, and it deserves our respect for that reason.

- Christopher Hitchens

[sec304]

I just don't get why they wouldn't want to let homosexual people be as miserable as the rest of us are!

[calgaryrocks]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Technically, gay men are more macho than straight men because they're far more manly in the literal sense of the word. No women involved.

lol except for allowing someone to have dominance over you

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I get that they think it's an abomination, but how does it affect them? Are they personally going to go to hell if gays get married?

That is an interesting question, and I obviously can't know how everyone processes this sort of belief.

In my own personal experience, I would suggest that in a twisted sort of way the opposition to same-sex marriage is actually rationalized on a weird sense of empathy. Conservative Christians believe that homosexuality is an abomination of nature, and that the practice and tolerance of homosexuality will result in an unacceptable rate of social decay. In their minds they are protecting society from something that they see as extremely harmful.

Furthermore, this sense of empathy likely also extends to practitioners of homosexuality: I would expect that most conservative Christians would consider the ban on gay marriage to be for their own good. If these people can prevent the practice of homosexuality, then they will have succeeded in protecting would-be practitioners from the dire consequences of their sin.

[troutman]

Zach Walls is an impressive young man, currently promoting his book My Two Moms:

http://www.zachwahls.com/?page_id=375

I guess the point is that my family really isn’t so different from any other Iowa family. When I’m home, we go to church together. We eat dinner, we go on vacations. But, we have our hard times too; we get in fights. My mom, Terry, was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 2000. It is a devastating disease that put her in a wheelchair, so you know, we’ve had our struggles. But we’re Iowans. We don’t expect anyone to solve our problems for us. We’ll fight our own battles. We just hope for equal and fair treatment for our government.

If I was your son, Mr. Chairman, I believe I’d make you very proud. I’m not so different from any of your children. My family really isn’t so different from yours. After all, your family doesn’t derive its sense of worth from being told by the state, “You’re married, congratulations!” The sense of family comes the commitment we make to each other to work through the hard times so we can enjoy the good ones. It comes from the love that binds us. That’s what makes a family.

So what you’re voting for here is not to change us. It’s not to change our families, it’s to change how the law views us, how the law treats us. You are voting for the first time in the history of our state to codify discrimination into our constitution, a constitution that but for the proposed amendment is the least amended constitution in the United States of America. You are telling Iowans, “Some among you are second-class citizens who do not have the right to marry the person you love.” So will this vote affect my family? Would it affect yours? In the next two hours, I’m sure we’re going to hear a lot of testimony about how damaging having gay parents is on kids. But not once have I ever been confronted by an individual who realized independently that I was raised by a gay couple. And you know why? Because the sexual orientation of my parents has had zero impact on the content of my character. Thank you.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I always took that as dietary laws because they weren't knowledgeable enough about the dangers of red tide, so they just banned shellfish.



The whole thing with a lot of the OT, is that it was written for a primitive society and has little to do with us today. Probably ditto for the NT as well other than the sayings of Jesus which are more timeless.

Yeah, that's exactly the point. Societal norms have changed over thousands of years. The Bible says outright that getting a tattoo or eating shellfish is an abomination, yet those concepts seem ridiculously outdated to our modern standards. So why do some people pick and choose certain elements from the Bible to be discarded but others that must be followed? People are simply using an ancient scripture to justify their shameless, unabashed bigotry. Using the Bible to justify descrimination against homosexuals is no different than anti-abolitionsts in the 19th century using the Bible to justify owning slaves.

Slave owners claimed that slavery was a positive good for masters and slaves alike, and that it was explicitly sanctioned by God. Biblical arguments were made in defense of slavery by religious leaders such as the Rev. Fred A. Ross and political leaders such as Jefferson Davis. There were Southern biblical interpretations that directly contradicted those of the abolitionists, such as the theory that a curse on Noah's son Ham and his descendants in Africa was a justification for enslavement of blacks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitionism#United_States

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by calgaryrocks

lol except for allowing someone to have dominance over you

Based on the experiences of some of my married friends, it seems to me that striaght marriage involves a lot of dominance too!

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by troutman

Zach Walls is an impressive young man, currently promoting his book My Two Moms:

http://www.zachwahls.com/?page_id=375...

Did anyone else find it a little odd that he was an Eagle Scout? Didn't the Boyscouts of America ban homosexuals? I wonder how he and his family handled that.