Gay Marraige?

[Na'dou]

I'm not against it. I say live and let live. I don't care. As long as it's not me....

I don't really care. I think everyone should marry who they want, but my mom says that that's why Sodum(SP) and Gamora(SP) was destroyed. It was because of all the corruption, but I don't think that this is the same case considering what went on then...

[Dan L]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Na'dou [/i]
[B]I'm not against it. I say live and let live. I don't care. As long as it's not me....

I don't really care. I think everyone should marry who they want, but my mom says that that's why Sodum(SP) and Gamora(SP) was destroyed. It was because of all the corruption, but I don't think that this is the same case considering what went on then... [/B][/QUOTE]

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because they tried to [i]gang-rape[/i] (obviously it doesn't say that, but that's how we'd put it these days) the angels God sent to find out whether they were as bad as they were supposed to be.. not because they were gay.

[Ravenstorture]

[color=darkgreen][font=gothic]I've been keeping my eye on this thread for a while, and I've decided what I want to say.

Let me take you back to a time, perhaps two thousand or so years ago, perhaps a lot more. During this time, whether you want to believe we were evolving from chimpanzees, inventing the trebuchet or following that guy across the red sea safely out of Egypt, things were terribly different then than they are now. Rules we apply to life in general must be flexible, as they cannot apply both then and now.

Then - we [i]needed to[/i] procreate. There weren't six billion people on this earth, two thousand years ago there were more like 150 million. Although it's a lot, it wasn't enough for every couple to only have one child, and it wasn't enough to sustain the rate in which we were advancing technologically.

Then - there was a different view of pleasure. Having a good time wasn't building yourself a nice home and a safe little stash of money so you could feel safe at night, it wasn't finding your true love and moving to Greece. It meant getting all the work done without slipping a intervertabral disc, and perhaps living through childbirth.

Now - there are over six billion people here, that's more than have [i]ever died.[/i] Many people agree that it's far too many. by the year 2020, eight billion people. Population is increasing rapidly in the economically unstable countries, simply because they need kids to help out. Australia, the average couple will have about 1.3 children (the replacement rate is 2.1). But in Palestine, I believe the average no. of children per family is more around seven.

Biologically, we don't need everyone in the world to have children - in fact, we more need most people [i]not[/i] to, at least for a while. Humanity can afford to indulge in the non-practical side: homosexuality, marriage without children, celibacy, and whatever. It doesn't hurt the population as much as it would have before, which is why I think books such as the Bible and the Qur'an disproves it - they were written in the time where the behaviour was impractical.

Religion these days, however, only serves a mental purpose more than a physical one - sure, it makes people kill each other, and (although not as commonly) help each other out. There are over four thousand religions today - and no proof as yet to which is more "right" than the other. Religions, just like people, all have different opinions on the mixture of gender in a relationship - and I find it depressing that these opinions affect our laws today.

I do not believe it is fair for government and religion to be intertwined, if there is a variation of religion under the jurisdiction of the government in question. Unfortunately, it is mainly the case today. Just as there are religions that don't support homosexuality, there are ones that do, and as I mentioned before, no proof as to which one is "right." As I believe in the existance of neither right nor wrong, I'll say no proof as to which one to go with.

Governments worldwide choose religions that do not support homosexuality - and as this ideology is one we have all grown up with, it is not hard to reject. But people are realising these days that not everone can be put in the same catagory - and therefore, cannot be held under the same restrictive laws.

New South Wales recently passed a bill equalising the age of consent from homosexual males from eighteen to sixteen. This, for some reason, made me happy, and proud of my country, perhaps for letting another group under the white-feathered wing of our government.

Out of interest, seventy percent of Australia place themselves in the Christian faith, as opposed to eighty-five pecent of the United States of America. The highest concentration of christians in the world per country is USA, whereas Australia isn't in the top ten.
And I'll bet you're dying to know which state in USA is dubbed "most christian" by statistics: It's Utah.
When an organisation or body demolishes a restrictive law, for example, the Church allowing gay marriage, it feels to me like they are really doing that whole Jesus thing. I know I shouldn't be going into the whole christian debate, but I believe this thread was founded on a christian principal... hang on, I'm thinking of something else. I'll bring that up now, because this post is still far, far too small.

In Australian news, there is a topic now of homosexuals becoming priests. One practicing homosexual entered the priesthood, and it caused such a riot that he stepped out.

But this made me angry, because the first (and I think only) thing I learnt about Jesus from my mother was that he always walked at the back of his procession, with the prostitutes. It was this that made me really love the guy.

That's right, I admit it, I'm a Jesus fan. But I wouldn't touch the Church with a bargepole, and this whole thing about homosexuals makes me think about why.

Let's do that whole What Would Jesus Do thing here: I reckon that if he looked at the current situation today, he'd say, "Go ahead, guys, have a ball. I love you all so much." I don't think he would like this whole law thing we have set up, and I certainly don't think he'd approve of the Church. [b]There should be nothing between you and your god.[/b]

God is different for everyone, and for those of you who are in love as I am, perhaps the experience of love is your saviour, your guiding star. I thought that the whole principal of christianity was based on love. I'm quoting the Book out of my head now, so don't bother correcting me if it isn't word perfect:
The most important commandment is Love your God more than anything. The second most important is Love your fellow man.
Then there is all you need is love, god is love, jesus loves you, etc etc etc. Love one another.

When the church tells a loving couple that they won't help them in their quest to show, strengthen, practify their love, it doesn't seem to christian to me.

The most dissapointing thing about this post is that no one will probably read it, I always skip the big ones.[/font][/color]

[Na'dou]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Dan L [/i]
[B]Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because they tried to [i]gang-rape[/i] (obviously it doesn't say that, but that's how we'd put it these days) the angels God sent to find out whether they were as bad as they were supposed to be.. not because they were gay. [/B][/QUOTE]

I said corruption. My mom said it was because (Don't read this if you do want to get sick) [spoiler]everybody was trying to boomboom with everybody. In the movie, the girls slept with their father because they were afraid they'd never get pregnate. They nabbed the angels, anybody they could.[/spoiler]

I never said that it was because of gay marriages alone. Not everybody there was like that. Besides, if gays are so bad, then how come Alexander the Great was so great. I have nothing agaist gay marriages. The government just wants something to complain about, that's all. Like I said, I say live and let live...*laughs* I almost said live and let liver...*coughs* But anyway, I say just leave people alone.

Why does the government have to make such a big deal about every little thing? That's why we're so passive now...

[Sandy]

Raven, can I found your fanclub?! I just love what you wrote! :love: It was so... wise, and I think nobody will find it easy to oppose what you said. Though I'm not Christian, I still admire your values - that's the right kind of religiousness. Not to care what "the Church" or "the Temples" feed you, just believe in your own faith. :)

Everybody, read Raven's post, I encourage you!

[SadClown]

This has definetly turned into one of my favorite threads.

[Guest Taylor Hewitt]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Kyru [/i]
[B].. [/B][/QUOTE]
I've heard of 1 word posts... but this?
This isn't spam. This is nothing.
Anyways.
Gay Marriage is fine with me.
But therer is the bible issue...
Ok fine... I'll go now.

[SadClown]

^^ There's only an issue if you think there's one...

[Morinaka]

As a laid back and chilled-out kinda guy i couldn't care less whether your gay or straight, at the end of day were all human and we should all get along and make the planet a half decent place.

Anyway, the only reason the goverment (dunno if its called that in USA?) won't have official gay marriages, as in having the piece of paper that says you're married, is that it will cost them money.
Here in England and i'm sure USA as well married couples get tax breaks, extra benefit and so on.

Extra gay marriages will cost them more money in that respect.
I didn't say a Christian Gay Marriage (as in a church wedding) because the heads of the church will never let that happen.

I think people of any race, religion or sexuality should be able to publicly express there love for each other in a official ceremony.

I agree with ravenstorture's post, mainly the bit about goverment and religion being mixed together, you'd think it was still victorian or middle ages in that way.

Sorry if that sounded a bit jumbled, just how my brain works when i type :D

[Dan L]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Na'dou [/i]
[B]I said corruption[/B][/QUOTE]

Sorry. Either I misread that bit or I just plain didn't see it. Either way yeah.. you did say that.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Ravenstorture [/i]
[B][color=darkgreen][font=gothic]I do not believe it is fair for government and religion to be intertwined, if there is a variation of religion under the jurisdiction of the government in question. Unfortunately, it is mainly the case today. Just as there are religions that don't support homosexuality, there are ones that do, and as I mentioned before, no proof as to which one is "right." As I believe in the existance of neither right nor wrong, I'll say no proof as to which one to go with. [/b][/color][/font][/quote]

You said far more than that and I did read it, I just didn't feel like quoting the whole thing.

Ultimately when it comes to the world as a whole, I'd agree with you. Religious rules and beliefs are one thing, but I don't think it's fair to enforce them on people of a different religion.

Just as I wouldn't be too happy if I was forced by law to do something against my beliefs, People of other beliefs (or none at all) shouldn't be forced to adhere to my own by law.

Which is why I'm in support of gay marriage, in a legal sense even if not in the church itself.

The reason I'm not in support of gay marriage in the church goes something like this:

You said quite rightly later in your post that Jesus often hung around the outcasts in the society- like prostitutes, tax collectors, adulterer/esses etc. However, there are two ends to this-

On one hand, he loved them as he did everyone else, as he did his disciples, and he rebuked those who looked down on these people.

However on the other hand he would often say "you are forgiven, now go and turn from your sinful ways". That wasn't because he didn't love them as they were, but because often the things they were doing [i]were[/i] wrong, and he wanted them to turn from that, and be forgiven.

That's not to say that if they carried on doing bad things then Jesus wouldn't love them any more.. they'd have the opportunity to be forgiven again, but it normally brings about personal change.

Jesus never turned anyone down regardless of how high or low they were in society, and regardless of how sinful they were. But he never turned to a prostitute and said "The Father is pleased with the work you do- I now ordain you as a prostitute in his name", becuase prostitution [i]is[/i] wrong, according to scripture.

What Jesus did was to accept people- regardless of who or what they were. He showed them love regardless of the things they may have been doing at the time. But he did [i]not[/i] ordain those actions and say that what they were doing was OK.

Marrying two people in a religious ceremony (as opposed to a purely legal ceremony) is to ordain them as right for each other, and to ordain the relationship as something good in God's eyes.

As I said earlier, in my particular church there would be no problem if a couple of homosexuals came in. They'd be no less welcome than any of the regulars, and they'd be just as free to take communion and such. When it comes to homosexuals in Christianity, the question isn't whether we should accept them (the answer to which is "yes") but whether or not we should be ordaining the relationship as the right thing. Even Jesus never said that all the guys he hung around with were doing the right thing- he just loved them anyway.

[James]

[color=#707875]It's a difficult issue, because you try to walk the lines between religious freedoms and anti-discrimination.

I think I've stated my feeling on this before, in regard to what Dan just said. I feel that if one specific church wishes to approve of gay unions, then they should not be pressured by anyone to avoid doing it. If people dislike that, they can go to another church. Know what I mean?

In Australia, the Uniting Church (I think it was them, anyway) recently voted overwhelmingly to approve of homosexual relationships. It's a big step forward for human rights and they're very proud of it. Some of their members (a small minority) said that they didn't accept it and that they'd start their own church...as if it was some kind of threat. My message to them would be "That's okay, you can start your own church and administer your own beliefs".

Despite what some have said, I'm not actually here to tell anyone that they [i]must[/i] conform to my views. I believe that the church's disregard of homosexual relationships is morally wrong -- and that's my personal view. However, I'm not going to stifle their ability to practice that idea.

I think that Dan's message is a good one overall. Accepting gay people as part of society -- recognizing that they exist and that they [i]do[/i] enter into lifetime, loving relationships -- but also retaining core principles with regard to the religion as a whole. To me, that seems like the fair and moderate way to go. It's a shame that more within the church are not as moderate.

Though, as long as the bible's view of homosexuality isn't brought into public legislation and imposed, I honestly have no problem with it. And thankfully, it seems as though public policy is always improving in favor of human and civil rights. Whether individual or groups of churches as a whole go along with that is entirely their optional choice. And I think that Dan's idea strikes a comfortable middle ground for most people.[/color]

[Bishie]

Personally i am all for it ^_^ Im a lesbian myself and i find it upsetting how half of the time i have to hide how i act/feel because i worry someone will look down upon me *twitches and hides*
However, its in places like this i feel i can be myself so..

Yes-I believe gay marriages should be allowed. I mean, aslong as no-one is doing anything wrong and they're both perfectly happy why should anyone else try to ruin it? Love is a beautifull thing.

Plus..every person believes in the perfect life. A nice marriage..a big house with a white picket fence *grins* well okay, not *everyone* wants this..but im sure they want the feeling of contentment and sercurity.

I myself would LOVE to get married some day..I doubt that will happen seeing as society is the way it is. Its nice to daydream though...

[amibasuki]

[FONT=arial]before I start, I'd just like to say I totally agree with Dan L's last post. most of it (if not all of it) is how I look on the issue.

I might just be repeating a lot of what other people have said, considering there [i]is[/i] eight pages of all of this, but hear me out. please ^_^.

From my own beliefs as a Christian myself, I do look at homosexuality as a sin. That does NOT mean, however, that I am going to patronize and look down on people who are homosexual. Kinda like saying "hate the sin, not the person who committed it." Yeah, that can be taken as a way of pointing the finger at someone, but in my case it's not meant to sound as patronizing as that. It's like how Dan L put it: Christ didn't agree with what they were doing, but he loved them regardless of what they did. He didn't look at them just as sinners, or recognize them as, "Okay, she's the one who sleeps around with everybody," or "Okay, he's the one who steals from people." He looked at them as his brothers and sisters, as children of God. Period. If anything, he felt grieved that they were committing the sins that they were, but he didn't think any less of them. That's how I think on the matter. It could be likened to other things as well. We are told to love everyone, not just people who live up to 'Christian standards'. That includes people who smoke, have premarital sex, and yes, people who are gay. People who do those kind of things can still be good people. Any 'Christian' who doesn't give and show respect to someone who has different preferences or a different lifestyle than they do, especially when the said person is in no way harming the other person or any other people at all, is just being a bigot. Using God as a scapegoat for a petty prejudice against someone who is different from you is one of the most un-Christian things you could possibly do.

Everyone is given free agency to make their own decisions in life, laws or no laws. With that said, there are also consequences. Applying this to people who are gay and also believe in Christianity, they already know what they're doing and getting into, so let them be. It's their decision. [i]They[/i] are the ones who are doing it, so it's not your place to get caught up in their business. If people choose to be openly gay, then that's their choice. If they want to be married, then they should have the right to do so. All the same, if churches don't want to marry them because it would be against what they believe, then they shouldn't be forced to. But gay couples who want to be married should at least have the right and opportunity to be legally married somewhere, since America [i]is[/i] a country where people [i]should be[/i] able to make their own choices and where everybody [i]should be[/i] counted as equals, regardless of personal differences. That's what the people who fought for this country centuries ago and even now wanted.

Well anywho, that's what I've got to say on the matter. Kinda wordy in some places, but I hope what I said made sense. [/FONT]

[Guest Altron Gundam]

As a Christian as well, to put it bluntly homosexuality is a sin through my perspective. Also in blunt terms, male and female, that's how it was made to be, and that's how it should stay. Again just my perspective.

Don't go all psycho on me for believing in what I believe, because I'm not forcing any certain belief on anyone, I'm simply stating an opinion. While I don't believe that homosexual ppl are evil or w/e to any extent, I believe their act is wrong.

Also, referring to another issue, about pro-homosexuality groups bashing churches or Christian beliefs or what not, is wrong in itself. They can't try to force everyone to accept what they're doing and that's how it is. As long as Christians as well follow suit and don't try to insanely bash other ppl's perspectives themselves.

What a certain group's opinion is one group's opinion and that's how it will be and how it will always be.

Another fact about homosexual groups that I don't like is the fact that they have to blow everything out of proportion. Such as getting their own parade just to simply blow out the fact that they are homosexuals. Straight ppl don't blow out our fact of our preference. They should just stay to what they're doing and stop trying to force their lifestyle on others.

[James]

[color=#707875]Heterosexuals don't need a parade because they aren't an oppressed minority.

I think there are more [i]tasteful[/i] ways of pushing equal rights, but I digress.

I would also say that religeous fundamentalists are far more "in your face" than homosexuals. The fact that some of them even campaign to get shows like Will & Grace off TV only proves that these people [i]are[/i] pushing their beliefs on everyone else.

But, then again, that is definitely another issue. It's not really related to the thread -- the thread is about [i]gay marriage[/i] and not whether you think gay people are sinning. So let's be clear about that.[/color]

[eleanor]

[size=1] Well, in the whole "gay marriage" thing, it could be about people pushing their beliefs. In my opinion, people [i] are[/i] using their 'God' to hide their own prejudice and discriminatin against homosexuals. When I used to be a Christian, I brought up the topic of homosexuality in bibly study class, and my teacher stiffly said it was a sin since God said so in the bible, and therefore all homosexuals were bad. Of course, after reading what amibasuki quoted from that...person (srry), the people who are rallying together and protesting against gay marriage are wrong. (If they are Christian)

But I guess some of the people protesting [i] know [/i] that they're wrong by saying homosexuals are bad in Christian terms, and they say that being homosexual is being anti-american. And that, from my point of view, is incorrect. [/size]

[amibasuki]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by maladjusted [/i]
[B][size=1] Well, in the whole "gay marriage" thing, it could be about people pushing their beliefs. In my opinion, people [i] are[/i] using their 'God' to hide their own prejudice and discriminatin against homosexuals. When I used to be a Christian, I brought up the topic of homosexuality in bibly study class, and my teacher stiffly said it was a sin since God said so in the bible, and therefore all homosexuals were bad. Of course, after reading what amibasuki quoted from that...person (srry), the people who are rallying together and protesting against gay marriage are wrong. (If they are Christian)

But I guess some of the people protesting [i] know [/i] that they're wrong by saying homosexuals are bad in Christian terms, and they say that being homosexual is being anti-american. And that, from my point of view, is incorrect. [/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

[FONT=arial]well, there are exceptions, but I believe for the most part that the people who are protesting and such are just doing what they think is right. what with the talk about all the sin that's coming into the world in these 'last days', they're doing all they can to make sure that things stay as 'wholesome' as possible, I guess. heh, you know how some people were trying to ban the Harry Potter books because of 'witchcraft'. gay marriage is just something else they're protesting against. but while most of them may have good intentions in mind, the way they're going about it is wrong, in my opinion. [/FONT]

[Guest Altron Gundam]

Ok fine then, again in my perspective gay marraige is wrong.

However, those ppl who decide to do it make their own choices. Its their life and they should do how they see fit. However, even as a minority don't go around rubbing into ppl's faces their lifestyle and such and how ppl should accept it or else...--;

[Anna]

I don't think that gay marriage is right for a lot of reasons beyond religious views. On the little sub-topic (well, since the post before mine) about "rubbing" a lifestyle in people's faces: I'm part of a minority, however I have never been in a parade or petitioned for a special day in Disney World because of it. And yes, my minority does recieve quite a heeping helping of bashing and the whatnot that some gays complain about. Granted that bashing of ANY sort for ANY reason is UNACCEPTABLE, it is not necessary, however, to 'force' others to agree/conform to how you think or take a 'you better not say anything bad about ME' type of rebuttle. Then they've become one of the people they're fighting against. It's a stupid cycle. The whole issue repulses me.

[amibasuki]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Altron Gundam [/i]
[B]Ok fine then, again in my perspective gay marraige is wrong.

However, those ppl who decide to do it make their own choices. Its their life and they should do how they see fit. However, even as a minority don't go around rubbing into ppl's faces their lifestyle and such and how ppl should accept it or else...--; [/B][/QUOTE]
[FONT=arial]while gay marriage is wrong to most Christians (and non-Christians), it's still also wrong to patronize gay people the way some people have been doing it. two wrongs don't make a right.

I do agree that it should stay their business as to what they do and not put it in others faces so blatantly though. as an example, some people talk about exactly what they did just because they know that it bothers some people. frankly I don't really want to hear that sort of rot, whether it was between members of both sexes or opposite sexes. [/FONT]

[James]

[color=#707875]Gay people seeking equal rights repulses you?

I'm not saying that I agree with the whole street parade thing or not. But a certain minority seeking [b]equal civil rights[/b] is not something to be taken lightly. I would certainly never have the gall to tell someone that they can't have their relationship legally recognized, nor would I have the gall to tell someone that they should quit seeking civil rights and simply shut up and put up with the crap they get. [/color]

[Anna]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B][color=#707875]Gay people seeking equal rights repulses you?

I'm not saying that I agree with the whole street parade thing or not. But a certain minority seeking [b]equal civil rights[/b] is not something to be taken lightly. I would certainly never have the gall to tell someone that they can't have their relationship legally recognized, nor would I have the gall to tell someone that they should quit seeking civil rights and simply shut up and put up with the crap they get. [/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

Now maybe I should have specified, but I did not say that people seeking equal rights repulses me; I said the situation (which is where I needed to specify, obviously) of people trying to force their way of life into someone else's repulsed me, i.e. the parades etc. etc. other things I see and hear more unaviodably than not. No need to twist my words against me--I said that I'm part of a minority group and I know what being oppressed feels like to an extent. Rights are one thing; I disagree with how some people go about trying to get them (beyond the marriage issue, too).

[James]

[color=#707875]Well, you certainly have more civil rights than a gay person. So, that does put you in a different situation at the very beginning.

Secondly, I would say that fundamentalists on the religious side try to force people to their way of thinking just as much, if not more. When people see outspoken gay people, they get the false impression that gay people are trying to acquire "special rights" that go beyond what they're entitled to.

That's not the case.

They are only trying to secure [i]equal[/i] rights to everyone else. The only reason that you don't see black people marching in the streets and "putting it in everyone's face", is because by and large, they have been afforded equal civil rights. It should be obvious that the quest for equal rights has to start somewhere -- whether it's a parade or a protest (and both of those things often intersect anyway).

Having said that, I do disagree with a lot of the parades that go on. A taudry parade isn't the right way to secure rights in my opinion. It only discredits you to the wider public. However, that shouldn't be used as a basis through which we can dismiss gay rights or the rights of anyone else. The desire for equal rights is as real and serious as it was for other minorities in the world.

As for marriage...I can only go back to what I was saying before -- the legal, constitutional argument that goes beyond any religious debate. If a gay couple can marry (or have a legal union), it doesn't affect [i]you[/i]. It doesn't impede your rights or force you into thinking that it's acceptable. If you want to have a prejudiced attitude toward a group of people, that's okay -- but the Government and the legal system should not sanction that. It should sanction [i]equal[/i] rights on a singular basis. By targeting a specific group of people and denying them the same legal rights as yourself, you are forcing your beliefs onto [i]them[/i]. [/color]

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B][color=#707875]
They are only trying to secure [i]equal[/i] rights to everyone else. The only reason that you don't see black people marching in the streets and "putting it in everyone's face", is because by and large, they have been afforded equal civil rights. It should be obvious that the quest for equal rights has to start somewhere -- whether it's a parade or a protest (and both of those things often intersect anyway).

[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

Not to mention black people already had their parades.. their protests.. and everything in between... and they got equal rights that way. I see no reason why we shouldn't do the same. The only way any rights can be gotten in this democracy is by majority. And if the majority doesn't know about it, it can't happen. So we protest, we parade, to get the majority involved. So that maybe if themayor or the president sees this.. well... it's obviously a big deal. And thus something should be done. Thats the meaning behind protesting, thats the meaning behind the parades.

Is it not wrong that 3 millions forster kids have no stable envoronment, yet many states, like mine for example, still refuse to allow gays to adopt any children eve though it's been prooven time and time again that we provide just a suitable household with little to no mental of physical draw backs to the children we raise?

Is it wrong that two people who love each other, of which you cannot deny, cannot even get married? Cannot legally get benefits that ther married couples have? That has nothing to do with the church. Thoe benefits are the federal and state government's ideals, not the churches. Quite frankly, we don't want a religious ceremony, we just want to say that we're married, we love each other, and we get all the rights every other married couple has.

This whole marriage debate is not about church, it's about rights. Marriage doesn't have to be preformed in a church. So it really has little to nothing to do with the church.... some people just can't seem to understand that... and others make it seem like they have to giveup their religion over two guys getting married.... please... get a life.

[Guest Altron Gundam]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]Not to mention black people already had their parades.. their protests.. and everything in between... and they got equal rights that way. I see no reason why we shouldn't do the same. The only way any rights can be gotten in this democracy is by majority. And if the majority doesn't know about it, it can't happen. So we protest, we parade, to get the majority involved. So that maybe if themayor or the president sees this.. well... it's obviously a big deal. And thus something should be done. Thats the meaning behind protesting, thats the meaning behind the parades.

Is it not wrong that 3 millions forster kids have no stable envoronment, yet many states, like mine for example, still refuse to allow gays to adopt any children eve though it's been prooven time and time again that we provide just a suitable household with little to no mental of physical draw backs to the children we raise?

Is it wrong that two people who love each other, of which you cannot deny, cannot even get married? Cannot legally get benefits that ther married couples have? That has nothing to do with the church. Thoe benefits are the federal and state government's ideals, not the churches. Quite frankly, we don't want a religious ceremony, we just want to say that we're married, we love each other, and we get all the rights every other married couple has.

This whole marriage debate is not about church, it's about rights. Marriage doesn't have to be preformed in a church. So it really has little to nothing to do with the church.... some people just can't seem to understand that... and others make it seem like they have to giveup their religion over two guys getting married.... please... get a life. [/B][/QUOTE]

Having a history of being enslaved and THEN being racial outcasts as bad as it was in the '60's and '80's is a whole lot worse than what gays have experienced through the 90's.