Christianity and Gay Marriage

[Boo]

[QUOTE=2007DigitalBoy][COLOR=DarkOrange]why not? And why are such brief, offtopic posts allowed so often? Mine included.

...and seriously, why IS this an issue?[/COLOR][/QUOTE][size=1]You're making it an issue, yourself. I just replied to your post.

Your line "everything is everyone's fault" is pointless. How is everything everyone's fault? It isn't, that's how. That you can't hold your tongue is not my fault. It's a pitiful failure in your own system. That gay marriage is not allowed by the church and by many countries/states is neither my fault. It's someone's opinion on that matter, carried on by many people, but certainly not all. And not everyone actually has the power to do something about it.

Don't try to use cool comments, because it's not making you look much smarter after you directly attacked a religion.

PS: Drix, thank you. :P[/size]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='2007DigitalBoy][COLOR=DarkOrange']why not?[/color][/quote]

[color=crimson]Because the stupidity of that statement invalidates it.

That's just how it goes I'm afraid.[/color]

[quote name='2007DigitalParrot][color=DarkOrange'] And why are such brief, offtopic posts allowed so often? Mine included.[/quote][/color]

[color=crimson]Funnily enough it's because God hates you.[/color]

[2010DigitalBoy]

[quote name='DeathKnight][color=crimson']Funnily enough it's because God hates you.[/color][/quote]

[COLOR=DarkOrange]Well then, he/she/it... tetragrammaton should join the club.

To Boo: I'm not just using quotes and lines to sound cool. I honestly trust that opinion i stated and stand by it until you can somehow provide me significant evidence otherwise. Isn't that what a debate is all about? Not just calling me an idiot but actully backing it up? [/COLOR]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='2007DigitalBoy][COLOR=DarkOrange']To Boo: I'm not just using quotes and lines to sound cool. I honestly trust that opinion i stated and stand by it until you can somehow provide me significant evidence otherwise. Isn't that what a debate is all about? Not just calling me an idiot but actully backing it up? [/COLOR][/quote]

[color=crimson]You trust the opinion that the entire scope of humanity is at fault for opinions held by parts of itself?

Seriously?[/color]

[Boo]

[quote name='2007DigitalBoy][COLOR=DarkOrange']I'm not just using quotes and lines to sound cool. I honestly trust that opinion i stated and stand by it until you can somehow provide me significant evidence otherwise. Isn't that what a debate is all about? Not just calling me an idiot but actully backing it up? [/COLOR][/quote][size=1]Did you even [i]try[/i] reading more than the last line of my post?[/size]

[Drix D'Zanth]

[quote name='2007DigitalBoy][COLOR=DarkOrange']why not? [/COLOR][/quote]
If you pardon Death Knight's ad hominem arguments for a moment. The reason your statement is wrong is because it is a logical fallacy. The statement that "everything" is "everyone's fault" is evading the premise of the discussion. The argument when applied to homosexual marriage falls under the logical fallacy of dicto simpliciter; a sweeping generalization to a very exceptional situation.
[QUOTE=2007DigitalBoy][COLOR=DarkOrange]
...and seriously, why IS this an issue?[/COLOR][/QUOTE]
Why are you bothering to ask this question when you already know the answer if you simply [i]think[/i] about it?

Don't worry Erik, I'll reply to your comment as soon as I finish my work for the day.

[2010DigitalBoy]

[QUOTE=Drix D'Zanth]If you pardon Death Knight's ad hominem arguments for a moment. The reason your statement is wrong is because it is a logical fallacy. The statement that "everything" is "everyone's fault" is evading the premise of the discussion. The argument when applied to homosexual marriage falls under the logical fallacy of dicto simpliciter; a sweeping generalization to a very exceptional situation.

Why are you bothering to ask this question when you already know the answer if you simply [i]think[/i] about it?

Don't worry Erik, I'll reply to your comment as soon as I finish my work for the day.[/QUOTE]

[COLOR=DarkOrange]Don't take that question so much at face value. I didn't mean what I said there.

Anywho, yes it is an oversimplification. But the world is overly complicated. I think a simplified view could save us all.

Also, @ Boo: I read it. It isn't an explanation.[/COLOR]

[Retribution]

[quote name='Drix D'Zanth]1. [u]Everyone has a right to pursue happiness[/u']: I think this is fair. It?s right there in the founding document of our nation (changed from the original ?pursuit of property? Locke idea to ?happiness? by Jefferson). Obviously, we set normative and legal limits to our pursuits. I can?t justifiably take my neighbor?s pool in my pursuit of happiness. Everyone has individual rights as well.[/quote][size=1]Very true. I always thought that it operated on a "your rights end where my nose begins" sort of premise. As long as you didn't obstruct another's pursuit of happiness, it should be allowed.

[QUOTE]Here?s the question that follows in my mind: Is granting marriage to homosexuals going to have no exterior social or economic impact?[/QUOTE]I say there will probably be a negligible [or none at all] impact. Look at other developed countries who allow gay marriage... it's not like they're economically or socially stagnant. In fact, many of them are flourishing. There is no drawback (aside from upsetting the Bible Belt), economically or socially, to allowing gay marriage.

[QUOTE]2. [u]Marriage is about love[/u]. This would ideally be true, but our legal society cannot really define love. I doubt this is true in most instances of marriage. This argument does not really hold water when I look at it; we should not justify legalizing marriage for this reason if we cannot even define objectively what it is![/QUOTE]I guess it's about the aforementioned 'pursuit of happiness' more so than 'love'.

[QUOTE]3. [u]Homosexuals cannot get married[/u]. This is where the 2nd premise falls apart. Homosexuals cannot legally be married. However, there is nothing preventing them from that religious/spiritual union. Ask yourself; when are you going to consider yourself married, at the alter, or at the (judge?s) bench?[/QUOTE]Very few, if any gays are looking to get a Christian marriage in a church. They would be content with skipping the ceremony in a church [i]if that meant they'd get the same legal rights as a heterosexual couple.[/i] Yeah, it's about that spiritual jazz for some, but the crux of the debate is about the legal benefits that result from being married. So basically they're looking for a state marriage.

[QUOTE]What do you think are the benefits toward a society that allows for legal homosexual marriages?[/QUOTE]Well for one, you stop discriminating against a group based on something they can't really change. I liken it to the civil rights movement of the 60s on a lesser scale (in terms of magnitude of discrimination).

[QUOTE]What do you think are the disadvantages?[/QUOTE]None, aside from upsetting the Bible Belt and the Evangelicals/Catholics. I haven't seen much of a counter argument aside from "it ain't right!".

[QUOTE]Do you think these civil liberties should apply to instances of polygamy or incest relationships (obviously, the slippery-slope argument isn?t really one that holds too much water with me, but it is worth addressing)?[/QUOTE]Certainly not for incest. You're a science guy, you know about the far reaching detrimental effects of incestuous relations. Polygamy, sure if the woman/man feels comfortable with effectively being a side dish, lol.

[QUOTE]5. [u]You are born gay[/u]. I am not opposed to this argument, but I think the burden of proof requires some evidence. No one (from what I?ve seen, correct me if I?m wrong) has cited any evidence in support of this argument.[/QUOTE]It's widely accepted as fact, but you're right, no one knows for certain.

[QUOTE]If the Bible, or some other religious text doesn?t serve as your moral guidebook, where would you say your morals come from (I?m just curious, not challenging)?[/QUOTE]It's quite alright if your morals are drawn from a religious text, but I think the main objection people have is if you blindly accept it as the word of God and follow it unquestioningly. I personally gleaned quite a bit from my Ethics class I look last year (Catholic school, yeah, but I constantly debated my teacher about the points, and through that I gained a deeper understanding of where I stood on the issues).[/size]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='Drix D'Zanth']If you pardon Death Knight's ad hominem arguments for a moment.[/quote]

[color=crimson]Uh oh, the all seeing eye of Drix has cast it's gaze upon me.[/color]

[quote name='2007DigitalBoy][COLOR=DarkOrange']Also, @ Boo: I read it. It isn't an explanation.[/COLOR][/quote]

[color=crimson]Then perhaps you could explain in more depth why you state everything is everyone's fault.

We could be misunderstanding or harping on you for false reasons. Just that one statement: EVERYTHING is EVERYONE'S fault doesn't tell the full story but it's loud enough to draw our attention.[/color]

[2010DigitalBoy]

[QUOTE=DeathKnight][color=crimson]Then perhaps you could explain in more depth why you state everything is everyone's fault.

We could be misunderstanding or harping on you for false reasons. Just that one statement: EVERYTHING is EVERYONE'S fault doesn't tell the full story but it's loud enough to draw our attention.[/color][/QUOTE]

[COLOR=DarkOrange]Tut tut, I'm no martyr. Honestly, i don't know why i try. So sew me, I obviously don't belong in an arguement like this. I disperse victory to those who consider my opposition.

My final comments before taking leave: says who?

Thank you, and have fun.[/COLOR]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='2007DigitalBoy][COLOR=DarkOrange']Tut tut, I'm no martyr. Honestly, i don't know why i try.[/COLOR][/quote]

[color=crimson]?

I just asked you to explain your point of view clearer. Something broader than a couple of sentences, lol. Similar to what Adahn did in the opening post, Drix's post(s) or Gavin's response to my post.

Like, before you say you don't know why you try maybe you could try a bit more first?[/color]

[Drix D'Zanth]

(Long overdue, sorry Erik; Retribution, I should respond to you by the end of the week if I can get a nice chunk to think about the debate for a while)

I am glad I did, Erik. I always like when a controversial topic such as this pops up on OB, although the last thirty times I have posted on Gay marriage it seems less of a round-table discussion and more a podium where each member takes his post to spit out his/her rhetoric.
[QUOTE=Adahn][size=2]I was wondering if/when you would show up, Jordan.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]First of all, there really haven't been any arguments. Not one person who has replied to this thread says we should keep gay marriage illegal. You yourself, Jordan, have taken no stance on the issue with your post, although I assume by your nature and the nature of your reply that I have not shaken your values.[/size][/QUOTE]

I can?t really control what you derive from my post, really. Nevertheless, I tried to remain neutral and simply ask some thought provoking questions. I don?t think people address these questions really thoroughly before they come to a decision regarding Gay Marriage.

[QUOTE=Adahn][size=2]And then the middle...stuff. 1-5 have little to do with what I have said. As for 6, the Bible lists homosexuality as a sin. The Bible is as much against homosexuality as it is against driving 56 mph in a 55 mph zone. It is the Christian ideology, the Christian majority, the group of people themselves that make this sin worthy of ostracism and oppression.[/size]
[size=2][/size] [/QUOTE]

Realize, Erik, my reply was not to your original post as much as it was for the rest of the post-ees. What?s interesting is how people interpret the Bible to suit what [i]they[/i] want as opposed to what God might want. Now, I?m not aware of any verse that talks about obeying every law your country has (I know the ?give unto Caesar....? thing was more about unnecessary social disobedience). Obviously we can justify obeying the law without needing a religious text as authority.

The last sentence of this quote is what really deserves attention. I think you raise a major point considering how un-Christlike that ostracism and oppression is.


[QUOTE=Adahn] [size=2]The Christian ideology, in vehemently denying homosexuals the rights associated with a civil union, keeps those homosexuals from accepting God, damning them to death, when otherwise it could relent, [i]allowing[/i] those homosexuals to come to God and making available to them the path to salvation. The ideology, and all who support it in this way, then, commit the greatest of sins, which is to actively prevent people from accepting salvation and eternal life.[/size]
[size=2]I tried being subtle and nice, but that doesn't work sometimes. No matter how much you try to deviate from [i]this[/i] issue, I will bring us back to it. I will continue to strike at the heart of this issue, which involves God and the [i]souls[/i] of all those involved.[/size][/QUOTE]

Christianity is not about soul saving alone. The Christianity you paint with these messages sounds an awful lot like, ?save as many souls as you can, no matter what it takes.? I think Ronald Sider?s book [u]The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience: Why are Christians Living Just Like the Rest of the World?[/u] serves as a nice (and more complete) treatise to the point I?m about to make. It is of course virtuous to wish that everyone experienced the salvation that you describe, Erik. However, the ?bulk soul train? image I am getting seems to have the wrong intentions. Bear in mind, for all of the souls that you save leaving this world; for some reason God keeps pumping souls into the world.

Being a Christian should be a life-changing event that is relevant to your time [i]on earth[/i]. A Christian believes that he has been given freedom from the shackles of his bad habits, desires, and mistakes with unmitigated mercy. Not only that, it?s a call to cast away materialism and embrace honesty, charity, love for your neighbor, and a significant journey along a path re-aligned with (hopefully) God?s.

Now, while I agree that we should love a gay man no less than a straight man and that there is no reason why a gay man cannot be a Christian (as we are all sinners), I simply don?t agree with the opinion that marriage includes homosexual partners. Now, I?ve thought this through a lot. I also happen to be more libertarian than most of my peers. If the state passes a law allowing gay marriage, I don?t think I?ll actively combat it (there are far more important issues in this world). However, when an (ideal) democratic government calls upon its citizens to cast a vote on gay marriage, we must judge ethically and practically if the law is worth passing (and in special circumstances like this, if it is morally just). At this moment, given the circumstances, I?m not convinced that gay marriage?s merits outweigh the flaws.

Erik, I have no purview over the eternal destination of anybody. I have no right to judge anybody?s sins. I am not ?voting? against gay marriage simply because I think homosexuality is a sin.

[Adahn]

[font=Tahoma][size=2]Very, very good, Jordan. I understand you completely, and my only disagreement is that I think the merits of legalizing gay marriage outweight the flaws.[/size][/font]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]I'm sensitive, almost empathic towards other people. I understand the intentions behind people's actions, and I feel I understand the decisions people make based on what actions are made against them.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]For you, personally, the decision to not legalize gay marriage is well-thought out, reasonable, and just. The problem, Jordan, is that not very many Christians are as good as you. Hardly any, I would wager. Where you make your decisions carefully by considering your own morals and ethics, others follow blindly. I am going to give you an extreme example. [url="http://www.godhatesfags.com/"][color=blue]Click here[/color][/url] if you want, but I warn you, the opinions are extreme.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]Most people who disagree with gay marriage fall between those on the above site, and yourself. The result is that the opposition to gay marriage is a mixture of love and hate. The hate predominates, though, because the vast majority of Christians are opposed to gay marriage. Homosexuals can [i]feel[/i] that hate, Jordan. It is the hate of the Christians for Homosexuals, which is in turn interpreted as the hate of the Christian God for Homosexuals.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]I think that the only way to break through that hate is a great expression of love and acceptance. It will not come from gays [i]fighting[/i] for gay marriage, it will [i]only[/i] come from the Christian acceptance of gay marriage. If they have to continually fight the Christians after it is passed (theoretically), they will have what they want, but they will be no closer to God.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]I believe it is imperative for Christians to accept homosexuals, and soon, or most will be lost forever.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]As a last note, Jordan, I would like to know something. Would you vote yes on a Constitutional ban of gay marriage? You have hinted that should the situation change, you may change your opinion on homosexuals having the rights of a civil union, and I would like to see if my perception is correct.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2][/size]

[Gavin]

[quote name='Adahn][font=Tahoma][size=2]The problem, Jordan, is that not very many Christians are as good as you. Hardly any, I would wager. Where you make your decisions carefully by considering your own morals and ethics, others follow blindly.[/size'][/font][/quote]

[SIZE=1]Adahn, I really do have to contend your point there. It's in no way, shape or form a shot at Jordan, as I consider him a good, if only occasionally encountered friend. But with that statement you seem to have labelled 99% of Christians as being blind, brainless individuals incapable of making a genuinely personal decision on an issue that is as serious and contentious as this.

I consider the decision that I made on the issue to have taken careful consideration of my own ethics and morals, but by that same point, those who choose to abide by the Catholic Church's position are not simply blindly following, they're accepting a piece of reasoning from those whom they believe are more qualified to make the correct decision. I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing with it, I'm simply stating my belief that it's unfair to simply paint every Christian with the same brush.[/SIZE]

[quote name='Adahn][font=Tahoma][size=2]I am going to give you an extreme example. [url="http://www.godhatesfags.com/"][color=blue]Click here[/color][/url] if you want, but I warn you, the opinions are extreme.[/size'][/font][/quote]

[SIZE=1]This has to be simply one of the most offensive things I've ever laid eyes on, both as a person and a Catholic. This is nothing short of drivel produced by red-neck cretins with no idea of who or what God is, or how to properly interpret His word. Of course I'm not even mildly surprised that the site is American in origin.[/SIZE]

[Retribution]

[quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']Of course I'm not even mildly surprised that the site is American in origin.[/SIZE][/quote]
[size=1]And there you were preaching about the inaccuracies of sweeping generalizations.[/size]

[Sandy]

[quote name='Retribution][size=1']And there you were preaching about the inaccuracies of sweeping generalizations.[/size][/quote]

Not all Americans are red-necks, but all red-necks are Americans...

What comes to this conversation, I don't think there's any opinions from an actual gay person included yet, so I'm going to give it one. I don't honestly care if I ever get to marry my loved one or not if I get to spend my life with him anyway, I just wish I would be treated as a human being first and a sexual person second.

[Adahn]

[quote name='Gavin][size=1']Adahn, I really do have to contend your point there. It's in no way, shape or form a shot at Jordan, as I consider him a good, if only occasionally encountered friend. But with that statement you seem to have labelled 99% of Christians as being blind, brainless individuals incapable of making a genuinely personal decision on an issue that is as serious and contentious as this.[size=2][/quote][/size][/size]
[size=1][size=2][/size][/size]
[size=1][size=2]I know Jordan very well, and cannot stress how thoughtful and intelligent about his faith he is. I said hardly any are [i]as good[/i] as Jordan, and I stand by it. I cannot even think to match him in this way. I have placed Jordan near the upper limit of thoughtfulness,caring, and sincerity, and when I said "others follow blindly", I thought I had appropriately juxtaposed the statement with the website. They are two opposite ends of the spectrum, with a host of intermediates. If I made it seem that 99% of Christians are terribly stupid, I apologize, because I did not clearly convey my intention.[/size]

[QUOTE=Gavin]
I consider the decision that I made on the issue to have taken careful consideration of my own ethics and morals, but by that same point, those who choose to abide by the Catholic Church's position are not simply blindly following, they're accepting a piece of reasoning from those whom they believe are more qualified to make the correct decision. I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing with it, I'm simply stating my belief that it's unfair to simply paint every Christian with the same brush[size=1].[/size][/QUOTE][/size][size=2]I don't exactly see how 'letting other people make moral decisions for you' isn't 'blindly following'. As an example, I give the [url="http://www.new-life.net/milgram.htm"][color=blue]Milgram experiment[/color][/url]. [color=black]The scientist is the authority figure, and people will do terrible things because of their respect for his station. It is not only important to make decisions for oneself without an authority figure to fall back on, it is [i]imperitave[/i] for people to keep themselves from doing atrocious things.[/color][/size]


[QUOTE=Gavin]
[size=1]This has to be simply one of the most offensive things I've ever laid eyes on, both as a person and a Catholic. This is nothing short of drivel produced by red-neck cretins with no idea of who or what God is, or how to properly interpret His word. Of course I'm not even mildly surprised that the site is American in origin.[/size][/QUOTE][size=2]Yeah, I think I did a good job choosing my lower bound of morality also. These are the people who show up at the funerals of those killed in combat to say that 'God wanted your son/daughter dead because this country is too lenient with homosexuals!'.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]EDIT: Thanks for your input, Sandy. I've been hit with a sudden better understanding of your perspective. There's so much more to a person than his/her sexual preference. The label 'homosexual' is but a word in the epic poem of someone's humanity. To single that out and place it above everything else is inhuman and immoral in the worst sense.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]I don't think you'll have to wait too long to be treated the way you deserve, though. If Bush keeps pissing people off, I have a feeling there will be a Democrat as president, and with all the effort Republicans put into a constitutional ban on gay marriage, the retaliation will be swift and in your favor.[/size]

[Boo]

[quote name='Adahn]I don't exactly see how 'letting other people make moral decisions for you' isn't 'blindly following'. As an example, I give the [url="http://www.new-life.net/milgram.htm"][color=blue]Milgram experiment[/color][/url]. [color=black]The scientist is the authority figure, and people will do terrible things because of their respect for his station. It is not only important to make decisions for oneself without an authority figure to fall back on, it is [i]imperitave[/i'] for people to keep themselves from doing atrocious things.[/color][/quote]
[size=1]Dude, people can actually [i]think[/i]. Why on Earth can't you understand that people can actually carefully consider and overthink moral questions, before they actually agree to them? They are not blindly following people, they have made the decision to follow that opinion. I cannot say that I always agree to those decisions, but I also can't deny that they are human beings with a brain to think things over for themselves.

[b]Edit:[/b]
Sandy is not an American. [/size]

[Sandy]

[QUOTE=Adahn]
[size=2]I don't think you'll have to wait too long to be treated the way you deserve, though. If Bush keeps pissing people off, I have a feeling there will be a Democrat as president, and with all the effort Republicans put into a constitutional ban on gay marriage, the retaliation will be swift and in your favor.[/size][/QUOTE]

Boo's right, I'm not a resident of USA but of Finland, and over here we already have "registered relationships" allowed between same-sex couples. It's basically marriage without the right to adopt and have the same last name, and also it cannot be called a marriage. XP

But I do flag for all the rainbow people over the other side of the Atlantic so that their oppression would soon cease at least in the governmental level.

[Adahn]

[QUOTE=Boo][size=1]Dude, people can actually [i]think[/i]. Why on Earth can't you understand that people can actually carefully consider and overthink moral questions, before they actually agree to them? They are not blindly following people, they have made the decision to follow that opinion. I cannot say that I always agree to those decisions, but I also can't deny that they are human beings with a brain to think things over for themselves.

[b]Edit:[/b]
Sandy is not an American. [/size][/QUOTE]
[Quote=Gavin]
[size=1]they're accepting a piece of reasoning from those whom they believe are more qualified to make the correct decision.[/quote][/size]
[size=1][/size]
[size=2]What Gavin said, whether he realizes it or not, is exactly the premise upon which the Milgram experiments were done.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]About two-thirds of normal people will administer a deadly shock to someone with heart trouble because a scientist tells them to.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]How many people do you think will accept a religious leader's decision, especially if they see nothing morally wrong with it, and there are no consequences to hold them back?[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]Just about all of them.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]People [i]can[/i] think and make decisions for themselves, but in a situation like this, they simply don't have to.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]My comments require a pretty good understanding of the Milgram experiments to make any amount of sense, so if you haven't looked at the link (there are better ones than mine), you may wish to do so.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]As for Sandy, well, I can't keep track of where everyone lives. Besides, if gays start getting treated better here, I don't think he would be too angry. Sure, it doesn't directly affect him, but what if he wants to travel here? It would be nice to be treated like a person and not a witch ripe for burning.[/size]
[size=1][/size]
[size=2][/size]

[size=2][/size]
[size=2][/size]

[Gavin]

[quote name='Retribution][size=1']And there you were preaching about the inaccuracies of sweeping generalizations.[/size][/quote]

[SIZE=1]Alex come on, most of the garbage comes from the U.S. and if you're honest enough you'll admit it. I probably could have phrased what I said a little more tactfully, and it did come out a little more preachy than intended, but I still stand by the fact that most of these sites and their proliferaters are American in origin.[/SIZE]

[QUOTE=Adahn][size=2]About two-thirds of normal people will administer a deadly shock to someone with heart trouble because a scientist tells them to.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]How many people do you think will accept a religious leader's decision, especially if they see nothing morally wrong with it, and there are no consequences to hold them back?[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]Just about all of them.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]People [i]can[/i] think and make decisions for themselves, but in a situation like this, they simply don't have to.[/size][/QUOTE]

[SIZE=1]I think then Adahn what we're talking about here is an issue of trust, these people trust that what their leaders are telling them is the truth and for the best. The Milgram experiment you've shown is fascinating a quite troubling at the same time, I had hoped that people would be less willing to injure others simply because someone else ordered them to. You do bring up a very valid point however that some people will simply avoid the issue by doing what their leaders tell them, while others will take what is said and then make their own decisions.[/SIZE]

[Aaryanna_Mom]

[QUOTE=Gavin][SIZE=1]Alex come on, most of the garbage comes from the U.S. and if you're honest enough you'll admit it. I probably could have phrased what I said a little more tactfully, and it did come out a little more preachy than intended, but I still stand by the fact that most of these sites and their proliferaters are American in origin.[/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]Gavin based on the Census done in 2000 in the USA which measured a population of 281.4 million, 31.1 million of whom were foreign born. This does not include others who were born to foreign parents and are considered citizens due to being born in the US. It's inaccurate to say most of the garbage came from the US.

Being in America does not automically mean the garbage started here. So lets drop the sweeping generalization that implys this sort of garbage started here and only here. I don't deny that there are a lot intolerant people here, I use to be one of them myself. But there are plenty of Americans who have no trouble with it at all. Even here in Utah over 35% of the population voted against a measure to deny gay marriage.

[Retribution]

[quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']Alex come on, most of the garbage comes from the U.S. and if you're honest enough you'll admit it. I probably could have phrased what I said a little more tactfully, and it did come out a little more preachy than intended, but I still stand by the fact that most of these sites and their proliferaters are American in origin.[/SIZE][/quote]
[size=1]Or [i]you[/i] could just man up to your mistake. You associated Americans with hateful messages. That was wrong of you say, and you know it. You're no better than someone who insinuates that 99% of Christians are blind.[/size]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='Sandy']Not all Americans are red-necks, but all red-necks are Americans...[/quote]

[color=crimson]Unless they aren't.[/color]

[quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']Alex come on, most of the garbage comes from the U.S. and if you're honest enough you'll admit it. I probably could have phrased what I said a little more tactfully, and it did come out a little more preachy than intended, but I still stand by the fact that most of these sites and their proliferaters are American in origin.[/SIZE][/quote]

[color=crimson][b]Specifically[/b] the hot topic of gay marriage in America has spawned a wide range of babbling incoherence from sides for and against it, yes but not all ******** spawns from this country, no.

The debate that has arisen will unfortunately bring out extremists and I cannot apologize for their actions as an American but I will fault you on being a fool about it. People like this exist in every nation and, when offered the proper stage, will show themselves just as loudly.[/color]

[Gavin]

[SIZE=1]It seems my last response was either vague or incorrectly interpreted, either way I'll attempt to clarify my point.[/SIZE]

[QUOTE=Aaryanna_Mom]Gavin based on the Census done in 2000 in the USA which measured a population of 281.4 million, 31.1 million of whom were foreign born. This does not include others who were born to foreign parents and are considered citizens due to being born in the US. It's inaccurate to say most of the garbage came from the US.

Being in America does not automatically mean the garbage started here. So lets drop the sweeping generalization that implies this sort of garbage started here and only here. I don't deny that there are a lot intolerant people here, I use to be one of them myself. But there are plenty of Americans who have no trouble with it at all. Even here in Utah over 35% of the population voted against a measure to deny gay marriage.[/QUOTE]

[SIZE=1]To be fair AM all that statistic proves is that America has a considerable foreign populace, as by that same token does the Republic of Ireland (approximately 10%). So while I accept that maybe 99% of Americans vehemently disagree with sites like Godhatesfags, the site is American in origin.

It wasn?t my intention to paint all Americans with the same brush, but there is a general perception outside of the United States, whether it is correct or not, that the southern states of the U.S. are home to extremists on this and other issues. I?m not saying other countries don?t have to deal with these kinds of people (France for instance has a severe problems with racism), I?m just saying that there is a perception that America has a higher percentage of them than other countries, and sites like Godhatesfags from Kansas don?t exactly challenge that perception. I am however glad to see that it may be an incorrect perception if places like Utah which would typically be considered prime red-neck country are less extremist than perceived.[/SIZE]

[quote name='Retribution][size=1]Or [i]you[/i'] could just man up to your mistake. You associated Americans with hateful messages. That was wrong of you say, and you know it. You're no better than someone who insinuates that 99% of Christians are blind.[/size][/quote]

[SIZE=1]I am more than man enough to own up to my mistake Alex, and unless you?re telling me that Kansas is no longer part of the U.S. than I?m not the one associating America with hateful messages, your own people are giving out the evidence.

I?ve already stated it wasn?t my intention to paint all Americans with the same brush, I simply alluded correctly or incorrectly to the general perception that sites like Godhatesfags and the ecclesiastical bigotry that goes with it comes from America. As for whether I?m not better than someone who insinuates whether 99% of Christians are blind, well I at least admitted my mistake, whether or not people who insinuate similarly to Christians can do the same is another issue.[/SIZE]

[quote=DeathKnight][color=crimson]The debate that has arisen will unfortunately bring out extremists and I cannot apologize for their actions as an American but I will fault you on being a fool about it. People like this exist in every nation and, when offered the proper stage, will show themselves just as loudly.
[/color][/QUOTE]

[SIZE=1]While I agree that this issue does bring out extremists on both sides, as we both well know, I think you're assuming that I expected you to apologise for the actions of other Americans, I didn't, nor would I ask you or any of your fellow countrymen to. As for faulting me for being a fool, I'm afraid Ken that's your own call and it doesn't in the least bother me in the least.[/SIZE]