Tue Mar 16, 2004 9:58 am
Is your present wife aware of this?Originally posted by -HaVoC-
And like I said, I want to marry the Damn triplets from Playboy. All I want is the same rights as the rest of you. I just want mine to consist of three Playboy bunnies.
Why can't I get the ACLU to support my rights that have been denied?
Tue Mar 16, 2004 10:54 am
Homosexuals have the same privledges as heterosexuals; they must marry someone from the opposite sex.
It's almost comical to read the ramblings of moral relativists. Please tell us what drives your moral compass. How do you determine what is right or wrong? It's a slippery slope, be careful.
There is no such thing as cold
There is no such thing as darkness
There is no such thing as evil
Oh, and there's no such thing as "separation of church and state". It's a nice sounding phrase, but has no historical basis in fact, although it's become the mantra of secularists and indoctrination in our publik skools.
It's almost comical to read the ramblings of moral relativists. Please tell us what drives your moral compass. How do you determine what is right or wrong? It's a slippery slope, be careful.
There is no such thing as cold
There is no such thing as darkness
There is no such thing as evil
Oh, and there's no such thing as "separation of church and state". It's a nice sounding phrase, but has no historical basis in fact, although it's become the mantra of secularists and indoctrination in our publik skools.
Tue Mar 16, 2004 11:25 am
Originally posted by SavageParrot
What's the problem with polygamy if everyone involved has consented?
My problem with it would be that there marriage should be a complete commitment to your wife/husband. No way you can say you are giving your all to all 3 or 10 or 100 of your wives/husbands.
Besides, for those polygamist men, it's just plain unfair to those of us who don't even have 1 woman
Tue Mar 16, 2004 11:33 am
Originally posted by RCglider
Oh, and there's no such thing as "separation of church and state". It's a nice sounding phrase, but has no historical basis in fact.
What do you think communist Russia was then?
Oh and if we are going to talk semantics, what do you define as historical fact anyway?
Tue Mar 16, 2004 11:34 am
Bill Clinton did NOT have sex with that woman!Originally posted by SavageParrot
...what do you define as historical fact anyway?
Tue Mar 16, 2004 11:36 am
Have you seen pictures of her?? It's obvious HE was the victim here.
Tue Mar 16, 2004 11:40 am
By PudRik
3) America was founded on separation of church and state. Freedom of religion...
Buzzzt... Wrong!
America was founded by Christians (Pilgrims and Puritians) fleeing religious persecution from the Church of England (The Anglican Church), and also to evangelize. Pilgrims started coming to America around 1620 with the Puritians following in the 1630's. I'm no history expert, but I do know that our country was founded on the Christian religion, NOT separation of church and state.
In fact I would be so bold as to say that our country was founded on the Christian religion and no other!
American is known as a "Christian" nation. In fact almost all countries are known for their religious affiliations, (e.g. Israel - Jewish, Iran - Moslem, Saudia Arabia - Moslem, India - Hindu?) I think you get the idea.
Yes, I am a Christian, but that doesn't change the history of America.
On homosexuality:
Leviticus 18:22: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”
Here is my personal take on homosexuals and homosexual marriage.
Homosexual sex is a sin. (It offends God, IMHO), but then again so is premartial sex. Both are sins against God. God has established marriage as a sacred covenant between one man and one woman and with Him. Almost every society, since recorded history, has established the union of one man and one woman as marriage.
I have had friends that are homosexual and lesbian. They were all good people. People that I liked and admired, but I still believe they were living outside of God's laws. Just because they were sinning didn't mean I shouldn't love them. As someone pointed out earlier we are called to love one another... and this is what I strive to do.
I know that a lot of you out there don't believe in God or follow the Bible... that's ok. It is a free country and you are entitled to your beliefs. I personally am against homosexual (or any other) type of marriage other than one man and one woman.
Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:33 pm
[/QUOTE]Again, no they are not. You are really comign off as some hillbilly bigot who is out of touch with this issue, and only going by what the local guy with a hood over his head is telling you to say. It is so wrong it is not funny.
Whoever 'told you this' is a narrow minded person who can not accept that someone may want to live their lives differently than them.
They just want the same rights and to be equal...............[/QUOTE]
Thats about as ignorant and offensive as you can possibly be and I wont respond in the language it really calls out for.
Who "told me this"? How about the guy who is gay that sits next to me at work? Or is he "the local guy with a hood over his head"? So apparently he is "Whoever 'told you this' is a narrow minded person who can not accept that someone may want to live their lives differently than them."
Thats funny, I accept it about him and he accepts me being straight.
You really need some help reading these things don't you Jimmy? I mean actual comprehension seems to be beyond you. Or do you get so morally indigant because you feel it is your crusade to enlighten us heathens?
Jimmy writes:
and from my original post which you responded to with pretty much blatantly calling me a racist and a bigot.
And I am pretty offended that you stooped to insinuating that I am a member of the KKK or a racist. You should apologize for that.
Whoever 'told you this' is a narrow minded person who can not accept that someone may want to live their lives differently than them.
They just want the same rights and to be equal...............[/QUOTE]
Thats about as ignorant and offensive as you can possibly be and I wont respond in the language it really calls out for.
Who "told me this"? How about the guy who is gay that sits next to me at work? Or is he "the local guy with a hood over his head"? So apparently he is "Whoever 'told you this' is a narrow minded person who can not accept that someone may want to live their lives differently than them."
Thats funny, I accept it about him and he accepts me being straight.
You really need some help reading these things don't you Jimmy? I mean actual comprehension seems to be beyond you. Or do you get so morally indigant because you feel it is your crusade to enlighten us heathens?
Jimmy writes:
They just want the same rights and to be equal...............
and from my original post which you responded to with pretty much blatantly calling me a racist and a bigot.
Should they have the same legal rights spouses do as far as benifits and legal status? Sure why the hell not. It makes no difference to me as long as they live their life and let me live mine.
And I am pretty offended that you stooped to insinuating that I am a member of the KKK or a racist. You should apologize for that.
Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:41 pm
Originally posted by SavageParrot
What do you think communist Russia was then?
Oh and if we are going to talk semantics, what do you define as historical fact anyway?
Communist Russia?? What are you talking about?
Simply put, a fact is something that happened.
Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:03 pm
Ok guys, I enjoy discussion, even heated debate, but I've learned (through job positions I've held over the years) at the end of the day to put it aside.
Just to let you know, I have no animosity toward any of you despite our disagreements, so don't take things personally. If you can't have civil intellectually honest discussions, that's your problem.
It's kind of like the Looney Tunes cartoon with Ralph and Sam, the coyote and the sheep dog. Know what I mean?
Just to let you know, I have no animosity toward any of you despite our disagreements, so don't take things personally. If you can't have civil intellectually honest discussions, that's your problem.
It's kind of like the Looney Tunes cartoon with Ralph and Sam, the coyote and the sheep dog. Know what I mean?
Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:07 pm
Woman + woman = sin if they don't include me or at least get it on videotape.
Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:31 pm
Oh boy.
Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:48 pm
I love how Jeffro gets us to do his homework assignments for him.. 
Tue Mar 16, 2004 2:31 pm
Originally posted by RCglider
Communist Russia?? What are you talking about?
It's an example of the historical basis for the separation of church and state. If you meant just in the USA then I'm sorry, it's probably irrelevant.
As to a fact being something that happened, this ignores the issue that all history is subjectively reported through the eyes of the historian, the gap between what he sees, and chooses to record, and what actually happened is immeasurable. So fact may be about what is, but historical fact is merely what people tell us is the case, not the same thing at all.
Tue Mar 16, 2004 2:39 pm
Originally posted by RCglider
Communist Russia?? What are you talking about?
It's an example of the historical basis for the separation of church and state. If you meant just in the USA then I'm sorry, it's probably irrelevant.