FRONT PAGE    SPORTS BOARD  Hop To Forum Categories  Political Discussion    Why I am Against Gay Marriage.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

Moderators: Admin, Chicopee John
Go
New
Find
Tools
Reply
  
-star Rating Rate It!  Login/Join 
Hall of Famer
Picture of Dencyguy
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Preacher:
Dennis...

I understand what your saying.

However, while words come from all over the place, but I think it does matter where words come from.


For instance, if we asked everyone to spend 2 minutes memorizing something... but we called it prayer... we would have an uproar... because the words carry definitions.

I argue that the definition of marriage still hold its original definition. As such, it is still too tied to the Christian idea of marriage.

________________

I don't know Dennis...

maybe we are kinda missing each other right now... did my response make sense to your post?


It makes sense, and I think that we are at cross-purposes. How would you respond to a Jewish person telling you that you couldn't use the word Yahweh, because it is based on Hebrew, and therefore offensive to him for two reasons:

1) As a Jew, he does not feel that anyone can/should pronounce the name of G*d;

2) Since the tetragrammatan is Hebrew, his people had it first, and it is inappropriate for an off-shoot religion to use it, especially since, he might argue, they are moving away from the true faith?

Since the word is taken from the original Hebrew, how much weight would you give his argument?

Dennis
 
Posts: 1565 | Location: Knoxville, TN | Registered: Sat April 28 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
NFL Starter
Picture of Preacher
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Dencyguy:
quote:
Originally posted by Preacher:
Dennis...

I understand what your saying.

However, while words come from all over the place, but I think it does matter where words come from.


For instance, if we asked everyone to spend 2 minutes memorizing something... but we called it prayer... we would have an uproar... because the words carry definitions.

I argue that the definition of marriage still hold its original definition. As such, it is still too tied to the Christian idea of marriage.

________________

I don't know Dennis...

maybe we are kinda missing each other right now... did my response make sense to your post?


It makes sense, and I think that we are at cross-purposes. How would you respond to a Jewish person telling you that you couldn't use the word Yahweh, because it is based on Hebrew, and therefore offensive to him for two reasons:

1) As a Jew, he does not feel that anyone can/should pronounce the name of G*d;

2) Since the tetragrammatan is Hebrew, his people had it first, and it is inappropriate for an off-shoot religion to use it, especially since, he might argue, they are moving away from the true faith?

Since the word is taken from the original Hebrew, how much weight would you give his argument?

Dennis


I am not quite sure YHWH works for that argument... as the tetragrammatan is a personal name of the diety, and not a word which is used to describe a practice with religious connotations...

What if we discussed Bris? Let's say the govt. said that all children HAD to be circumcised. Furthermore, they issued licenses for it and it said, xxx's Bris was on xxx.

Then, six months later, it was changed to a bris only being a naming... with or without a circumcision, and also changed to include females.

I would think that the govt. overstepped its boundaries by

1. Regulating a religious activity
2. Violating separation of church and state

My point about where the word came from was to actually show that marriage was associated with Christianity by the time it came to america. Thus, the institution of marriage in America is hand and glove with Christianity.

However, the conversation went everywhere... So i never really got a chance to get back to that point.

I would argue that the govt. had overstepped its boundaries because one, Bar Mitvah
 
Posts: 707 | Registered: Mon August 06 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of Dencyguy
Posted Hide Post
The bris is a whole other topic...quite frankly, I wouldn't have a problem with the government stepping in to say that mutilating the genitals of an infant shouldn't be done. I say that for both ethical and common-sense reasons:

1) The ethical: Circumcision was meant to show that one was in a covenant relationship with God. What kind of eight day-old can enter into a covenant? Wouldn't it make more sense to have it done later, when the kid reaches the age of responsibility? I think I know why it isn't at the later age, but that's neither here nor there.

2) The common sense: Can you get a cross tattooed on an infant? Of course not--it's illegal, even if you say it's because you want to mark the child as Christ's possession. Also, there's the hypocrisy involved in most Americans' attitudes toward male genital mutilation vis-a-vis their attitudes toward female genital mutilation. If a community in the States said that it was part of their religion that the older women in the community cut of a girl's clitoris with whatever sharp objects are handy--broken Coke bottles are popular in parts of Africa--why should the government intercede if it's not going to say anything about a guy in a hat with a scalpel?

I'm of the opinion that circumcision for Jewish infants merits very serious debate, and for non-Jewish infants it can border on evil, but that's for another thread.

Dennis
 
Posts: 1565 | Location: Knoxville, TN | Registered: Sat April 28 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Skipper of the Lake Erie Booze Patrol
Numbers Retired and hangs in the rafters
Picture of Westside Steve
Posted Hide Post
quote:
I'm of the opinion that circumcision for Jewish infants merits very serious debate, and for non-Jewish infants it can border on evil, but that's for another thread.


Aren't most of you guys circumcised?
T'was common practice when I was born and nary a synagogue in sight.
WSS.
 
Posts: 5186 | Location: Norton Ohio USA | Registered: Mon September 15 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of DieHardBrownsFan
Posted Hide Post
I don't consider circumcision "mulilation". I was circumcised. All my brothers were also. What's the big deal? It is actually more healthy. Less chance of disease.
 
Posts: 1595 | Location: Cuyahoga County | Registered: Mon September 18 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Pro Bowl Player
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Westside Steve:
quote:
I'm of the opinion that circumcision for Jewish infants merits very serious debate, and for non-Jewish infants it can border on evil, but that's for another thread.


Aren't most of you guys circumcised?
T'was common practice when I was born and nary a synagogue in sight.
WSS.


Little Feat - Skin It Back lyrics
Paul Barrere


Well I'm waitin' for something to take place
Something to take me away from this race
'Round city to city, town to town
Runnin' around in the shoes of a clown
And that desperate, no count, desperado
A thief of love, my business is the street
I be shakin' 'em down
In old Colorado
Texas she's nice, but Georgia's oh so sweet
Steal away with me darlin' your lovin' just can't be beat
So it seems that the world keeps on turnin' but so what
I don't doubt it, it just keeps on the move
You're a dream, and that's all that I ask for
So well now, I'm wonderin' just how I'm gonna tell it to you
Skin it back (skin it back)
Somethin' real, somethin' to feel
I can't find a soul who'll take on this mess
It's those rock and roll hours, early graves without flowers
Please, please darlin' put my mind at rest
I'm beggin' please darlin' put my mind at rest
So it seems that the world keeps on turnin' but so what
I don't doubt it, it just keeps on the move
You're a dream, and that's all that I ask for
So well now, I'm wonderin' just how I'm gonna tell it to you
Skin it back tell it to you
Skin it back tell it to you
Skin it back tell it to you
Skin it back tell it to you
 
Posts: 1377 | Location: South Windsor, CT | Registered: Fri September 12 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of sevknowsbetter
Posted Hide Post
Again you are just reinforcing my position. The LATIN base that was spread AFTER christianity took foothold in Europe.

It was only AFTER 1563 that your church decided to get involved with the marriage ceremony. ONLY AFTER 1563 DID YOUR RELIGION GET INVOLVED WITH MARRIAGES ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN HISTORIES.

You know well that your religion was a small cultic sect until AFTER LATIN SPEAKING ROMANS/CONSTANTINE RECOGNIZED IT AND SPREAD CHRISTIANITY AS THE FORMAL ROMAN STATE RELIGION.

Your own histories as well as the ROMAN BASE LANGUAGE AND THE BEGINNNINGS OF CHRISTIANITY FROM ROME.

Again the english terrirtories who were conquered by the ROMANS AND LATER OTHER TRIBES.

Meaning marriage from the ROMAN LATIN had no original concept of christianity. MEANING THE BASE CONCEPT AND WORD FROM LATIN PRE CHRISTIANITY IN THE WESTERN WORLD HAD NO CHRISTIAN BASIC ORIGINS.
 
Posts: 1548 | Registered: Mon October 08 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Posted Hide Post
Dennis, you're reading a little too much Andrew Sullivan on the circumcision topic. In my mind, preventing HIV infection is a good reason for "non-Jewish infants" in Africa to be circumcised.

And how does removing/damaging the clitoris compare at all to snipping off some foreskin?
 
Posts: 1657 | Registered: Tue January 29 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of Dencyguy
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Aloysius:
Dennis, you're reading a little too much Andrew Sullivan on the circumcision topic. In my mind, preventing HIV infection is a good reason for "non-Jewish infants" in Africa to be circumcised.

And how does removing/damaging the clitoris compare at all to snipping off some foreskin?


I have been reading Sullivan on the topic--he's my favorite blogger, so I read him on a lot of things, even when I disagree with him--but I've been thinking this about circumcision before then as well.

For me, it has to do with motivation. Does circumcision help protect people from STDs? That's what the research says, although I haven't read the studies, so I don't know if it's unprotected sex (which seems like it would make sense)...it seems like there are other ways of protecting people from STDs.

The reason I don't like it is because a lot of people do it because it's tradition, and not because of health concerns. Cutting a kid's genitals because that's what your dad did just rings hollow to me.

The "borderline evil" thing came from Penn and Teller's show on circumcision. A number of the women interviewed on the show said that they had their kids circumcised because they "didn't like how uncircumcised penises look." That's stupid at best; again, would you let a person get their kid tattooed because of aesthetics?

And I think that clitorectomy and circumcision are absolutely analogous, even though the female version is unquestionably worse. If you tell people they can't do it, they're defended on cultural/religious grounds.

Dennis
 
Posts: 1565 | Location: Knoxville, TN | Registered: Sat April 28 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Posted Hide Post
Tradition isn't in of itself a bad thing. I think there's some truth to the Burkean idea that traditions tend to have coherent reasons for them, even when we can't locate one.

And it's ironic that Sullivan, an self-professed Burkean conservative, doesn't find these arguments to be valid when it comes to circumcision.
 
Posts: 1657 | Registered: Tue January 29 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Posted Hide Post
And I'll agree with you that advocating circumcision for aesthetic reasons is pretty sick.
 
Posts: 1657 | Registered: Tue January 29 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of Dencyguy
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Aloysius:
Tradition isn't in of itself a bad thing. I think there's some truth to the Burkean idea that traditions tend to have coherent reasons for them, even when we can't locate one.

And it's ironic that Sullivan, an self-professed Burkean conservative, doesn't find these arguments to be valid when it comes to circumcision.


I don't know that there's a really big contradiction there. As I said earlier, it would be one thing if people could choose to opt into the tradition--I want to be a part of this community, so I will be circumcised. Infants obviously aren't able to decide for themselves. Tradition is fine, but individual freedom and choice is better in a post-Englightenment world.

Sullivan also has an affinity for Hobbes, but he doesn't argue for a monarchy; he modifies it a bit and says that in a post-monarchical (I don't know if that's a word, but it should be) world, the idea of a monolithic government, however constituted, still makes a great deal of sense.

Dennis
 
Posts: 1565 | Location: Knoxville, TN | Registered: Sat April 28 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of DieHardBrownsFan
Posted Hide Post
WHO GIVES A FU---K WHY ANYONE IS AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE? IT IS ABNORMAL PEDOPHILE BEHAVIOR. SICKENING, DISGUSTING, ETC. END OF STORY. NEXT.
 
Posts: 1595 | Location: Cuyahoga County | Registered: Mon September 18 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
NFL Starter
Picture of Preacher
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by DieHardBrownsFan:
WHO GIVES A FU---K WHY ANYONE IS AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE? IT IS ABNORMAL PEDOPHILE BEHAVIOR. SICKENING, DISGUSTING, ETC. END OF STORY. NEXT.


Die Hard...

I am sure that if you look close enough at the stats..

You will find that there are as many heterosexual pedophiles as homosexual pedophiles...

Furthermore, same sex pedophilia is not the same as homosexuality. It is usually very different issues which drive the two acts... and pedophilia is NEVER a issue driven out of biology.

There are a number of studies that show some homosexuaility is driven out of chromosomes which do not fully function in sexual development.
 
Posts: 707 | Registered: Mon August 06 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
NFL Starter
Picture of Preacher
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sevknowsbetter:
Again you are just reinforcing my position. The LATIN base that was spread AFTER christianity took foothold in Europe.

It was only AFTER 1563 that your church decided to get involved with the marriage ceremony. ONLY AFTER 1563 DID YOUR RELIGION GET INVOLVED WITH MARRIAGES ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN HISTORIES.

You know well that your religion was a small cultic sect until AFTER LATIN SPEAKING ROMANS/CONSTANTINE RECOGNIZED IT AND SPREAD CHRISTIANITY AS THE FORMAL ROMAN STATE RELIGION.

Your own histories as well as the ROMAN BASE LANGUAGE AND THE BEGINNNINGS OF CHRISTIANITY FROM ROME.

Again the english terrirtories who were conquered by the ROMANS AND LATER OTHER TRIBES.

Meaning marriage from the ROMAN LATIN had no original concept of christianity. MEANING THE BASE CONCEPT AND WORD FROM LATIN PRE CHRISTIANITY IN THE WESTERN WORLD HAD NO CHRISTIAN BASIC ORIGINS.


Sev... and the Latin base was spread BY WHOM? CHRISTIANS...

The CHURCH got involved in the CEREMONY... but the TEACHING is much older. Do you understand the difference between teaching and ceremony? It doesn't matter when the church got involved in the ceremony... I am arguing the TEACHING.


Furthermore, it was not England as the romans had it, but England as the ANGLES and SAXONS had took it, and introduced christianity and LATIN as SEEN IN CHRISTIANITY BECAME THE MAIN CULTURE.

Therefore, the English as developed FROM THE ANGLES in ENGLAND took the LATIN term as brought into GERMAN since English is a GERMAN language descendant. . . and latin was brough in AFTER the GErmans became christian... thus, accepted the teaching of the church... which INCLUDES MARRIAGE.
 
Posts: 707 | Registered: Mon August 06 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of sevknowsbetter
Posted Hide Post
preacher Die hard can get a little irate at times, its better to let him get it out than to argue with him. He means well he is just brutally honest with his feelings.

I will admit with Diehard at least you know he is not sugar coating his real feelings, I respect that most of the time.
 
Posts: 1548 | Registered: Mon October 08 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of sevknowsbetter
Posted Hide Post
ok preacher lets just agree to disagree on this one. I am not going to come around from my position anymore than I expect you to.

I do appreciate the good debate, these are always fun.
 
Posts: 1548 | Registered: Mon October 08 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Famer
Picture of sevknowsbetter
Posted Hide Post
Here is something I am pretty sure you can agree with me on

The Browns fans and franchise is a more classy operation than your three rivers pollution ridden team. chairbeat
 
Posts: 1548 | Registered: Mon October 08 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Hall of Fame Legend
Picture of Beanpot
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by DieHardBrownsFan:
WHO GIVES A FU---K WHY ANYONE IS AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE? IT IS ABNORMAL PEDOPHILE BEHAVIOR. SICKENING, DISGUSTING, ETC. END OF STORY. NEXT.


Sweet!

 
Posts: 3316 | Location: Tampa, FL | Registered: Fri September 12 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Numbers Retired and hangs in the rafters
Picture of Flugel
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Westside Steve:
quote:
Originally posted by heckofajobBrownie:
Robert Towne is gay? Roman Polanski? What do you mean?



OK Heck.
Tom asked if anyone wouldn't listen to Elton John since he's gay.
Tom also voiced his objection to screwing children.
So I just figured most of us knew Polanski fled the US to avoid prosecution for sex with a minor.
And CHINATOWN is still a great flick.
See?
WSS


God bless ya! To be honest, I always thought "Chinatown" was an overrated flick. It was missing something - maybe it was just the distracting bandage over Jack's nose for the entire movie. Who knows! If you want to see classic Jack Nicholson back in the 70s rent "One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest."

Tell you what though Steve: if OJ Simpson wrote a book I wouldn't pay a FREAKIN Canadien penny to read it. That's a little different than hating someone like Elton John or Ellen Degeneres because they have significant others of the same gender.

Heck, this is what Steve was referring to from me:

"I have a BIGGER problem with child pedators. As I've read over the years some child predators were very well disguised as Pre-Cana Teachers young couples were looking to in order to prepare for their covenent with God. YES, I know that's not the rule - it's just the exception but these are KEY figures in some churches teaching the ways of the Bible but living the ways of Satan. BTW, some celibate clergy fit the stereotypes of a homosexual. Are we wired to be celibate? That's just as unnatural but the belief a priest has to be celibate is 100% man-made unless one can find exactly where God or Jesus wrote it was necessary. I haven't seen it writtten and neither has MANY churches outside of Catholisism."
- Tom F.
 
Posts: 10213 | Location: Nashville, TN | Registered: Sat September 13 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
 Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by eve community Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  
 

FRONT PAGE    SPORTS BOARD  Hop To Forum Categories  Political Discussion    Why I am Against Gay Marriage.

Designed by: CreAtens