• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Political Email

Pruddock said:
Clipclopclop I have no problem whatsoever with you or your partner, and I agree that you should have the ability to get a Civil Union as I stated in the first part of the post. I just also understand where the government could be worried about fraud. I hope that the gay community IS allowed to acquire a civil union, and I support your argument wholeheartedly.
Click to expand...
Good for us. We need more people who understand and value the separation of church and state.

But I must admit that I am still confused about the potential fraud issue. Who would be committing this fraud? Gays? Since we only compose 3-5% of the population, even if we were to rush into fake marriages wholesale just to get tax benefits, I don't think it would make a big splash. This begs the question of what is in place to prevent the 95-97% of heteros from running out and having fake marriages? Nothing. But is it a rampant problem? Not really. Why? Because tying yourself up legally to another person so tightly isn't something to be taken lightly, and it prevents you from tying yourself up legally with anyone else.

From a cultural standpoint, gays are actually probably much LESS likely to engage in fake marriages for tax benefits than straights, because a lot of gays (like feminists) have mixed feelings about the whole institution. This ambivalence toward the institution is much more common among gays than among straights in my experience. But it seems that you are suggesting that for some reason gays are more likely to get "fake" married. Why?

As a side-note, what constitutes a fake marriage? Nothing, really. There's no law that says that in order for two straight people to be married they have to live together, have an exclusive sexual relationship, have ANY sexual relationship, like each other, have any kids together, whatever. Dean and I could go get married tomorrow and it wouldn't be a fake marriage, it would be a legal, civil marriage that comes with a whole bunch of rights and privileges. There's nothing at all in the world to prevent it and there's nothing fraudulent about it. It would be odd, because it would be a little crazy to get legally bound to each other like that since we don't know each other that well, but it would make the point that civil and religious marriages are two different things. In fact, I know two gay people who got married in just that way to make just that point. She's a lesbian and he's gay and they are in committed, monogamous sexual relationships with same-sex partners, living in domiciles with their same-sex partners, but they are married to each other. There you go. There's your "fraudulent" marriage. They would much rather marry their respective sexual and emotional partners, and would if given the opportunity, but if it arises, they'll have to get divorced first. :)
 
When I say fraud I'm more addressing the heterosexual people who would see this as a chance to take advantage of the benefits a homosexual couple would get. They are no more than roommates, but because they've lived together long enough they can "justify" that they are a homosexual couple even though they have no sexual or loving feelings for one another. I don't think that the gay community would take advantage of the deal as I feel that it would be a large step in the right direction for them/ya'll. I just can see the argument the government has, and I, personally, think that its pretty crappy that because of a few scammers the entire system will suffer consequences.
 
susang said:
Sorry Matthew 22:36-40 does make sense in this entire argument and so does the Torah. The Torah says all laws (commandments of God) come down to one "the golden rule". It doesn't say your neighbor you like or your white neighbor or your legal immigrant neighbor. If we can't love our neighbor as we love God we are very sad people. We can't just pick and choose scripture, to our pleasure or our needs. Luke 6:27-36...
Click to expand...

I never negated that and I've never said that I "hated" or didn't love anybody. I don't really understand what you're trying to get at here as it applies to me. If you are just trying to use this thread as a way to spread the word of God about loving one another then kudos to you ;) I love how because I said that the church shouldn't have to recognize gay marriage and that scholarships should look at people based on merit and not on race or ethnicity that I now hate Mexicans. I never once said that, and I come from a community that has a large, well-liked Mexican population. I also was not picking and choosing to pleasure my needs, I was using one of the many different scriptures that address the issue. On a side note, I'm glad that you quoted Luke as its one of my favorite books ;)
 
Snake Dave said:
I'm an athiest so I'll side with logic as opposed to the rules of faith.
David
Click to expand...

This is the last post I'm going to make and its just because I love the "logic" reason given most by atheists. I wanted to address this specifically because I find it rather entertaining. Now, this isn't the reason that I'm a Christian, but here are a few "logical" reasons why I can see religion in general as being a more "logical" choice than atheism (I'm going to stick to Christianity here as my knowledge of other religions is fairly general and not as broad so I don't want to misspeak):

A) Christianity gives a good general set of rules that are based around loving one another as you would love God and this tends to be a good way to live a good life - by loving.

B) What happens to Christians if atheists are correct and there is no eternal life beyond an earthly death? What happens to atheists if Christians are correct, and that because they don't believe in God wholeheartedly they get to spend eternity in Hell?

Now logically, that last point would be one heck of a kicker in the end and as a Christian I would feel sorry for atheists as I have some close friends who are atheist and I would now not be able to spend eternity with them in heaven. Now, if ya'll are right though I guess I at least can say that I've lived a good, loving life based on my beliefs. ;) Just lookin at it like a card game David ;)
 
Pruddock said:
A) Christianity gives a good general set of rules that are based around loving one another as you would love God and this tends to be a good way to live a good life - by loving.
Click to expand...
How is this a logical argument for the existence of a god?

B) What happens to Christians if atheists are correct and there is no eternal life beyond an earthly death? What happens to atheists if Christians are correct, and that because they don't believe in God wholeheartedly they get to spend eternity in Hell?
Click to expand...
This argument isn't logical either. Pascal's wager is an old, tired, and illogical concept. What happens to Christians if they're wrong and adherence to the tenets of another religion are the requirements for entry into eternal paradise. Despite your faith, you do not know.
 
Pruddock said:
When I say fraud I'm more addressing the heterosexual people who would see this as a chance to take advantage of the benefits a homosexual couple would get. They are no more than roommates, but because they've lived together long enough they can "justify" that they are a homosexual couple even though they have no sexual or loving feelings for one another. I don't think that the gay community would take advantage of the deal as I feel that it would be a large step in the right direction for them/ya'll. I just can see the argument the government has, and I, personally, think that its pretty crappy that because of a few scammers the entire system will suffer consequences.
Click to expand...

Ohhhhh, I get it. Huh. I haven't actually heard this point made before, and I see now that you aren't an adherent to it, but what a strange idea it is to deny rights to a 20th of the population because the 19/20ths of the population who already have those rights might then take advantage of them when you bestow them on the last 20th. Odd.
 
Pruddock said:
A) Christianity gives a good general set of rules that are based around loving one another as you would love God and this tends to be a good way to live a good life - by loving.
Click to expand...

I agree with Dean, this doesn't prove the existence of God. Now I know that's not necessarily what you're trying to convey here, but it's true. Those are just 'logical' rules that could have been thought of by anyone with an ounce of common sense. It doesn't make them special or hallowed, that's just logic. The Bible could have been written by anyone, faith is something inside of us that we turn to in time of need in my opinion, to gain answers to the unknown. Someone could have wanted to make that more official, like a rulebook for a club; someone could have come up with a formal idea for faith, tossed some points around, and decided to write about it. Religion, in my opinion, arose because people used the existence of God/an entity as an excuse and a reason for what they thought to be unanswerable questions. Now those questions can mostly be answered by science, logic and other things. There we go, people still have faith, as I do, but I don't have faith in a grand entity above.

Pruddock said:
B) What happens to Christians if atheists are correct and there is no eternal life beyond an earthly death? What happens to atheists if Christians are correct, and that because they don't believe in God wholeheartedly they get to spend eternity in Hell?
Click to expand...

Again, I agree with Dean. Look, put it this way. No one knows who is right, and since we can't bring people back to life and ask them of what lies beyond, we'll never know. I'll stick to living my life along the side of logic and reason, allowing them to guide my actions as opposed what somebody thousands of years ago could have written. Look at the seven Deadly Sins, I mean come on, why spend your life completely restricting nearly every natural emotion you feel. I mean come on, everyone feels pride for something, whether it be themselves, their children, their friends, and according to the Bible; that's a sin. If God gave us the ability to feel pride, and then order us to restrict that as a test, that's just stupid.

'Dear Lord, I'm so sorry I'm proud of my son's achievements, which I express as love, please don't send me to Hell'. What kind of an existence is that? Oh yeah wait, you can constantly repent no matter how many times you do it, as long as you're 'truly sorry'... What if you're with the wrong faith?

Look, I don't care if you don't respond to this. I have my beliefs, you have yours. You're not gonna convince me to believe in God, and I'm not convince you to become an athiest. Wait... why did I reply? :grin01:

All the best

David
 
Pruddock said:
. Clipclopclop I have no problem whatsoever with you or your partner, and I agree that you should have the ability to get a Civil Union as I stated in the first part of the post. I just also understand where the government could be worried about fraud. I hope that the gay community IS allowed to acquire a civil union, and I support your argument wholeheartedly.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...I think you were meaning Desertanimal? I am bisexual and have a strong commitment to my male partner right now. Lol. We certainly could get married any day!

Because the homosexual community has been denied those marriage rights for so long, it seems very plausible to me that people who had same-sex partners would mostly enter into marriages that were for real, steady, and committed. Marriage takes on a different, more serious flavor when it is something you'd like but cannot have.
Just a thought...
 
Pruddock said:
This is the last post I'm going to make and its just because I love the "logic" reason given most by atheists. I wanted to address this specifically because I find it rather entertaining. Now, this isn't the reason that I'm a Christian, but here are a few "logical" reasons why I can see religion in general as being a more "logical" choice than atheism (I'm going to stick to Christianity here as my knowledge of other religions is fairly general and not as broad so I don't want to misspeak)
Click to expand...

Religion is, by definition, illogical. Doesn't necessarily make it wrong - don't take this as a criticism of faith. I spent twenty years of my life believing. But I never once thought of it as a rational belief.

Canada has legalized gay marriage and has yet to have any issues arise from it. Also, the idea that a couple of heterosexual guys would get married to enjoy the benefits is pretty ludicrous. Marriage, as far as the state is concerned, is a legal contract. And like most legal contracts, it's not an easy thing to nullify it (Annulment notwithstanding - an annulment is not something commonly granted). By defrauding the state by entering into a 'gay marriage', those two guys would create a huge pile of issues for when one or both decided to marry a woman for real. The fear of fraud is unfounded.
 
Roy Munson said:
How is this a logical argument for the existence of a god?

This argument isn't logical either. Pascal's wager is an old, tired, and illogical concept. What happens to Christians if they're wrong and adherence to the tenets of another religion are the requirements for entry into eternal paradise. Despite your faith, you do not know.
Click to expand...

I agree with this and is the point of my biblical quotes, maybe it was to broad in terms fo this thread. My point is acceptance, Christians aren't the only good people, they aren't the only ones with the qulifications and a rule book for life on this earth. I'm not saying anyone said this directly.
This is a rule from the "Book of Shadows"
"Wiccians accept that every religion is right to its adherents. There is no "right" or "wrong" religion, even if you happen to disagree with said religion. This can also be applied to accepting people of other backgrounds and races. It's accepting what's different and not judging it, or degrading it because it's different from your own ways and thoughts."
 
Hey everyone,
I would just like to break in and add my 2 pennies, if I may.
Sure, political discussions can get ugly.
People have points of view and opinions about everything, and when our opinions are particularly strong we tend to view those on the other side as idiots, or worse yet, the enemy.

What we need to remember is that, whatever side of the aisle we happen to align with, be it right or left or somewhere in the middle, those with opposing views have the best interests of this country and its people in their hearts, just as you do. They just see a different way of getting there.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program :)
 
Pruddock said:
When I say fraud I'm more addressing the heterosexual people who would see this as a chance to take advantage of the benefits a homosexual couple would get. They are no more than roommates, but because they've lived together long enough they can "justify" that they are a homosexual couple even though they have no sexual or loving feelings for one another. I don't think that the gay community would take advantage of the deal as I feel that it would be a large step in the right direction for them/ya'll. I just can see the argument the government has, and I, personally, think that its pretty crappy that because of a few scammers the entire system will suffer consequences.
Click to expand...

This makes absolutely no sense. To pretty much repeat what desertanimal said, it is silly that 5% of the population is denied rights because 95% of the population who already have those rights are going to take advantage of it? As someone who is bisexual, but has a female partner, why should my gf and I be denied rights that essentially all others in the country have?
 
Girl Scouts are scary. They lie in wait at the grocery store with their boxes of cookies and even if you escape their big cookie sales pitch, they send their parents to work with cookie buying sheets with which to accost their coworkers. That conspiracy runs deep. Beware!
 
ssmith_1187 said:
I'm finding it really hard to believe that I am the only one that likes shrimp. :shrugs:
Click to expand...

I like shrimp, too. Shrimp is the fruit of the sea. You can barbecue it, boil it, broil it, bake it, saute it. Dey's uh, shrimp-kabobs, shrimp creole, shrimp gumbo. Pan fried, deep fried, stir-fried. There's pineapple shrimp, lemon shrimp, coconut shrimp, pepper shrimp, shrimp soup, shrimp stew, shrimp salad, shrimp and potatoes, shrimp burger, shrimp sandwich. That- that's about it.

regards,
BenjaminBufordBlue

P.S. A little levity can go a long way in turning someone's day around.
Click to expand...
Am I a clown? Do I amuse you?
 
diamondlil said:
So by the tone this thread is taking now, the USA is under attack from hordes of girl scouts, marauding 'Miss Black America' contestants, and pretend gay couples just waiting their chance to defraud the system? Amazing. You'd never believe it.
Click to expand...
We're buying cookies from them here so you don't have to buy cookies from them overseas.

NEVER FORGET!!!!!11!!!!!1!

regards,
jazz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top