Submitted by creative_me on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 11:30am.
I would vote for John McCain and against Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, because I am 'republican' and I don't believe that we should have abortion, or gay marriage.
Submitted by Animeqn89 on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 12:43pm.
There is nothing wrong with gay marriage. You should love somebody for who they are not what they are. Massachussetts already has it and nothing seems to be wrong there. As far as abortion goes, it's a lot better than the alternative which would be back alley abortions.
I'm voting democrat and most likely for Obama. I voted for him in our primaries and I'm sticking to him in the end.
Submitted by lgrf4evr on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 1:49pm.
There had been gay marriage in MA for a couple years now, and people there realize that it had no effect whatsoever on straight marriage and everyone else got over it.
I don't think that two gay people getting married in Boston, MA would caused a straight couple in the rural county of Texas or more neoconservative states to get a divorce.
Submitted by mobydick1036 on Sun, 04/06/2008 - 12:23pm.
Amen to that!! Except, I wouldn't vote for John McCain either. Ron Paul for '09. What is this bull crap calling people who are against homosexuality homophobes? Im not scared of homosexuals. I do not agree with thier lifestyle. Hate the sin, not the sinner. Who says that homosexuality is right?
Submitted by lgrf4evr on Sun, 04/06/2008 - 2:32pm.
So since you disagree with homosexual, you are going to elect someone who would denied them civil liberties?
Gay and lesbian lives are made miserable by the laws that people like you elect.
I just don't understand how you can said that you don't hate the sinner but sin and that you’re not a homophobe and then turn around would denied them their right to married, promote intolerance of homosexuality by saying that is a moral sin thus resulting in
the misery of teenage homosexuals who gets pick on by their peers because of their parents attitudes like yours, boycotting corporation (i.e. ford motor, McDonald's, target, Wal-Mart) that support homosexuality, denied them properties that their gay
Spouse gave to them though their will, take away their children to foster cares or to relatives just because you disagree with their lifestyle although you had nothing personally against them.
Make their life a felony by sending them into prison by passing laws like the Sodomy laws, where two homosexuals engaging in gay sex in the privacy of their own home.
Did you know that it was a felony for homosexuals to engage in gay’s sex in the privacy of their own bedroom in the state of Texas? Yeah, if someone caught you in the act while in your own bedroom in your own house, you can literally go to prison for it. It was overturn in Lawrence vs. Texas.
It like white southern saying I am not a racist and I had lots of black friends but I just don't want blacks integrating with my children or that I just don't think black should be voting because their place is in my cotton flied and my kitchen working as slaves.
I am not trying to be offensive, I just want an intellectual discussion and reason about why people like you would support legislation that would made homosexuals lives miserable while saying that you are not a homophobe?
It is like Senator Strom Thurmond (R-SC) blocking civil rights laws in congress while fathering a daughter out of wedlock with his black maid.
Submitted by bunnysquirrel on Sun, 04/06/2008 - 8:17pm.
lgrf4evr, I do not think that disliking homosexuals makes someone afraid of them. Are you telling me that because I do not like ignorant people that I fear them? I am not scared of an ignorant person even though I think that they should become more learned if they can. I don't understand the logic that disliking someone or something means fearing it.
And mobydick1036 never said that he would be denying homosexuals rights. He just does not agree with the way they live. Unless I missed something in mobydick's post, I do not think that he mentioned anything about slavery or denying homosexual's their rights.
Denying homosexuals the right to marry is not the same as physical slavery. They are not allowed to marry, but they do not face the daily prospect of back breaking physical labor and possibly being sold away from their loved ones. Emotionally it can be taxing, I'm sure, but there is no law against living together. And some states, Massachusetts, allow for marriage between homosexuals to be married. So obviously the president does not have control over the situation if some states allow gay marriage and some do not.
As for some stupid laws, according to dumblaws.com, it is illegal for a man to knit during fishing season. There are so many stupid laws that need to be changed. In the privacy of his own home, a man cannot knit because other people are out fishing. Good thing my dad does not knit, I'd have to turn him in to the law.
Are there not more important political issues to be worked up over? Homosexuality is not a political right. The government only has say in marriage, while it should legally be allowed for all (we are supposed to be secular, right?), churches should be the ones making the decision. Not the next president. Besides the President cannot wave his/her hand and make gay marriage legal or illegal.
If America is deciding their political parties over such un-immediate issues, then I fear the path our country is taking.
Submitted by mobydick1036 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 4:53am.
Well...I am pretty much sayin that homosexuals do not have the right to get married...but i believe it should be decided by individual states (if you have read my states rights vs federal power youll see what im talking about). your apsolutely right. What ticks me off is people go tot he courts to get rulings changed and all that b.s. They bypass the very fabric of democracy. If you want to change it, vote on it and elect people who like it. That doesnt mean ill change my views of homosexuality but use our democratic republic system.
Submitted by mobydick1036 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 4:49am.
If you want an intelecutal discussion we can have one, I dont mind. Here is the first question I have for you. I have already stated or implied why I think it is wrong (
biblical principles) so why do you think that homosexuality is right and that people are entitled to it? What is your authoritative doctrine or person or idea that says that homosexuality is ok. Secondly, I do not truly hate homosexual people. I really dont. I may think there lifestyle is, to be frank, apalling, but I do not hate them. If i hated them then that would go against the very thing that i believe. Thirdly, what is up with calling everyone who is against homosexuality a homophobe. Do you kow what homophobe means? The last part of homophobe means fear. So it is the fear of homosexuals. I ofr one am not afraid of homosexuals. So if im against the idea of killing someone im a murderphobe? Or if im agains the idea of abortion im an abortionphobe? Your second to the last paragraph is why we have the problem with child molestors and rapists today. People take pity on them and dont wnat to ruin there lives, letting them out of prison. Once out, many comit the same heinous crimes again.
Here is another reason why I do not think homosexuality is right. Since you probably dont believe in the Bible and God I will use natural selection to demonstrate. If one believed in natural selection to the degree that all the earth's animals were created through it, one might believe what im saying. I forgot the source, but it was said that homosexuals contract more aids and STD's then heterosexuals do. Once they catch them, they could spread them to other people and so on. If one believe in natural selection, since homosexuals are contracting much of the deadly STD's, doesnt that mean that they are not fit to survive and if they die thats natures way of getting rid of them? If it was, then that would mean that homosexuality isnt supposed to be.. Straight from the get go i wil tell you that i do not believe this, but i know that you would not understand my reasons on a biblical level so i must use somthing else that you might understand. another question, why arent animals homosexual to?
Submitted by mvenus929 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 6:39am.
I have already stated or implied why I think it is wrong (
biblical principles) so why do you think that homosexuality is right and that people are entitled to it?
Because I don't think that the Bible should be the basis for the laws in this country, primarily.
I forgot the source, but it was said that homosexuals contract more aids and STD's then heterosexuals do.
And I forgot the source (but I'm pretty sure it was reliable, like... I dunno... the CDC), but lesbians hardly contract any STDs, and have the lowest incidence of AIDS. That would mean that lesbians are more 'fit', wouldn't it? Oh wait... they're homosexuals too....
Also, I'm pretty sure the highest rate of AIDS is among the heterosexual male population in Africa (prostitutes are protected against it as long as they continue to be prostitutes).
another question, why arent animals homosexual to?
They are; do your research.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
Submitted by mobydick1036 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 6:52am.
If the Bible should not be the basis of the laws of this country, then why should have laws against rape, stealing, lying, etc. Here is a source of my claim for a prevelance of EBV type 2 among homosexuals http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/315521. and its not wikipedia either :D. So i did my research. Why do you think that gay people have a right to practice homosexuality? you still havent stated a logical answer. and, "becuae i believe they do" does not count. i can believe that the earth is flat or that a rock is a living, breathing thing but that does not mean im right.
Submitted by son_of_disaster on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 12:02pm.
Why should we create laws if we're not following a biased piece of literature? Because all religions and philosophies follow the same system of thought. Even the 10 Commandments can be broken into two laws which are 1)Do all you have agreed to do, 2) Do not encroach on other people or their property. Pretty black and white, or God thinks that his creation is too stupid to understand that and I believe with the latter.
If gays don't have the right to practice homosexuality, then why should you have the right to practice your religion? Religion isn't natural, it's manmade. Homosexuality on the other hand is prevalent in the animal kingdom and since humans are infact animals, then we are no different.
Submitted by mobydick1036 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 12:39pm.
how is religion man made? maybe quanza is man-made but how is christianity man made? all the historical events that happend in the old testament are backed up by other documents. even non-christian scholars agree that those things happend. I have a right to practice my religion becuase it is not morrally wrong and is stated in the constitution. Is that the best you can do? I have been waiting for an answer as to why homosexuality is morally upright and should be allowed. So since my cat has kittens with her son, then i should be allowed to have sex with my mother? Why cant i do that? i mean we are, infact, animals right?
Submitted by mickey1657 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 12:50pm.
Keep it coming...No one has come up with a legit answer yet... If you can convince me that homesexuality is morally upright than we can have something to talk about.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
Submitted by TUFFGONG on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 2:40pm.
This is some funny shit; you are either a master flame baiter or a raging simpleton, either way, kudos for providing me with some amount of amusement.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
Submitted by mvenus929 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 5:49pm.
There is no archaeological evidence of the 40 years the Israelites roamed the desert. There is no valid archaeological evidence of a world-wide flood. Those are two pretty big events in only the first two books of the Bible. So no, not all the historical events in the old testament are backed up by other documents.
And it's kind of a 'duh' moment for religions being man-made. If they weren't man-made, why would there be so many of them? Divinely inspired or not, you still have tenets and interpretations that ARE man-made, and if you try to argue that........ I won't continue that thought.
You only think homosexuality is morally wrong because the Bible condemns male homosexuality (nothing, at least in the OT, condemns lesbianism, and I've yet to see you say anything against that, which again, is a type of homosexuality). Additionally, homosexuality doesn't infringe upon anyone's rights. If I wanted to go and marry one of my roommates, that wouldn't affect YOU in the least. Murder, rape, and all those other horrible things infringe upon the rights of an individual, and so there are laws against them. Did you never study Locke?
Also, did you read about Lot and his daughters in that Bible of yours? Just curious.
So, while you claim that no one has given you a logical argument of why homosexuality should be allowed, I have yet to see a logical argument of why homosexuality should be banned from people like you.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
Submitted by mobydick1036 on Wed, 04/09/2008 - 5:38pm.
dude...the bible condemns all types of homosexual before...read the new testament about the great apostle paul writing to the chuches to abstain from homosexuality and other immoral sins. yeah and i know about lot...that has nothing to do with this argument. ...were talkin about homosexuality here. it doenst matter if what i believe about homoexuaity is based on the bible...i have still to hear why homosexuaity is morally ok. you peple keep attacking my religious beliefs when you never even answer my single simple question on why you think its ok. will you just hurry up and answer it? ive been asking that question for about what...6 posts so far? all i get back are comments on how christianity is false and man made. answer my flippen question, is it that hard for you to do!!
Submitted by mvenus929 on Wed, 04/09/2008 - 7:30pm.
There is absolutely nothing in old testament about lesbianism. Prove me wrong.
And I have told you time and time again why homosexuality is ok... it doesn't affect anyone else. It doesn't hurt anyone, and it is an expression of love. Why should I condemn people for expressing love? Exactly.
Again, you have no logical reason for saying homosexuality is wrong except for the Bible. Since the laws in this country are not based on the bible, it's not a valid argument. I'm not attacking your religion, merely saying it isn't valid in discussing the legality of gay marriage. End of discussion.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
I don't like to get into arguments that are none of my business, but to put it bluntly, Someone (meaning you) on the internet is wrong. So here you go.
Why is homosexuality morally ok? First, let's discuss what makes something moral. You say it doesn't matter if the Bible mentions it, so we'll leave religion out for now. Besides, stoning kids who talk back to their parents doesn't count as moral in my book.
I can only give you my own definition of morality, which is "do no harm." What that means is that anything is permitted so long as it does not detract from another person's quality of life. Little things, like buying the last copy of a video game and therefore witholding it from another, are irrelevant. We're talking big things, like murder. In killing someone you destroy something very valuable of theirs - their very existance. Exceptions to this include voluntary, doctor-assisted suicide, which the patient has requested in order to better their own life.
Now, does homosexuality jibe with my definition of morality? Yes, because it harms no one. No one - if we discount the possible emotional trauma of learning someone close to you is gay - who is not participating in a homosexual relationship is directly affected by one. Furthermore, nothing happens to the people involved that is not caused by some outside source that they have no control over. Incomplete legal rights? Not a result of homosexuality, but homophobia. Assaulted? Same. STDs are often assumed to be caused by/higher in the gay community. This is mostly rubbish. Yes, anal sex carries a higher risk of disease contraction, but straights do it too, and you never hear anyone whining about them. Besides, lesbians are gay, too, and they have the lowest rate of contraction. Shouldn't we be honoring them?
Perhaps you have a different definition of morality. That's fine, so long as you keep it consistent. Think about how issues relate to it before giving a knee-jerk reaction and getting your debating ass kicked.
Submitted by son_of_disaster on Wed, 04/09/2008 - 7:02am.
All religion is man-made dude. It's based off the belief in a Supreme Being, the Supreme Being didn't create it, it created the people who created the system. I find it amusing that only Christians and Muslims fail to grasp this concept. Yes, they agree that most of those things happened, but your point is missing one thing....that God told these people to kill others for their "promised land". There is no evidence. If I were to say that today, you'd throw me in a mental institution, so what makes that different from now?
I never said you didn't have the right. Does the Constitution say it is morally wrong to be gay? No, so your logic in this argument is a tad flawed. I still have yet to hear a decent argument from anyone saying why homosexuality is wrong...except using a biblical text with opinion pieces in it. I would suggest Percivale's blogs on homosexuality, they give a nice background onto why it is now believed that homosexuality is actually a genetic thing, not a choice like Christians so proudly proclaim like a school girl who recently lost her virginity to the star quaterback.
Yes, we're animals. And you also have a strong likely-hood of fucking a distant relative when you get married. You do remember that Adam and Eve's children had to only themselves to make more little children. Now I thought the Bible said that incest was wrong...obviously not when you're populating the Earth. Everyone is biologically connected to eachother, if we weren't then Autism and the likes wouldn't exist. Am I suggesting that you do that? Not necessarily, if the world was going to die out, I'd fuck the nearest person to keep humanity alive, even if it was my mother...well I wouldn't because personally I dislike humanity, but most people would. You ability to grip morality and more complex thoughts and abilities is primarily what seperates you from other animals, but that's about it.
BTW, do you happen to have some footprints so I can see where the Jews walked for 40 years...since it is proveable?
Submitted by mobydick1036 on Wed, 04/09/2008 - 5:42pm.
dude you dont have to lecture me about the Bible. of course adam and eve screwed there kids...thats the only way that it was possible. it was morraly right to at the time...then later God said it was wrong. Dude, how it is provable that there is no divine being? do you have proof of that? Where do we get our consciences from that lets us knwo whats good and bad? its not a physical organ, so what it is? if its not physical it has to be spiritual. and evolution cant create things that arent spiritual...hm....you can say whatever you like to say, but im entitled to my opinion just like your entitled to yours. well just have to see whose right in the end.
btw...science can only prove physical things. if you dont know what physical things are, its things that we can see, touch, hear, etc. the 5 senses. it cant prove anything outside of that, including religion and spiritual things. ask any secular science teacher and thats what they will tell you. i should know, im a science major. just beucae there is no physical evidence found about a crime doenst mean it wasnt committed. thats what Christianity's all about, faith. take it or leave it, thats all i gotta say.
Submitted by son_of_disaster on Wed, 04/09/2008 - 10:08pm.
So basically you're saying that God is falliable. If God is really perfect, then God would have found a loophole for the whole incest thing. Consciences are created by environmental experiences. Equating that to God is proving God falliable once again. Because since none of our consciences are created equal. It depends on the environment and the child, not a mythical being. The conscience is a process in our brains it is physicological.
There is always a miniscule amount of evidence for the crime or unsolved cases wouldn't be solved with a small break. You've proven nothing really. Faith will only get you so far in life.
Submitted by mobydick1036 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 12:52pm.
what bible are you reading? The ten commandments are not broken down into two groups...The ten commanments are actual commands. Do all that you agreed to do? Is that the 13th commandment? yes do not steal is encroaching on other peoples property and goods.but else where in Scripture God says that being homosexual is wrong. Besides...your missing the whole point of the ten commandments....they were to show the Jews that they were sinful and needed a savior, not to stop there partying.
Submitted by son_of_disaster on Wed, 04/09/2008 - 7:07am.
I said they could be broken down. The key word here is could...context clues are wonderful things, my enlightened friend.
You're missing the point of fundamental laws that Christians respect. They are just to makes sure you don't do something stupid. It is simpler commands and can be made into laws easily. You can still party with them.
It is just funny that God believed that his creation was unable to comprehend two laws...it's just fascinating, but of course God works in mysteriously spooky ways.
Submitted by madiporter on Sun, 04/06/2008 - 4:14pm.
Technically who you vote for does not impact gay marriage and/or abortion, abortion has been declared by Roe vs. Wade, and their party does not individually impact abortion, they would need more than just the president to be against it. in terms of the way the government works: with checks and balances, it takes more than a president to reverse a supreme court case.
For example, Mitt Romney (republican) governor of Massachusetts has made legal gay marriage and with the state agrees with abortion... but yet he's republican isn't he?
Im also republican, and i am strongly agreeing to the fact that abortion and gay marriage is wrong, but don't base your opinion for who you are going to vote for because of that.
Submitted by MSmithWisconsin on Wed, 04/09/2008 - 11:23am.
I'm sorry, but I thought this was a "progressive" blog? I'm all about defining myself outside of labels like "republican" or "democrat" but what is your deal with the legality of abortion or gay marriage? just because you don't want to work for the post office doesn't mean you should ban the rest of us from receiving mail...
And I don't mean to offend your sensibilities, I just don't understand how you were attracted to this website. I am sincerely confused because the substance of Hillary Clinton's policies are much more progressive than either John McCain (absolutely, rigidly conservative policies) or Barack Obama (great progressive rhetoric, but yet to rise to really progressive policy!). Can you elaborate on why you reached these views?
Submitted by creative_me on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 2:16pm.
That really doesn't have to do with gay marriage...but generally, yes, I am against divorce. In some cases though, such as abusive situations, I see it as plausible.
Submitted by thehermanator on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 3:26pm.
welcome to 2008, amanda. plus is that you're only reason for voting against the democratic nominees? because if that's what you're baising it off of then you're voting for all the wrong reasons. do your research.
Submitted by TUFFGONG on Sun, 04/06/2008 - 6:45am.
"No need for in-depth research"
That speaks volumes about the value of your opinion.....
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
Submitted by violinkeri on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 7:28pm.
Same thing. Let me break this down for you.
W-white. if that picture is you, then that much is clear.
A-S--Anglo-Saxon. Anyone who can trace their ancestry to Western Europe, primarily the British Isles. Most Caucasians fall into this category in America.
P-Protestant. If you are Christian and you aren't Catholic, then yes, this is you.
Do you mind if I ask how old you are? You seem really naive about certain things, and I don't want to give you the label 'ignorant' if you are just too inexperienced to know better.
Submitted by mvenus929 on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 7:51pm.
Quote:
If you are Christian and you aren't Catholic, then yes, this is you.
Not necessarily. You could be orthodox (Greek and Russian are the most popular, I think) or Anglican, both of which were different schisms than the Protestant Reformation.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
Submitted by violinkeri on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 4:18am.
Perhaps I should have worded that better. She says she is a non-denominational Christian, and Catholicism and Orthodoxy are denominations. The rest is Protestantism, as far as I am aware.
Submitted by creative_me on Wed, 04/09/2008 - 11:03am.
I'm 17, Um, what about all of the different people at my church... they're not all white.
So they would not fit into that group...
Honestly, I don't consider my self as a WASP, non-denominational is good for me.
- I agree that I lack experience in some areas, but I do know what is right and wrong.
Submitted by kariskoett on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 6:27pm.
It may be different than YOUR definition of marriage. So don't marry a woman, and you'll be fine for yourself. But don't shove your relgious or whatever beliefs on the rest of the country. This shouldn't even be a discussion. If you don't agree with something, then don't do it. But don't think that your beliefs should be the law of the land. Who are you??
As far as abortion goes, you might want to do some research before you go making blanket statements. Until our society changes, abortions are going to happen whether they are legal (and safe) or not, and frankly, I'd rather them be safe.
In the end, you cannot base your decisions about a political party on two issues. TWO issues out of a million - look at what else the Republicans and Democrats stand for? And try not to listen to the bias in their voices... For example, McCain has just recently added Education to his campaign in the last couple of months. Education!!! Holy cow!! He doesn't know jack about education, clearly, and we want him in charge of our country? We expect him to make good decisions about our future when he doesn't even understand the biggest influence on our future?? MM, no. So uh, let's broaden our horizons here.
"All things appear and disappear because of the concurrence of causes and conditions. Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to everything else."
-Buddha
Submitted by creative_me on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 7:33pm.
It's not my definition of marriage:
marriage >noun 1 the formal union of a man and a woman, by which they become husband and wife.- that'd be from the dictionary
On abortion, I don't think it should happen because it is a means by which another life is ended.
Those two issues, either way you go- for or against, will still have an impact on our society after it is all said and done.
Submitted by lgrf4evr on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 2:00pm.
I think that she is a very dishonest person. She chose to stay in the primary even though she knows that she will lose to Senator Obama. She is hurting our party. Also, I went to CSPAN to check who voted for the invasion of iraq, and she voted for it. She also voted against dick durbin bill which didn't allow using military force against.
She said that if she knew what she know then what she knows now she would had voted against it but that is not true. Senator Clinton had bill on her side, he could had sucessfully convince her to vote against he resolution.
There was major evidence that Bush/Cheney were determined to invaded Iraq no matter what the consequence and that they didn't really had a plan to deal with the aftermath just as they did with afghanistan (which i support).
Submitted by aiko.miyahira on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 10:39pm.
If Clinton wins, our nation is going to be even more of a mess than it is right now. If she allowed her husband to get away with what he did then what else will she let slide? I think she'll end up letting her emotions run the country rather than thinking about what is in the best interest of the people.
Submitted by mllepink on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 2:02pm.
I would vote against Barack Obama. I like Hillary Clinton for that fact that she is fact, and Barack Obama is more like political poetry. Although I am a strong-running Democrat, I very, very much like McCain.
Submitted by kickasandria on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 3:33pm.
If I had to choose between Obama and Clinton, I definitely would be voting against Hillary Clinton. However, that's just because Clinton is more annoying than Obama. Their policies are equally dangerous, because they are willing to be weak on every area America needs strength right now.
America needs someone to have a strong plan against illegal immigration.
America needs someone that will say abortion, especially partial-birth abortion, is murder and is wrong.
America needs someone who does not bow in the face of the mainstream media.
America needs someone who will support the individuals choice, but not promote and legalize the unnatural state of gay marriages. (Where does the perversion stop, huh?)
America needs someone who will not waste the precious lives of our men and women who have died for a just cause and will win the war in Iraq - not just finish it.
America needs someone who has strong core values that scream of non-racism, non-sexism, non-liberalism, and non-fascism.
America will undoubtedly be divided over these candidates, but I think McCain is the moderate most democrats and independants will be united over. I don't agree with all of Senator McCains policies, but out of the 3 evils, I would definitely choose the lesser of them. My vote's in for McCain.
Submitted by Animeqn89 on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 4:15pm.
I'm against all of your reasons. I'm voting Democt because I support women's right for an abortion and it doesn't matter if it's murder because it's a right to privacy. The nineth amendment protects it. Besides, staying in Iraq kills just as much. Nice contradictions there, silly Republicans.
We're all immigrants of some sort. We've all migrated into this country. All we have to do is make it easier to get in the country. Like having an easier test. That way, they don't have to come in illegally. As far as the jobs they get goes, blame the big white company owner that hires them.
Gay marriage is not unatural. Love is natural to everybody. When a mother loves her daughter, is that unatural because they are of the same gender?
I feel that we've been in Iraq for way to long. I've known people who have died in there and I don't want anybody else to die.
Non-liberalism? So you hate me because I'm a liberal? That's dirty. It's just a party. I'm still a person. Besides, Democrats aren't sexist or racist. Just because they happen to be the most diverse people in the race doesn't mean they prefer black people or women to any other voter.
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
Submitted by mllepink on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 6:48pm.
I really don't want to sound rude, but you make the Democratic party look like a big box of snobs, and I don't appreciate that. I am proud to be a Democrat, but take pride in and respect the opinions of those who declare a Republican standing. If you have to disagree, do so politely.
♥- Voyons ce qui ne va pas. Voyons comment le monde meurt. Voyons comment nos rêves et nos idées sont cachés en ayant peur de la réalité d'eux autour de nous. Faisons un monde où nos rêves peuvent survivre. Ce sont nos rêves -- Gardons-les.
Submitted by mickey1657 on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 2:04pm.
Ok WOW, ANIME, It doesn't matter if its murder? it's about privacy? So should I kill a man in my basement and it be ok because I wanted to do it to help myself out and it was done in privacy? Are you serious? So it doesn't matter that you are actually killing another human being to benefit yourself. I believe abortion is a selfish act. Women who do it can't face the consequences or just don't care for what GOD has given them. I also agree with the war, but I don't agree with gay marriages. God never intended a man to marry a man or a woman to marry a woman. Our fourfathers were God fearing men, they had the strength of the nation in mind.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
Submitted by Violinstef on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 3:54pm.
that our FOREFATHERS (unless, of course, god wanted you to have four fathers) were "god-fearing men" is because most countries were theocracies at the time. Also, women who get abortions may find it moral because unborn children cannot live on their own and are not yet fully formed humans.
Submitted by Animeqn89 on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 4:35pm.
It wouldn't be a privacy act in your basement, another person is there. One that knows what's going on. If anything you're violating someone elses privacy by murdering them and before you tell me it would be the same for a baby because that baby doesn't know anything at the time. It hasn't developed enough to even be considered a baby.
And who cares if God says being gay is wrong. If God said being black was wrong, would you be against black people?
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
Submitted by mickey1657 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 6:36am.
OK really I am tired of people saying that they are not considered human beings. If you grow to be a human fetus than you are considered a human being. If the main development of its growth is to be a human baby then dammit it's a human being. You were just a speck in you moms womb, so if you're mom killed you it's ok, cuz your form was not human-like yet. Imagine the world without your brother or your sister or your wife or your husband. Imagine it. Someone you loved so much not being there because their parent decided to get an abortion. So many gifted children, future presidents, future writers, future leaders of this world, all dead because of the person who stopped its life dead in its tracks.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
Submitted by Animeqn89 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 11:39am.
Then it is a human being but not a wanted human being. The mother will probably neglect it. I suppose that's better than dying? You know feeling like you have no loved ones and being hated and yelled at or possibly hit every day of your life.
Besides that fetus may not live but it could still support life. It could help with research with stem cells. Stem cell research could save millions. So, as a fetus (if it could think, which it can't) given the choice between saving millions by dying or being abused as I grow up, I'd rather save the millions.
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
Submitted by mickey1657 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 11:54am.
This is why there is one more option if you don't want your child.... Adoption. There are loving parents out there that cannot have babies, that are willing to take in an "unwanted" child. It just strikes me as amazing when people throw this gift away and other people can't even have it,or are not physically able to. I'm not too familiar with how stem cell research works but I'm sure the babies or fetus's (which can't think, youre right) don't know what they are being destroyed for.
Another thing that bothers me is that I have known women who have had at least 3 abortions. She goes to the clinic like she's in for her monthly waxing or something. These women are unbelievable. You know eventually abortions can harm your body.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
``...being gay is not as simple as your skin color.``
It`s not as ``simple?`` My husband is of a different race than I am and the same sex as I am. I love him and he loves me, and we have a happy life together. It seems simple to me.
Back in 1967, Mr. Loving was told by a judge in Virginia that he would have to leave Virginia or go to jail because God didn`t want him to be married to someone of another race. Sexist and racist marriage laws have followed similar patterns within states, with states like Alabama lagging the longest on one side of both issues while more progressive states like Massachusetts moved forward.
Likewise, it has been almost uniformly the same church groups who have historically fought in favor of racist laws and for sexist laws, for reasons that are almost word for word the same.
Sexist and racist discrimination is just the same crap in a different pile.
Submitted by mickey1657 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 10:14am.
I was replying to someone who gave an example, they said that if God said that black people were bad would i dislike black people", ( or something to that extent). People are born black, white, brown whatever. They are born that way. But from birth, you definitely don't know that you are gay. God does not specifically create gay people. I don't know if you understand, what I am trying to say. But that's what I meant by simple. It's in plain sight. The doctors, the nurses, and the parents see the color of baby skin from the moment it leaves the mothers womb.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
Submitted by Animeqn89 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 11:46am.
Alright but it's the same concept. We can marry another race because we love them. They are people just like us and share love just like us. So why can't we love someone of the same sex? They share the same love. God created love and He certainly didn't make love biased. It's 'Oh, I can't love you because your the same gender as me.' God made love natural so that we could feel it for everybody. If you say that God made people the way they are then you must agree that God put love in us. And just like He loves everbody, I'm sure he expects us to do the same.
And suppose God didn't make skin color but it was something that grew on you as you grew older and in the bible it said that certain skin tone was wrong. Would you be against it because God is?
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
Submitted by mickey1657 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 12:03pm.
You bring up a good point, but even now there are things that I don't agree with that's in the bible. Not that I am right or wrong. Just some things that don't fit right that I occasionally have to question. So if my heart is telling me that it doesn't feel right to hate people of a certain skin tone, than I won't hate them. However, God is the example I live by, it would take great convincing but I try my best to follow him. But I am thankful that God does not think that way. He loves all people, straight, gay, black, white, evil and good. And I try my best to be the same way.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
Submitted by mobydick1036 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 12:46pm.
if God said he was against black people...then he would be a hypocritical God ha ha. He did tell the Israelites to kill everyone who wasnt Jewish back in the time of the Hitites and Amalekites. If God said that homosexuality was ok, id have no problem with it. but he says it is wrong, so i have a right and freedom to also believe it is wrong and no one can take that away. I mean look at Sodom and Gomora. Scientists all agree that those two tons were whiped off the face of the earth. The Bible proclaims that it was becuase of rampant homosexuality becuase the townsmen tried to rape some angels....
"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry
Submitted by mickey1657 on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 12:55pm.
I think he meant it hypothetically.... Like if God were to tell you to jump off a roof, would you do it... that kind of thing. But you do bring up a good point.
You sure know your bible though....
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
Submitted by violinkeri on Wed, 04/09/2008 - 1:29pm.
Go back and re-read Sodom and Gomorrah. No where does it actually say "This action against Sodom and Gomorrah was taking because of rampant homosexuality." Rather, this conclusion is come to by people manipulating the bible into saying what they want it to say. The bible is full of contradictions of itself, and it is very easy to mold the text into whatever you need it to say at any given time.
Submitted by Green Underbelly on Sat, 04/05/2008 - 3:40pm.
McCain has some interesting stances. They'll make you study up real hard-like and he's a survivor. That being said, I would vote for Obama or Hillary before I marked an 'X' for McCain, because I feel he represents a continuation of conservative policies that have this country in an energy crisis, a foreign policy tangle, and absolute stagnancy on the issue of climate change and green infrastructure revitalization.
Submitted by darielle_23 on Sun, 04/06/2008 - 9:54am.
Obama has got this election down!
Hilary changes personalities
McCain thinks he should win souly off of his past experiences
-I don't understand why people say they are a Rep. or Dem. I think you have to let all of the opinions of the candidates and what they stand for swirl in your head before you choose.
Submitted by FullyAware on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 1:24pm.
Most of the time, for me at least, it's the issues you stand for, sometimes you stand for issues on both sides of the track and the side where you agree more with is possibly what you are, then now that I put that, maybe not. I don't know either. What makes the party you are. You have your conservative and your non-conservative, but of course those aren't parties, but those are usually the issues. I guess, I really don't know what makes a person a Rep. or Dem. Sorry.
Submitted by AprilsDarkRose on Tue, 04/08/2008 - 6:47am.
Well I must say that I a an Independent, but sometimes I lean over to the Democratic side. I feel that (especially here in NYC) there is no longer a right and wrong political party. understand that the issues that we fae today have nothing to do with morals. Gay marriage is a question of cons
I would vote for John McCain and against Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, because I am 'republican' and I don't believe that we should have abortion, or gay marriage.
-Amanda-
please vote for me on brickfish
I would really appreciate it!
There is nothing wrong with gay marriage. You should love somebody for who they are not what they are. Massachussetts already has it and nothing seems to be wrong there. As far as abortion goes, it's a lot better than the alternative which would be back alley abortions.
I'm voting democrat and most likely for Obama. I voted for him in our primaries and I'm sticking to him in the end.
There had been gay marriage in MA for a couple years now, and people there realize that it had no effect whatsoever on straight marriage and everyone else got over it.
I don't think that two gay people getting married in Boston, MA would caused a straight couple in the rural county of Texas or more neoconservative states to get a divorce.
Amen to that!! Except, I wouldn't vote for John McCain either. Ron Paul for '09. What is this bull crap calling people who are against homosexuality homophobes? Im not scared of homosexuals. I do not agree with thier lifestyle. Hate the sin, not the sinner. Who says that homosexuality is right?
So since you disagree with homosexual, you are going to elect someone who would denied them civil liberties?
Gay and lesbian lives are made miserable by the laws that people like you elect.
I just don't understand how you can said that you don't hate the sinner but sin and that you’re not a homophobe and then turn around would denied them their right to married, promote intolerance of homosexuality by saying that is a moral sin thus resulting in
the misery of teenage homosexuals who gets pick on by their peers because of their parents attitudes like yours, boycotting corporation (i.e. ford motor, McDonald's, target, Wal-Mart) that support homosexuality, denied them properties that their gay
Spouse gave to them though their will, take away their children to foster cares or to relatives just because you disagree with their lifestyle although you had nothing personally against them.
Make their life a felony by sending them into prison by passing laws like the Sodomy laws, where two homosexuals engaging in gay sex in the privacy of their own home.
Did you know that it was a felony for homosexuals to engage in gay’s sex in the privacy of their own bedroom in the state of Texas? Yeah, if someone caught you in the act while in your own bedroom in your own house, you can literally go to prison for it. It was overturn in Lawrence vs. Texas.
It like white southern saying I am not a racist and I had lots of black friends but I just don't want blacks integrating with my children or that I just don't think black should be voting because their place is in my cotton flied and my kitchen working as slaves.
I am not trying to be offensive, I just want an intellectual discussion and reason about why people like you would support legislation that would made homosexuals lives miserable while saying that you are not a homophobe?
It is like Senator Strom Thurmond (R-SC) blocking civil rights laws in congress while fathering a daughter out of wedlock with his black maid.
lgrf4evr, I do not think that disliking homosexuals makes someone afraid of them. Are you telling me that because I do not like ignorant people that I fear them? I am not scared of an ignorant person even though I think that they should become more learned if they can. I don't understand the logic that disliking someone or something means fearing it.
And mobydick1036 never said that he would be denying homosexuals rights. He just does not agree with the way they live. Unless I missed something in mobydick's post, I do not think that he mentioned anything about slavery or denying homosexual's their rights.
Denying homosexuals the right to marry is not the same as physical slavery. They are not allowed to marry, but they do not face the daily prospect of back breaking physical labor and possibly being sold away from their loved ones. Emotionally it can be taxing, I'm sure, but there is no law against living together. And some states, Massachusetts, allow for marriage between homosexuals to be married. So obviously the president does not have control over the situation if some states allow gay marriage and some do not.
As for some stupid laws, according to dumblaws.com, it is illegal for a man to knit during fishing season. There are so many stupid laws that need to be changed. In the privacy of his own home, a man cannot knit because other people are out fishing. Good thing my dad does not knit, I'd have to turn him in to the law.
Are there not more important political issues to be worked up over? Homosexuality is not a political right. The government only has say in marriage, while it should legally be allowed for all (we are supposed to be secular, right?), churches should be the ones making the decision. Not the next president. Besides the President cannot wave his/her hand and make gay marriage legal or illegal.
If America is deciding their political parties over such un-immediate issues, then I fear the path our country is taking.
Well...I am pretty much sayin that homosexuals do not have the right to get married...but i believe it should be decided by individual states (if you have read my states rights vs federal power youll see what im talking about). your apsolutely right. What ticks me off is people go tot he courts to get rulings changed and all that b.s. They bypass the very fabric of democracy. If you want to change it, vote on it and elect people who like it. That doesnt mean ill change my views of homosexuality but use our democratic republic system.
"GIve me liberty or give me death."
If you want an intelecutal discussion we can have one, I dont mind. Here is the first question I have for you. I have already stated or implied why I think it is wrong (
biblical principles) so why do you think that homosexuality is right and that people are entitled to it? What is your authoritative doctrine or person or idea that says that homosexuality is ok. Secondly, I do not truly hate homosexual people. I really dont. I may think there lifestyle is, to be frank, apalling, but I do not hate them. If i hated them then that would go against the very thing that i believe. Thirdly, what is up with calling everyone who is against homosexuality a homophobe. Do you kow what homophobe means? The last part of homophobe means fear. So it is the fear of homosexuals. I ofr one am not afraid of homosexuals. So if im against the idea of killing someone im a murderphobe? Or if im agains the idea of abortion im an abortionphobe? Your second to the last paragraph is why we have the problem with child molestors and rapists today. People take pity on them and dont wnat to ruin there lives, letting them out of prison. Once out, many comit the same heinous crimes again.
Here is another reason why I do not think homosexuality is right. Since you probably dont believe in the Bible and God I will use natural selection to demonstrate. If one believed in natural selection to the degree that all the earth's animals were created through it, one might believe what im saying. I forgot the source, but it was said that homosexuals contract more aids and STD's then heterosexuals do. Once they catch them, they could spread them to other people and so on. If one believe in natural selection, since homosexuals are contracting much of the deadly STD's, doesnt that mean that they are not fit to survive and if they die thats natures way of getting rid of them? If it was, then that would mean that homosexuality isnt supposed to be.. Straight from the get go i wil tell you that i do not believe this, but i know that you would not understand my reasons on a biblical level so i must use somthing else that you might understand. another question, why arent animals homosexual to?
Because I don't think that the Bible should be the basis for the laws in this country, primarily.
And I forgot the source (but I'm pretty sure it was reliable, like... I dunno... the CDC), but lesbians hardly contract any STDs, and have the lowest incidence of AIDS. That would mean that lesbians are more 'fit', wouldn't it? Oh wait... they're homosexuals too....
Also, I'm pretty sure the highest rate of AIDS is among the heterosexual male population in Africa (prostitutes are protected against it as long as they continue to be prostitutes).
They are; do your research.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
If the Bible should not be the basis of the laws of this country, then why should have laws against rape, stealing, lying, etc. Here is a source of my claim for a prevelance of EBV type 2 among homosexuals http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/315521. and its not wikipedia either :D. So i did my research. Why do you think that gay people have a right to practice homosexuality? you still havent stated a logical answer. and, "becuae i believe they do" does not count. i can believe that the earth is flat or that a rock is a living, breathing thing but that does not mean im right.
Why should we create laws if we're not following a biased piece of literature? Because all religions and philosophies follow the same system of thought. Even the 10 Commandments can be broken into two laws which are 1)Do all you have agreed to do, 2) Do not encroach on other people or their property. Pretty black and white, or God thinks that his creation is too stupid to understand that and I believe with the latter.
If gays don't have the right to practice homosexuality, then why should you have the right to practice your religion? Religion isn't natural, it's manmade. Homosexuality on the other hand is prevalent in the animal kingdom and since humans are infact animals, then we are no different.
how is religion man made? maybe quanza is man-made but how is christianity man made? all the historical events that happend in the old testament are backed up by other documents. even non-christian scholars agree that those things happend. I have a right to practice my religion becuase it is not morrally wrong and is stated in the constitution. Is that the best you can do? I have been waiting for an answer as to why homosexuality is morally upright and should be allowed. So since my cat has kittens with her son, then i should be allowed to have sex with my mother? Why cant i do that? i mean we are, infact, animals right?
Keep it coming...No one has come up with a legit answer yet... If you can convince me that homesexuality is morally upright than we can have something to talk about.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
J for the juicy truth
exactly. ive stated my reasons over and over again..and no one has given me a logical reasonable answer. i like your quote btw
This is some funny shit; you are either a master flame baiter or a raging simpleton, either way, kudos for providing me with some amount of amusement.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/tuffgong
TUFFGONG
Senior Executive Administrator™
There is no archaeological evidence of the 40 years the Israelites roamed the desert. There is no valid archaeological evidence of a world-wide flood. Those are two pretty big events in only the first two books of the Bible. So no, not all the historical events in the old testament are backed up by other documents.
And it's kind of a 'duh' moment for religions being man-made. If they weren't man-made, why would there be so many of them? Divinely inspired or not, you still have tenets and interpretations that ARE man-made, and if you try to argue that........ I won't continue that thought.
You only think homosexuality is morally wrong because the Bible condemns male homosexuality (nothing, at least in the OT, condemns lesbianism, and I've yet to see you say anything against that, which again, is a type of homosexuality). Additionally, homosexuality doesn't infringe upon anyone's rights. If I wanted to go and marry one of my roommates, that wouldn't affect YOU in the least. Murder, rape, and all those other horrible things infringe upon the rights of an individual, and so there are laws against them. Did you never study Locke?
Also, did you read about Lot and his daughters in that Bible of yours? Just curious.
So, while you claim that no one has given you a logical argument of why homosexuality should be allowed, I have yet to see a logical argument of why homosexuality should be banned from people like you.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
dude...the bible condemns all types of homosexual before...read the new testament about the great apostle paul writing to the chuches to abstain from homosexuality and other immoral sins. yeah and i know about lot...that has nothing to do with this argument. ...were talkin about homosexuality here. it doenst matter if what i believe about homoexuaity is based on the bible...i have still to hear why homosexuaity is morally ok. you peple keep attacking my religious beliefs when you never even answer my single simple question on why you think its ok. will you just hurry up and answer it? ive been asking that question for about what...6 posts so far? all i get back are comments on how christianity is false and man made. answer my flippen question, is it that hard for you to do!!
There is absolutely nothing in old testament about lesbianism. Prove me wrong.
And I have told you time and time again why homosexuality is ok... it doesn't affect anyone else. It doesn't hurt anyone, and it is an expression of love. Why should I condemn people for expressing love? Exactly.
Again, you have no logical reason for saying homosexuality is wrong except for the Bible. Since the laws in this country are not based on the bible, it's not a valid argument. I'm not attacking your religion, merely saying it isn't valid in discussing the legality of gay marriage. End of discussion.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
I don't like to get into arguments that are none of my business, but to put it bluntly, Someone (meaning you) on the internet is wrong. So here you go.
Why is homosexuality morally ok? First, let's discuss what makes something moral. You say it doesn't matter if the Bible mentions it, so we'll leave religion out for now. Besides, stoning kids who talk back to their parents doesn't count as moral in my book.
I can only give you my own definition of morality, which is "do no harm." What that means is that anything is permitted so long as it does not detract from another person's quality of life. Little things, like buying the last copy of a video game and therefore witholding it from another, are irrelevant. We're talking big things, like murder. In killing someone you destroy something very valuable of theirs - their very existance. Exceptions to this include voluntary, doctor-assisted suicide, which the patient has requested in order to better their own life.
Now, does homosexuality jibe with my definition of morality? Yes, because it harms no one. No one - if we discount the possible emotional trauma of learning someone close to you is gay - who is not participating in a homosexual relationship is directly affected by one. Furthermore, nothing happens to the people involved that is not caused by some outside source that they have no control over. Incomplete legal rights? Not a result of homosexuality, but homophobia. Assaulted? Same. STDs are often assumed to be caused by/higher in the gay community. This is mostly rubbish. Yes, anal sex carries a higher risk of disease contraction, but straights do it too, and you never hear anyone whining about them. Besides, lesbians are gay, too, and they have the lowest rate of contraction. Shouldn't we be honoring them?
Perhaps you have a different definition of morality. That's fine, so long as you keep it consistent. Think about how issues relate to it before giving a knee-jerk reaction and getting your debating ass kicked.
T.k.
All religion is man-made dude. It's based off the belief in a Supreme Being, the Supreme Being didn't create it, it created the people who created the system. I find it amusing that only Christians and Muslims fail to grasp this concept. Yes, they agree that most of those things happened, but your point is missing one thing....that God told these people to kill others for their "promised land". There is no evidence. If I were to say that today, you'd throw me in a mental institution, so what makes that different from now?
I never said you didn't have the right. Does the Constitution say it is morally wrong to be gay? No, so your logic in this argument is a tad flawed. I still have yet to hear a decent argument from anyone saying why homosexuality is wrong...except using a biblical text with opinion pieces in it. I would suggest Percivale's blogs on homosexuality, they give a nice background onto why it is now believed that homosexuality is actually a genetic thing, not a choice like Christians so proudly proclaim like a school girl who recently lost her virginity to the star quaterback.
Yes, we're animals. And you also have a strong likely-hood of fucking a distant relative when you get married. You do remember that Adam and Eve's children had to only themselves to make more little children. Now I thought the Bible said that incest was wrong...obviously not when you're populating the Earth. Everyone is biologically connected to eachother, if we weren't then Autism and the likes wouldn't exist. Am I suggesting that you do that? Not necessarily, if the world was going to die out, I'd fuck the nearest person to keep humanity alive, even if it was my mother...well I wouldn't because personally I dislike humanity, but most people would. You ability to grip morality and more complex thoughts and abilities is primarily what seperates you from other animals, but that's about it.
BTW, do you happen to have some footprints so I can see where the Jews walked for 40 years...since it is proveable?
dude you dont have to lecture me about the Bible. of course adam and eve screwed there kids...thats the only way that it was possible. it was morraly right to at the time...then later God said it was wrong. Dude, how it is provable that there is no divine being? do you have proof of that? Where do we get our consciences from that lets us knwo whats good and bad? its not a physical organ, so what it is? if its not physical it has to be spiritual. and evolution cant create things that arent spiritual...hm....you can say whatever you like to say, but im entitled to my opinion just like your entitled to yours. well just have to see whose right in the end.
btw...science can only prove physical things. if you dont know what physical things are, its things that we can see, touch, hear, etc. the 5 senses. it cant prove anything outside of that, including religion and spiritual things. ask any secular science teacher and thats what they will tell you. i should know, im a science major. just beucae there is no physical evidence found about a crime doenst mean it wasnt committed. thats what Christianity's all about, faith. take it or leave it, thats all i gotta say.
So basically you're saying that God is falliable. If God is really perfect, then God would have found a loophole for the whole incest thing. Consciences are created by environmental experiences. Equating that to God is proving God falliable once again. Because since none of our consciences are created equal. It depends on the environment and the child, not a mythical being. The conscience is a process in our brains it is physicological.
There is always a miniscule amount of evidence for the crime or unsolved cases wouldn't be solved with a small break. You've proven nothing really. Faith will only get you so far in life.
what bible are you reading? The ten commandments are not broken down into two groups...The ten commanments are actual commands. Do all that you agreed to do? Is that the 13th commandment? yes do not steal is encroaching on other peoples property and goods.but else where in Scripture God says that being homosexual is wrong. Besides...your missing the whole point of the ten commandments....they were to show the Jews that they were sinful and needed a savior, not to stop there partying.
You're such a funny little Christian....
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
I said they could be broken down. The key word here is could...context clues are wonderful things, my enlightened friend.
You're missing the point of fundamental laws that Christians respect. They are just to makes sure you don't do something stupid. It is simpler commands and can be made into laws easily. You can still party with them.
It is just funny that God believed that his creation was unable to comprehend two laws...it's just fascinating, but of course God works in mysteriously spooky ways.
Ron Paul write in 08!
Lol, I don't agree with your views on homosexuality, but I like how you think for the presidential election.
Technically who you vote for does not impact gay marriage and/or abortion, abortion has been declared by Roe vs. Wade, and their party does not individually impact abortion, they would need more than just the president to be against it. in terms of the way the government works: with checks and balances, it takes more than a president to reverse a supreme court case.
For example, Mitt Romney (republican) governor of Massachusetts has made legal gay marriage and with the state agrees with abortion... but yet he's republican isn't he?
Im also republican, and i am strongly agreeing to the fact that abortion and gay marriage is wrong, but don't base your opinion for who you are going to vote for because of that.
I'm sorry, but I thought this was a "progressive" blog? I'm all about defining myself outside of labels like "republican" or "democrat" but what is your deal with the legality of abortion or gay marriage? just because you don't want to work for the post office doesn't mean you should ban the rest of us from receiving mail...
And I don't mean to offend your sensibilities, I just don't understand how you were attracted to this website. I am sincerely confused because the substance of Hillary Clinton's policies are much more progressive than either John McCain (absolutely, rigidly conservative policies) or Barack Obama (great progressive rhetoric, but yet to rise to really progressive policy!). Can you elaborate on why you reached these views?
whats wrong with gay marriage? I can understand abortion, but why no gay marriage?
It's not natural. It is a perversion of the institution of marriage, which should be between a man and a woman.
-Amanda-
please vote for me on brickfish
I would really appreciate it!
Than are you against divorce? It make marriage less scared by ending it?
That really doesn't have to do with gay marriage...but generally, yes, I am against divorce. In some cases though, such as abusive situations, I see it as plausible.
-Amanda-
please vote for me on brickfish
I would really appreciate it!
Why does it have to be between a man and a woman?
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
welcome to 2008, amanda. plus is that you're only reason for voting against the democratic nominees? because if that's what you're baising it off of then you're voting for all the wrong reasons. do your research.
*edited by _Meke, 5 April 2008*
No need for in-depth research, I know where I stand on certain issues, which will the be the deciding factor for me.
-Amanda-
please vote for me on brickfish
I would really appreciate it!
"No need for in-depth research"
That speaks volumes about the value of your opinion.....
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/tuffgong
TUFFGONG
Senior Executive Administrator™
If I don't agree with a candidate because of thier views on certain issues, than I will vote for the other party. (most often republican)
-Amanda-
thats rediculous. Let me guess... your a WASP?
A what?
-Amanda-
please vote for me on brickfish
I would really appreciate it!
White Anglo-Saxon Protestant
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
Thanks, I honestly had no clue what that was....
-Amanda-
please vote for me on brickfish
I would really appreciate it!
Nope. Just a Non-Denominational Christian.
-Amanda-
please vote for me on brickfish
I would really appreciate it!
Same thing. Let me break this down for you.
W-white. if that picture is you, then that much is clear.
A-S--Anglo-Saxon. Anyone who can trace their ancestry to Western Europe, primarily the British Isles. Most Caucasians fall into this category in America.
P-Protestant. If you are Christian and you aren't Catholic, then yes, this is you.
Do you mind if I ask how old you are? You seem really naive about certain things, and I don't want to give you the label 'ignorant' if you are just too inexperienced to know better.
Hug a musician, they never get to dance.
If you are Christian and you aren't Catholic, then yes, this is you.
Not necessarily. You could be orthodox (Greek and Russian are the most popular, I think) or Anglican, both of which were different schisms than the Protestant Reformation.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
Perhaps I should have worded that better. She says she is a non-denominational Christian, and Catholicism and Orthodoxy are denominations. The rest is Protestantism, as far as I am aware.
Hug a musician, they never get to dance.
I'm 17, Um, what about all of the different people at my church... they're not all white.
So they would not fit into that group...
Honestly, I don't consider my self as a WASP, non-denominational is good for me.
- I agree that I lack experience in some areas, but I do know what is right and wrong.
-Amanda-
It may be different than YOUR definition of marriage. So don't marry a woman, and you'll be fine for yourself. But don't shove your relgious or whatever beliefs on the rest of the country. This shouldn't even be a discussion. If you don't agree with something, then don't do it. But don't think that your beliefs should be the law of the land. Who are you??
As far as abortion goes, you might want to do some research before you go making blanket statements. Until our society changes, abortions are going to happen whether they are legal (and safe) or not, and frankly, I'd rather them be safe.
In the end, you cannot base your decisions about a political party on two issues. TWO issues out of a million - look at what else the Republicans and Democrats stand for? And try not to listen to the bias in their voices... For example, McCain has just recently added Education to his campaign in the last couple of months. Education!!! Holy cow!! He doesn't know jack about education, clearly, and we want him in charge of our country? We expect him to make good decisions about our future when he doesn't even understand the biggest influence on our future?? MM, no. So uh, let's broaden our horizons here.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/kariskoett
"All things appear and disappear because of the concurrence of causes and conditions. Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to everything else."
-Buddha
It's not my definition of marriage:
marriage >noun 1 the formal union of a man and a woman, by which they become husband and wife.- that'd be from the dictionary
On abortion, I don't think it should happen because it is a means by which another life is ended.
Those two issues, either way you go- for or against, will still have an impact on our society after it is all said and done.
-Amanda-
please vote for me on brickfish
I would really appreciate it!
"It's not natural."
Neither is surgery.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/tuffgong
TUFFGONG
Senior Executive Administrator™
I think that she is a very dishonest person. She chose to stay in the primary even though she knows that she will lose to Senator Obama. She is hurting our party. Also, I went to CSPAN to check who voted for the invasion of iraq, and she voted for it. She also voted against dick durbin bill which didn't allow using military force against.
She said that if she knew what she know then what she knows now she would had voted against it but that is not true. Senator Clinton had bill on her side, he could had sucessfully convince her to vote against he resolution.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm...
She then voted to allow using military force in invading iraq
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm...
There was major evidence that Bush/Cheney were determined to invaded Iraq no matter what the consequence and that they didn't really had a plan to deal with the aftermath just as they did with afghanistan (which i support).
She also tends to do a lot of 'pork-barreling' apparently. Or so one of my professor's said, and I haven't had the time to verify.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
If Clinton wins, our nation is going to be even more of a mess than it is right now. If she allowed her husband to get away with what he did then what else will she let slide? I think she'll end up letting her emotions run the country rather than thinking about what is in the best interest of the people.
_______________________
Help stop the traffick!
www.love146.org
www.stopthetraffik.org
I would vote against Barack Obama. I like Hillary Clinton for that fact that she is fact, and Barack Obama is more like political poetry. Although I am a strong-running Democrat, I very, very much like McCain.
~::_:! Sauvons notre monde !:_::~
If I had to choose between Obama and Clinton, I definitely would be voting against Hillary Clinton. However, that's just because Clinton is more annoying than Obama. Their policies are equally dangerous, because they are willing to be weak on every area America needs strength right now.
America needs someone to have a strong plan against illegal immigration.
America needs someone that will say abortion, especially partial-birth abortion, is murder and is wrong.
America needs someone who does not bow in the face of the mainstream media.
America needs someone who will support the individuals choice, but not promote and legalize the unnatural state of gay marriages. (Where does the perversion stop, huh?)
America needs someone who will not waste the precious lives of our men and women who have died for a just cause and will win the war in Iraq - not just finish it.
America needs someone who has strong core values that scream of non-racism, non-sexism, non-liberalism, and non-fascism.
America will undoubtedly be divided over these candidates, but I think McCain is the moderate most democrats and independants will be united over. I don't agree with all of Senator McCains policies, but out of the 3 evils, I would definitely choose the lesser of them. My vote's in for McCain.
I'm against all of your reasons. I'm voting Democt because I support women's right for an abortion and it doesn't matter if it's murder because it's a right to privacy. The nineth amendment protects it. Besides, staying in Iraq kills just as much. Nice contradictions there, silly Republicans.
We're all immigrants of some sort. We've all migrated into this country. All we have to do is make it easier to get in the country. Like having an easier test. That way, they don't have to come in illegally. As far as the jobs they get goes, blame the big white company owner that hires them.
Gay marriage is not unatural. Love is natural to everybody. When a mother loves her daughter, is that unatural because they are of the same gender?
I feel that we've been in Iraq for way to long. I've known people who have died in there and I don't want anybody else to die.
Non-liberalism? So you hate me because I'm a liberal? That's dirty. It's just a party. I'm still a person. Besides, Democrats aren't sexist or racist. Just because they happen to be the most diverse people in the race doesn't mean they prefer black people or women to any other voter.
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
I really don't want to sound rude, but you make the Democratic party look like a big box of snobs, and I don't appreciate that. I am proud to be a Democrat, but take pride in and respect the opinions of those who declare a Republican standing. If you have to disagree, do so politely.
♥- Voyons ce qui ne va pas. Voyons comment le monde meurt. Voyons comment nos rêves et nos idées sont cachés en ayant peur de la réalité d'eux autour de nous. Faisons un monde où nos rêves peuvent survivre. Ce sont nos rêves -- Gardons-les.
I suppose your right. I guess I got a bit carried away with my beliefs.
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
Nice. Nicely said.
Ok WOW, ANIME, It doesn't matter if its murder? it's about privacy? So should I kill a man in my basement and it be ok because I wanted to do it to help myself out and it was done in privacy? Are you serious? So it doesn't matter that you are actually killing another human being to benefit yourself. I believe abortion is a selfish act. Women who do it can't face the consequences or just don't care for what GOD has given them. I also agree with the war, but I don't agree with gay marriages. God never intended a man to marry a man or a woman to marry a woman. Our fourfathers were God fearing men, they had the strength of the nation in mind.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
J for the juicy truth
that our FOREFATHERS (unless, of course, god wanted you to have four fathers) were "god-fearing men" is because most countries were theocracies at the time. Also, women who get abortions may find it moral because unborn children cannot live on their own and are not yet fully formed humans.
~Violinstef
It wouldn't be a privacy act in your basement, another person is there. One that knows what's going on. If anything you're violating someone elses privacy by murdering them and before you tell me it would be the same for a baby because that baby doesn't know anything at the time. It hasn't developed enough to even be considered a baby.
And who cares if God says being gay is wrong. If God said being black was wrong, would you be against black people?
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
OK really I am tired of people saying that they are not considered human beings. If you grow to be a human fetus than you are considered a human being. If the main development of its growth is to be a human baby then dammit it's a human being. You were just a speck in you moms womb, so if you're mom killed you it's ok, cuz your form was not human-like yet. Imagine the world without your brother or your sister or your wife or your husband. Imagine it. Someone you loved so much not being there because their parent decided to get an abortion. So many gifted children, future presidents, future writers, future leaders of this world, all dead because of the person who stopped its life dead in its tracks.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
J for the juicy truth
Then it is a human being but not a wanted human being. The mother will probably neglect it. I suppose that's better than dying? You know feeling like you have no loved ones and being hated and yelled at or possibly hit every day of your life.
Besides that fetus may not live but it could still support life. It could help with research with stem cells. Stem cell research could save millions. So, as a fetus (if it could think, which it can't) given the choice between saving millions by dying or being abused as I grow up, I'd rather save the millions.
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
This is why there is one more option if you don't want your child.... Adoption. There are loving parents out there that cannot have babies, that are willing to take in an "unwanted" child. It just strikes me as amazing when people throw this gift away and other people can't even have it,or are not physically able to. I'm not too familiar with how stem cell research works but I'm sure the babies or fetus's (which can't think, youre right) don't know what they are being destroyed for.
Another thing that bothers me is that I have known women who have had at least 3 abortions. She goes to the clinic like she's in for her monthly waxing or something. These women are unbelievable. You know eventually abortions can harm your body.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
J for the juicy truth
That example isn't really a good one, being gay is not as simple as your skin color.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
J for the juicy truth
``...being gay is not as simple as your skin color.``
It`s not as ``simple?`` My husband is of a different race than I am and the same sex as I am. I love him and he loves me, and we have a happy life together. It seems simple to me.
Back in 1967, Mr. Loving was told by a judge in Virginia that he would have to leave Virginia or go to jail because God didn`t want him to be married to someone of another race. Sexist and racist marriage laws have followed similar patterns within states, with states like Alabama lagging the longest on one side of both issues while more progressive states like Massachusetts moved forward.
Likewise, it has been almost uniformly the same church groups who have historically fought in favor of racist laws and for sexist laws, for reasons that are almost word for word the same.
Sexist and racist discrimination is just the same crap in a different pile.
I was replying to someone who gave an example, they said that if God said that black people were bad would i dislike black people", ( or something to that extent). People are born black, white, brown whatever. They are born that way. But from birth, you definitely don't know that you are gay. God does not specifically create gay people. I don't know if you understand, what I am trying to say. But that's what I meant by simple. It's in plain sight. The doctors, the nurses, and the parents see the color of baby skin from the moment it leaves the mothers womb.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
J for the juicy truth
Alright but it's the same concept. We can marry another race because we love them. They are people just like us and share love just like us. So why can't we love someone of the same sex? They share the same love. God created love and He certainly didn't make love biased. It's 'Oh, I can't love you because your the same gender as me.' God made love natural so that we could feel it for everybody. If you say that God made people the way they are then you must agree that God put love in us. And just like He loves everbody, I'm sure he expects us to do the same.
And suppose God didn't make skin color but it was something that grew on you as you grew older and in the bible it said that certain skin tone was wrong. Would you be against it because God is?
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
You bring up a good point, but even now there are things that I don't agree with that's in the bible. Not that I am right or wrong. Just some things that don't fit right that I occasionally have to question. So if my heart is telling me that it doesn't feel right to hate people of a certain skin tone, than I won't hate them. However, God is the example I live by, it would take great convincing but I try my best to follow him. But I am thankful that God does not think that way. He loves all people, straight, gay, black, white, evil and good. And I try my best to be the same way.
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
J for the juicy truth
if God said he was against black people...then he would be a hypocritical God ha ha. He did tell the Israelites to kill everyone who wasnt Jewish back in the time of the Hitites and Amalekites. If God said that homosexuality was ok, id have no problem with it. but he says it is wrong, so i have a right and freedom to also believe it is wrong and no one can take that away. I mean look at Sodom and Gomora. Scientists all agree that those two tons were whiped off the face of the earth. The Bible proclaims that it was becuase of rampant homosexuality becuase the townsmen tried to rape some angels....
"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry
I think he meant it hypothetically.... Like if God were to tell you to jump off a roof, would you do it... that kind of thing. But you do bring up a good point.
You sure know your bible though....
"In a world where we all can't make up our minds, we are definitely too sure of ourselves."
J for the juicy truth
I'm a she. And his point is weak as the lady below me points out.
"It takes an uncommon mind to think of these things." -Calvin and Hobbes.
Go back and re-read Sodom and Gomorrah. No where does it actually say "This action against Sodom and Gomorrah was taking because of rampant homosexuality." Rather, this conclusion is come to by people manipulating the bible into saying what they want it to say. The bible is full of contradictions of itself, and it is very easy to mold the text into whatever you need it to say at any given time.
Hug a musician, they never get to dance.
McCain has some interesting stances. They'll make you study up real hard-like and he's a survivor. That being said, I would vote for Obama or Hillary before I marked an 'X' for McCain, because I feel he represents a continuation of conservative policies that have this country in an energy crisis, a foreign policy tangle, and absolute stagnancy on the issue of climate change and green infrastructure revitalization.
Every organism's heartbeat holds a universe of beauty at http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/green-underbelly
I am a conservative Republican.
Clearly Hillary and Obama are unacceptable to me and I have hated John McCain for years mainly because of his amnesties.
So all three!
go Hilary!
I'd vote against Obama-hama-hama.
Obama has got this election down!
Hilary changes personalities
McCain thinks he should win souly off of his past experiences
-I don't understand why people say they are a Rep. or Dem. I think you have to let all of the opinions of the candidates and what they stand for swirl in your head before you choose.
Most of the time, for me at least, it's the issues you stand for, sometimes you stand for issues on both sides of the track and the side where you agree more with is possibly what you are, then now that I put that, maybe not. I don't know either. What makes the party you are. You have your conservative and your non-conservative, but of course those aren't parties, but those are usually the issues. I guess, I really don't know what makes a person a Rep. or Dem. Sorry.
Well I must say that I a an Independent, but sometimes I lean over to the Democratic side. I feel that (especially here in NYC) there is no longer a right and wrong political party. understand that the issues that we fae today have nothing to do with morals. Gay marriage is a question of cons