Subject:
|
Re: codifying marriage on biblical principles
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:32:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
383 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Terry Prosper wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
I honestly don’t see how
choosing the former makes me a bigot or narrow-minded.
|
That’s precisely the problem. You are a bigot and narrow-minded, only, you
can’t understand that fact and therefore, you think you are not and that
everyone else is wrong.
|
Merely because I think I’m right doesn’t make me narrow-minded or a bigot. You
think that you’re right and I’m wrong.... As far as accusing me of thinking
that everybody else is wrong, well I think that you have me confused with
Dave! :-)
| |
You compare Gay marriages to brother-sister marriages and group marriages. I
don’t see the connection.
|
I didn’t compare them. I said that if the definition of marriage is expanded
beyond the current one of 1 man and 1 woman, I don’t see how one could
logically argue to ban brother-brother, or sister-sister, or
brother-sister-sister marriages, etc (something which I believe the overwhelming
majority of people-- even those who are in favor of gay couple marriages-- would
find intolerable).
| |
I personnally don’t give a damn about marriage.
|
Hmm, you cared enough to respond...
| |
This is a religious tradition that has little impact in our modern-days life.
|
Only that our entire society in based upon it, but other than that, yeah.
| |
But gays and heteros should have the same privileges, including marriage. As
for bros-sis, well, I couldn’t care less either. Most people accept the fact
that it’s disgusting. I say that between consenting ADULTS (note the
emphasis on adults here), I don’t care if it’s 2 guys, 2 girls, 2 sibblings,
2 different religions or skin colors, etc. If those people love each other
in a romantic way, then let them be happy and shut up with your moral
contestations.
|
I say the same thing. This is an issue of the government recognizing such
“unions”
| |
But knowing what kind of individual some people are, I know i’ll get flamed
to death for saying that, so here, let me give you the match, I’m already
standing on the bonfire and ready.
|
Nobody is going to light you up for stating your opinion-- you are entitled to
it.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: codifying marriage on biblical principles
|
| (...) Oh, give me a frelling break! The world is not coming to an end because 50% of marriages fail, and the world won't come to an end if gays are allowed to *marry*. The society is {not} based on marriage. The Nuclear Family is a farce and a (...) (21 years ago, 11-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: codifying marriage on biblical principles
|
| (...) That's precisely the problem. You are a bigot and narrow-minded, only, you can't understand that fact and therefore, you think you are not and that everyone else is wrong. You compare Gay marriages to brother-sister marriages and group (...) (21 years ago, 11-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
93 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
