Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 370 of total 370 in this topic |
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Jun 19, 2008 - 04:24pm PT
|
Much to the chagrin of some Idahoans.
People gay and straight can now get married, life goes on, ho-hum.
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2008 - 04:30pm PT
|
I'm not so sure about that dirtbag.
I was out at Mickey's on Sunday and I got smited by a rogue wave. Totally doused with seawater.
I repented my ways with a beer at the 2 am Club in mill valley.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 19, 2008 - 04:36pm PT
|
The next Cali-quake will be on your shoulders, my friend.
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2008 - 04:36pm PT
|
Forgive me lawd!
I know not what I did?
I sure didn't send though. Damn. Pumped off the last move.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2008 - 05:02pm PT
|
God sees the truth and waits....
hold on to something. (dirt, these trolls are really tired, couldn't you just re-awaken a fag thread or something?)
Mocking God isn't smart either CI and dirtbag...what if?
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2008 - 05:04pm PT
|
forgive me lawd!
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2008 - 05:05pm PT
|
Now they can become as miserable as the rest of us.
Hooray.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 19, 2008 - 05:11pm PT
|
"Mocking God isn't smart either CI and dirtbag...what if? "
I'm mocking all the haters. The ones who are so obsessed with how other tax paying, law abiding citizens lead their lives that they will scream, threaten, and pass laws to make sure others can't enjoy the same rights and privileges they do.
|
|
crusher
climber
Santa Monica, CA
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2008 - 05:15pm PT
|
No,
For some reason those uptight midwesterners are getting it...
|
|
stnmn
climber
intransit
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2008 - 05:15pm PT
|
all i have to say to those gays getting married: "careful what you wish for, you might get it . . ."
|
|
james Colborn
Trad climber
Truckee, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2008 - 06:15pm PT
|
Bluering, "What if" your kid comes to you in sixteen years and says dad I'm gay. Really, I don't just like snowboarding I like boys/girls.
Would you reject your son/daughter. Would you want your god to smite them down and all that fire and brimstone stuff?
I see you christians as phony, shallow and as far from Christs image and action as can be. You and your "god Bless...." What a bunch of crap. I want no blessing from your god of hate. Jesus Christ was no hater. He accepted.
"What if?"
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 01:28am PT
|
"Gays got married, and God didn't smite California. Much to the chagrin of some Idahoans."
Where do you live, Dirtbag? You used to work in the Centennial Mountain range. Was it on the Idaho or Montana side?
If you're living in Idaho, now, you'll know residents are more mindful of the price of gasoline and local weather than the social politics in the Golden state. California may be the major trend setting state in the west, but most Idahoans don't pay attention unless the effects hit home.
We have homosexuals in Idaho, too, and they seem to get along fine without parades, gay festivals and special holidays. Marriage is essentially a covenant between two people. Couples, married or unmarried, tend to have their own discrete understandings and covenants. Does state recognition, in effect, solidify such unions? Or are gays just rejoicing in the attention and illusion of credibility, the changes in gay marriage laws bring?
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 05:06am PT
|
Jennie wrote: “We have homosexuals in Idaho, too, ”
You want a ribbon or a cookie?
Jennie wrote “and they seem to get along fine without parades, gay festivals and special holidays. ”
There are no holidays that I know of, and if it were not for the parades, for example, then awareness about the current inequality and denial of rights to people simply because of their sexual orientation would not be as high.
Once all states recognize the principal of equal rights with regard to marriage, those parades the so bother you will probably disappear.
Jennie wrote:” Marriage is essentially a covenant between two people.
Glad we agree. So why all the hub bub by GWB, for example, about pushing through and amendment of the US Constitution – a supposed beacon of equality and Democracy – to ban marriage between people of the same sex?
Jennie wrote: “Does state recognition, in effect, solidify such unions?”
Probably not, but then why have state recognized heterosexual unions?
Equality under the law, it’s a simple concept to understand.
Jennie wrote: Or are gays just rejoicing in the attention and illusion of credibility, the changes in gay marriage laws bring?
This question is so f’ed up I don’t know where to begin. Credibility? For what? Seriously, what business is it of yours?
In any case, I think it’s great to rejoice in moments where we as a society move forward socially, you know, like when women finally obtained the right to vote, the civil rights laws and amendments, the fact that the democratic front runners were a woman and an African-American.
When that stuff becomes old hat, just the normal way things are, than the rejoicing that seems to so bother you subsides.
|
|
crusher
climber
Santa Monica, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 10:29am PT
|
Jennie, really, shut up. You know those are not honest, intelligent questions but simply provocations.
If you don't like the gay culture or gay people being afforded the legal protections (and honors) of being married, then don't do it yourself.
Otherwise butt out of other peoples' lives - they're not doing you any harm.
|
|
nb3000
Social climber
Oakland, CA.
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 10:58am PT
|
hey it'll be good business for divorce attny's
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 20, 2008 - 11:46am PT
|
"Where do you live, Dirtbag? You used to work in the Centennial Mountain range. Was it on the Idaho or Montana side? "
Idaho side. I lived in Island Park for 5 months several years ago and probably spent a month total working in the Centennials. The Montana side is lovely too--more of a remote feel, as I recall. I'd love to go back some day.
And my dig was not directed at you, but a certain other Idaohan who frequently bashes California on this forum.
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 12:19pm PT
|
"We have homosexuals in Idaho, too"....
That line and post....
Yep, I was raised a Christian, and still believe in God, But... the hypocrisy of religious folks -saddens me.
It's none of our business, or the governments business.
Live and let live.... probably delete this to stay out of the fray.
|
|
salad
climber
Escondido
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 12:19pm PT
|
ron i tried your statement out on my wife last night. she was not impressed.
|
|
Landgolier
climber
the flatness
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 02:13pm PT
|
"We have homosexuals in Idaho, too, and they seem to get along fine without parades, gay festivals and special holidays."
Weird, all of the pictures and web sites that come up on the first page of google results for "Boise pride parade" must be fake. Personally I think giving an often-marginalized group in society their day in the sun is a hell of a lot better reason to have a parade than most of the crap that brings out the VFW and the high school marching band in our cities and towns, but if Spud Day is more your thing then to each his own.
Bluering, these are all God's children. He doesn't make any trash, and judgment is his, not ours.
"I don't mind straight people as long as they act gay in public"
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 20, 2008 - 02:27pm PT
|
"We have homosexuals in Idaho, too"
They even have closeted US Senators in Idaho.
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 02:49pm PT
|
"We have homosexuals in Idaho, too, and they seem to get along fine without parades, gay festivals and special holidays."
If'n I were gay and lived in the inter-mountain west and thought I might be tied to fence and beaten to death, I suppose I too might keep my homo-ness on the down low.
|
|
rockermike
Mountain climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 03:06pm PT
|
Hey Crusher; "shut up" (to borrow your phrase), and lay off Jennie.
There is room here for various opinions and they are all welcome.
The question to me is does the collective society have ANY rights or responsibilities to "form" and manage social standards. For 10,000 plus years human society (which has also been religious society) has almost universally condemned homosexuality, as do almost all traditional religions. Now, in the last 20 years or so, at least in Calif, that norm has largely been reversed. Its now seen, at least amongst the young and hip, that accepting or defending the older moral standards (that is the rejection of homosexuality) IS ITSELF a sin. If I say "homosexuality is unnatural and against the laws of God" most young people consider ME the transgressor. "Equal rights" is their rhetoric". Talk about the tail wagging the dog. The PC cops tell people openly to "shut up" if they don't support the new mind set.
But if moral standards really are merely relative to contemporary trends then what is the moral standard, the base line, that we can all agree to. Child marriage, polygamy, animal sex, public sex, drug use, nudity, "man-loves-boy" clubs meeting in the public library?? Do they get "equal rights"? All these are still forbidden and few would defend them, but with an organized PR campaign perhaps they will all become legitimate and popularly accepted. Does that make it right? I actually don't know where I come down on the subject but I do believe that the social fabric holding this (once fine) nation can be torn. In that you can call me a conservative. Not as in "neo-con", but as in respecting the values of our forefathers, and not being comfortable with shaking things up too much just for the cheap thrill of change.
|
|
WoodySt
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 03:07pm PT
|
I'll repeat what I said on a previous post: the court decision jumped the gun and might well turn out to have been a very big mistake. A Gay group has also made that point. California is a liberal state when and only when the central parts of the state are apathetic about issues. When the vote quantity is high due to an issue that generates a lot of emotion, the state goes center right.
If the court had stayed out of this, I feel certain, California would have gone for Gay marriage. The court has shoved this issue forward in a way that now could take the issue down to defeat as well as significantly help McCain in November. Makes one wonder about the court doesn't it; I'm a real cynic.
|
|
rockermike
Mountain climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 03:14pm PT
|
I'm with Woody on that. Same sex marriage is the third rail of politics. Nobody wants to touch it. At least not the liberals if they want to win. Too much backlash potential and little vote gain.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 20, 2008 - 03:16pm PT
|
" If I say "homosexuality is unnatural and against the laws of God" most young people consider ME the transgressor"
Our laws are secular.
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 03:32pm PT
|
Courts are like guns, they can't stay out of things unless nobody pulls the trigger. It may be that gay rights groups moved too soon on this, but the courts simply decide the cases brought before them.
We've had a couple of cases in front of the gay marriage trial court judge, the one whose opinion was affirmed by the Cal Supe. Ct. He has a corporate/banking law background, is smart and methodical and is certainly no "activist."
|
|
JuanDeFuca
Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2008 - 03:37pm PT
|
Call it what you want but in my book a union between two men or two women is not a Marriage.
Juan
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 04:20am PT
|
Rockermike wrote: Hey Crusher; "shut up" (to borrow your phrase), and lay off Jennie.
There is room here for various opinions and they are all welcome.
What about hatred? Bigotry? Are those welcome, 'cause jennie's post was clearly filled with both.
Rockermike wrote:The question to me is does the collective society have ANY rights or responsibilities to "form" and manage social standards. For 10,000 plus years human society (which has also been religious society) has almost universally condemned homosexuality,
The ancient Greeks considered homosexuality to be perfectly normal.
Rockermike wrote:as do almost all traditional religions.
Now, I've read the Torah (Old Testament) a couple of times, many passages in the original Hebrew, and with the exception of the "spilling seed" passage, I can't remember it stating anywhere that homosexuality is wrong and to be condemned.
While a good portion of the values, laws and morals in the US certainly have judeo-christian origins, the ancient Greek and Roman philosophies, laws and governments are right up there in influence. Not that it matters, the US was founded on the separation of religion and state.
Rockermike wrote:Now, in the last 20 years or so, at least in Calif, that norm has largely been reversed.
Discrimination based on race was a norm reversed not so long ago. Women not having the right to vote was the norm for a long time.
See where I'm going with this?
Rockermike wrote:Its now seen, at least amongst the young and hip, that accepting or defending the older moral standards (that is the rejection of homosexuality) IS ITSELF a sin.
Care to site any examples?
My grandparents taught my parents to be tolerant of others, regardless of differences, my parents taught me the same. That's just about 100 years of moral standards.
Rockermike wrote:If I say "homosexuality is unnatural and against the laws of God" most young people consider ME the transgressor.
See comment about separation of religion and state.
Rockermike wrote:"Equal rights" is their rhetoric". Talk about the tail wagging the dog. The PC cops tell people openly to "shut up" if they don't support the new mind set.
First, you're exaggerating, second, that's Sunday school compared to what happens if you're gay, people know about it and you live in Wyoming:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard
Rockermike wrote:But if moral standards really are merely relative to contemporary trends then what is the moral standard, the base line, that we can all agree to. Child marriage, polygamy, animal sex, public sex, drug use, nudity, "man-loves-boy" clubs meeting in the public library??
Lovely, once again those who would discriminate against anyone homosexual slyly slip the animal sex and child molestation issues into the discussion. One has nothing to do with the other. Most child molesters are heterosexual (and many of the more recent highly publicized cases were with Catholic priests).
By the way, underage marriage (at least a man marrying a woman younger than 18) has been around a lot longer during those 10,000 years you mentioned than having to be 18 to marry. As a matter of fact :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age#Americas
Many states allow underage marriages as long as there is parental consent.
Rockermike wrote:In that you can call me a conservative. Not as in "neo-con", but as in respecting the values of our forefathers,
If you really plunged into history, I'd think you'd be quite surprised (and not in a good way) about what our forefathers valued. Those same forefathers had slaves (and no qualms about it) and the brilliant Thomas Jefferson had plenty of illegitimate children.
Rockermike wrote:and not being comfortable with shaking things up too much just for the cheap thrill of change.
Cheap thrill? Really, that's what you think equal rights under the law is all about? Tolerance of those different from you is a cheap thrill?
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 04:44am PT
|
"Cheap thrill? Really, that's what you think equal rights under the law is all about? Tolerance of those different from you is a cheap thrill?"
waah waaah waambulance? Its the internet duder. Its all a cheap thrill.
So I found out recently I can marry my first cousin in California. Score! Too bad Brian is taken : /
(and in 24 other states, to boot!)
Why is this not an issue, I ask curiously. Anyway... if my cousin were Anne Hathaway I might just take California up on that offer (or CO, NM, TX, NY, TN, FL... etc)
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 09:20am PT
|
But the restroom enthusiasts run the state don't they?
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 10:00am PT
|
Jody,
What "lifestyle" would you be referring to?
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 10:38am PT
|
There will always be those who choose not to take a wide stance on this issue.
|
|
james Colborn
Trad climber
Truckee, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 10:52am PT
|
Jody, I think Nita's point is that Christian infers that you live your life by the example of Christs life. The guy hung with societies low lifes. Hookers, thieves, deviates, hell nearly all the Apostles were a bunch of losers. Acceptance and understanding was his MO. Most right wing christians spout hatred, thats the hypocrisy.
|
|
Tahoe climber
Trad climber
a dark-green forester out west
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:52am PT
|
Agreed.
Including Jody.
Hatred is not = righteousness.
TC
|
|
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 01:24pm PT
|
Please cite bibilical passages that address homosexuality.
|
|
rockermike
Mountain climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 05:04pm PT
|
Degaine, in partial response;
I carefully said "almost" all religions. Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Chinese Toa, all condemn homosexuality. Of course we don't have to follow their examples but its interesting to note the fact.
Our laws may theoretically be "Secular", but presumably there is some "moral" grounds that they are based on, and I would argue that those moral fundamentals are the children of religion. The whole concept of marriage and fidelity to sexual partners, and lifelong commitment comes from religious tradition.
I wasn't equating homosexuality with pedophilia; by way of analogy I was trying to point out the weakness of the argument "equal rights", that's just a rhetorical device to win the argument, but no one actually supports equal rights for everyone. Hell, we have millions of people in jail for using drugs or for driving away in cars that society has deemed "private property". As with my other examples - society sets standards. The phrase "equal rights" sounds good but only blurs the issue I was trying to make, that ultimately "society" makes decisions about what goes and what doesn't, and that society has the right and the responsibility to make such standards. Yea, the conservatives always use the example of animal sex (do you support equal rights?) but the liberals always point to racial discrimination as if that is the only valid analogy. Neither fits perfectly.
By the way, it is said that Marry, the mother of Jesus, was only 12 years old when she gave birth. I'm not arguing for or against any particular age for marriage, I'm only pointing out that society makes those decisions - fairly or not.
Try to run a business and not hire homosexuals and see how long it takes before you are sued in a court of law for discrimination.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 05:18pm PT
|
Threads like this can usually use a report of this classic. Funny how we selectively use what we want out of scripture...
Of course, we could just go back to the Holy Marriage of the Old testament, where you could have as many wives as you wanted and screw some concubines and slaves too. (Soloman had 700 wives plus concubines and Abraham had a kid with his slave before he sent them both packing when his old actual wife finally conceived)
Morality, same as it ever was, but different.
""The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and 362
admonishments to heterosexuals.
That doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals. It's just that
they need more supervision."
Dr. Laura Schlesinger is a US radio personality who dispenses advice
to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as
an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according
to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The
following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a US resident,
which was posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as
informative.........
Dear Dr. Laura
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I
have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that
knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend
the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that
Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other
specific laws and how to follow them.
1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors.
They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual cleanliness - Lev.15:19-24. The problem is,
how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.
4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend
of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can
you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated
to kill him myself?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don.t agree. Can you settle this?
7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I
have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading
glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room
here?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.
19:27. How should they die?
9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn.t we just burn them to
death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with
their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident
you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is
eternal and unchanging.
Your devoted disciple and adoring fan,
Jack"
From all over the net
Peace
Karl
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 06:46pm PT
|
It's funny when people quote bible verses to back up their hatred.
They focus on a handful of sentences, and then completely ignore, or contradict the rest of the book.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 06:46pm PT
|
Perhaps if it had been three wise womyn, they would have:
1. Made reservations, so no one had to stay in the stable.
2. Reported Joseph for child abuse.
3. Given the child up for adoption, as he was a male.
Assuming that three wise womyn could have been found, that is.
|
|
rockermike
Mountain climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 08:05pm PT
|
If the serpent had had a photo ID we might not be in all this trouble.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 10:54pm PT
|
LEB, in one sentence, are you pro gay-marriage or against it?
Make the 1st sentence the answer then explain why...I might return the favor, but you already know my 'stance' prolly....
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:14pm PT
|
Lois, it was kinda yes or no.
I too have stipulations but i was looking for a gut-reation answer, black or white.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:15pm PT
|
For me, I'm against it...'nuff said.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:29pm PT
|
Since we're going all the way back to the "perhaps mythological" beginning, let's note that Cain married his sister (we have to assume)
That's not legal anymore either!
Peace
Karl
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:37pm PT
|
I knew Lois couldn't give me the straight answer....1 sentence, girl.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:49pm PT
|
right on, Lois.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:54pm PT
|
According to the bible, Adam and Eve had three sons, Cain and Abel and Seth, as well as other sons and daughters. (Adam allegedly lived until he was 930.) Anyway, the book blithely goes on to talk about the children Cain has after he's banished, without mentioning his wife.
I believe one Jewish tradition has it that he married his sister.
Later in the old testament there's an awful lot of smiting and rending. Pretty bloody stuff - definitely PG if not R if not XXX. But then all that part got cancelled out in the second version.
Really, I'm not making any of this up. Someone else did.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:57pm PT
|
Anders, what's you're point? I fail to see it.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2008 - 11:59pm PT
|
Way back, about 20 posts or so, LEB asked about Cain and Abel and so on, and I finally got around to replying.
Although the story is a fine example as to why all religious books need to be examined critically. Lots of entertaining myths, some useful information and even wisdom, but a lot of what you find in them is subjective, and depends on interpretation and viewpoint.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:03am PT
|
Anders, ain't that the f*#kin' truth, looking at religious texts in a spiritual and contextual manner. Now I've put 'contextual' words in your mouth, no regard. I'm just teasin'!!!
Is context even spelled that way?
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:03am PT
|
yatthecchasi tatha karu
there's some scripture for you.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:05am PT
|
Doug, you're a FREAK, stay out of this you Hindu!!!!
:}
Hey how do you spell Doug?
B A I T !
now I'm reACHIN'......
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:06am PT
|
Tantric if anything...
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:07am PT
|
Let's all gang up on the heathen!
Oh wait, which one IS the heathen?
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:08am PT
|
Just remember.... you believe in one less god than I do
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:09am PT
|
oFFICIAL THREAD HIJACK, cAPS LOCK AND ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:11am PT
|
Doug, like I said, you're a freak.
I still love you though, and I'd store my my DEET in you food any time, dude. I love you, man!
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:11am PT
|
Om Namah Shivaya
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:14am PT
|
you're right too, in retrospect that was f-ked up ! But whatever, you'll prolly live.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:19am PT
|
Lois, where you been? (one sentence reply?)
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:22am PT
|
We all sometimes wonder where she's been, and is.
Noah and wife went on the ark with their children and spouses thereof. Even I know that!
|
|
Mtnmun
Trad climber
Top of the Mountain Mun
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:26am PT
|
100 Gay couples were wed in large ceremony in PS today. The streets were blocked off to accommodate the families and friends. These folks are so stoked to have their commitment of love for each other recognized by the law.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:29am PT
|
I'm pretty sure that they fed heathens and pagans to the carnivores on the ark. Maybe other people they didn't like, too.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:33am PT
|
Doug's scripture (thanks to my Sanskrit training) meant "Do as you wish/will"
Folks who look to ancient scripture for the rule of law run into trouble.
After all, it's been pointed out that Islam's, through Mohammed, rules about marriage and women were actually a REFORM, at the time. They gave women more rights and restricted marriage more than it was previously.
But because of hanging on to the letter of the law, what used to be a reform has become an abuse. The Christians complain about Islam and then do the same thing.
Safest to apply the law of Love to things and worry about your own morality before restricting what other's do. It's easy to be moral about other people's actions.
If gays getting married offends religion, let's get politics out of the marriage business and religions can decide among their own ranks who can get married.
The problem is, marriage has become a legal, political contract with implications for inheritance, sick visitation and insurance, and thus the issue of how alternative people can be fairly treated becomes an issue.
peace
Karl
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:43am PT
|
"Do as you wish/will"
A fair interpretation. I've seen a number of interpretations but they all essentially say just that.
It's from the 18th chapter of the Bhagavadgita. After over 600 verse's where Krishna is telling Arjuna what he should do he finishes up by saying , "Just as you desire, do that"
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 12:55am PT
|
"Karl, the already existing "Civil Union" accomplishes the same thing."
Almost but not quite. Federal rules keep civil union couples from receiving federal benefits such as social security. Plus there are no federal tax breaks for civil union couples. So they do get some benefits and protections, they do not get all of them.
It is about equality.
|
|
Jingy
Social climber
Flatland, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 01:09am PT
|
dirtbag - here here
who gives a shot?
Move on
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 01:35am PT
|
Jody is like the moon. He goes away, but eventually comes back, little by little until his tide creates lunatics who eventually eclipse him out of dodge, only to repeat the cycle again and again.
Jody bro, you're getting full on yourself again!
peace
karl
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 01:42am PT
|
"who gives a ---"
I'll tell you why I give a hoot. It is because the religious right use this issue to decide who to vote for. Republicans claim that they are the most religious because they don't support gay marriage, so what ends up happening is that we get another George Bush.
Another reason I give a hoot is because it makes God look cruel. Humans tend to confuse how religions acts with what God is really like. If religious are uptight and cruel, then God must be also. So when Christians claim to be loving and then treat a group of humans as unequals in the sight of the law, it gives God a figurative black eye. Sounds weird, but it is true. Remembering the America is considered to be a Christian nation, whether it is or isn't.
So I have two reasons for supporting gay marriage, or at least an equal civil union. One is that I think it is a terrible reason to vote for someone or not vote for a different person based on their views on gay marriage and two it makes God look bad because most folks aren't able to separate out their feelings about God from their understandings and relationship with religion.
I honestly do not think that Jesus would care whether gay couples got federal benefits, so why keep them from having it. Treat them equally, making them follow the same rules of marriage and divorce that heterosexual couples face and let God determine what Karma they are creating.
Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord. Romans 12:19. If God sees it as a perversion, then let God decide the punishment. If it harms anyone, it only harms the people involved, so there is no good reason to outlaw it. That is much different from such things as having sexual relations with a child.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 02:21am PT
|
Nice post Moose man!
|
|
Ricardo Cabeza
climber
Meyers,CA
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 02:37am PT
|
Moosie,
Thanks for a concise response to something I feel strongly about!
If folks who happen to want to get married are gay, LET THEM!!!
These folks are people just like you and me and deserve the same legal protections.
Any argument countering my opinion is to me both bigoted and invalid.
Homophobes are closed minded,
Brandon-
|
|
Ricardo Cabeza
climber
Meyers,CA
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 03:49am PT
|
So Jody,
Nothing but respect for you as a person but (and I know this has been stated a million times) , what if your child were gay? Would you not want the same rights and protections for him or her?
A child who feels as if this is who they are should not face hurdles that set them back.
Rather, these people should be given the same rights as us, being gay does not make one inferior, only different; and therefore confusing to some.
I apologize for calling all naysayers homophobes and bigots, however, I stand firm to my belief that a gay person should be granted the same rights as their straight counterparts.
In my mind, a human being is a human bring and there is absolutely no reason to treat people as less than Human Beings.
To me, gay, straight, agnostic, devout... all humang beings and should be both treated as such and guarenteed sights as such.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 11:39am PT
|
Jody
"How does not condoning homosexual behavior make me a homophobe? "
You don't have to condone anyone's behavior to offer them equal rights. The same arguments were used in preventing couples of mixed race from marrying.
Heck, when they were feeding Christians to lions in Rome, there was probably some guy claiming the right to persecute them because they ate human flesh and drank blood.
PEace
Karl
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 01:49pm PT
|
good post Moosie...
quotes from the bible > >that some of you bibleboys seem to over look.
I Jn 4:20
If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar:
for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he
love God whom he hath not seen?
Matt 22:37-40
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Job 20:4-5
4 Knowest thou not this of old, since man was placed upon earth,
5 That the triumphing of the wicked is short, and the joy of the
hypocrite but for a moment?
Job 27:4
4 My lips shall not speak wickedness, nor my tongue utter deceit.
Job 27:8
8 For what is the hope of the hypocrite, though he hath gained,
when God taketh away his soul?
Prov 11:9
9 An hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbour: but through
knowledge shall the just be delivered.
Matt 7:1
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Luke 6:46
46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?
Luke 6:31
31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them
likewise.
Luke 6:36
36 Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
Matt 5:43-44
43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour,
and hate thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you,
do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully
use you, and persecute you;
Matt 19:19
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour
as thyself.
Luke 6:27
27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them
which hate you,
John 13:34
34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another;
as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
Gal 5:14
14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt
love thy neighbour as thyself.
Gal 5:25
25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
1Thes 3:12
12 And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward
another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you:
1Thes 4:8
8 He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath
also given unto us his holy Spirit.
1 Pet 2:17
17 Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.
1 Pet 3:8
8 Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another,
love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous:
I Jn 3:11
11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we
should love one another.
I Jn 3:14
14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love
the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.
I Jn 3:23
23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of
his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us
commandment.
I Jn 4:7
7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one
that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
I Jn 4:11
11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.
I Jn 4:12
12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God
dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
I Jn 4:16
16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us.
God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and
God in him.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 02:58pm PT
|
Great post Nita. I also like when Jesus said something like "how you treat the least among you, that's how you are treating me."
Want those sinners to look toward the Spirit instead of resenting the religious folks? Treat em with Love and Respect and quit judging them so hard.
Peace
Karl
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 03:09pm PT
|
In order to be religious, you have to ignore and/or contradict certain parts of the Bible. That’s the one common theme among all religious people.
Yeah, the Bible says all of those nice things. But, as Jody pointed out, it also says that homosexuality is wrong.
In the end, the definitions of “morality” and “sin” all come down to the individual person. They try to blame it on their religion, but it’s really their own personality that is forming their opinions.
It’s much easier to be hateful than it is to be understanding. And that’s why religion gets such a bad rap these days. The majority of religious people focus in on the hateful passages in the bible, and ignore all of the good things it tries to teach.
|
|
WoodySt
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 03:14pm PT
|
It might be best if both sides in this issue set the Bible aside. The Bible allows one to support just about any position taken. It's rife with inconsistencies and contradictions.
An appeal to the California SC (my understanding)has been submitted to remove the November ballot issue vis a vis the Gay Marriage decision.
Next controversial issue coming our way will be legalization of polygamy and polyandry. If you doubt this, reflect on the history of the Gay Marriage issue. The identical arguments can apply based partly on the right to Privacy etc.
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 03:44pm PT
|
"Do you have any numbers to back up this type of bigoted statement. "
Nope. I just read it in a book once. Instead of forming my opinions based on common sense, I just blindly agree with everything in the book.
Oddly enough, it also says that religious people are kind, thoughtful and compassionate. It also says that I should treat them with respect. But then it says they are all sinners, and should be spit upon.
I wish I was able to simply go with my gut instinct on this matter, but the book says otherwise. Well, at least SOME parts of the book. It's so confusing!
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 03:47pm PT
|
LEB, you're right that it takes time. Right now god is busy smiting the Midwesterners for their gluttonous ways. California is going to have a HUGE earthquake sometime in the next 1000 years or so, and it will all be thanks to the queers!
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 03:49pm PT
|
Yeah Jody, but Jesus did condone paying taxes to the sinful Romans with their violent occupying army. Separation of church and state, started with Jesus and it's still a good idea.
Peace
Karl
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 03:49pm PT
|
So you Love them by treating them unequally? Is that Love?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 04:06pm PT
|
Jody
"Help me out Karl, what was your point and what did it have to do with my last post?"
We don't have to condone behavior to allow it to be legal Jody. I'm sure there are hundreds of legal things you don't approve of already
Peace
Karl
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 04:12pm PT
|
Jody, you are still missing my point, maybe one day we can speak in person.
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 04:16pm PT
|
"..."(2 TIMOTHY 3:16). "
I believe that's what they call a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Back on track here.
Jody brings up a good point about not condoning their behavior. The problem is that he is confusing religion with morality. Religion was once invented to try to bring morality to the masses. But as has already been mentioned, the Bible was written by many different people, with many different viewpoints. Timothy added that line to his book in an attempt to add validity. Seemes like it worked on some people.
The only reason homosexuality is considered "immoral" is becuase of the Bible. Step away from the Bible for a moment, and you'll see that those people aren't doing anything "wrong". They aren't harming anyone or anything. Their actions are NOT immoral. They are NOT sinning. They are just living their lives as they see fit.
Without referring to the Bible, can you tell me why YOU think homosexuality is immoral?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 04:31pm PT
|
"Karl, thanks for the explanation. If I condoned legal homosexual "marriage", would I not be condoning the act itself?"
It's not about "condoning" Jody. You can feel however you feel personally. That might change in time or it might not. It's about treating people whom you don't jibe with as human beings and affording them fair legal rights.
You might not approve of Alcohol, but it's legal. It sure causes a lot more harm than we might imagine that "gays" do. You might not like that there are naked pictures on the net either. You might not even condone the other religions that people practice in this country. They can all still be legal.
Christians didn't used to be the Majority in the the world of power. They were discriminated against and persecuted. That's enough to remember in order to see that it's more moral to allow people to act according to their free will and let God judge their behavior by God's more wise standard.
If being Gay was a choice, can you look into your own desires and heart and tell us that becoming Gay would be an option for you if your religion endorsed it? If it's not a choice, we should have some compassion for it. Even if it's a choice, we can't judge it or make it any more illegal than we should eating pork or other prohibitions from Leviticus and so on.,
Peace
Karl
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 22, 2008 - 04:45pm PT
|
"Listen, dirtbag, stop trying to micromanage God."
LOL, you're right. He's been doing this whole universe management thing much longer than I have.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 04:58pm PT
|
Lois, my idea is that we are discussing whether Gay Marriage should be legal. I'm am only speaking to Jody regarding that issue. I'm not trying to suggest he should cozy up to gays nor even get comfortable with the idea, only that he should allow people outside his moral comfort zone to have rights and priveleges in society.
Rabbis, religious people and just about everybody else during the time of Jesus were almost universally married. Jesus wasn't and it's ironic that some reactionary people during his own time might have assumed he was gay and discriminated against him as such.
Lois, your post addressing the subject directly was very good.
peace
Karl
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 05:21pm PT
|
"Give me an example where Jody mistreated a homosexual? Show me an ACTION of his where he discriminated against them. And don't cite his vote at the polls because he has an inviolate right to vote his conscience."
He is mistreating homosexuals by not allowing them the same rights as heterosexuals. No one is denying him his right to vote how he chooses. We are saying it does no harm to society to legalize homosexual unions, recognizing that God may not honor them and that their behavior may be causing them karmic problems, but that does not harm society. So why make it an issue?
The old testament allows slavery. Should we allow it today?
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,"
Jody, who chooses what is considered to be considered scripture?
Edit:
Actually I think it does harm society because there is a collective consciousness that we all contribute to. I also believe that drinking alcohol harms society yet I wont outlaw it because I don't think outlawing it does any good, people will still drink, and there are much more important things to base our vote on.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 05:27pm PT
|
LeB wrote
"The bottom line, however, is that we all vote with our feet or more accurately our fingers and the "winner" (the ones who get to make the rules) is the side who gets the most votes. There are widely divergent views on these topics and, in fact, we have both sides are represented on this forum. Ultimately, the one which gets the most votes wins and then controls the state and so they, in turn, make the rules and write the laws."
The constitution was written to protect minorities, both religious and otherwise, so they get equal rights and protections. That's the issues. The majority cannot make laws that are unconstitutional without changing the constitution. That speaks to the state constitution as well, which is the issue in california as our supreme court here has made it a constitutional issue.
It's worth remembering that during the early days of the reformation, there were many, many places where the penalty for being Protestant was death. What's "condoned" for the minority keeps changing with time.
Peace
Karl
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 05:39pm PT
|
Isn't the Sabbath supposed to be a day of rest?
Why aren't all you sinners in church today?
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 06:04pm PT
|
" What this really boils down to (given that domestic partnership laws exist) is acceptance - plain and simple"
Not true as I pointed out earlier, because the domestic partnership laws do not include federal benefits such as social security. So while the wife in a heterosexual couple can keep her husbands social security benefits when he dies and vice versa, this does not apply to homosexual couples. If Jody supported them having this right, then I wouldn't have as big a problem with him, instead, he makes a lousy joke.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 06:21pm PT
|
LEB:
"And, Karl, Jody has an absolutely right to practice his religion"
There's a climb in Yosemite called "God told me to skin you alive!"
Not that Jody would do that.
Out of impatience, he'd kill you first!
;-)
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 06:28pm PT
|
I feel a great irony reading the posts about Jody being hateful to homosexuals. I know for a fact that Jody has a Lesbian friend whom he worked with for years. I don't know the woman personally but apparently her one time "partner" treated her badly after their breakup. Jody helped her through the bad time and they remain good friends.
Why the need to lay blame on a "goat"? Does that relieve us of our own burden of sins? Because one criticizes the homosexual lifestyle, does that equate with "hate"?
Homophilic behavior is just one component of a homosexual's humanity. Because one is critical of a friends homophilic aspect doesn't mean they reject their humanity. I have an uncle who is homosexual. The family never rejoiced in his lifestyle but he remains a full member of the clan.
If I'm critical of a friend drinking alchohol, does that mean I hate them and everyone else in the world who consumes alchohol?
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 06:50pm PT
|
"If I'm critical of a friend drinking alchohol, does that mean I hate them and everyone else in the world who consumes alchohol? "
So in this analogy, you are comparing alcoholism to homosexuality.
We are all aware of the negative aspects of alcohol. Both physically and socially.
So I would like you to explain to me why homosexuality is negative. Why is it considered immoral? What harm does it do to the individual? What harm does it do to others?
Their union doesn't produce children, so from that perspective homosexuality won't further our species. But lots of heterosexual couples choose not to have children, so are they sinners?
All of the "negative" things about homosexuality come from the Bible. Basically, a few thousand years ago some guy hated fags. He wrote it down, claiming it was the word of god, and today people STILL can't see it for what it is!
Talk about closed minded!?!?!?
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 07:25pm PT
|
Thanks LEB,
But I would like Jennie to answer the question. I know she can't, but I find a great deal of humor in the fact that she is referring to other people as "closed minded".
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 07:50pm PT
|
Again, the bottom line of what we're talking about here is legal rights for people who pay the same taxes and premiums that we do.
Jody, would you support the government offering Gay couples civil unions with all the rights and privileges of Marriage , including social security benefits, without the name marriage?
How about if the Government got out of the marriage business for everyone?
Peace
Karl
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 07:50pm PT
|
Uh, Jody......
When you say things like that it only proves my point even more. If you can't answer the question, then you probably shouldn't try.
AIDS has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality. And even if it did, how does contracting a disease make it "immoral"?
Does that mean everyone with cancer is a sinner? What about diabetes?
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 07:55pm PT
|
I can't stop laughing about Jody's last response! That is some funny sh#t right there!
Jody, I would seriously like you to answer the question. How is homosexuality immoral?
Yes. Some of them contracted a nasty disease. Many people contract nasty diseases. Many hetersexual people have AIDS. It is a disease, and is IN NO WAY related to the preference of its host body.
So, HOW IS HOMOSEXUALITY IMMORAL?
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 08:10pm PT
|
Actually Jody, you didn't answer the question.
You simply stated an unrelated and unfortunate coincidence.
Once again, AIDS and gay sex are not related.
Yes, many gay men contracted AIDS. And at the same time, MANY DIDN'T.
Many straight people contracted AIDS, and at the same time, the lesbians DID NOT.
FACT:
Gay sax doesn't give you AIDS.
I know you're religious, and I know that religon is based on ignoring facts. So maybe it's best if you run along now.
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 08:14pm PT
|
"If you deny that a vast majority of AIDS patients are homosexual, then you are blind or ignorant, or in your case, probably both"
So the people in other countries don't count? Why are you ignoring them?
Is it because they aren't christian, or because they're black?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 08:17pm PT
|
Thanks for spelling it out Jody.
You see, our opinions and beliefs translate into legal situations for others. That's what this argument is about. It's not about condemning Jody, It's about let and let live in the eyes of the state for both Jody and Gay folks.
Peace
Karl
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 08:22pm PT
|
Well, that specific answer does not apply to gay woman.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 09:27pm PT
|
This thread has reached the Jodisian point.
Here is the joke Jody... You basically said we didn't need to let them get married because they had the protections of civil unions. I pointed out that they did not get all of the same benefits as a heterosexual couple, to which you replied.
"they do not get all of them."
Well, they could just marry the opposite sex like most people and then they would get All the benefits."'
That is a joke. Not a particularly bad one, but could indicate that you don't really want to give them equal rights as Lois believes.
So which is it, do you believe they should have equal rights?
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 09:27pm PT
|
”All of the "negative" things about homosexuality come from the Bible. Basically, a few thousand years ago some guy hated fags. He wrote it down, claiming it was the word of god, and today people STILL can't see it for what it is!
Talk about closed minded!?!?!?”
This is untrue. All major religious traditions of the world, condemned and still condemn homosexuality.
”But I would like Jennie to answer the question. I know she can't, but I find a great deal of humor in the fact that she is referring to other people as "closed minded".
I’m happy you’re finding humor in something, Andy. But I haven’t referred to anyone here, as “closed minded”. Perhaps your monitor is malfunctioning, this evening.
If I was of the opinion YOUR mind was closed, I wouldn’t be addressing you. Same goes for the other forum members who have diverging opinions. And if MY mind was closed, I wouldn’t take the time to read those opinions.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 11:13pm PT
|
Lois, I respect your opinions and your medical knowledge greatly. But no homophilic genes, or series of genes have been discovered. Many in the medical profession share your opinion, but nothing concrete supports that view.
Many psychologists believe humans are born with both male and female sexual drives and through upbringing and socialization (and perhaps choice) one sexual polarity is accentuated and the other is attenuated. That is theory, also.
|
|
WoodySt
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 11:22pm PT
|
I find it interesting how quickly Jody's data was blown off as though it didn't exist.
If the data disturbs you, refute it with counter data; but don't run away from it.
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2008 - 11:56pm PT
|
I think ignoring Jody's data is just payback,
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 12:05am PT
|
masculine natures!
There's only one of me. But thanks for noting my masculinity. The girls at the yoga studio will appreciate knowing...
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 02:52am PT
|
Jody's data is beside the point. Are we going to give out social security on a sliding scale with lessened benefits for smokers, fat people or horney people?
There are tons of groups in this country that can be statistically categorized as having a greater share of certain problems. It might take more study to see if they were genetically prone to those problems or if some result from discrimination and feeling dissed by society around them.
We could find that African Americans have less money, a higher incarceration rate and more sickle cell anemia than whites but we don't use that data to isolate their legal status.
Peace
Karl
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 03:45am PT
|
My statement.
""He is mistreating homosexuals by not allowing them the same rights as heterosexuals."
Jody's response...
Welcome to Moosie's world, where simply voicing an opinion is the same as mistreating someone. I am not allowing them the same rights you say? I didn't know I was that powerful.
John, stop while you are behind. You aren't sounding too intelligent right now."
...............
Then I asked you if you would allow homosexual couples to have the same rights as heterosexual couples. This was your answer
"John, no, not as "couples"...as individuals, yes."
...............
So now you admit that I am correct, you would not allow homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples. Your vote counts Jody. The same as it counted when you voted for George Bush twice. You have a responsibility for your actions. George Bush is against homosexuals having equal rights. So is John McCain. You voted for them and this is how you deny homosexuals equal rights.
Many years ago in the South people thought they treated Blacks kindly, yet they denied them equal rights. Equal rights are what the homosexuals are asking for.
Nothing extra, just equal.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 05:31am PT
|
John Moosie posted:” You voted for them and this is how you deny homosexuals equal rights.”
“Many years ago in the South people thought they treated Blacks kindly, yet they denied them equal rights. Equal rights are what the homosexuals are asking for.”
“Nothing extra, just equal.”
Rights must have a source. They don’t pop into existence out of nothing. Rights don’t flow from mountain springs or wash up on the seashore. We inherit no rights from the Earth. Rights must have a source and authority that declares and logically supports their CORRECTNESS.
Where else can rights come from but the STATE or a transcendent source (GOD)?
Barring a direct revelation from God, we have no source of Deity from which to attribute gay marriage rights, since all major religions condemn homosexual marriage.
If the right of homosexual marriage must come from the STATE, it follows that those who make laws and declare rights must be convinced of their CORRECTNESS. In a democratic state, the people are the authority from which laws are enacted and rights declared.
Being free will creatures, homosexuals can make covenants with each other. In the United States, rights of free speech and assembly would suggest they have rights to conduct insular marriage ceremonies in the presence of others willing to attend. But the state is not obliged or in authority to RECOGNIZE homosexual marriage unless that authority is given to it by voters in the democratic process.
…….And that must depend on whether the voting public believes state recognized marriage of homosexuals gives credibility to a questionable lifestyle or a lifestyle they deem incorrect. And contrary to some opinions, there is really nothing in the U.S. Constitution from which the authority to recognize marriage rights of homosexuals can be inferred.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 23, 2008 - 08:26am PT
|
"And contrary to some opinions, there is really nothing in the U.S. Constitution from which the authority to recognize marriage rights of homosexuals can be inferred. "
The decision in CA is based on the state Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution.
And actually we have a republic, not a democracy.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 08:37am PT
|
Jennie wrote :
And contrary to some opinions, there is really nothing in the U.S. Constitution from which the authority to recognize marriage rights of homosexuals can be inferred.
Could you please clarify for me where in the U.S. Constitution we can infer authority to recognize the marriage rights of heterosexuals?
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 08:37am PT
|
Jody wrote : Degaine, I edited my post to say "homosexual" instead of "gay", does that help?
Sorry, Jody; I should have been clearer with my question. I was actually referring to the word lifestyle.
What is this “homosexual lifestyle” (or gay if you prefer) to which you refer?
Jennie also mentioned in a post this “homosexual lifestyle” that I don’t understand:
Because one criticizes the homosexual lifestyle, does that equate with "hate"?
Do both of you feel that there is a “heterosexual lifestyle”?
The thing is, in terms of lifestyle, the only thing I have in common with a lot of heterosexuals - let’s take Mike Tyson or say Ms Spears as examples - is the heterosexual sex as in when I have sexual relations with my significant other (wife). Given the two examples I even wonder if the heterosexual sex I’m having even resembles what goes on in their bedrooms.
On the other hand, I’ve met a few climbers who are homosexual, and aside from the difference in sexual orientation, our “lifestyles” – that’s to say climbing, travelling, interests, etc. were very, very similar.
So what exactly do you mean by lifestyle? Do we deny people rights in the US based upon their lifestyle?
Jody wrote :
When are you people (and another, et al) going to get it through your thick skulls full of mush that I don't HATE the homosexuals?! I just don't approve of their behavior. Go ahead and another, show me any verse in the Bible that condones homosexuality(or any sexual immorality). Love the person, not the sin...this is the last time I am going to explain myself on this issue.
For what it’s worth I understand that you don’t hate homosexuals, etc., etc.
I also have no doubt based upon your posts here, that you’re a nice, caring person on an individual to individual level. I’m sure you’re a good father, etc.
That said,
I also have met plenty of Vietnam Vets who have best friends from their former units who are African American, a lifelong bond type of friendship, yet they are extremely racist. They are capable of looking beyond their prejudices and bigotry to see the individual before them.
But they’re still bigots.
It’s also pretty unbelievable that you still consider AIDS to be a homosexual disease when it’s been clearly documented that (a) the primary mode of infection is intercourse between members of the opposite sex, and (b) the incidence rate of contracting HIV is higher in penile/vaginal intercourse than in anal intercourse (and the anal intercourse incidence rates take into consideration both male/female and male/male intercourse).
Jody wrote :
If I condoned legal homosexual "marriage", would I not be condoning the act itself?
No, you would not be condoning the act.
You are still confusing equal rights under the law with condoning, just as others are confusing hatred and the fact that you do not condone homosexuality..
I know plenty of Jewish people who don’t condone the idea of eating pork (or mixing milk and meat, etc.) yet have no problem with it being legal. Ditto for their kids or other Jewish people marrying someone who is not Jewish: they don’t condone it but they don’t think it should be illegal either.
I don’t think people should smoke (I don’t condone the behavior) but also think that they should have the legal right to do so as long as my health isn’t affected.
See where this is going?
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 08:39am PT
|
rockermike wrote : Our laws may theoretically be "Secular", but presumably there is some "moral" grounds that they are based on, and I would argue that those moral fundamentals are the children of religion. The whole concept of marriage and fidelity to sexual partners, and lifelong commitment comes from religious tradition.
I’m pretty sure I addressed this in my other post, but I’ll address it again.
First, I stated that there are definitely judeo-christian foundations to US law, but it’s certainly not limited to that: as I mentioned before, the Greeks and Romans had a significant influence. Add 232 years of history in the country since the Declaration of Independence – waves of immigrants, wars, etc., etc. – and the culture and laws have certainly evolved.
To take your example of the concept of fidelity to sexual partners, while infidelity is for the most part a cultural no-no, it certainly is not illegal to cheat on one’s girlfriend / boyfriend, to have multiple partners, etc., etc.
Second, do I really need to bring up the whole “separation of church and state” concept again?
Why not get the state out of the marriage business altogether?
rockermike wrote : I wasn't equating homosexuality with pedophilia;
Glad we cleared that up. So what was your point?
Oh, here it is:
rockermike wrote : by way of analogy I was trying to point out the weakness of the argument "equal rights", that's just a rhetorical device to win the argument, but no one actually supports equal rights for everyone.
It’s pretty obvious that you, Jody, and Jennie do not support equal rights for everyone.
rockermike wrote : Hell, we have millions of people in jail for using drugs or for driving away in cars that society has deemed "private property".
So now, instead of comparing homosexuality to pedophilia, you’ve decided to use crime as an analogy.
I’ll make it simple for you, a highly regarded Constitutional Law scholar once explained it to me in very basic terms that our rights extend as far as our neighbor’s nose. That’s to say that we pretty much have the right to do what we want as long as it does not have impede on the rights of our neighbors.
Stealing, drug related crimes, etc., very much affects others. I fail to see where to people of the same sex getting married has any affect on the lives of others, or at least anything different than a heterosexual marriage.
rockermike wrote : As with my other examples - society sets standards. The phrase "equal rights" sounds good but only blurs the issue I was trying to make, that ultimately "society" makes decisions about what goes and what doesn't, and that society has the right and the responsibility to make such standards.
I agree, society sets the standards. At the same time, as Karl pointed out(I believe it was Karl), the US Constitution affords protection from the potential dictatorship of the majority. He better expressed this point, so I'll leave it at that.
I don’t agree that “equal rights” blurs the issue. Perhaps I should rephrase and write “equal opportunity under the law” or “equal rights under the law”. Don’t know if that makes a difference for you.
rockermike wrote : Try to run a business and not hire homosexuals and see how long it takes before you are sued in a court of law for discrimination.
So you only hire someone whose sexual orientation is homosexual simply to avoid being sued in court?
You see, that’s where you and I differ, I don’t give a rat’s ass about the sexual orientation of a person applying for a position at my company, don’t care about their sex, age, family status, race (I could continue the list, but you get the point). I look at the experience, the qualifications to perform the job, and whether or not based on the interaction the person is someone with whom I’ll be able to work for 8-10 hours a day.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 10:57am PT
|
"There is only one state in the country that still bans interracial marriage and, if the polls are right, a majority of Alabama voters will vote next year to repeal that statute.
But about a third of them are expected to vote against repeal, just as a third of South Carolinians voted unsuccessfully last year to keep their state's ban. Both states mirror the nation as a whole: Polls show that between a quarter and a third of us oppose the marriage of whites to blacks.
It is telling that most Alabamians opposed to interracial marriage identify themselves as evangelical Christians, according to a poll by the Alabama Educational Association. They say they believe that such relationships contravene the word of God....Any prohibitions - religious or otherwise - against interracial relationships would seem moot in 1999, 32 years after the US Supreme Court's landmark decision known as Loving v. Virginia. In the middle of the night on July 11, 1958, Richard Loving, who is white, and his African-American wife, Mildred, were rousted from their bed and arrested in Caroline County, Va.
Soon afterward a Virginia judge ruled their marriage illegal and added, ''Almighty God created the races ... and the fact that He separated the races showed that He did not intend for the races to mix.'' The Supreme Court ruled otherwise.
But today, three decades later, a sizable percentage of Americans continue to be skeptical about mixed marriages. A Washington Post poll conducted last summer revealed that 1 in 4 Americans still found marriages between blacks and whites ''unacceptable....''
thats from 1999!
http://members.aol.com/ebonylvory/dividingus.html
Society ultimate does decide and it's clear which direction society in inexorably moving toward. Gay Marriage is going to be legal sooner or later.
The whole thing is sad for religion because Christians are once again being known for being judgmental and negative rather than for loving and attractive aspects of their faith that could make them a stronger force.
It has little to do with religion and more about conservative values that fear those who are different than themselves. After all, the marriage of Bible times was almost universally arranged by the family, often to an under-age bride and the wealthy often had numerous wives. We're not hearing about rushing to return to Bible marriage are we?
PEace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 11:11am PT
|
Skip
I'm hoping that if Jefferson were alive today, he's support gay marriage. After all, he didn't have a problem having sex with his black slave and having a baby with her, despite the fact that mixed-race marriage was illegal at the time
Peace
Karl
|
|
Dick_Lugar
Trad climber
Indiana (the other Mideast)
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 11:20am PT
|
God loves everybody...and God does not judge, we sad, pathetic humans do!
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 01:00pm PT
|
Thank You Degaine and karl for your thoughtful posts.
Karl wrote,
"The whole thing is sad for religion because Christians are once again being known for being judgmental and negative rather than for loving and attractive aspects of their faith that could make them a stronger force."
This is the reason I do not want to make marriage between two people of the same sex illegal or deny them any of the privileges that heterosexual couples have even though I understand the background forces in why God says homosexuality is a perversion and I accept this as Truth. Ultimately I believe we shouldn't engage in homosexuality, but I wouldn't deny them the same privileges as heterosexual because of what comes out of Stizzo's post.
"Once again, it's between those who take their direction from "God" and those who take their direction from good sense..."
And Dingus' post,
"I'm not moved by Jefferson's god. Not one whit."
Christians today seem to think that by making things legal or illegal we can demonstrate our Love for God. Yet when you examine Jesus' teachings you see that during his lifeftime the people who were considered to be the most righteous people where the leaders of the church. They had set down so many rules of behavior that the average person just couldn't live up to them. The people, being blind, thought this was how one became more God like and thus more righteous and so they elevated the leaders of the church giving them power. Power is what the leaders really wanted, The rules weren't really about helping people know God, Love accomplishes that, forgiveness accomplishes that, not rules. Once a person finds they want to know God better, then one can show them the things that block them from deeply knowing God.
What did Jesus say and do in regards to these rules? He healed the sick on the Sabbath even though the church leaders said the sabbath was holy and to keep it holy we must rest as God did. Healing was considered to be work, so it was outlawed. Jesus broke these rules in an effort to show people that rules are not what gets you to heaven, rules do not make you God-like nor does the following of rules make you more like God .
Jesus went on to say.
"unless your righteousness exceeds even that of the scribes and the Pharisees, then you shall in no way enter the kingdom of heaven."
Say what??? How could the average person exceed the righteousness of the leaders of the church, the people who are chosen to be leaders because they follow the law better then anyone else and are therefor more god like?
This is where you have to start learning what it truly means to be righteous. It isn't about how many laws you follow and how correctly you follow them. It is about how much you can Love. Love God first, Love yourself, and Love others as yourself.
This is the beginning of spirituality and the beginning of Truth.
So even though I think homosexuality is wrong, I do not support outlawing it nor do I support denying them the privileges that heterosexual couples enjoy because people need the chance to see and experience a loving God and the only way they can is through "We the People". If we show them a judgmental God, then that is all they will know.
Don't legalize spirituality, Jesus was against that.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone....
You are casting a stone when you deny people equal treatment under the law.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 03:02pm PT
|
I believe the relevant half of that phrase is: "...the Laws of Nature... "
Homosexuality expresses itself throughout nature and has been observed in most mammalian species. It is, by it's very existence, a "law of nature". If anything, humans who attempt to deny homosexuality and depict it as 'unnatural' are the ones who are perverting reality and simply fooling themselves. For that matter, heterosexuals are the real problem in this case; marriage between a man and a woman is the true source of the problem. I mean, if those damned 'natural' heterosexuals would simply quit having all these homosexual children then the problem would simply go away.
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 03:31pm PT
|
It's interesting the things in the Bible (and other religions) that people CHOOSE to believe while rejecting other parts. You don't see many people nowadays advocating stoning, slavery, multiple wives, etc. things that are honky dory in the Bible but homosexuality is sooo wrong.
So don't pass the buck on your beliefs to the Bible. You don't subsribe to everything the Bible says is wrong or right, why do you choose to for this topic?
|
|
WandaFuca
Gym climber
San Fernando Lamas
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 03:35pm PT
|
GOD™?
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 06:49pm PT
|
LEB- many gay men are in monogamus relationships. I can think of several that I know personally that are. The hook up thing definately goes on, but I think is concentrated in places like NY and SF. In fact, I was just complaining that it's easier to find astro-glide than kids sunscreen in our local drug store.
The marriage to goats, kids, cousins, etc. argument is a strawman.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 07:59pm PT
|
The old testament provides some fine, detailed laws.
That is, for an 8th century BCE tribal culture.
Funny that no one ever asks why god couldn't bother to provide detailed laws in the old testament for everything else that came along later, and has yet to come along.
Oh wait, she eventually did. The new testament provides a much more adaptable moral code for what had become a monotheist urban culture. The new testament is intended as a new dispensation, with one supreme commandment. It supercedes the old testament. Which is why it's so amusing, and depressing, to watch fundamentalists try to apply the 'laws' of the old testament to the modern world.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 08:07pm PT
|
LEB, as far as generalization go, I agree. We have only to look at what some straight guys with unlimited access to women/sex have done (Wilt Chamberlain and a host of rock stars)
Peace
Karl
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 23, 2008 - 08:29pm PT
|
Can I please be an editor? The last version was rushed out in a hurry and some parts were either incorrect, unclear, or not well thought out.
|
|
happiegrrrl
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 09:44pm PT
|
Someone made a comment way back about there being no 'history' for gay marriage to be in context with. Something akin to that the idea is new in recent years.
Well, considering that in some places a gay person is STILL in danger of being beaten to death by groups of men... and that in this day and age, people are still saying "God doesn't like it"and comparing the marriage between humans to be one step away from marrying your cat - it seems completely rational to me that gay people might not be all out and open about their situations.
Has it occurred to everyone here that there are, undoubtedly, gay members of Supertopo who never felt it necessary(or prudent) to let on?
Homosexual people have most likely existed from the moment genders came into existence. Do even a small bit of research and it's not difficult to see that people have lived with same-sex lovers throughout history, and that there has been a gay subculture in existence for some time before the Stonewall riots.
The reason we won't be marrying animals is because an animal is unable to give consent. Are there people who would LIKE to marry their pets? Yes, undoubtedly so. Even if that bridge did come to be crossed at some future time - I have a feeling that the majority of animal "lovers" probably identify more as heterosexual than homosexual.
One thing I CAN see coming down the road is a potential for the introduction of polyamorous couples to form marriages beyond the "take one only." What will we do then - when John and Sue have married, and Sue wants to add Richard or Rebecca as a second spouse?
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2008 - 11:31pm PT
|
"I believe if an institution were to be created with an alternative name - say, for example, committed life partnership - it would be much more acceptable to people."
 oh sis, you are so 1996, (1096?) get with it, I know you're on the slow coast, but really...
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:31am PT
|
Homo sex is not natural.
Anybody that thinks so is way homo.
Some of you people are way homo screwed up, yes definately.
This thread is way homo ......
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:37am PT
|
Hey Jody, Please show me where I said this...
" But then he gets off the beaten path by extrapolating that into, "God doesn't judge or have rules"."
I didn't say this. Why would I teach Karma and you reap what you sow if I believed that God did not judge?
|
|
monolith
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:59am PT
|
The 'theory' is just the attempted explanation.
The observations of the behavior in these animals are real.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:00am PT
|
Sadly, many here who accuse Christians of lacking compassion for homosexuals, are confusing flattery with Christian compassion. The world is full of flatterers, backslappers and the politically correct empty suits who smile and tell the gays what they want to hear. But when gays hit bad times or affect them personally our PC heroes put up that partition of indifference, and let gays flounder. (Homosexual relationships tend to be quite volatile, especially males.)
If they are lucky, they may have family or real friends who tell them the truth and, if need be, help them pick up the pieces when things shatter.
|
|
monolith
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:03am PT
|
OMG, God created animals with homosexual tendencies.
Now why would God do that?
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:12am PT
|
"but when gays hit bad times or affect them personally our PC heroes put up that partition of indifference, and let gays flounder."
Jennie, I call bull. Who are you generalizing about? There is a surprising number of gay people here in the park and I am friends to many of them. I have helped them through all of the same things that heterosexual couples go through. So please save your generalizing for yourself.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:13am PT
|
Yes I have gay friends. I have, or had, a gay uncle. Does my opinion count?
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:24am PT
|
I would say that is a biased use of statistics. Women don't do as much battering as men, so of course men in heterosexual relations are battered less. But how many women in heterosexual relations report as least some type of battering?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:30am PT
|
So Jody, if suddenly certain religious groups wanted to legalize under-age marriage and Polygamy, citing support and precedent for it in the Bible, would you support it?
What basis would you then turn to for saying it was immoral?
It has never been easy to determine when to give rights to groups we marginalized previously. Heck, women only got the vote in 1920. (Kinda disgraceful don't cha think?)
Jody, can you claim that if you were your present age in 1915, you would have resisted women voting? Lots and lots of people did resist it. How would you know how you would have viewed the issue then?
Another question to ponder is, "Should Sin be illegal if it doesn't directly harm other non-consenting people?" What's the point of us have "free will" if the State compels us to follow religious laws? Where's the virtue in that? How would we be separate from those Islamic states with their morality police?
Peace
Karl
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:35am PT
|
Jennie,said "(Homosexual relationships tend to be quite volatile, especially males.)"
Does my opinion count?
.....................................
OMG....NO NO No NO No.
Jennie, Almost all of my Gay friends are in a commited-long term relationships....... Oh..Did you delete that comment?
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:42am PT
|
Nita,
I didn't delete anything. I know a Lesbian couple in a long term relationship. Another girl I went to high school with, who was apparently heterosexual then, now is lesbian and has been in many relationships.
My uncle (dad's half brother) died of AIDS. He chnaged partners many times. Had fights with other homosexuals from time to time.
My experience....if yours is better, I can appreciate it.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:43am PT
|
Jody,
Then we could say that homosexual relationships are safer for women then heterosexual relationships, because then no men would be involved and men do most of the physical violence.
Using statistics to prove homosexuality is immoral is just silly.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:46am PT
|
Jennie,
I could tell you about heterosexual couples where the man was convicted of rape, murder, battery or all sorts of things. What does that prove?
I use to help in a womans shelter.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:51am PT
|
John:
I gave my personal experience. I didn't draw my conclusions just from that.
"Despite homosexual claims that “Love Makes A Family,” homosexual domestic partners are experiencing
an epidemic of violence—both physical and emotional abuse at the hands of their “lovers.” Until recently,
this was a dirty little secret that was kept from the public. In a PBS “All Things Considered” interview with a
Boston homosexual activist in 1996, the commentator noted that the problem of homosexual domestic partner
“battering” is not new. According to homosexual activists, battering has “been kept quiet in the gay community
for political reasons. It was dirty laundry that didn’t need to be aired in public.”
It appears that homosexuals are now going public with the truth about homosexual domestic violence because
they’re seeking local, state, and federal funds for “safe houses” and counseling programs for the victims
of domestic abuse.
It is instructive to compare the various published statistics of how many homosexuals are victims of samesex
violence each year to how many “hate crimes” are committed against homosexuals by heterosexuals. In
TVC’s special report, Hate Crime Legislation: Unequal Treatment Under the Law, we noted that the latest
FBI hate crime statistics are from 1999. They indicate that in that year only 1,317 hate crime incidents involving
homosexuals were listed. Of those, many of them were name-calling or simple assault. In 1998, there
were 16,914 murders committed. Only four were considered hate-motivated murders against homosexuals.
This is not stated to minimize the horror of murder, but to point out that overall, homosexuals are relatively
free of violence directed at them because of their sexual behavior.
Domestic Violence Is A Serious Threat To Homosexuals
Recent statistics compiled by researchers and by homosexual lobbying organizations show that it takes
more than “love” to make a family. In 1999, for example, the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs
(NCAVP) issued a report indicating that there were 3,120 documented incidents of homosexual domestic
violence in San Francisco, New York City, Chicago, Boston, Los Angeles, Colorado, Cleveland, and Columbus,
Ohio. Compare the 3,120 figure to the 1,317 hate crimes committed against homosexuals nationally in
1999. The conclusion is obvious: Homosexuals pose a far greater threat to other homosexuals than do
heterosexuals.
“Violence in Lesbian and Gay Relationships: Theory, Prevalence, and Correlational Factors,” was published
in 1999 by the Clinical Psychology Review. This study surveyed 19 different studies on homosexual domestic
violence, comparing those rates to heterosexual rates of violence. It found: 28% of heterosexual couples,
48% of lesbians and 38% of homosexual male couples reported physical abuse in one study. In studies using
only lesbian couples, psychological abuse was reported by 73% to 90% of lesbians. More than 30% of
lesbians had been in a relationship where at least one physical incident occurred.
In “Extent, Nature, and Consequences Of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings From The National Violence
Against Women Survey,” published by the federal National Institutes of Health in July, 2000, researchers
found “that same-sex cohabitants reported significantly more intimate partner violence than did oppose-sex
cohabitants.” Among lesbians, 39.2% reported being raped, physically assaulted, or stalked by their samesex
partner. For male homosexuals, 15.4% reported being raped, physically assaulted, and/or stalked by a
male partner. Overall, the research indicated that partner violence (both heterosexual and homosexual) is far
higher among unmarried couples than married couples.
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/DomesticBattering.pdf
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 01:53am PT
|
Jody, I go to a Methodist Church that welcomes all people..Gay, bisexual, transgender,straight, black white,blue, brown.... Some of the gay couples have been together for- 10-40 years. After reading some of these posts, I feel blessed to have a church that welcomes all to worship God.
I usually don't talk about my beliefs, it's very personnal for me....I don't claim to be a daisy.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 02:00am PT
|
" After reading some of these posts, I feel blessed to have a church that welcomes all to worship God."
My church lets gays attend worship services.But they may not preach the homosexual lefestyle or hold church office. What churches do not allow gays to worship?
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 02:01am PT
|
Jody,Jennie, Yeah, with big strings attached! I don't believe it! I GIVE UP!!! Must use my ignore button..
Edit: My Pastor treats Gays like everyone else..It called People..humans..
Not Gay People..Just People. In Church and out of church..Just people..
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 02:03am PT
|
Yes, preaching homosexual lifestyle, in church, is a BIG string !
Nita, our bishop or congregation members don't refer to them as gays in church. The worship of God is the focus, there, not saint/sinner distinctions. And no segregated chapels either
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 02:04am PT
|
Maybe if Gay relationships sometimes run into trouble, that introducing more commitment, like marraige, would help.
Maybe if people accepted them more and they feared judgement, denial, and persecution less, then their relationships would get healthier as well
Peace
Karl
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 02:17am PT
|
Jennie,
Yes.. People are violent. Are you going to say heterosexual relationships are immoral because they are violent? No.. of course not. So using statistics to say that homosexual relations are bad or immoral is just silly. Humans with egos and carnal minds are violent. The solution is the Christ mind, but most folks wont want to try to understand this because to them God is an angry judgmental being in the sky who is just looking for an excuse to judge people.
That, in my opinion, is too bad. They wont see that God is Love and Power , not just love and not just power, because we seem to focus more energy in judging people then we do in Loving them.
Do you think Homosexuals feel loved by the church? Aren't we God's representatives? I have no doubt that the laws of Karma will cause people to reap what they sow, so I don't have to add to it.
It would be useful for Christians to understand why God says homosexuality is immoral. I wonder when they will start asking that question, or do they continue to believe that all revelation stopped with Jesus and the apostles.
Hopefully Christians will wake up and see that God is still talking to us. The bible is incomplete and is flawed. Or why would we not continue to allow slavery today. It isn't banned anywhere in the Bible, in fact there are rules on how to do it properly.
Did America screw up by banning slavery?
|
|
crusher
climber
Santa Monica, CA
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 02:43am PT
|
Wow, go away to climb for the weekend and then find that this thing has blown up.
Jody wrote:
"Crusher, what's wrong? Jennie make some points that hit close to home?"
Pfft - that's funny - what, are you 12? Because I support the right of gay people to marry that means I'm gay? (And if I were, who cares?!). Then I guess a whole bunch of us have now come out of the closet here - oh, whoops, wait a minute - actually it's YOU and JENNIE! I mean it's you gay-bashers who keep turning out to be closeted after all.
Jennie just gives a very sheltered, closed-minded opinion, which she is certainly entitled to. However treating our homosexual brothers and sisters like they're anything less than fellow human beings deserving of all the same rights as the rest of us, in this day and age, with all the really big and tragic problems we have in this world, is truly sad. "We have them here too" she says - what, are they aliens? Who talks like that?!!!
Thank you to John M., Karl, Degaine, Nita, Khanom, DMT and others who said it way better than I could.
The issue at hand is an issue of human rights. Whether or not you feel homosexuality is right or wrong, it's here, it's with us out in the open and it's not going away. If you are against it then don't associate with gay people or frequent gay establishments, don't go to a gay neighborhood or city, don't practice your religion in a house of worship that is accepting of "them". Live how you want to. BUT LIVE AND LET LIVE.
Honestly - what harm does it do to you personally if gay people marry?
And you can cite all the research you want - each side has their research negating the other side's research and so on ad infinitum. We can spin until the cows come home...bottom line, whatever other peoples' relationships are like, most of them will never have any direct bearing on YOU - so why be so concerned with others and why not mind you own house?
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 11:46am PT
|
Homosexual trad climbers!! Now you are going to get people's knickers in a knott. By 'disinfect', do you mean bolting?
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:05pm PT
|
"Jennie, I call bull. Who are you generalizing about? There is a surprising number of gay people here in the park and I am friends to many of them. I have helped them through all of the same things that heterosexual couples go through. So please save your generalizing for yourself."
John, I should have mentioned this last night, but I wasn't suggesting you were a flatterer or backslapper, or indifferent to gays in need. Yes, I was generalizing from my own experience. I believe my point was valid but it wasn't aimed at you, personally.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:08pm PT
|
"Jennie just gives a very sheltered, closed-minded opinion, which she is certainly entitled to. However treating our homosexual brothers and sisters like they're anything less than fellow human beings deserving of all the same rights as the rest of us, in this day and age, with all the really big and tragic problems we have in this world, is truly sad. "We have them here too" she says - what, are they aliens? Who talks like that?!!! "
Its amazing to me how much competitive mileage and socio-political hay some of you can make out of my statement "We have homosexuals in Idaho, too!" Sorry I'm not in lockstep with Southwest political correctness. Where I live such observations do not bring on gasps of horror or stoning.
What many of you have conveniently ignored is the fact Jody, myself (and others) have said, repeatedly, we're not against gays civil or property rights or their rights to make covenants with one another. We are against STATE RECOGNIZED gay marriage.
Adolescents sometimes have gender identification crisis. I hope the State of California recognizing homosexual marriage and thus equating it with heterosexual marriage doesn't lead to your children making careless decisions that affect them in a negative way. "Homosexuality must be KOOL! LOOK, the state recognizes it."
I won't weary you with more of my opinion. Its obvious most of you here opt for head-in-the-sand, "Oh but we're so progressive" blindness. And as was obvious yesterday morning, chomping at the bit to tilt the context of my posts in order to make "heroic" counterposts in your own honor.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:22pm PT
|
Hey Jennie, Thanks for responding.
You wrote,
"What many of you have conveniently ignored is the fact Jody, myself (and others) have said, repeatedly, we're not against gays civil or property rights or their rights to make covenants with one another. We are against STATE RECOGNIZED gay marriage"
I wish that this were true, if it is true for you, then that is great. I personally don't care what a relationship is called. Jody on the other hand has indicated that he would be against Homosexual couples receiving the same privileges as heterosexual couples, that being social security benefits.
John
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:24pm PT
|
"This is disengenuouos AT BEST and most likely a bald-faced lie."
"The anti-gay-marriage coalitions are in large part against gay civil unions, gay rights and the gay-way entirely."
I have no connection to any anti-gay coalition. Why don't you try Communism, Islam or Scientology, Dingus. Thats sure to get some hits.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:30pm PT
|
John,
I believe Jody opposes Social Security entirely, but I should let him speak for himself on that.
Im not contrary to Social Security or Gov't pensions for gays. Or appropriate and fair distribution of property, largesse after breakup of homosexual union.
|
|
WoodySt
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:31pm PT
|
There's something quite interesting I've noticed about Gays, and it hasn't been mentioned yet on this thread. Further,it's quite pertinent to the various issues discussed: Gays only sportclimb.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:36pm PT
|
Jennie wrote: “its amazing to me how much competitive mileage and socio-political hay some of you can make out of my statement "We have homosexuals in Idaho, too!"
I remember well an educational commercial that was on TV a lot when I was a kid (early / mid eighties) that address prejudice / bigotry. Kid and his grandfather in a boat fishing. Kid says something to the effect “I have black friends”, etc., grandfather says that prejudice to distinguish black, white, asian, etc., friends. They should all just be his friends.
The above statement about which everyone keeps hounding you demonstrates a clear prejudice on your part.
Jennie wrote: “What many of you have conveniently ignored is the fact Jody, myself (and others) have said, repeatedly, we're not against gays civil or property rights or their rights to make covenants with one another. We are against STATE RECOGNIZED gay marriage.”
You and Jody have conveniently ignored is the fact that myself and others have brought up the US Constitution and equal protection under the law, the bill of rights, etc., and stating that either the federal government recognizes both in order to keep its nose in the marriage business, or it should get out of the marriage business altogether.
Jennie wrote: “Adolescents sometimes have gender identification crisis. I hope the State of California recognizing homosexual marriage and thus equating it with heterosexual marriage doesn't lead to your children making careless decisions that affect them in a negative way. "Homosexuality must be KOOL! LOOK, the state recognizes it."
That paragraph is so f’ed up I don’t know where to begin. I’ll let someone with more time on their hands address it.
Jennie wrote: “I won't weary you with more of my opinion. Its obvious most of you here opt for head-in-the-sand, "Oh but we're so progressive" blindness.
Wow, that’s a cop out. We have our head in the sand? In my case, I never claimed to “be so progressive” as you put it.
But do tell, since I apparently have my head in the sand, to what am I blind? You keep mentioning (as does Jody) this “homosexual lifestyle”, to what exactly are you referring? Care to shed any light on the apparent heterosexual lifestyle that I am currently leading?
Jennie wrote: “And as was obvious yesterday, chomping at the bit to tilt the context of my posts in order to make "heroic" counterposts in your own honor.
No one has to tilt your posts, it’s pretty clear where you stand.
But I’ll just say that your posts are pretty aggressive, as are Jody’s with regard to this particular subject, and that contributes to the types of responses your receiving.
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:39pm PT
|
Jennie says,"Adolescents sometimes have gender identification crisis. I hope the State of California recognizing homosexual marriage and thus equating it with heterosexual marriage doesn't lead to your children making careless decisions that affect them in a negative way. "Homosexuality must be KOOL! LOOK, the state recognizes it".
.........
Jennie, I doubt that, because- who wants to be discriminated against, kids want to fit in.
I have come to the conclusion... that some people really are NOT AWARE of how there words hurt others.
off to work- bye.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 12:44pm PT
|
"Adolescents sometimes have gender identification crisis"
GIC's? Really? And is the idea behind a GIC is that this is 'natural' or simply a matter of suburban confusion that, left to their own devices, adolescents will on their own 'do the right thing'. How interesting! God only know how easily influenced such youths are. And god forbid they stumble 'under the influence' and come down on the gay side of life?
The clear back beat and unconscious innuendo from Idaho appears to be that, given enough time, any ['natural'] right-thinking kid will come to his or her senses unless unless of course they are lured to the darkside by gay marriage. Given the abysmal divorce statistics for hetero marriages which you and god condone it's pretty clear gays would be hard pressed to do worse than hetero marriage. And the fact you folks in Idaho, along with a lot of other red states, have some of the worst divorce rates in America makes me wonder all the more if christian 'family values' isn't something more sprayed about than lived by conservatives.
|
|
happiegrrrl
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 03:28pm PT
|
"Homosexuality must be KOOL! LOOK, the state recognizes it".
Well....if anything, being 'state-sanctioned,' will reduce the cool factor of any belief, behavior or way of being; that's pretty much been proven throughout history. I mean - "Drive 55!" sure didn't make it cool to go slow on the road. Raising the drinking age to 21 didn't make it cool to wait those extra virginal years between 18 and 21, either. Nor did allowing the vote at 18 make it cool to vote....
hmmm....
While it does seem to be cool to be playing at bisexuality these days, I think that when it comes to marriage, people will pretty much do exactly what has been being done for years and years. To wit; they will marry sometimes out of love, sometimes out of desperation, sometimes for convenience, sometimes under pressure compounded with an inability to stand up for themselves, probably impulsively while in the throes of fascination and infatuation(a real often-timer for the hetero crowd, it appears) and sometimes out of misplaced ideas of romanticism. Plus the numerous other reasons people find themselves(ala Meatloaf) "waiting for the end of time, so they can end their time with..."
Imagine - how many homosexual people have entered into heterosexual marriages? And what happens? they get to deal with it(or not, or some variation of dealing/not dealing). Well - now people can just as well find themselves in a marriage and realize "I can't TAKE it any more! I'm straight!!!!"
But probably not so much.....
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 24, 2008 - 03:40pm PT
|
Hey Weschrist,
Hurry up with that latest Bible edition.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 04:22pm PT
|
"Nice dodge. Care to address the (and others) part of your statement? Or will you deflect once more?"
Deflect what? Address what?
I believe my posts are pretty clear. That is, to individuals not bent on distorting them.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 04:27pm PT
|
You could try reading the thread Dingus. The "others", I referred to are there.
No, I'm not in an anti gay coalition or speaking for one. I was posting my personal opinion on a very political climbing forum.
|
|
Dick_Lugar
Trad climber
Indiana (the other Mideast)
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 05:02pm PT
|
Aha Dirtbag...you fail to recognzide that God has a peculiar sense of humor and has the luxury of time on his side in that he is infinite. He'll wait until the "Kalifornicators" are lulled into complacency as they head daily to the beach to eath seafood with not a worry in the world...then, he will UNLEASH THE HOUNDS OF HELL UNTO THE PEOPLE OF LALA LAND TO RIP THEIR FLESH FROM THEIR BONES, WHILE THEY ARE ALIVE MIND YOU, AND LAUGH MANIACALLY FROM HIS MIGHTY THRONE IN HIS KINGDOM OF HEAVEN!!!... at least that's what I envision!
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 24, 2008 - 05:05pm PT
|
Oh no Dick...you mean the wolves of Idaho are heading our way?
(shudder!)
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 05:57pm PT
|
Kermit Love, the man who helped create Big Bird, the Snuffleupagus, and other Sesame Street creatures, has died.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/24/arts/24love.html?_r=1&ref=obituaries&oref=slogin
"The cause was congestive heart failure, said Christopher Lyall, Mr. Love’s partner of 50 years."
Was it Big Bird, Elmo or Barney that was supposed to be part of a homosexual conspiracy to subvert American values? I always get confused.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 24, 2008 - 06:00pm PT
|
Bert and Ernie were supposedly lovers promoting a gay lifestyle.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 08:57pm PT
|
As I've pointed out before, doctrine-informed anti-gay folk's most basic assumption is that a genuiine gay person does not, in fact, exist. "God" only made straight folks and a gay is in fact a perverted or disgtorted staight person who doesn't know who he or she really is (straight).
In short, anti-gay arguments are most often forms of wholesale denial, insisting that natural born gay folk are no such thing. Secondary foolishness is hooked up to orientation being not instinctual, but a choice, hence the fear that staight folk who make such a damnable choice can possibly influence others to go fruit as well. Isn't this all bollocks, really.
JL
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 09:02pm PT
|
I heard the new wolves in Idaho are not like the natives in that the reintroduced wolves are much bigger, and have a much wider stance.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 09:37pm PT
|
Largo wrote
"In short, anti-gay arguments are most often forms of wholesale denial, insisting that natural born gay folk are no such thing. Secondary foolishness is hooked up to orientation being not instinctual, but a choice, hence the fear that staight folk who make such a damnable choice can possibly influence others to go fruit as well. Isn't this all bollocks, really. "
They funny thing is, they insist that being Gay is a choice that could become more popular if legitimized, but none of them will admit that it's a choice they feel for themselves or have any trouble resisting.
Everybody who would consider acting Gay if it were just legal to be married raise your hand!
Peace
Karl
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 09:42pm PT
|
"I heard the new wolves in Idaho are not like the natives in that the reintroduced wolves are much bigger, and have a much wider stance."
Yeah, but are they Canadian, and do they hang out at airports in Minnesota?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 11:15pm PT
|
Agreed Lois
Seems like there are some who feel gays should keep their feelings just bottled up and join the priesthood or something. That hasn't turned out to be so much better for society.
Peace
Karl
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 11:35pm PT
|
I can't believe this thread made it to over 300 replies.
but I still enjoy knowing the Jody believes in one less god than I do.
:-)
|
|
crusher
climber
Santa Monica, CA
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 11:52pm PT
|
"So, what I am getting from coz and others is they only believe in a god that has an "anything goes" policy. What's the point in believing in a god at all then?"
So...any form of God that's believed in should have a closed-minded policy and that's the "one way or the highway"?
There are many different versions, forms, types and variations of a God or higher power. We live in a free society where citizens have the choice to believe in whichever God or Gods (or none for that matter) they like. They can believe in Joseph Smith and golden tablets and magic underwear. They can believe in animal Gods, plant Gods, Hindu Gods/Goddesses, Buddha, Wicken, whatever.
Why is there only a "point" in believing in only ONE particular God (i.e. yours)?
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 11:55pm PT
|
Jody, I talked with my neighbor about your link and mental health, by the way.. he's a shrink. First, he pointed out the data was from the Netherlands, and he didn't really know any numbers. What he did tell me..was.. suicides in gay teens has large numbers. Why, because they feel hopeless, they don't want to be gay and their families don't accept them.
edit: please don't blame me for your closed mind.
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2008 - 11:55pm PT
|
Supreme Consciousness
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 25, 2008 - 12:01am PT
|
"Seems like there are some who feel gays should keep their feelings just bottled up and join the priesthood or something. "
When my friend first came out, he told me he was considering doing that for that reason. I advised him "don't."
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 12:22am PT
|
Just popping in, haven't read the last 200 posts.
Have we solved it yet? Everyone agreed?
No?
Carry on.
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 12:23am PT
|
Om Namah Shivaya
|
|
nature
climber
Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 12:33am PT
|
Hare Krishna....
Om Shanti
Edit: So, nita, George sings of "(his) sweet lord". Who was his lord? Vishnu? Krishna being the 7th incarnation of Vishnu and (Krishna) being like, the dude, in the Gita... etc. etc. Just wondering. I mean, George sings the song like some western evangelical so it's kinda confusing.... (to me at least).
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 12:46am PT
|
Nature,I don't know... i always assumed he, like you.. believes in more than one God.??? More than one way to enlightenment.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 01:09am PT
|
If you talk to most serious students of most of Indian philosophy, it turns out that the vast majority believe there is only One ultimate Spiritual Being and the rest of the show projects from that.
Pretty much the same as Christianity (unless you play games with the Trinity not being One)
We have to assume All the Religions are pointing to the same One Ultimate truth. It's just that they go about misunderstanding and misinterpreting it in different ways according to their tradition, culture and politics.
Yup, same God made all those Gay people. That's why there are found everywhere.
But, I have to admit, God seems to be smiting California at the moment. Funny thing is, the fires are burning closer to where the rednecks (not that there's anything wrong with that) live, rather than the gay neighborhoods.
Peace
Karl
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 01:20am PT
|
"Funny thing is, the fires are burning closer to where the rednecks (not that there's anything wrong with that) live, rather than the gay neighborhoods.aaaa"
Karl, yep..new fires in the foothills above Chico.. again. Lots o Redneck and regular folks live in them hills. Smoky as hell here..cough.cough..
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 01:26am PT
|
Some non-Christians, particularly some Muslims, see Christianity as a form of polytheism. There certainly are a lot of holy spirits, angels, saints and blessed subsidiaries, not to mention all the holy relatives.
I'm fairly sure that George was actually trying to say "He's so fine" - even though it cost him $587,000.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/He's_So_Fine
|
|
Doug Buchanan
Mountain climber
Fairbanks Alaska
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 06:00am PT
|
Late at night as usual, and not to be outdone by such a grand array of intellect among my astute SuperTopo colleagues for an issue so central to quality climbing opportunities, and having not read most of the thread, wisely recognize that the design of living species requires mechanisms (several) to slow reproduction upon approaching or reaching the maximum species population for their current or optimum ecosystem condition.
My last casual notice of the current stats revealed somewhere over 150 larger species having been verified as manifesting homosexual activities in relation to real or test situation over-population, if my memory on that data is correct.
Blame it on the designer, God, the scientists, George Bush or the Californians, but it is a logical mechanism inherent to sex on a finite rock.
An involved verification of the impartial ignorance of the humans, not exclusive to the straights, is the craving of the gays to get "married" under a government "marriage license" in which the government is the third contractual party in the "marriage", granting idiot court judges (lawyers with politically appointed judge jobs) the power to make binding decisions on the two idiots who agreed to include the government in their marriage agreement.
There is a process for more intelligent gays and straights to acquire the full, complete benefits of marriage, without exception, without government involvement or intervention, but this sentence just as well be written in Swahili when presented to the gullible Americans who have been fooled into believing inherently lying lawyers, government dolts, news journalists, and not ask questions of we of the Higher Order, the Mountain Climbers.
Or so I might imagine. The Alaskan Alpine Club's new climbing stuff display room will accept equipment donations resulting from marriage separations among straight, gay and confused couples. We need more carabiners of any condition, to hang stuff. Gates optional.
Doug
AlaskanAlpineClub.org
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 03:21pm PT
|
1 Corinthians 13:13 So faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
Loving your fellow man is more important that faith!
Lots of good stuff in the Bible is ignored by those who wish to reinforce their narrow views.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 03:26pm PT
|
Yeah, but there're a lot of 'rules' in the Bible too that are overlooked in search of 'turn the other cheek' and 'love thy neighbor'.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 04:13pm PT
|
"Yeah, but there're a lot of 'rules' in the Bible too that are overlooked in search of 'turn the other cheek' and 'love thy neighbor'. "
Yep...Like slaves and such. I'm thinking about getting a couple of Canadians. How about you?
As for your male and female slaves whom you may have-- you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. Lev 25:44
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 25, 2008 - 04:20pm PT
|
Idahoan slaves work better.
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 05:32pm PT
|
Oh man!
I’m trying to get caught up on the last two days of posts. There’s some real gems in here.
That long list of facts that Jody posted is interesting. But, it’s already been noted that those things could be attributed to a number of factors, and not necessarily lesbianism.
And the fact that he had all of that stuff ready to go at the drop of a hat is, well, kind of weird. The guy has done his homework! And he seriously doesn’t like lesbians!
Khanom asked:
”When do we get the New Testament™ 2.0? “
That was tried already by the Mormons. It didn’t go over too well and is the reason why Mormons are about as respected as the Scientologists.
Many years from now, we’re all going to look back on this thread and laugh. Gay marriage is going to similar to inter-racial marriage. It’s just going to take time. The dinosaurs are slowly going extinct.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 05:34pm PT
|
Non, non, non! The dinosaurs aren't going extinct. They're EVOLVING.
Hypothesis: Human nature and behaviour disprove the 'theory' of intelligent design. No intelligent being could have designed humanity, unless hungover at the time.
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 08:02pm PT
|
Jody, I said this upthread, but we've had a couple cases in front of the judge that wrote the decision eventually affirmed by the appellate court and then supreme court. He's no lib.
DMT is right, the 14th answers the question. That's why the anit-gay marriage zealots (do they not have anything better to do?) know they need to amend the constitution to prohibit it.
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 08:04pm PT
|
"The definition of marriage from that era is irrelevant. Look up the ....
DMT"
TL:DR
GD
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 08:10pm PT
|
Jody's a bigot and homophobe? That's so ridiculous it's almost funny.
If Jody has a lesbo friend, how can he be a homophobe or a bigot. You people throw these terms around whenever somebody makes a moral stance on something.
Kinda like if you are against illegal immigration, you're a racist.
It's really weak and shows a lack of any legitimate arguement. Or the old, "they're doing the work Americans won't do", yeah, tell that to an underpaid or unemployed construction worker.
I guess that I too am a racist, a bigot, and homophobe. Oh well. Say what you will.
"What a notion! Incredible! You'd think maybe some poeple would have founded, like, a whole country based on that idea. Wow. "
Am I allowed to vote to change the state constitution though?
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 08:11pm PT
|
I thought I was a homophobe once because I made my boyfriend wear a wig : /
|
|
tolman_paul
Trad climber
Anchorage, AK
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 08:14pm PT
|
The religous views of the founders of this country were the basis for the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and foundation of our legal system. Not implementing a state religion is entirely different than forming an atheistic state. But many don't want to acknowledge the foundations of this countries government.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 08:32pm PT
|
It's equally possible to be against gay-marriage and not be homophobic or bigoted.
Are you motophobic because you dislike the use of OHV's on public lands that consume and spew gasoline? Not really. It's a 'rational' fear.
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 08:41pm PT
|
many don't want to acknowledge the foundations of "religous views". Like an Egyptian obelisk with a cross stuck on top of it or Christmas taking place on the winter solstice, the "judeo-christian values" are based on older laws/values.
All people are created equal is an American value. Personally I believe in that value more than religous values that discrimintate.
It would be interesting to ask politicians what is more important to them American Values (equality) or Religous Values. Of course most wouldn't have the guts to give a straightforward answer.
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 09:00pm PT
|
Jody wrote:"You haven't read a single post I have made on this thread have you? You, and the others on this thread who continually say that if you don't accept every behavior of a person then you don't love them...are so close-minded it is pathetic. You people keep spouting off with the same talking-points..."If you don't accept their behavior you don't love them", "Judge not lest ye be judged", "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone", etc. Yet nobody answered the post where I spelled out how out-of-context you were taking all those Scriptures. Nobody has given me any reason why we have to accept ALL behavior ALL the time in order to love someone. "
I might have read one or two of your posts, but what's the point? You just put words in my mouth, you lump me in with liberals, and assume to know what my thoughts and motivations are. You insult me. You are like a broken record.
If you really had an open mind you would read what I have to say and take value out of it, instead of being insulted by it.
There is acceptance and there is tolerance. You don't have to accept that being gay is ok, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But being tolerant is not only good for those you don't agree with, it's good for you.
Sure you can love someone without accepting any/all of their behaviors.
Put yourself in other people's shoes for a moment. What if you were born gay? You knew you were absolutely attracted to the same sex and everything you tried to change it did nothing. Wouldn't you want equality?
I used to believe in civil unions. Mainly because a gay friend said she was ok with it, if not calling it marriage doesn't offend some people she could live with not calling it marriage. But now i believe that is seperate but equal, which or course isn't really equal.
All men are created equal. I believe that is a great ideal to live up to.
It's up to us how we intepret the scriptures. And that says a lot about us as people.
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 10:29pm PT
|
No worries Jody. I would guess your strong desire to pursue what you see is good/right fuels your posts and thoughts.
There is a whole spectrum of feelings and people. There are even some people who are much more conservative than you! You California hippy! :-)
I would not consider myself liberal or conservative, because I think once you label yourself it contributes towards accepting other peoples views, instead of making my own mind up about what I think is good and just.
|
|
rockermike
Mountain climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2008 - 11:33pm PT
|
Damn, I'm out of town for 5 days and this thing is still growing. Who would'a thought.
Take note though, there are 1000 wildfires in California burning right now. Maybe this is the beginning of the end. ha
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 26, 2008 - 12:07am PT
|
Yes Jody, there are many things I believe are immoral, too many to list: almost all inflict some kind of pain/damage to someone else. Basically, violations of "Do unto others..."
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 12:48am PT
|
I'm curious as to how those advocating for 'traditional' marriage would address the situation of those with XXY chromsomes, XXY chromosomes, or the various other unusual combinations. Perhaps less than 1% of the population, but then the active homosexual population of the U.S. seems to not be more than 4% or 5%, and perhaps less.
So, are those with XXY or XYY chromosomes male, or female? Who should they be allowed to marry?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 01:22am PT
|
"I think the only question remaining is "Will any given Government or Church recognise a particular marriage?" Or even "Do they HAVE to?"
That was a fine post Rox but folks are hanging on to their perspective and since when has common sense or a superior argument changed anybody's mind around here? It happens about %5 of the time, maybe %15 of the time among the lurkers who might not have felt strongly about it enough to post.
We're living in our own worlds and believe what we want to believe.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 01:27am PT
|
Please, I ask that you go back and read my last post
Fine thoughts. Too bad the people slinging mud at each other on this thread won't stop to read it.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 01:36am PT
|
Rox,
"Nobody will like this, (too bad), but again I will tell my most cherished secrets to make my point. My wife and I were not married by any established rite, or by civil act."
I can't imagine that there are very many here who would disagree with your method of marrying. There is a benefit that you may be depriving yourself of though, or at least making it more difficult to obtain, and that is social security benefits for a surviving member of a marriage. If one member of a married couple dies, the surviving spouse can continue to receive her/his own Social Security benefit, or 100% of the deceased spouse's benefit, whichever is more. If your wife earned less over her lifetime than you did, and she outlives you, she'll start receiving your benefits. And vice versas or so I understand.
This is of course the benefit that Homosexual couples would like to have and one I see no reason to deny them, even though I believe God meant sexual relations to be between a man and a wowan.
So there is a benefit to having that legal document. Plus Idaho does not recognize common law marriages for relationships that started after 1996. I don't know when your marriage started, but that legal document makes life easier. That is if you end up staying together through old age.
.....................
About Quaker marriages, there is a part that I think you left out. In the Friends meeting that I attended, to be recognized as married by the Quakers, one has to declare their desire to marry, then the meeting appoints a clearness committee that determines if they think the couple is ready to marry and if the marriage is sanctioned by God. If the couple passes this, then the wedding ceremony they choose is up to them. They could in effect just stand up in meeting and declare themselves married, though it usually involves a worship service in which you meet in silence and anyone who feels led to speak, can.
As I understand it, the clearness committee is an important part of Quaker beliefs. I could be wrong as I only attended meetings for about a year. I attended an unstructured meeting, one without a pastor which could also be called a silent meeting. It isn't exactly silent though, it just doesn't have a formal preacher. In the meeting I attended anyone who felt led by the spirit could get up and speak, although there are leaders in the church who could override you if turned out to be a whacko. If no one felt led by the spirit, then no one spoke.
As I said earlier, I only attended meetings for about one year, so I could be wrong about some things.
John
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 02:12am PT
|
I already posted that, Karl.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 03:17am PT
|
Jody, Jennie and others keep bringing up the “homosexual lifestyle”, what the f’ is this lifestyle you’re talking about ?
As far as quoting the bible, talking about God or being Godless, that’s all religious stuff and I fail to see the relevance when discussing US Law and a US citizen’s right to equal protection under the law as clearly outlined in the US constitution?
If we must talk about religion, Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, Christian (Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Lutheran, Protestant, Unitarian, etc., etc.) do not define marriage in the same manner, given the first amendment, I fail to see where the US Government and / or US States would be justified in taking it upon themselves to define marriage. Perhaps those with a greater expertise in Constitutional Law, or law in general can help me out.
LEB wrote : It guarantees that no action based solely in religious ideology becomes the law of the land nor that we enact laws which require others to think in that same (religious) way. If the religious ideology and the legal ideology happen to overlap e.g. injunctions against murder or theft - that is permissible.
Succinct and well put.
Rokjox,
For what it’s worth, I read your post from beginning to end. Nice post.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 03:36am PT
|
Jody wrote: You haven't read a single post I have made on this thread have you? You, and the others on this thread who continually say that if you don't accept every behavior of a person then you don't love them...are so close-minded it is pathetic.
Plenty posters, okay at least I have clearly stated that I’ve understood the distinction you are making. I understand that you love a lot of people who do certain things of which you do not approve.
Jody wrote: You people keep spouting off with the same talking-points...
As do you.
Jody wrote: Nobody has given me any reason why we have to accept ALL behavior ALL the time in order to love someone.
No one’s trying to get you to accept all behavior all the time. Condoning a behavior and being tolerant of the legality of certain behaviors are not the same.
I don’t condone overeating and smoking (and especially combining both), should we modify the CA state or the US constitutions to ban both?
I can point to plenty of Jewish and Muslims in the US who do not approve of (“accept” as you put it) eating pork, yet you never here a peep from them asking that the law prohibit others from eating pork. Sure, they could state,
“Everyone has equal protection under the law to consume other foods for nourishment, no one’s stopping them from doing that!”
But that would be imposing religious dietary laws on the population as a whole. And as you seem to be aware, that’s a big no-no according to the US Constitution.
Any chance you see my point?
|
|
Doug Buchanan
Mountain climber
Fairbanks Alaska
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 06:00am PT
|
What is the record for absolutely non-climbing threads on SuperTopo?
Back at 318 I stated: There is a process for more intelligent gays and straights to acquire the full, complete benefits of marriage, without exception, without government involvement or intervention, but this sentence just as well be written in Swahili when presented to the gullible Americans who have been fooled into believing inherently lying lawyers, government dolts, news journalists, and not ask questions of we of the Higher Order, the Mountain Climbers.
Now therefore we know there are no SuperTopo readers of this entire thread who are interested in their own gay marriage with full benefits, or who understand the value of asking questions, who have not already figured it out.
And God can speak for herself on the issue, to the entire universe. If she needed humans to speak for her, she is obviously not God, much to the confusion of all the laughable human religious leaders who claim to speak for what is therefore obviously not God. Check out Astronomy Picture of the Day to consider the ludicrous nature of a suggestion that God needs humans for anything.
And the Alaskan Alpine Club museum just got a pair of Embick's rock shoes, but we still need donated carabiners of any condition, to hang stuff. Gay, straight, believer or non believer biners are welcome.
Doug
AlaskanAlpineClub.org
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 08:52am PT
|
Doug wrote
"Back at 318 I stated: There is a process for more intelligent gays and straights to acquire the full, complete benefits of marriage, without exception, without government involvement or intervention, but this sentence just as well be written in Swahili when presented to the gullible Americans who have been fooled into believing inherently lying lawyers, government dolts, news journalists, and not ask questions of we of the Higher Order, the Mountain Climbers. "
Come on Doug, this is about the bazillionth post where you claim to have some advanced insight, but instead of actually posting your knowledge and opinion. you merely claim to know it and spend the rest of the post knocking others down.
Why not just tell us in as simple a terms as you can manage?
Peace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 10:24am PT
|
Once the Islamic Raghead terrorists invade and take over this country due to the weakness of the PC crowd, they will begin to feed the Christians to the Lions and Jody will be calling for "Equal rights and Justice for the minority"
God forbid
Peace
Karl
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 10:49am PT
|
While we may never see eye to eye on this subject, I think we can all agree on one thing:
Doug Buchanan is as nutty as a fruitcake.
Are there any passages in the Bible about handicapped people? How should they be treated? Since they have chosen to be retarded, I'm guessing they are no different than gays in God's eyes.
|
|
Todd Gordon
Trad climber
Joshua Tree, Cal
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 11:12am PT
|
I'm single, boys......any takers?
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 12:17pm PT
|
Good post Rockjox, but a religion did have a big influence on marriage.
The Cannanites in what is now Israel had a pretty lax policy on relationships. Part of their religion was focused on fertility/sex and celebrating it, including watching priests have sex and temple prostitutes. When the Jews took over they saw the problems inherent in that lifestyle and made "rules" and put forth "marriage". At that time it wasn't monogamous marriage though!
Over the years marriage came to be generally accepted as a man and a woman. It leads to a stable society and stable families, less transfer of disease, etc.
Much later our founding fathers promoted the idea of equality as a value. At that time equality meant white, male, land owners, but the idea was greater than the men. Over time the conditions have been and are being removed from equality. Why should someone born gay have less rights than someone born straight?
Of course gay marriages aren't the same as straight marriages. It is better to have a father and mother when raising kids, to give role models of behavior, etc. But when someone doesn't want to be married to and isn't attracted to the opposite sex should they be prohibited from marriage? It's better to have enough money for good education and nutrition, but should poor people be prohibited from having kids?
Society and it's view points change. The original and most basic meaning of a conservative is someone who wants to hold on to and do things as they have been done in the past. While a liberal/progressive wants change. This topic is a perfect example of that.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 26, 2008 - 12:39pm PT
|
Wow. Gotta hand it to you Rokjox, that was one hell of a fine post.
"Smile and be happy for the people who think they are happy with the homosexual life. They (I think) give up a lot to pursue it. But that is not my business, or concern. Just be happy for them, as they have won a hard battle to get this recognition of their marriages. A lot of happy tears are being shed over this. "
Excellent stuff!
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 12:48pm PT
|
Rokjox .....* Beautiful Post*.
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 01:26pm PT
|
There was a time when a white and a black person of any combination of sexes could not become legally married.
One of the reasons I so strongly support equality in all aspects of the law for gays is rooted in this. I am a partner in an interracial marriage. Not very long ago we would not have been allowed to marry, and had we chosen to live together we would have faced ostracism and probably violence. Neither of us chose our different racial backgounds, and neither of us can change. We are deeply in love, and see that love as no different than the love of a same-race couple. Should we be denied the right to marry because of the color of our skin or the shape of our noses or eyes?
In much the same way, the love of gay couples is no different than the love of any other couples, and to say to them that they don't have the same right to legal marriage as straight couples, or mixed-race couples, is cruel and unjustifiable.
Let churches bless or deny couplehood in whatever way they see fit. I don't care if some Christian sect doesn't offer its blessings to gays or blacks, or if the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster refuses to bless unions of left-handed people. As long as they don't force their beliefs on others, they can be as crazy as they want. What really matters is that the rights, duties, and protection accorded to married couples under the law be available to all.
D
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 01:45pm PT
|
Another *Beautiful post*, Thanks ~ Ghost.......
.........................................
1 Corinthians 13:4. Love endures long and is patient and kind; love never is envious nor boils over with jealousy, is not boastful or vainglorious, does not display itself haughtily.
1 Corinthians 13:5. It is not conceited (arrogant and inflated with pride); it is not rude (unmannerly) and does not act unbecomingly. Love (God's love in us) does not insist on its own rights or its own way, for it is not self seeking; it is not touchy or fretful or resentful; it takes no account of the evil done to it [it pays no attention to a suffered wrong].
1 Corinthians 13:6. It does not rejoice at injustice and unrighteousness, but rejoices when right and truth prevail.
1 Corinthians 13:7. Love bears up under anything and everything that comes, is ever ready to believe the best of every person, its hopes are fadeless under all circumstances, and it endures everything [without weakening].
1 Corinthians 13:11. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; now that I have become a man, I am done with childish ways and have put them aside.
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 02:52pm PT
|
Anders, Thanks for the link, I love the last line in the story......
Mrs. Loving stopped giving interviews, but last year issued a statement on the 40th anniversary of the announcement of the Supreme Court ruling, urging that gay men and lesbians be allowed to marry.
..........
edit: another well written post~~ raises it's voice up high.. Thanks L.;-)
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 02:52pm PT
|
"As you work to define and catalog your unique personal belief system, you may at times reflect upon the condition of the world and the struggles humans have endured throughout time.
Seeing the overall disasterous effects of repression in its many forms and disguises may lead you to understand the importance of allowing intellectual and spiritual freedoms for all. When you become a person who actually defends others’ rights to express their ideas and opinions freely, to pursue self-actualization, and to explore spirituality in a variety of ways, you ensure that your own rights are protected in the future.
Though most people loudly articulate their love of freedom, they may nonetheless consciously or even unconsciously deny others their right to do, say, or live as they please. When you understand that people who think and believe differently than you do should be free to do so and when you are willing to defend their right to do so, you demonstrate your open-mindedness and your commitment to supporting autonomous choice. As you have stood up for others, so will they stand to defend you should your rights be challenged.
The protection you afford the rights of others represents an integral part of bringing about a more conscious, liberated and unified world."
This came to me today from a web site called Daily OM, and it reminded me that even those opinions I don't agree with need to be allowed expression.
There's no other way to challenge and dissipate fear unless you bring it out into the open first.
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 06:58pm PT
|
You're welcome, Jody.
My thought is that even if I don't agree with you, unless you're allowed the same freedom to express as I am, then I'm a hypocrite.
Expressing an opinion is different than actively practicing repression and bigotry, however, and cultivating hatred for "others". Like that email said, only when people are truthful about their feelings can we even begin a dialogue...and that's what it's all about--learning to listen with our hearts, and being open enough to empathize with others.
That someone like Bush would attempt to change the Constitution because of their personal fears and prejudices is an act of repression and hatred, though...just to be clear on that.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 07:01pm PT
|
Everyone has a right to their opinion and the climbing world is big enough to hold them all. But things can get interesting when you start clarifying what that opinion actually is, or what is implied. For instance, I made the point that most anti-gay advocateds deny the very existence of gay folk, os far as them being naturally born as such and "God created' if you like to think in those terms. These advocates insist there are only us straight folks, and the sexual behavior of every other model is defective, perverted and unnatural, even to them.
This just so happens to be the one point - the most basic of them all - that gets glossed over in "accepting" the person but dismissing their conduct, and all the other dodges of the bottom line. Not that I've ever done anything to help gay folk, but the opinion that these people don't exist as advertised (naturally so) seems an isue that needs to be wrangled and explained by those insisting as much.
JL
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 07:19pm PT
|
This bares repeating. I wonder who here fully understands this.
"The Bill of Rights was written in part to protect the minority from the tyranny of the masses"
Lois, I am not absolutely certain what post you are referring to, but karl was speaking about a hypothetical situation. What if Jody became the minority? What if Sharia law became the law of the land? Then would Jody be crying for his equal rights to worship as he pleases?
This whole conversation is about equal rights. We give heterosexual couples certain benefits, we should give homosexual couples those same benefits. Nothing more, nothing less.
We aren't ignorant Lois, we understand that much of the country has a right leaning religious belief system. We just ask them to imagine if a different regime came into power, a regime that denied Christianity and forbid the worship of Jesus and they started trying to put into place laws that supported their beliefs. Then what? Would he then hope that the people would rise up and support equal treatment under the law? If so, then he should support it now, or he risks losing it.
Homosexuals simply want equal treatment under the law. Nothing more.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 26, 2008 - 08:06pm PT
|
Lois Wrote:
"I would like to preserve the institution of marriage for heterosexual couples. I have no problems with establishing a comparable institution for gay persons which protects their rights and well being. Personally, I think, even, it serves the best interest of the gay to have such an arrangement meaning an alternative (but legally equal) institution available."
Why not marriage? There's a problem with separate but equal. Often they are not equal. Even assuming that Civil Unions get 100% of the legal rights of marriages, there is a certain stigma attached without actually being deemed as married. It's seen as a second class status, a runner-up prize. There is an attitude inherent in such classifications that says "Nah, you're not good enough for marriage, we'll give you this instead."
"First of all, when a lot of people hear that gay persons want to "marry" or that they are "married," ridicule ensues. People commonly snicker and sneer and laugh about whether this man is the "wife" of that man or even speculate (with ridicule) as to who is the "wife" and who is the "husband "(snort, snort, snicker, snicker). It seems patently ridiculous on some level and, moreover, it leaves the path wide open for "bull dike" jokes and all the sneering and snickering which goes along with them."
That's not your fight. If people are willing to undergo that, that's their choice, not yours.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 08:15pm PT
|
Drives for constitutional amendments and the Nazis specific targeting of homosexuals in their campaign of genocide are driven by the exact same sad perceptions and intolerances - that homosexuality is somehow 'unnatural', 'evil', or an 'abomination'. Again, homosexuality is completely a natural genetic expression within almost all mammalian species. And yeah, it's abnormal by numbers alone in the same way as left-handedness is. And god knows, allowing left-handed people the same rights and respect as right-handed people would clearly be another case of according 'special rights' and forcing left-handedness on all the rest of us.
That there would be 400 posts on this topic in 2008 just shows you U.S. fundamentalists pose just as great danger to our constitution and society as fundamentalist 'terrorists' of any stripe living abroad.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 26, 2008 - 08:18pm PT
|
" 'Even assuming that Civil Unions get 100% of the legal rights of marriages,'
That's not an accurate assumption - no state in the land can award 100% of the same rights and privileges afforded to married couples. The Fed does not recognize civil unions."
I realize that Dingus. I'm trying to make the point that there is an issue aside from rights, and that is the dignity that comes with being deemed to be married, instead of being in a second class union.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 08:58pm PT
|
Which part of 'homosexuality is genetically expressed in almost all mammalian species' don't you get...?
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 09:03pm PT
|
and the part that implies that homosexuality is 'natural' by any definition of the term. Again, left-handed people aren't normal either by your standard and should have different rights than you.
|
|
crusher
climber
Santa Monica, CA
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 09:07pm PT
|
I didn't know that nature had laws...
How can something go against the "law" of nature?
Is nature a state? Does it have legislators and senators and congress-people? Does it have a constitution?
Just wondering...
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 09:41pm PT
|
"Equal rights,
and justice"
-Bob Marley
for everyone
-Jaybro
Why does that offend so many people that it does not effect?
in 1975(?) my top bunk hogging older bro Chasbro, became a judge and justice of the peace in the first state to have a woman governor. His comment on performing marriages was that he insisted that both spouses be of the same species.
Seemed rhetorical at the time...
Have we devo™-ed so much that we, the nation as a whole, can even vaguely have a problem, with things that don't concern many of us?, to the point that we have to dictate the mores of people whose lifestyle/inclination/plumbing/wiring etc, is a bit a skew of what our own might be? To the point that we have failed a standard from Wyoming, thirty odd years ago? How far up our own alimentary tract have we had to recede to get to this point?
People need to do what they do,(this isn't about putting anyone in physical risk, now, is it?) we can always talk about it later.
|
|
happiegrrrl
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 09:54pm PT
|
"..."It(homosexuality) completely deviates from the normal human instinct,..."
..not for those who are homosexual, it doesn't!
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 10:03pm PT
|
Holy crap! I didn't know that since being left handed is "not normal" it's against "the laws of nature"!
My aunt who is left handed was forced to write with her right hand and slapped with a ruler if she wrote with her left. Thankfully by the time I was in school the 'liberals' had allowed us lefties to do what is 'natural' for us.
I wonder what Warren Harding's response would have been if some one told him he couldn't hammer with his left hand anymore, and had to switch to his right? LOL! Actually he must have been able to hammer with his right as well to put the bolts on the rightward traverse on the last pitch of the Nose.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 10:12pm PT
|
that's pretty weak, Fet.
it's not that they're 'different', it's that accepting that behavior as normal in society and, hence, o.k. It may affect youngsters in a way they wouldn't encounter.
Left handers are kinda freaks, but they don't change the healthy societal mold that has been built up.
It pollutes our society, IMO, much like porn everywhere. I don't really want a ban on it, just not promoted everywhere and put in a childs face in a tv ad. And my face.
|
|
Doug Buchanan
Mountain climber
Fairbanks Alaska
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 10:59pm PT
|
Yoooo Karl Baba and colleagues of all that is known....
If you were to suggest that the lawyers, verbose lot that they are, who won the gay marriage rights cases present their case within a SuperTopo forum entry, you would be considered by everyone as nuttier than a fruitcake. There is not sufficient space.
But if a person with no titles and credentials suggests the existence of certain knowledge, you consider him nutty as a fruitcake if he cannot present it in the same forum, much to the amusement of the observers, and therein my entertainment.
As I have stated, if you ask for a 1000 word explanation of new knowledge, in 33 words, you will sustain your amusing ignorance for the rest of your life.
The process for gays to get formally married and receive all the benefits available to heterosexual folks getting married has been presented by myself several times online, at different websites including in sum of various comments on various threads on SuperTopo. It is available for the asking, but not by impossible process.
It is a 17 part puzzle. Learn 16 parts, and you hold no knowledge of any utility, analogous to a automobile without the piston arms.
Consider one part. You must learn what the common law is, how it was created, how it functions, and the process to access its protection, wisely for everything you do in this common law nation. No, not that of common law marriages, a phrase to fool fools, but the common law, otherwise described as the prevailing law not contradicted by any superior law, the superior law, or the superior law above any inferior law, etceteras, the law most hated by lawyers and judges because easily understanding it negates any need for lawyers, and eliminates the power of court judges, replacing it with a known legal duty to the existing prevailing law as written with words that hold their meanings, as already stated on SuperTopo. The US Constitution is a common law document. The common law for any human action can be identified in the law library by anyone who learns the simple process of using a law library.
Then, for the 33 word explanation of no value without the rest of the knowledge, get married under the common law of contract, and use its protection for the effect of the contract.
And laugh yourself to tears at all the amusing chaps who say, "you can't do that", for lack of the knowledge they could have learned if they had learned the controlling part of the knowledge puzzle, that of how to ask effective questions of their perceived contradictions, instead of call you a fruitcake and say "you can't do that."
It was not that long ago when I was dumber than even that, and then I started asking questions.
Consider doing the same. It is the process to learn new knowledge, if you actually ask the questions, and answer them.
And if you don't donate your old carabiners or other climbing stuff to the Alaskan Alpine Club's new museum, you will not be allowed to marry a climber. Wait. No one would want to do that anyway. Well, donate your spouse's climbing gear and divorce the individual before you get drug out to the pursuit of the useless.
Off to BarbecueNight.com with wine, moose steaks, cigars and a chalk bag of bizarre knowledge, where things discussed by the end-of-the-roaders who show up make the SuperTopo forum look like the elder ladies Thursday afternoon home doily crochetting tea, as usual.
Doug
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 11:09pm PT
|
Gay-ass, oops I mean blue-ring,
You don't have to accept the behavior only tolerate it. It IS normal for 5% or whatever percent of the population that is gay. It may affect youngsters?? Like it may change them to become gay... that's weak. That like saying needle exchange programs encourage drug use.. a stupid argument.
I don't want it in my face either (well the guys anyway), but I'm not willing to deny somene's equal rights to marry.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2008 - 11:12pm PT
|
that wasn't very nice, Fet.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2008 - 12:11am PT
|
" dirtbag,
I don't know that it would be a "second class union." You make an assumption there. For thousands upon thousands of years marriage means man and woman - people have that concept in their mind. You just can't change it all that easily. It would be like doing something so that from hence forth dogs meow instead of bark. It would raise a lot of eyebrows for sure and some people (lots of people) would hold that dogs "bark" - they don't meow. "
Sure it's a second class union. It's saying "We're not sure if you're good enough for marriage." Yeah, the reason might be because people are hesitant to rock the boat, but what it means is, we're going to give you this "not quite married" status. It's second class.
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 01:05am PT
|
"Left handers are kinda freaks, but they don't change the healthy societal mold that has been built up."
Bluering,
In five years, if your son starts writing with his left hand...you're going to tell him he's "kind of a freak"??? Is that your idea of good parenting?
And if you really want to discuss this "healthy societal mold" you hold to such high standards, then please, let's discuss the hundreds of thousands of verified cases of child sexual abuse, child physical and emotional abuse, wife batterings and sexual abuse, girls and women rapes by fathers, brothers, uncles and male "friends", and all the other abominations we get to read about everyday in this "healthy society".
And then, like Dingus said...50% of heterosexual marriages end in d-i-v-o-r-c-e these days. And it's only 50% because so many men (and women) out there are too friggin' afraid to step out of a marriage situation that's slowly killing them emotionally--if not physically--so they resign themselves, and they cheat repeatedly, and they live in denial--like mortal enemies who treat each other with perfect smiling civility. They stay "for the children". Or the $$$$. Or the fear of being lone. Or a 100 other rationalizations.
And this is your "healthy societal mold that's been built up".
Meanwhile, homosexual couples who have been together for decades (like Sulu from Star Trek, and another dozen that I know personally), who have loved each other every bit as much as some hetero couple, and stayed together through the pistol-whippings of a "healthy society", they are ridiculed and abused and denied many of the basic rights of hetersexuals.
It's this blatant hypocrisy which I find the most disturbing about those with the greatest religious fervor, or those who claim to "really care" about people...as long as those people are having sex with the correct sexed partner.
Most disturbing.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 01:33am PT
|
Just checked in after a day at the river. Very proud of some fine posts which were acknowledged as such.
Thank you, a pleasure to be associated in cybespace with you.
Peace
karl
|
|
Grant Meisenholder
Trad climber
CA
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 11:43am PT
|
It just will never cease to amaze me that this issue continues to hold such fascination in our "advanced" society.
Karl Rove & Co certainly know how to yank America's chain and use a completely irrelevant issue (as far as making the country strong and efficient) to distract us from the truly monumental issues threatening our country so that they can implement their own myopic and self-serving agenda.
One of the most important strengths of our form of government is "separation of church and state." This means that no vision of *anyone's* god/afterlife/whatever can be used to as a basis for our laws. It also means that people are free to practice whatever version of religion they see fit in their personal space without fear that the gov't will restrict it. Sadly, neither of those tenets are widely practiced.
War in 2 countries (oh sorry, I forgot- "Mission Accomplished!", so now it's only a police action in Iraq), hundreds of thousands of people are dead as a direct result, gas projected to be over $5/gal by the end of summer, unemployment rising, recession, inflation, global warming (or the tamer "climate change" if you prefer), the rapidly sinking dollar, travel abroad (if you can afford it) is becoming dangerous to any place with a significant population of Muslims, our president is a laughingstock worldwide, our civil liberties have been pillaged, Guantanamo & secret interrogation centers, the Geneva convention is "quaint", oil companies are enjoying obscene profits while simultaneously trying to grab as much land as they can under the guise of "increased drilling will lower gas prices" (utter B.S.).....AAAAAAAUUGHH!
But oh, never mind- just the thought of 2 same sex people committing themselves to a lifelong loving relationship is enough to make any God-fearing American quake in their boots. It'll be the end of the American Dream! Why, there'll be Chaos & Anarchy! It'll be like Ice-9 (see Vonnegut- "Cat's Cradle" for the Unread Masses); the whole world'll turn queer! There outta be a law!
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 12:11pm PT
|
Excellent, Grant!
That was going to be my next point: Don't we have more important things to focus on than who's doing whom?
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 12:23pm PT
|
Just joking bluering, I find it funny that someone who is against gay stuff has an online name that translates to gaysphincter.
You said my post was weak, and called me a freak, so you started it! :-)
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 12:26pm PT
|
Hey Bluering, how would you feel if someone told you that you had to cut your hair? added: for instance what if someone told you that you couldn't be around children, because your long hair might confuse them, that only women should have long hair.
I used to have long hair too and was once told I wouldn't be hired for a job because my hair was too long. Luckily that is about the most discrimination I have ever faced. I can't imagine what it's like for people who can't change their sex/color/sexual orientation.
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 03:10pm PT
|
If karma exists I think some people might get reincarnated as Giraffes ;D
(think rednecks)
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 03:21pm PT
|
I didn't bring up the lefty thing, I just extrapolated it a bit in a satirical manner. Since most people are right-handed, lefty's could be considered unusual or 'freakish'. Not in the 'you're a freak' sense, but in the not common sense.
Maybe it's a bad example. Kinda like long hair is a bad example. An employer does have a right to descriminate on your appearance it you're representing them. I had a few jobs that required me to maintain a 'professional' appearance.
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 03:22pm PT
|
and by sword, you mean penis.
|
|
happiegrrrl
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 03:48pm PT
|
I think the 'left handed' thing is actually a very good example. Didn't people actually used to believe that left-handed ones were somehow doing the devil's work, or something?
About the teenage prostitute - we had a similar here a few months ago. It turned out that a NYC policeman and his wife had taken this runaway in, and were turning her out as a hooker.
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 03:54pm PT
|
Actually in many asian countries isn't it still a social taboo to touch someone with your left hand (i.e. tibet)?
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2008 - 04:09pm PT
|
I'm left-handed, I practice self-love (sometimes with my left hand!), and I'm not a Christian. I'm going to hell for sure, but I'm sure looking forward to seeing some of my Supertaco friends there.
|
|
Grant Meisenholder
Trad climber
CA
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 04:09pm PT
|
Rokjox-
You are an admirable troll, but not a good scientist. Ok, so HIV diagnoses have increased in the U.S. homosexual population. As the study reports, that can largely be explained by the trend that that population gets tested more often. They go on to state that another factor seems to be that the younger population (that the increase in most prevalent in) hasn't had the misfortune of having friends die of the disease.
What you fail to realize is that the virus is very weak and cannot survive outside the body for more than a few seconds. Also, the virus has mutated to a nearly non-lethal state and is continuing on in that trend. Furthermore, the only people who need to be concerned about infection are those who have unprotected sex (or share I.V. drugs) with a carrier. Do you have a secret you want to share? We won't tell, promise!
So what's your point? That we should outlaw homosexuality because people can get sick and/or die from it? What are your positions on alcohol/smoking/recreational drugs/prostitution/one night stands/overeating/undereating/steroids/travel to 3rd world countries? Or for that matter driving/flying/living in big cities/extreme sports/gun ownership/eating tomatoes/eating red meat/eating poultry/eating fish/.../living?
This is America last time I checked and you are perfectly right to your own opinions and anyone else's you care to adopt, just don't be uninformed about them. And don't go trying to force me to accept some mangled view of a religion/philosophy that has been twisted out of context from its original form by two millenia of quasi-governmental megalomaniacs who want to mold the masses for their own gain and world domination.
Jesus was all about love and forgiveness; why can't his followers get that right...?
|
|
howlostami
Trad climber
Southern Tier, NY
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 04:23pm PT
|
Sluts exist in every sexual orientation. Why should decent gays have to explain the aberant ones any more than you or I should have to compensate for spring breakers or paris hilton? The homosexuals who want to get married have already self-selected themselves as being morally aligned with a proper marriage, why should they have to jump through any more hoops? Call it a marirage and be done with it, let's not have modern Jim Crow, sparate but equal will never be true.
|
|
Grant Meisenholder
Trad climber
CA
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 04:36pm PT
|
I still don't understand why it's your problem. Or why it should be my problem.
To rebut your argument, there are plenty of people who die from illnesses that are transmitted willingly or unwittingly from random people. HIV is a small percentage of that compared to the influenza virus or hepatitis, etc.
|
|
DJS
Trad climber
wherever my mind exists
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 04:56pm PT
|
Actually in many asian countries isn't it still a social taboo to touch someone with your left hand (i.e. tibet)?
It's a health/respect thing due to the fact that they do not use toilet paper and instead wash themselves with their left hand.
Edit: Oops, DMT already covered this.. I'll shut up now
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 05:46pm PT
|
"Karma exists. It is alive and well. Live by the sword, die by the sword."
One in four heterosexual teen females now have one or more STDs. It's clearly retribution from God for their sin of being young and female by way of your thinking. Let's see, you can't figure out that homosexuality is a naturally expressed, genetic-based behavior in mammals and disease is an act of god - it doesn't get more fundamentalist than that.
So when you next stop and rage about 'Islamic fundamentalists' threatening the U.S. I'd suggest you take a time out and take a hard look in the mirror. That face staring back at you is just a softer, less-motivated one than the ones of those who attacked us. This administration has played on your fundamentalism and the fears it is wholly based upon to wreak more damage on our Constitution and nation's security than OBL, Ahmadinejad, or Hu Jintao together could have ever dreamed of achieving.
It is exactly this fundamentalist and jingoist mentality which has been marching the U.S. backwards on the world stage. It's your right to your views - however uneducated, obnoxious, and steeped in fear - but know they are at the very core of our current woes as a nation.
|
|
poop*ghost
Trad climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 05:50pm PT
|
Whenever I think about how I should feel about the approximately six million openly gay men and women in the United States, I like to cozy up to my favorite copy of the bible and see what God has to say about it.
Man, after that - everything becomes so clear.
The problem for me is that I am a big fan of Historical Judaism, Rastafarianism, Early Gnosticism, dable in Protestantism, like to poke my toes into Lingayatism but only when I've boned up on my Javanese Hinduism.
Then I get a bit confused about which of the six major schools and movements of Hindu that I should be attending.
Never went to a Zurvanism surmon that I didn't like... which brings up a great place for getting down when on the continent: African Initiated Church - damn they can party.
Some say that Candomblé has it all wrapped up - (but don't ask a Quimbanda).
Which brings me to the most "fun" of all: Vodou - but I can't remember if I'm Dahomey or Haitian!
All in all - figuring out which belief system I should be "beliefing" in... gets so exhausting and troublesome that I just bag it all and toss my lot in w/ my favorite scroll above.
|
|
Grant Meisenholder
Trad climber
CA
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 06:26pm PT
|
Rokjox (and anyone else this applies to) -
You're right; I haven't taken the time to read the full thread and I apologize for retreading old ground. And I commend you for your position that all homosexuality isn't wicked. And I don't mean to focus my invective on you personally. It's really more that your position seems to reflect those that I can't understand and I am tired of not speaking out with my viewpoint.
That said, your point seems to hinge on the perception that this rise in HIV infection is going to affect you personally or someone close to you. It may already have, I don't know. You may not know because they were too afraid of what you would say and didn't want to be subjected to your judgement. The article plainly puts forth that the epidemic appears to be limited to the gay population. As such, there is very little reason for you to be worried. There are many, many more threats to your well-being that you should be concerned about first. If you're concerned about the long-term healthcare costs of this news, don't worry, there are plenty of other non-flagrant-gay risky health behaviors that will cost many times over what a few thousand gay men will cost us.
And the cost of all the health care for everyone in the U.S. over the last century is dwarfed by what we will spend on Iraq and related costs for the last 5 years. But that's another thread entirely.
You say "The disastrous and flagrant "gay" (and mostly MALE) party scene..." is a disgrace and liability to the "general" population. Again, the only way the virus can be spread is through direct transmission of blood with a carrier. Donated blood in the U.S. is screened for all blood-borne pathogens, so don't worry about that.
I live in San Diego where we have a very active and vibrant gay community with some of the most morally upright and brightest people I have had the pleasure to know. I've never been hit on or seen a "vulgar" display of gayness (outside of the Gay Pride festival, and that is supposed to be a bit "campy"). I guess you're right though, heteros never display that type of behavior on a national level- oh wait, I forgot about Mardi Gras, Girls Gone Wild, The Hustler Channel, MTV, any major Spring Break destination... need I go on?
Gay society is just like us "regular folk." We all have a segment that we'd rather not know about and we have some we hold up as shining examples of humanity. It really seems to boil down to your perception of morality and what that's based on. And it seems to me that those who share your point of view tend to wave the Bible as the ultimate authority. I applaud that and support your right to choose what guidelines you live by. But don't try and legislate morality based on it. We have a constitution that takes a very dim view of that kind of behavior...
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2008 - 07:02pm PT
|
"NEWSFLASH: Gays got married, and God didn't smite CA
More than 1,000 wildfires burn in northern California
Care to rethink your post dirtbag"
No.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2008 - 07:47pm PT
|
"Masturbation makes you blind. "
I'm having trouble reading that small font.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 08:07pm PT
|
this thread is going nowhere...fast.
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 08:54pm PT
|
Sis, I don't like to think about couples I know having sex, no matter how attractive they each are, let alone people doing stuff I don't do... Even though I get a giggle over their enthusiasm telling me about their enthusiasm in doing what they do, do.
It happened here, there will be setbacks, but it will, as always, work it's way backwards to the repressive east (why do I bait you guys like that?) get with it, or let it overwhelm you.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 09:26pm PT
|
Clearly more in tune with your delicate christian sensibilities...
|
|
happiegrrrl
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 09:42pm PT
|
"Are THESE the people who you want to be cops in your community? Teaching in your children's public schools classrooms?"
Rox - Those guys may very well BE policemen and teachers. How do you know they aren't? One thing I have found is that some of the most quiet are the most out there(I haven't found that through personal experience, I'd better add....but from what people have said about themselves in unguarded situations). You know the old "hot librarian" thing? Like that.
I've also heard several people who have very staid jobs where a conservative presence is required(lawyer, for instance) really get into having "hidden" quirks, like genital piercings, and...other things. They get into the fact that people see them as one way and they have a"secret."
That's why momma always said "wear clean undies! You never know when you'll get into an accident and be taken to the hospital unconscious!" I bet emergency room people have seen spome...interesting...things when they've had people come in.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 09:54pm PT
|
No, Lois, I'm not missing any points here at all. You are completely wrong in almost every aspect of your last several posts. In fact, they simply point out the depth of intolerance which is the real problem. Aside from Roxjox's picture being from Krakow, Poland and the men pictured being released from an all-male prison against their will in the midst of a media event, I'd say you, Jody, and Roxjox simply dig your own holes of intolerance deeper and deeper with every post.
Hey, I personally despise religion in all it's guises - every church, synogague, and temple is pretty much a complete afront to my poor sensibilities. Seeing people congregated outside of them before or after services is especially disheartening bordering on obscene, let alone them coming to my front door prostelizing - but hey, it's their right - I deal with it. If I can manage, then you can learn to deal with open displays of affection by gays. At least they aren't knocking on your front door with the tome of all-knowing gay wisdom in their hand attempting to convert you to their 'way'.
|
|
rlf
Trad climber
Josh, CA
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 10:13pm PT
|
I always love how the religious third reich goes on and on about what loathesome creatures the gays are, but it's always one of theirs that's out molesting children, going on serial killing sprees.... etc etc etc etc etc....
Boy, those queer boys sure are offensive and have no morals, unlike us the mighty god types. Yup, we sure are moral. Can I borrow your twelve year old, I'm feeling an urge.
|
|
Jay Wood
Trad climber
Fairfax, CA
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 10:27pm PT
|
Today I heard an interesting thought re gay parenting.
The fear is that if gays become parents, then the children would be warped- possibly turn out gay.
But think about it- almost every gay person was raised by heterosexuals. Perhaps man/women unions are flawed, if they produce so many gay offspring. (for the sake of argument)
Conversely, gay parenting cannot happen by accident, but requires thought, desire, planning, communication. This likely leads to better family outcomes.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 10:34pm PT
|
"If you despise all religions then it would seem you are the intolerant one. Despise is a pretty strong emotion, wouldn't you say? I mean we are not talking simple dislike or distain here. You can't preach tolerance on one hand and then spew hatred (in the form of despising xyz) on the other. Once again, it would seem a case of wanting it both ways"
I think it is a perfect example of tolerance. Even though Healje says he despises religious people, he says he is willing to accept them in the community and allow them to do what they want.
Tolerance |ˈtäl(ə)rəns|
noun
1 the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with :
|
|
crusher
climber
Santa Monica, CA
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 10:36pm PT
|
I think Healy means he despises organized religion, not religious PEOPLE per se. Healy?
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 11:39pm PT
|
This is the way I see it skip. Jody has said he is not for homosexual couples receiving federal benefits. I asked him on this thread and he said he was against this. Some people certainly got upset and did some name calling. I do not support that. The rest tried to explain that America is about equal treatment of everyone, so if heterosexual couples have certain benefits and rights, then so should homosexual couples.
One again the definition of Tolerance is...
Tolerance |ˈtäl(ə)rəns|
noun
1 the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with :
So when Healje says he despises religious people yet allows them to do what they want, he is demonstrating tolerance. Tolerance isn't about agreeing with each other, it is about what you do if you disagree.
Whereas Jody says he Loves Gay people, yet will not allow them equal treatment under the law. This reveals an aspect of intolerance. Certainly he isn't completely intolerant as he is friendly towards them, but that doesn't indicate complete tolerance.
..........................
I am currently reading a book on political polarization and the need to overcome it. "Common Ground" by Cal Thomas, a dedicated conservative, and Bob Beckel, a dedicated liberal. It is an interesting read. I haven't finished it, but it talks about this countries voting blocks becoming polarized on issues that appear to be black and white and the problems that arise from this. How the politicos are using these polarizations to control the people, getting the people to vote based on fear.
It is an interesting read. Especially how two people with divergent beliefs are trying to work together and are working together as they produced this book together.
Personally I don't think that polarization can be overcome with the egoic/dualistic mind that created it in the first place, it can only be overcome with the Christ mind, but that is another topic.
It is important though that we become aware of the influence of polarization.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 11:54pm PT
|
Some people have brought up masturbation.
I say in you play with yourself, you're having a same sex relationship and shouldn't be eligible for social security yourself!
Now check this out
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16020.html
Just this week, a group of Republican senators re-introduced the Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution, which, as we know, would ban gay marriage.
And once again, the language is pretty straightforward:
Section 1. This article may be cited as the `Marriage Protection Amendment’.
Section 2. Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.’.
This isn’t especially surprising. Republicans are looking at the political landscape, and they’re feeling awfully discouraged. The polls look bad, the base looks depressed, and fundraising looks iffy. Rallying the far-right troops with an anti-gay amendment to the Constitution — even though it has no chance at even getting so much as a hearing — might be helpful to the conservative movement.
But the funny part is looking over the list of the 10 original sponsors. Most of the names are predictable — Brownback and Inhofe, for example — but there are two others whose names stand out: Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Larry Craig (R-Idaho).
Yes, two of the principal sponsors of a constitutional amendment to “protect” marriage include one far-right Republican who hired prostitutes and another far-right Republican who was arrested for soliciting gay sex an airport men’s room.
As my friend Kyle put it, these two are “not exactly the poster boys of the family values crowd or particularly upstanding examples of the supposed sanctity of the ‘union of a man and a woman.”‘
????
Peace
Karl
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2008 - 11:59pm PT
|
The constitution does not define marriage as between a man and a woman. That is simply what most folks want it to say.
Jody did not say he would not support the law if it defined marriage as a relationship between either a man and a woman or a man and a man, or a woman and a woman.
He said he would be against such a law being written in the first place or the supreme court ruling that marriage should be defined as between two consenting adults. This is of course his right. Folks here are just trying to show him how this attitude means he is unwilling to give a certain group equal treatment under the law.
What is amazing to me is how many people think that telling Jody he is wrong is somehow denying Jody his rights. Good grief, that isn't denying him his rights, it is just disagreeing with him.
Now if we kicked him off of supertopo because of his beliefs, then we might be denying him something. Tolerance is disagreeing with someone yet allowing them to be.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 28, 2008 - 12:00am PT
|
I guess Republicans are for state's rights until they are against it.
|
|
Binks
Social climber
i am of the universe and you know what it's worth.
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 12:16am PT
|
i'm so sick of republicans trying to run everyone's life, meanwhile stealing the people's money for wars. they are sanctimonious fools. a lot more people are starting to see thru the constant barrage of meaningless GOP soundbites. can't wait for November when even more are shown the door.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 28, 2008 - 12:21am PT
|
Rarely do I hear Dems pontificate about how they value state's rights.
Bush v. Gore, and Gay Marriage Amendment. Prime examples of staunch conservative defenses of the principle of state's rights.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 12:45am PT
|
"nd the liberals trying to force us to accept things that are an aversion to us is NOT trying to run OUR lives? "
No one is telling you you have to become gay, so no, they are not trying to run your life. They are just telling you that equal means EQUAL. Thankfully our government sort of understands that.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 28, 2008 - 12:57am PT
|
"Do you think it might be because Democrats are traditionaly against them.
Duhhhhh..... "
No, it's because they don't give a sh#t either way, at least enough to pontificate about it. State's rights are great when they result in good policy. They suck when they don't.
Duhhhhh.....
|
|
Binks
Social climber
i am of the universe and you know what it's worth.
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 01:30am PT
|
Yes it is OK that Heather has two mommies. My friend Reid has two as well. Straight and married with two kids himself. Just like blacks and whites getting married, it could be called historically abnormal behavior. The same arguments were used, this is just the next phase. You can do what you want, now let others have the same freedom.
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 01:34am PT
|
Jody...I have been married to the same woman for 33 years and counting. Gays getting married has nothing to do with the success or failure of my marriage.
I wish them all the happiness that I have found. Love is a beautiful thing.
|
|
Doug Buchanan
Mountain climber
Fairbanks Alaska
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 02:04am PT
|
Moose, rice, vegis and SuperTopo again for supper.
Upgraded some dumpster-find shelves for the AlaskanAlpineClub museum today, with some dumpster-find paint.
Another reason the observers are so well entertained by the humans rhetorically thrashing-about over gay marriage, drugs, guns, abortions, climbing area closures and such adventures can be seen in this thread, and the others.
Primitive lot that they are, especially the Americans have not yet learned how to use words that hold their dictionary meanings, which creates 2 problems.
Just read some of the thread comments slowly, and consider the real meanings of the words.
Because even the dictionary meanings of words include an extent of similar concepts, the mind must work to successfully convey or understand a concept from any given sentence.
But when the words are used for concepts beyond their dictionary meanings, the normally fast reading reader's mind, having barely learned the dictionary meanings and little else, will routinely route data into the wrong neurally identified concept, creating confusion and arguments that hold no substance.
But worse, the mind of the person using the wrong words will do the same thing with his own words. It is how the mind physically works. Your own mind will therefore remain confused with concepts expressed by yourself and others.
Worse, a confused neural routing pattern will alter the synthesis of similar data.
Worse, when somebody else uses words that actually hold their meanings, and thus offers extremely valuable knowledge you clearly want, your mind will have no trained neural routing patterns to understand the words.
There are many gays, gun owners, pot smokers, climbers and such questionable sorts who sincerely want to be able to exercise their HUMAN RIGHTS without being harassed by cops, Park Service pigs, RepublicratDemocans, Christian SuperStatists, and the local schoolyard bully. The process to do so is laughably easy to learn and manifest, defeating any possible human opponent, by design of the human mind.
But to convey the concept requires that the receiver of the knowledge first learns how to understand words that hold their meanings. Why do you think the observers laugh themselves to tears at such sentences?
If you think the marriage craving gays have a problem, consider those gullible climbers on another SuperTopo thread holding yet another fund raiser to get more climber money to feed and kowtow to the lawyers and bureaucrats who are therefore being rewarded to continually close or threaten to close climbing areas.
Like the gays, they have been offered the solutions many places and times, but by necessity, with words that hold their meanings, so the establishment climbing organization leaders remain clueless and even denigrate the people attempting to help them, much to the laughter of the observers.
The resolutions of the contradictions are child's play, but you must learn how to use words that hold their meanings. Practice. You do not care about the other guy. He must learn on his own. Your own mind must be accurately functioning, to therefore be able to play with the idiots who still do not know how to use their mind, and assist them in defeating their goals, if you wish.
That is just one part of the puzzle. Easily learn the puzzle, or end up so confused you cannot even arrange words that hold their meanings.
Or so I might imagine. A little wine might be in order, perhaps a Fidelitas 2005 Cabernet Sauvignon, on account as it is in front of me.
DougBuchanan.com
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 02:18am PT
|
I personally blame my out-of-wedlock child and heathen cohabative lifestyle the looming specter of gay marriage and you should too.
Oh wait you already are.
Carry on.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 02:22am PT
|
KB "Also, throughout MOST of history and in MUCH of the world, marriages have been arraigned by the families for their kids, often when they have been too young to choose for themselves."
Now that, I believe, is what is called a Freudian slip.
I gather marriage is ostensibly a life sentence, but didn't know one had to be arraigned first.
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 02:34am PT
|
There's a gay couple I know who lives in West Hollywood. They've been together for about 12 or 15 years--I forget exactly. They're very funny, wonderfully intelligent men. Business professionals, too.
Anyway, they both really wanted children. Yep, imagine that. Even pervs feel that biological need to "father". But two gay men were not going to be allowed to adopt a baby...they didn't need Dr. Phil to tell them that.
Unless...
...they took what no one else wanted.
Yep. They adopted a "crack baby".
All you Healthy Moral Society members know what a crack baby is, don't you? It's this tiny infant whom God has cursed for its sins even before its birth...oh, wait a minute...wrong belief system...It's this tiny infant whose only crime was to be born to a mother addicted to crack.
So these babies--and there are lots and lots of them--cry and scream and go through withdrawals from a drug they never wanted to ingest. There are many physical complications along with the withdrawal symptoms, too. It is horrible. And heart-wrenching to watch and listen to such an innocent little being in so much agony. Many of them die. No one wants to adopt a crack baby, so their torture is exacerbated by being virtually abandoned by humanity.
These two gay men in West Hollywood adopted a crack baby...a little boy. And although it was extremely difficult for all the reasons mentioned above, and much, much more--that infant did remarkably well with those two ungodly sinners. So well, in fact, that the agency gave those two freakin' queers another crack baby--a little girl.
Since they knew what to expect this time, those hedonistic homos got that little baby girl to respond as a normal baby would much sooner than their first little boy...and their first little boy was turning into a fairly healthy toddler by this time. Both of these guys were working day and night to help these thrown-away babies not only survive, but thrive. Those friggin' fags...turned out to be dang great fathers.
They ended up getting four crack babies total last I heard, and all four have survived into toddlerhood, and are well on their way to living a normal childhood...with two faggots.
Now, I have to be honest with you guys. That some of you think it's a "problem" for these kids to go to school some day and admit to having two fathers...two dads who held them as they screamed and vomited and crapped all over everything all day long...and all through the long nights...
Two dads who fed them when they couldn't keep food down, cradled them to their hearts when those tiny bodies were racked with the shakes, and sang them to sleep when exhaustion finally closed those small eyelids...
Two fathers who loved what no one else wanted, and produced miracles that even the doctors couldn't believe--well, all I've got to say is I don't think anyone anywhere, especially those four kids, is going to give a rat's batootie if their parents names are Jim and Mark, or Steve and Bill. The fact that some of you are worried about it truly is a lack of love and compassion...and that lack does not exist in those two gloriously gay friends of mine.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 04:11am PT
|
I personally view religion and the sheparding techniques it employs as the root source of war and genocide - so yes, I despise religion. But I'm polite when Jehovah's Witnesses come to my door, though they usually leave pretty quickly of their own volition. But as dangerous as I view religious beliefs - particularly the twins of Christianity and Islam - I respect the Constitution with regard to this aspect of our nation's society and laws.
Again, every post succeeding post you make, Jody, just further illustrates the depth of your intolerance and fear. One ludicrous claim after another rolls out in your posts, like the gem about 'marriage is timeless' - you and roxjox ever been divorced? The stats are pretty bleak on the 'timeless' front...
Percentage of marriages which reach their 5th, 10th, 15th, 25th, and 35th anniversaries:
05th: 82%
10th: 65%
15th: 52%
25th: 33%
35th: 20%
My wife's and most other Native American tribes also didn't think homosexuals among them were normal - they were considered special or gifted - and were accomodated as an integral part of tribal culture and life. That they did so ended up just another rationale for genocide by folks who I'm guessing thought a lot like you when they arrived. On the whole, I'd say your department's diversity training really isn't getting a whole lot of traction with you and your buddies.
|
|
happiegrrrl
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 09:42am PT
|
L's story of her friends brought tears to my eyes. Don't see how anyone could have read it and not felt joy, not only for those children but for the guys who are parenting them.
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 10:04am PT
|
the boomers didn't change the rules on this...
it's the folks entering their early 30's now who did.
you cannot be concerned with how others engage in intimacy,
it is impolite and the climate of intolerance toward
hating or bigoting "alternative" lifestyles is high.
Besides, the main fear homophobes have is that THEY
are homo, and that someday it'll be considered as
normal as being hetero.
It's a fear thing, but I think respect and
love toward those with deep seated fears
is the best thing.
Bigotry is dying. It has to.
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 12:13pm PT
|
Heh-heh-heh...whew! Thanks, Wes...thought you'd undergone a personality change or something.;-)
Stzzo, Happi--thanks for the thanks. If you knew my friends, and saw what they went through with those beautiful little kids...you'd think my story was shallow compared to the real deal.
And I think they are going to get married with a State-sanctioned ceremony...only so their children won't be thought to be bastards...;-)
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 12:27pm PT
|
Jody says,"L, I am not denying that there are stories like yours. You can, however, find a few great examples from any segment of society that in no way, shape or form is indicative of that segment as a whole."
...........
Jody,I just talked with my girfriend who works with California State -Foster Adoptions. Her words..Gay couples are a huge resource for us,there are a large number of adoptions by gay couples. She told me when she had time, she would try to find numbers.
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 01:12pm PT
|
Hi Princess Nita!:-)
Jody, my story wasn't about showing what a great group of people gays are as "a whole", as you put it, and to try to invalidate it like that means you didn't actually read it, not with an open mind anyway. My story is about the love and compassion of two ordinary human beings who are literally doing something to make this world a better place.
They are not quoting scripture and then ignoring the "love and compassion" part, which happens to be the norm in this society. (I know this from multiple first-hand experience--arguments on that point won't fly.) They do not think of themselves as special--they think of themselves as lucky to have found a life-partner, and the fact that our bigoted society has labeled them "perverts" is unfortunate, but it hasn't stopped them from loving each other and offering that love to other cast-offs.
There are heterosexuals out there doing the same sort of thing, I'm sure. My point is what the heck does someone's personal lovelife have to do with anything?
It's none of our business...we on the outside...what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms as long as it's between two consenting adults and no one is getting hurt.
It's none of our business if two people in love with each other want to honor that love with a marriage sanctified by the State. I say Good for them! I myself am disillusioned with the mental institution of marriage--so what? That people who have been brutalized by society still want to participate in its rituals is none of my business.
Jody, when I see photos of you, your wife and kids, and read about the great relationship you have, all I do is celebrate a union that's working, that's bringing joy to its partners. Bob being married for 33 years makes me happy! The wife appreciation thread made me ecstatic! I love reading about love. I could have put three posts in there from friends of mine about the deep love they feel for each other, and no one on this forum would've recognized it as coming from a same-sex couple.
Why does it matter what physical make-up a person is wearing when it concerns matters of the heart?
I'm not trying to dissuade you from your viewpoint--I am trying to show you that perhaps your viewpoint is not encompassing the "do unto others as you would have others do unto you" golden rule.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 01:32pm PT
|
"By the way, just because someone SAYS they "did it in the name of God" doesn't mean it is so."
Truer words never spoken.
Likewise, when someone says "god says to do this/not do that", don't bet on it being the case.
L, I liked your story about the adopted crack babies. It's hard to see how anything but good came from what your friends did.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
Nowhere
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 01:55pm PT
|
When someone is labeled as "gay" or "lesbian" or "bisexual" these words defined by who you are primarily attracted to. In other words, if you are a man primarily attracted to woman you are a heterosexual even if you are virgin.. Likewise, if you are man who is primarily attracted to other men, you are gay even if you have never had gay sex. And if you are a man attracted to both men and women, you are bisexual, even if you only have sex with women.
" Wes, please do not equate the choice to engage in homosexual acts with being born black."
This statement is based on the premise that gays and lesbians have a choice between being homosexual and heterosexual and are choosing to be homosexual. Rightly or wrongly, many (but probably not most) Americans share this belief.
Why would they think that people have a "choice?" In order to reasonably make this argument they must feel that they, themselves, also had a choice. So are they closet bisexuals that are suppressing part of their sexual desires and "choosing" instead to pursue only heterosexual activities?
If not, why do they think gays have a "choice?" Can anyone answer that?
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 02:01pm PT
|
"Nita, have any long term studies been done on children who grew up in same-sex parent families?"
.....
Jody, when she gets back from a out of town wedding..I will let her answer that question. Some how, i think she will say something in reguards tooo.
If we leave kids with Meth parents that's healthier? No food, drugs in their system, no supervision, no consistency, no love,left to fend for themselves etc...
Living in 10 to over 20 foster homes- is healthier than a loving family? .... Jody,gays are people,if you think of them as people ...it may help.
Jody, I will make sure she answers your question.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 03:07pm PT
|
Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were all astute scholars of the various organizing methodologies of fear including those used by the western religions. The fear and fervor-based power structures they generated shared many aspects in common with the world's great religions from whom they liberally borrowed as suited their needs. That they assumed the mantle of 'gods' here on Earth has no shortage of religious parallels. Religion is simply one of the most persistent, pervasive, and pernicious of these human power constructs which I find particularly dangerous and contemptable.
Being black, left-handed, and homosexual are all genetic expressions of the human genome.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 03:13pm PT
|
And where is the documentation on the so-called "handedness gene"?
For that matter, disctinctions of 'race' consist of only about 8% of the mere 0.1% of differences in our human genomes; i.e. 'race' is, biologically-speaking, a fairly irrelevant term - i.e. there is no "race gene" either.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 03:25pm PT
|
And virile, neocon, Republican Vice Presidents aren't even immune! Amazing that Jody would vote for a person to run the country who is so incompetent he couldn't even manage the simple task of raising a straight daughter.
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 04:16pm PT
|
What I hate, is how much I'm agreeing with that sleazy weasel weakwrist, these days...
Though I think Ray truly nailed it with the fear thing. I think that really is what it's all about. why do feel we have to work around that, seemingly obvious truth?
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 04:23pm PT
|
Jody says,"You have to look at the big picture, not just a few isolated cases that stand out".
Jody, once again you missed my point,which is... to look at what is best for kids languishing in the foster care system.
I think being raised by caring/loving parents is key, whether they are gay, or straight does not matter.
Looking forward to my friends replys to your questions,She will apeak from experence.....
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 04:25pm PT
|
Jody, just how many mammalian species would have to exhibit homosexual behavior for you to believe it is simply a natural expression of being a mammal? Again, it is explicitly no different than being left-handed. Did you choose to be whichever handed you are given there is no handedness gene?
|
|
happiegrrrl
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 04:40pm PT
|
"Still waiting on the documentation for the proof of being born homosexual..."
I have seen some news articles where scientists have found that gay people's brains are physiologically different than straight peoples. Also, if I remember correctly, differences in hormonal levels between homo and hetero sexuals in studies.
But - the GOOD news is that even though Jody does not agree with the concept it is possible, it don't make a difference, except to keep this ST thread in a race to overpower the bolting Half Dome one....
The thing about sex being "for" procreation, and not for pleasure - Just because some religious factions have stated that - does not mean it is true.
If it were true - then wouldn't it go to follow that people would not be interested in doing it except when women were in heat, errrr, I mean ovulating?
I would suggest that anyone who follows the belief it's reproductive only maybe ought to choose to abide by that natural law then, and not go off pleasure-seeking.
On the other hand - if sex didn't feel good - would people still do it, even just for reproduction? I can tell you that I'm pretty sure that if a woman is pissed off at her guy, it don't matter where she is in that cycle - even if she is 44 years and 11 months old and been hoping for children since she was playing with dollies - he ain't getting any!!!
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 04:54pm PT
|
How about a lot of individuals in a lot of species making it an absolutely normally occuring genetic expression. "Normal" isn't a matter of percentages when it comes to genetic expression, it's that a trait gets expressed at all. Again, mammalian species 'normally' express homosexual behavior in a percentage of any given species. Handedness is a "normal" expression of our genome and, yes indeed, that there are left-handed people is "normal", even if a minority relative to the whole of our population.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
Nowhere
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 05:19pm PT
|
The more research that is done into homosexuality, the more clear it becomes that homosexuality is part of the natural order not just in humans but across the other sexual species.
For those so inclined, they can view the natural order as part of God's plan. But, if so homosexuality would be part of this plan... This begs the question--as to those who condemn homosexuality, who are they who presume to question the will of God?
Good explanations are emerging as to why homosexuality continues to exist and even confers a genetic advantage. If you believe homosexuality is "unnatural" and "serves no purpose" see http://www.slate.com/id/2194232/ (for example).
The day is fast approaching when the current "Christian" conservative notions of homosexuality will be considered as absurd and antiquated as the old "Christian" conservative notions of race (i.e. the notion that black skin was the "mark of Cain).
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 05:35pm PT
|
Jody,
The fact that you and Skip and many, many other men on this forum get grossed out by the thought of having sex with another man means only one thing:
You are a flaming heterosexual.
Your biological wiring was designed that way. You can choose to have sex with another man (you just grimaced, didn't you?), but you probably couldn't even get aroused...unless you had been in prison for a while. Maybe not even then.
Most of my gay friends have the same reaction to the thought of having sex with a woman--they grimace like they'd just eaten a lemon. They do this instantly and naturally; they don't have to think about it. They are biologically wired for other males.
When someone suggests I think about having sex with another female, I grimace and make the pukey face, just like you. Even intimately kissing another woman is not a thought I can entertain without being icked out. This is because I am a flaming heterosexual, too.
My younger sister, on the other hand, tried to date men for many years and found each relationship progressively more annoying and unfulfilling. And then she finally did what she told me she'd wanted to do since she was in grade school: she started dating other women. She fell in love, and had a great eight-year relationship--and that's how she discoverd she was a homosexual.
And if you think she didn't fight that realization, and the societal suicide it entails, you have a lot to learn about gays in this society.
Who in their right mind would choose to be a pariah of their society? Who would choose to cause their parents such mortification? To be ridiculed and abused by the non-gay, passed over for jobs, looked at with loathing, made the boogeyman of children, alienated and rejected and hated. Jody, do you really think sane people choose that sort of nightmare?
The only reason most people travel that path is because that is their nature. They are naturally attracted to members of their own sex, and they have been like that since early childhood. No gay I know woke up one morning and said, "Hey, I think I'll switch teams!" If anything, most homosexuals deny their true nature and are all messed up because of it for much of their lives.
Science hasn't found the gene yet, just like science has been very slow about finding the cancer gene, or the left-handed gene, or the genius gene, or the superior athlete gene--but it will eventually be found. And then, just like when Blacks and Native Americans and the Irish and Aborigine and Jews and Women finally won their Fully Human status (at least in the USA), we won't have to waste our time and energy on such petty matters as this...when the world is in such desperate need of all our help.
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 06:29pm PT
|
That was amazing, L. Cheers!
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 06:38pm PT
|
So there has never been any sort of scientific proof that homosexuality is genetic. The same can also be said about god.
Religion keeps coming up in this argument. But it has been proven time and time again that the need for religion is little more than a mental disorder.
People make the choice to have this condition, and then try to force their mental problems on other people. And a group of people gets discriminated against simply because another group of people doesn’t want to take responsibility for their own decisions.
You have to grow up sometime, people. Might as well start now.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 07:13pm PT
|
"Nobody has found a relationship between homosexuality and brain disorder of any sort. A study came out trying to claim that, but it was quickly shot down and no study that has ever been replicated has ever shown such a thing. Ditto genetic studies, though those are in a very early stage to say that there is no possibility. The question of homosexual motivation is still very open, with most reasonable minds leaning towards it being a complex learned behaviour.
Inpentrable as stone - yet again, substitute 'black' or left-handed' for 'homosexuality' and you get a statement with the exact same validity. There is no strict or clear genetic basis for race or handedness either - 'with most reasonable minds' leaning towards it being a complex genetically derived expression. Your statement above is patently false, with only bigoted, prejudicial, and unreasonable minds leaning towards homosexuality being a complex learned behavior.
I'm also sure those same 'most reasonable minds' would love to see laws against sodomy and interracial marriage back on the books as well.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 07:45pm PT
|
Oh, and "brain disorder"? WTF! They also haven't found a 'brain disorder' with handedness or race either. As I said, with each succeeding characterization like that you just make yourself look more ridiculous by the post. Personally, I don't find it a brain disorder that Jody manages to find beauty all around him in his photography and only ugliness within when he sees gays - but then I do view that as a 'complex learned behavior'.
|
|
Grant Meisenholder
Trad climber
CA
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 08:12pm PT
|
I once saw a French movie once that summed up my basic view on those who would try and take away another consenting adult's personal freedom because they think it is abnormal & repulsive. The character in this movie was a "flaming homosexual" but was minding his own business in a bar when 2 hardcore gay-basher types attacked him physically & verbally.
His response was perfect: "How sad for you that your lives are so vacant and void of love that you must spend your time attacking someone so insignificant as me."
I can't say I've ever seen a single naked flaming gay wedding at any crag I've been to. Or anywhere else for that matter (and I've been a lot of places). So rather than perseverate on an issue that most of us likely will ever actually come into contact with, why don't you go out climbing or find something else enjoyable to occupy your mind? You'll likely live longer if you relax and don't worry about such an insignificant issue.
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 08:53pm PT
|
Oh CossieMan,
When you're up at those pearly gates arguing with Saint P about why you shouldn't be allowed in, and he'll be saying you should, God is going to come out, grab you, give you a great big bear hug, and set you up in the best heavenly mansion She's got. Mark my words.
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 09:04pm PT
|
Good point, Lois. That's what I was saying earlier, too.
The gays and lesbians I know personally have all told me this inclination started at a very early age--and not a single one of them had gay parents. They weren't around homosexuals to be "influenced" by them. Just the opposite, in fact. Many of these people didn't meet other gays until later on in life--and the relief they felt at finally not being alone with their shameful secret was like a buoy to a drowning man.
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 09:05pm PT
|
"My Daughter, and Brother are Gay, and I LOVE both of them with ALL my heart. If either of them were to get married, I would wish them all the happiness in the world."
Cosmic, thank you for those beautiful words of Love. Hope I get to meet you at the Facelift.... Cheers..nita;-)
Hi Goddess L..;-)
|
|
Maysho
climber
Truckee, CA
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 09:43pm PT
|
Been on a rare and wonderful mini vacation, and have held off of posting on this one in any case.
I was raised by a gay dad, and his partner, my step-dad. Living with them from the age of 11. I can say from my own experience that gay people make fine parents. They ran in circles of also marginalized gay people, (early 70's different world) many of whom had kids from previous attempts at passing as hetero folks. Weekends were often spent with some of these people and their kids. My dad knew how he was wired from an early age, but growing up in Indiana in the 40's he had to try hard to be other than his true self.
I knew I liked girls right off the bat. My dad and his partner were very polite to the great women I brought home. The idea that we learn sexual behavior from our parents is ridiculous.
Only two things were hard about growing up in a gay family. One was the homophobia and bigotry I had to listen to as a young climber in Camp 4, and from my colleagues at the mountaineering school. The other was the fact that my dad, the couple of partners he had over the years and most everyone else in our community died by the early 90's.
What I care about now is that a gay youth of today has every chance to have normal self esteem, and with that will practice good health habits. Accepting gay partnerships in marriage is one way that our culture can embrace all members.
I hope you all have the love and sex and partnering that you desire, and do it safely!
Peace,
Peter
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 10:36pm PT
|
Very lovely post, Peter. Thank you for sharing your experience.
Jody, I've worked with many gays and lesbians in many types of therapy. And most of the therapists I worked with have a thriving practice of homosexual clients, as many as hetero clients, usually.
That is one of the first avenues most turn to when they figure out what they are...at least it was. It's changing for the better now--that label of "crazy" has mostly disappeared. But many homosexuals stay in therapy, dealing with, as Peter said, devastated self-esteem issues and feelings of alienation and inferiority.
And yes, there are some gays who work through certain issues and decide that being a practicing homosexual is too difficult, or not for them for one reason or another. These people, Jody, were most likely bisexuals to begin with.
If you think about how repulsed you are by the thought of being intimate with a man, and know that others feel exactly the same when it comes to being with someone of the opposite sex, then you surely must realize that you can talk to a shrink untill you're blue in the face, but you're never going to change your sexual orientation. And that's how it is with most homosexuals.
Young boys playing with dolls and Easy-Bake Ovens when they were 4 years old, playing dress-up in mommy's clothes and hanging out at the tea parties with little girls all the time, those are not learned behaviors. They can't be "talked straight" when they wanted to be girls at that age.
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 11:00pm PT
|
Hahahahaha! No, I think you're young and passionate, and very brave, really, and need to get to know some nice homosexuals as people before you judge them as a group. :-)
Life is all about change, Jody, and the more we can figure out how to ride the waves to our intended destination, as opposed to standing waist-deep in them shaking our fists and getting crushed by the surf, the better for all of us.
Did you read my email?
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 11:17pm PT
|
Perhaps further discussions should be deferred to a real campfire, say at the FaceLift? It probably wouldn't "solve" these questions, or change anyone's views, but may be a good way to have a civilized debate.
As with so many matters involving religion, though, it may ultimately come down to someone saying "I believe, therefore.." The only question then is the extent (if any) to which that person may promote or impose her or his beliefs on others.
As the U.S. is a liberal democracy, the general constitutional principle is that conduct is permitted, unless it adversely affects others or their rights, or is illegal. (Often the same thing.) In the long run, governments may simply opt out of the marriage business, instead simply recognizing legally binding civil unions of whatever kind, for the social stability they bring. Same legal obligations as marriage, different name. They'll leave it up to churches to provide for marriage as they seem fit, and for people to avail themselves of it as they wish. As a significant proportion of heterosexual couples aren't married, but are in stable relationships implying legal and moral commitments, that would serve them also.
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 11:23pm PT
|
Resent it Jody. Let me know that you've gotten it.
Hey Dingus...thought you were up in the mountains. I've been sitting here working on a story and playing on ST and eating my heart out for not being away from this city either by land, sea or mind. Smokey where you are?
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 11:23pm PT
|
"To be honest, I don't read blogs. As far as I am concerned, they are usually [anonymous] people full of crap who can spout off about anything and be called an expert."
If you'll excuse the expression, amen to that!
SuperTopo may sometimes meet that description, but at least many of us have met, and we have the self-moderating influence of a multitude of posters and views.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
Nowhere
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 12:13am PT
|
Those who are taking the position that sexual orientation is a learned behavior may indirectly be victims of one of the great scientific frauds of the late 20th Century--this misreporting of the case of David Reimer.
David Reimer was born as a boy. However, David's circumcision was botched and his penis was accidentally cut off. The decision was made to surgically alter him to be a girl and raise him as a girl. He was given a girl's name and raised as girl. At puberty he was given estrogen to develop breasts, etc. His birth as a boy was kept secret from him.
He had an identical twin who remained a boy, and was considered a good "control" for comparison purposes. The doctor who recommended and oversaw the sex change published a widely reported paper about how David "successfully" developed into a girl.
This was cited by many as definitive proof that sexual orientation was not genetic but the product of our development.
However, the paper was not correct. Although every effort was made to turn him into a girl, both physically and mentally, the truth was that the effort was total failure.
In a turnaround, the case of David Reimer is now seen as strong evidence that sexual orientation is mostly genetic.
For more information on David Reimer, read these links:
http://infocirc.org/rollston.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 01:47am PT
|
I'm jealous ding, I think I've only done that one six times, Got ' first tracks' in '05. But I ain't stoppin' now! and I think I have a hot date for it August...
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
Nowhere
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 02:23am PT
|
Jody, the initial (false) report was seen as proof that sexual orientation was very malleable and a product of the environment. However, after the full facts were revealed, it is now seen as strong evidence that sexual orientation is genetic. Read the links.
I did not see the let you mention but will look at it.
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 02:49am PT
|
equal rights and justice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAFoCH3-anM
VIVE Y DEJA VIVIR!
Hey Peter, thank you.. for sharing your story with us..;-)
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 03:26am PT
|
Jody (sorry Roxjox), that's a pretty mixed grab bag of references you've cited - controversial researchers, UFO / new age physics proponents, Mormon psychologists, militant gay/feminist biologists, etc. really don't do more than muddy the water.
No one is saying homosexual behavior is only rooted in genetics, or even that the exhibition of homosexual behavior is always biologically based. What is being said is homosexual behavior is in fact a 'normally' expressed behavior in most all mammalian species - with reasonable thinking people chalking it up to genetics (unless of course, you are positing a form a beastial pedaphilia and abuse to blame for such expression in animals). By the same token, no one is saying there is a 'gay gene' or 'gay' brain structure - there isn't a 'black gene' or a 'left-handed gene' either. Our genetics, our hormonal systems, and our behavior are entwined in highly complex ways we are only just beginning to understand. That's why data from other species is important. Hell, tweak one gene in a fruit fly and you can switch sexual orientation back and forth - mammals, primates, and humans are a bit more complex.
And just so you know relative to one of your references, a whole branch of militant gays and lesbians are completely with you and dead set against any notion there is a genetic/biological basis for homosexuality - they definitely/desperately want to believe it is strictly a matter of choice. The whole topic of a genetic or biological basis for homosexuality strikes fear into many gay and lesbians as an attempt to 'medicalize' it - turn it into what you would call a 'condition' or 'disorder'. They also, like many in the deaf community, fear if a genetic basis for homosexuality [or deafness] could be identified then embryos / fetuses would be [url="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4232383.ece" target="new"]unused or aborted on that basis[/url]. That would certainly set up a real quandry for christian parents whom are against both homosexuality and abortion if they were to confront such a choice. What do you suppose the Cheney's would have done had the capability been available to them when their daughter was being carried to term?
And again, you voted for and stand by a guy who couldn't even raise a straight daughter - now that is liberal for a guy with your beliefs and perspective.
|
|
howlostami
Trad climber
Southern Tier, NY
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 10:00am PT
|
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4232383.ece
Gattaca is just a couple minor tech advances away. It'll be nice when we can finally get a handle on this genetic variation thing, people are too different, and that obviously causes problems.
Nobody here would pass the screening, we're all fetuses that got too far, too much mental instability :)
|
|
_MUDD_
climber
Schwagstaff
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 10:37am PT
|
Cool!
Soon I can make my own RuPaul!
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 11:22am PT
|
"WHAT do your group call the social conservative relatinship seeking homosexual, as opposed to what do you call the leather stud agressive sexual hobbist that is the party going, agressively self-satifaction seeking sexually active multiple anonymous partners in a night, type that I am calling socially deviant for lack of a better term? "
Maybe there is a "Mullet" class? You know, Business in the front, party in the rear?
Oppps.. Sorry. Should have resisted.
What's the point of arguing the deepest origins of what makes people gay? After all, if they themselves don't know and, as a general rule, can't change, it's a red herring.
so those who don't want Gays to have legal rights to marry the person of their choice because you don't approve of their behavior, I'd like to know what other rights you'd care to deny other groups whose behavior you don't like?
Many of the disabled got there through their own choices, and some via genetics, (or signing up for Bush's war) They are costing society piles of money, way more than Gay social security benefits. Should all or a certain portion of the disabled get limited rights?
How about procreation in general? Now that we have DNA testing, perhaps there should be a license to have sex (or, if we had better birth control, just a permit to have a baby) You'd have to pass a dna screening to show the medical condition of you kid wouldn't be a burden to society. (of course, like justice department hiring, during some administrations the permit process could screen out potential liberals as well) Sickle Cell anemia? We could wipe it off the planet if the highest danger carriers weren't allow to procreate
How far the rabbit hole do you want to go? (opps, getting in dangerous territory again)
A modest proposal
Karl
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 01:11pm PT
|
Roxjox, at this point, as Lois points out, a little education might go a long way towards understanding what has been consistently said prior to and after Jody's posting of a set of references which taken as a whole constitute just that - so much 'malarkey'. Even attempting to give some legitimate shape to those references requires at least a cursory understanding of genetics (and gay and lesbian politics).
I've not 'backtracked' a wit - there is no gay, black, or left-handed gene or brain structure - but that doesn't mean they aren't normal expressions of our genome. Homosexuality is a normal expression of the mammalian/primate/human genome - i.e. being homosexual is as normal as being black or being left-handed. The idea that behaviors and traits/characteristics necessarily have a one-to-one mapping to genes is a profound misunderstanding of the genetics and biology involved unless you are talking about very, very simple organisms (which is why fruit flies, planaria, [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caenorhabditis_elegans" target="new"]nematodes[/url], and zebrafish are so useful in research).
Where behaviors and biological traits/characteristics (handedness, eye color, etc.) differ is traits are only expressed genetically - even if we can't figure out why genetically (even something as simple as eye color is a result of a complicated polygenic system); behaviors on the otherhand, can and do have multiple if not endless roots - genetic, biological (hormonal), psychological (cultural, stress, etc.), and yes, even choice. No one is, or has been, saying that there aren't people who partake of homosexual behavior by choice - clearly many do. What has been consistently said is homosexual behavior is a 'normal', even pervasive, behavior expressed throughout mammalian/primate/human genome.
Ever travel in Asia or the Middle East? Some Americans might easily assume entire countries are homosexual based on the clear segregation of sexes and open displays of affection between men (and between women). But they aren't and such perceptions are a matter of cultural bias. It's a complicated business, but the bottom-line is there is nothing 'abnormal' about homosexual behavior whereas there is sexual behavior practiced by both heterosexuals and homosexuals which is often deemed 'deviant' or 'abnormal', but by and large that's just another cultural bais. And again, if virile heterosexuals like the Cheneys would stop having homosexual children then the problem wouldn't exist. Don't you think as loyal republican and daughter of an arch-conservative that Mary Cheney would restrain her 'choices' to heterosexual partners if it was as simple a matter as you suggest?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 02:15pm PT
|
Jody is saying he has compassion for gays but doesn't think they should act on being gay. Abstinence-only Gay rights?
and if you aren't acting on your gay feelings, you also shouldn't be feeling Love or the need to marry right? Feel gay but marry straight, right Jody?
This Abstinence thing turns out to be quite hard and folks merely make a show of it. Heros of the Bible like David used their peckers and so have any number of TV evangelists and GOP closet gay congressmen.
Not very solid ground to determine who has basic rights
PEace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 02:36pm PT
|
You got the coveted 666 post LEB.
but I guess the point is, LEB, doe marriage equal sex? Many hetero couples, i think, would report that getting married hasn't increased the amount of sex they have.
If somebody like Jody were to say being Gay is not a choice, but acting sexually on being gay is wrong, then how would he say a gay person should live out their life.
I'm guessing he would say they need therapy to try to straighten out their life (pun intended) but is that realistic and couldn't it be very wrong for gay folk to get mixed up in straight marriages and relationships trying to reform themselves? I've seen that!
Or can gays find love and form partnerships and yet, if they believe in Jody's form of morality, keep it in their pants?
After all, with their birth control stance, the Catholic church has basically said that sex is for procreation and not pleasure and that it's immoral to have sex for fun only. Otherwise, why no birth control? See, we need to scale back sex laws to include their moral judgments as well, perhaps some kind of chastity belt system.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 03:41pm PT
|
Remember LEB that the underlying question is whether Gay couples should have the right to marry and get equal rights and benefits under the law.
Personally I have no idea whether Gay, or even Straight, sexual relationships are moral under what standard of God, or this or that culture. I judge not.
Would you support taking the marriage and social security rights away from couples where adultery is proven? Should adultery be punished by the law?
These are the questions REALLY at hand here. Prejudice can die slow but the law needs attention now.
PEace
Karl
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 03:42pm PT
|
"are there NO practices that deserve condemnation"
Racism, sexism, chauvinism, homophobia, and other [widespread]forms of intolerance...
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 03:56pm PT
|
Roxjox, clearly you don't have an good understanding of genetics or the fact that homosexual behavior is common in mammalian species or that the sexual orientation of a fruit fly can be easily manipulated would ring a bell for you. You confuse our inability to describe a specific genetic basis for homosexual behavior with a lack thereof. Again, no one can describe the specific genetic basis for many of our biological traits let alone our behaviors. To say that handedness doesn't exist genetically because we can't describe the specific genetic basis for it is foolish in the face of the data.
Now, if being gay was an abstraction with no concrete manifestation - say, like being god - then I'd agree with you that the inability to describe any specific basis for it's existence probably does mean it doesn't exist [genetically]. But gay behavior, unlike god, plainly exists or it wouldn't irritate you to the degree it does. And really, given there is no goddess, what does that make god's sexual orientation? Who knows, but maybe there is a potential resolution between the ideas of god and the 'big bang' after all...
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 04:14pm PT
|
LEB
"If they seek medical care from me they will receive the exact same care and consideration as anyone else gets. Do I want them over to my house for dinner. No, absolutely not. "
Let the state treat them that way too.
LEB, I think the Civil Union compromise you state might be a fine place to start. Problem is, the federal government is nowhere near affording even "Seperate but equal" right to gays.
Getting marriage into government hands was a mistake that violated the separation of church and state if you consider Marriage a 'Sacred Union" Return Marriage to the churches and let the government ONLY do civil unions
How would that be?
PEace
Karl
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 06:36pm PT
|
Guys humping guys totally affects my life.
No really.
Also, not living in a society that is openly hostile towards gays is telling me how to live.
Guys.
Guys.
Seriously.
Here let me quote Leviticus except for the parts (most of them) that I don't follow.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 07:34pm PT
|
Now that there have been several hundered posts per all this I wonder how many folks have changed their minds or learned something new and valuable that might lead to an expanded understanding of a very nuanced subject.
JL
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 07:40pm PT
|
The thing is I don't think this is a nuanced subject. There's plenty of superfluous arguing over nature vs nuture and the bible and blah blah blah but in the end it's simply about controlling what other people do. Either you are convinced somehow that same-sex marriage "hurts" you in some way or you aren't. Personally I don't find the argument that gay marriage hurts people a very authentic argument. I think it's just people find homosexuality foreign and frightening for whatever reason and use that as an excuse to try to repress it.
Stem cell research is a nuanced topic. Gay marriage is pretty simple.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 08:18pm PT
|
I think you can look at most anything in all-or-nothing or black and white terms if you shine all the equivocal stuff and reduce it all to a few key factors. But the gray areas remain.
For instance, most any gay person would say that, in their experience, they were born that way. But how would they ever prove it, and how could they ever refute what Jody is saying, that in fact they were not born that way but are choosing their orientation, even though us heteros don't "choose," we simply follow our instincts. The last part in not nuanced - following instincts. You just go with what feels right. Who questions that?
People's beliefs are also nuanced in many cases. In fact, doctrine-influenced beliefs are not personal beliefs so much as personal choices to accept someone elses beliefs (doctrine) as your own, then saying these are not beliefs but rather the word of God (which is itself a belief). The trouble starts when people present their beliefs as plain and simple fact, when many facts are lacking in this argument/discussion.
The fact of someone's direct experience gets overlooked a lot in these discussions. Anti-gay folk say that gays life experiences count for nothing in this discussion, which makes me wonder what the anti-gay persons direct experience is that led them to their beliefs? Who has had the direct experience of having their sexual identity waver or their marriage eroding by virtue of the gay communities very existence. As if sodomy was somehow contageous. How could this possibly be so? Who has ever experienced this? Isn't it a little like the specious argument that soloing is also contageous.
There's a big difference between a fear and an actual threat.
I mention all of this not because I am an activist. Gay behavior is incomprehensible to me. But there's no indication that gays are going to suddenly vanish, so instead of denying who they are, is it not more constructive to work with rather than against them?
JL
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 08:34pm PT
|
Jody, friend...that is so not a good comment.
And as a matter of fact, we do work with pedophiles. It's recognized by officials that pedophilia is a lifelong illiness, which is why pedophiles must register wherever they live, and are kept track of by watch-groups.
But Jody, pedophiles hurt people--children--which is as different from consenting adult homosexual behavior as you and your wife being intimate is different from rape.
Please don't let your anger post for you...you are a much bigger person than that.
|
|
happiegrrrl
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 08:50pm PT
|
Jody - We GET it. You don't condone homosexuality.
But, just because your attitude isn't "going away any time soon" should I just accept it?
I think the answer is - yes. I can accept you will probably never change your attitude. And if I end up working with you at the Facelift....I can work with you(on picking up trash, that is).
You may think your post didn't equate homosexuality with pedophilia but I can assure you that is how most anyone would interprate the words. Even your second post saying it didn't equate wouldn't change that. That was a very, very ugly post.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 08:59pm PT
|
Leb
"So, it is already as you are proposing it be. The church has no legal status to marry unless that state grants it."
No Lois, what I'm saying is that "Marriage" as the Religious right are claiming as a sacred union, should belong to Religions to chose who gets married, and the State should Butt out of EVERYONE's Marriage.
The Gov should only deal in Civil Unions (that individual religions can back up with religious marriage)
That's the solution that even conservatives should be able to live with (Small government out of our business) but they don't want to lose any ground so eventually they will just seem like (insert negative stuff here) while they do down on the wrong side of history like when denying interracial marriage
peace
karl
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 09:15pm PT
|
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 10:46pm PT
|
I hear ya LEB but how people react in not relevant. That takes time. What matters is what the state does, and what legal rights are available.
I'm making the case that, if you don't allow gay Marriage, then marriage has become an issue where the barrier between church and state has been breached and needs to be fixed.
If gays can marry, then the state isn't using religious criteria for marriage and we can go on as usual.
You guys choose which is preferable
peace
karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 12:10am PT
|
But Lois, the point I"m making is, take the state out of the marriage business and nobody can complain. If the church of eternal equality chooses to marry Gays, it's up to then.
Let the state only offer civil unions as a legal contract and we're all good.
Peace
karl
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 12:32am PT
|
"Equal rights
and justice."
|
|
Captain...or Skully
Big Wall climber
Yonder
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 12:53am PT
|
Cali is on fire....You have been smitten.(smote?)
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 01:09am PT
|
This is why gay marriage is bad...could you imagine these two homos???
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 01:10am PT
|
Jody...No worries. Thanks for explaining.
Cap'n...where've you and your little duckling been? Cali's been burning for a while now...but I think it's more Mom Nature trying to do a bit of 100-year housecleaning...
Speaking of "smitten" though, what the heck has that bastion of MiddleWest Bible Belt Brethren been doing to cause a 100-year flood in Gulfport, Illinois? They didn't just give Gays the Right to Marry did they????
Bluering Edit: Yes!!! ;-)
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 02:37am PT
|
Rockjox,
First, just to clarify, I read most of your posts and understand that you’re okay with the legality of marriage between two people of the same sex.
Why is it so important to you for there to be a distinction between what you consider to be two different forms of homosexuality? Especially with regard to the gay marriage issue?
We do not distinguish between heterosexual practices, and any heterosexual couple can marry.
With regard to a few stats and articles you posted:
1) When I was in high school, due to rising rates of teen pregnancy and std’s among teens, we received a lot of education about safe sex. No one made our heterosexuality and issue, the issue was teens having sex and being safe about it.
Don’t you think the 13-18 year old male category you cited has much less to do with homosexuality and much more to do with an age group of males clearly uneducated about how to have sex safely?
2) I’m not sure why a particular group having a higher incidence rate for a given disease should be justification for people within that group to have the right to marry. AIDS can’t be transmitted if neither partner has it. Perhaps, as I believe is the case with tasax and sickle cell anemia in certain states, people should be tested (both heterosexual and homosexual) before marriage.
3) I just don’t get the need to back and forth regarding the subject of homosexuality’s genetic or environmentally based cause. Who cares? None of my damn business (or yours).
How should that matter when it comes to equal protection under the law?
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 02:38am PT
|
Jody wrote: Dingus, most people that support homosexual "marriage" are the same people that think nothing of trampling on the Second Amendment.
Funny, the same people who support the Second Amendment at all costs are the same people who think nothing of trampling the First, Fourteenth and all the Civil Rights amendments. Also the same people who fervently support the Patriot Act.
Also the same people who have no problem sticking their noses into people’s private affairs while at the same time hypocritically calling for a “smaller, less intrusive government”.
Of course, we’re all hypocrites, or at least to some extent inconsistent. Some of us just more easily admit it than others.
Jody wrote: Look at the female body and the male body...they are made to mate...that is natural. Mating is the purpose...the fact that it is an awesome feeling and experience is secondary. Sure, there are other ways to feel good, but they are not natural when the physiology of the male and female are taken into account. You can't naturally have a family in a homosexual relationship...you can't have biological children of your own...
Where do you stand on adoption for married heterosexual couples that are unable to have children? How about women getting married who’ve had hysterectomies? Who’ve gone through menopause?
I just don’t get the “natural” argument either. Hostess made its fortune on the unnatural. Should would deny Twinkie eaters equal rights simple because it may appear to some that this is an unnatural act?
P.S.
Rockjox wrote:
Hi John. Long time no see...
Jody, I’m 99% sure Rockjox was making a funny. Take away the period and you have “Hi John Long”
RJ, am I warm?
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 03:57am PT
|
Roxjox:
[url="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316316,00.html" target="new"]FOXNEWS.COM - December 11, 2007 / HOME > SCITECH > Scientists Make Fruit Flies Gay, Then Straight Again[/url]
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 30, 2008 - 07:37am PT
|
" This is why gay marriage is bad...could you imagine these two homos??? "
Frightening indeed, but at least they can't produce offspring together.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 01:13pm PT
|
"Pedophiles aren't going away either...should we just "work with" them? "
Um....YES. Repression sure hasn't worked. However, in their case they exhibit behavior that HURTS AND VICTIMIZES SOMEONE ELSE and so your analogy falls apart (as you noted above). Jody, you don't need to accept gay people. You don't need to accept black people or Indians or Mexicans or whomever. You can have your prejudice and be happy with it and that is fine by me. You realize that "accepting" gays doesn't necessarily mean you have to have them over for dinner though, right? You don't need to actually march in a pride parade or anything. You can just let them live their lives as they let you live yours.
Anyway, take the government out of the marriage business already. Make civil unions the benchmark for legalized couplehood and leave "marriages" to social institutions.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 01:43pm PT
|
Bluering wrote
"This is why gay marriage is bad...could you imagine these two homos??? "
Bluering and MonkeyBoy climbing up the rocks
They don't have big brains but they do wear big socks
First comes Love
then comes climbing
but I can't talk dirty and still keep rhyming
Think of the two women it would protect!
;-)
Karl
|
|
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 02:15pm PT
|
When the camp is quite,
and everyone else is asleep
Pagan and Bluering
have a secret they keep.
They pop the cover
on the back of that truck,
they climb in together
and they have a good
bottle of beer.
What were you thinking???
Well, you shouldn't be. It's none of your dang business.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 30, 2008 - 02:31pm PT
|
Too Funny L and Locker!
I mean, LOL, L 'n L.!
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 05:10pm PT
|
Roxjox,
Every behavioral aspect of your post above is reflected in heterosexual society. We have a very public, large, and active sex club here in PDX not five blocks from my house ([url="http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=298645660" target="new"]Angels Sensual Social Club, see their MySpace page here...[/url]). There are heterosexuals who also knowingly infect themselves with STDs and hetersexuals who knowingly transmit STD to those without them or knowledge that the person is infected. Heterosexuals infected with STDs advertise for single, multiple, and group partners all the time. You are being selective or niave, hard to tell which from this thread.
A simple perusal of Craigslist in any city in America should persuade even the most blind among us that there is no shortage of heterosexual analogs to any 'gay' behavior. Your proposition above is ridiculous on the face of it and heterosexual society - particualarly Republican society - is so fraught by ruinous hypocrisy as to merit openly deeming the entire 'family values' theme to be the schlock divisive political rhetoric it is.
And me closeted? Sure if pointing out the obvious, explaining basic genetics, and promoting common sense is 'closeted' then yeah, close the door and count me in. No, I'm just sulking because no one liked my idea of a monosexual god creating the universe with a masturbatory big bang.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 05:17pm PT
|
I don't believe homosexuals care all that much about accceptance, but they are definitely about equal rights for all.
|
|
Grant Meisenholder
Trad climber
CA
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2008 - 05:29pm PT
|
"Heterosexuals are not trying to get homosexuals to allow them acceptance and legal marriage."
Uh, hello? (sound of knuckles rapping on granite bust being carried on a pair of shoulders somewhere in southern idunno)
Please try and cogitate before submitting commentary to this thread.
Thanks
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
Lois and DMT arguing with themself, Pagan and Blue, going Deliverence™ in the bed of a pick em up truck; More laws, Already! Hurry!
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Homo sex is definately not natural.
Take it up your azz and tell me again it's so natural.
Oooooh aaaahhhh like WTF man!
Two guys getting married? Most definitely weird.
|
|
Doug Buchanan
Mountain climber
Fairbanks Alaska
|
|
All things are natural, by design, even the idiots who claim knowledge beyond their current understanding to be unnatural, much to the howling laugher of the observers.
DougBuchanan.com
|
|
Grant Meisenholder
Trad climber
CA
|
|
If you're going to try and support an argument with a point like that, you'd better stay out of politics, Cleitus.
|
|
L
climber
Soy latte center of the Known Universe
|
|
Gay Couples I Have Known:
Mom, Dad...you might want to sit down. We've got something to tell you...
You sexy floppy-eared thing you! Whatta ya say we head up to my bedroom, I put on the theme from Catz, show you my autographed photo of Morris...and we let Nature take Its course?
They laughed at us. Said it would never work. And now look, 52 dog-years later...just a couple of old flamers still mad for each other...
NO! NO! A thousand times NO! It will NEVER work! You're a vegetarian for godsake!
Felix! Stop it--you sex-crazed kitten you! They're looking at us!
Yes I wuv my wittle bunny munchiken! I wuv you, wuv you, wuv you!
Stephie...I think I'll get a pedicure and highlight today. Would you like me to make an appointment for you to get your tail fluffed?
Grrrrrr...grrrrr.....you want the Big Carrot, my little love-bunny? You got to come and get it!
Pssssst...Alfred, Darling--would you just look at those shoes Maurice is wearing!
Beauford! Beauford! Wake up! It's time for Oprah!
Whadda ya mean they're mine??? We're GAY!
|
|
Grant Meisenholder
Trad climber
CA
|
|
"t must be considered a lifelong incurable affliction, JUST LIKE PEDOFILLIA"
?!! The embellishing of feet with gold and silver paints?!!! Wow, we're really off-topic now...
RJ- I'll leave you to your rants with this one last point- You've never put forth a single argument that answers the question of what precedent in either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights you think applies to this "aberrant behavior" - which is present in both straight and gay populations (and in terms of percentage of human population is far, far greater in heterosexuals) - that it should be legislated against only for gays.
Just because it goes against your personal morality doesn't make it a defensible legal argument.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Heterosexual SC/SD has coexisted forever - in fact, they often coexist with homosexual SC/SC, often all four in the same Republican and Evangelical bodies.
Your arguments relative to the whole SC/SD thing is patently ridiculous and rooted in so much bias you don't even realize it. There is no uniquely gay behavior relative to your examples, just different degrees of publicity and percentages of practice within heterosexual/homosexual worlds. You have zero argument based on merit - it's all based on what you happen to find repugnant. Hey, I find most SC and fundamentalist behavior both repugnant and dangerous to our nation and constitution, but it's covered so despite how f*#ked up it is I tolerate it. You should learn to do the same.
Marriage is a 'right' of individuals and should be available to any and all individuals - no dicking around with the language, just a straightforward "proposition that all men are created equal." It's easy to tell that backing up in time you'd also have been able to write a similar tract on why women should never be allowed to vote.
|
|
| Messages 1 - 370 of total 370 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!