Copy this sentence into your LiveJournal/blog/whatever if you're in a heterosexual marriage, and you don't want it "protected" by the bigots who think that gay marriage hurts it somehow.
from coeli
A Return to the Stars
-
After a veeeeerrrryyyy long, and mostly unplanned, hiatus, Stuart and I got
together to play more Stargrave in recent days. It was good! It was also a
bit ...
.jpg)
%202.png)
.JPG)
.png)
.gif)
Posts
So believing that the Bible is God's word makes me a bigot. That's nice, Jeff.
ReplyDeleteOr maybe you'll tell me that my morality should have nothing to do with my politics. No thanks, I don't want to be a Democrat. I think I'll allow my moral knowledge to actually have something to do with my personal life and with my participation in the common good.
Wow, this is going to end up badly - oh wait it already has. I support you Jeff. :)
ReplyDeleteBigot
ReplyDeleteBig"ot\, n.
2. A person who regards his own faith and views in matters of religion as unquestionably right, and any belief or opinion opposed to or differing from them as unreasonable or wicked. In an extended sense, a person who is intolerant of opinions which conflict with his own, as in politics or morals; one obstinately and blindly devoted to his own church, party, belief, or opinion.
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
I have to back up Korgoth on this one.
ReplyDeleteI consider myself a strong Christian , yet I don't hate homosexuals.
But I do believe that marriage is meant to unify a man and a woman. I believe that men and women each have separate but equal roles that they play in a successful marriage. I do not believe those roles can be substituted by a member of the same sex.
My beliefs come from my faith in Christ, which is based on love and respect. I try to love my neighbor and respect them. That doesn't mean that I have to approve of them doing something I consider wrong.
I don't hate Christians. I just firmly believe that they're immoral. And should be put in jail.
ReplyDeleteSee guys, it doesn't really make sense does it?
I have to admit I'm indifferent to the statement.
ReplyDeleteJeff's views. That's fine. Good for him. Yadda, yadda, yadda.
Do I disagree with it, sure. If I cared enough, though, I'd revive my blog and rant away.
As it is, I bailed on the defence of marriage movement when I came to the realization that the battle to defend against homosexual parodies of marriage was lost when society embraced contraception as a legitimate activity within marriage.
Change the civil law all you want. It won't change the fact that homosexual "marriage" is as much a parody of the real thing as most intentionally sterile heterosexual "marriages".
This is why I have one blog for gaming, and another completely different one for religion. And, perhaps soon, another one just for politics.
ReplyDeleteSome things are best left differentiated, and sometimes a tag ain't enough.
neeeeeeeeerhhhhh - BOOM!
ReplyDeleteThat was the sound of the rise and fall of traffic on Jeff's blog. I'm going to risk nothing and merely add...
Come On People! We _ALL_ know that Marriage is meant only for Gnomes and Halflings to formalize their sexual ambiguities... Oh, and trolls too. Thank the gods that I'm a troll and my wife is a halfling...
OMG.. did I just make a BSG reference? anyone catch that?
Yes, marraige must be saved but we don't go far enough. What we must do is ban interracial marriage. It was banned for years in America and any change to marraige destroys it.
ReplyDeleteReally, its the same old bigotry.
But I kind of have to point out the obvious. If one feels that if gay marriage is allowed their own marraige will be destroyed, doesn't that say something more about their marraige than it does about homosexuals?
And really, even if God doesn't like gay marriage, I think he is probably smart enough to decide which marraige is real and which isn't without our help. As I recall, Jesus told us to worry about our own sins, not the sins of others.
Rotwang:
ReplyDeleteObviously you've never heard of the Folsom Street Fair and similar events.
Already in Canada, Christians are being brought up on charges before the so-called "Human Rights Commission" for quoting the Bible and the Catechism that same-sex marriage is immoral. "Tolerance" is just another word for "Stamp out Christianity".
The Christian religion teaches that homosexuality is a sin. And homosexuals know that and will seek to employ state power to wipe Christianity out, if they can.
New ceremony for Supplement V:CARCOSA - "Lamentatious Initiation of the Hatesworn Monotheists"
ReplyDeleteRequires seven Red Staters to be buttcongressed for seven hours, with seven-inch long megaphalli that can only be harvested from the crystal caves in Hex 6969, by the light of the harvest moon.
Whence seven hours of buttcongressing have elapsed, gay marriage will be legal in California, Baby Jesus will weep, and NASCAR lovers will be infuriated.
Right on Jeff.
ReplyDeleteI don't like liver. The fact that they still allow liver to be sold proves that they are trying to wipe me out.
ReplyDeleteUm, not doing that stuff you said up here in Canada, Korgoth. We're quite fine with Christianity here. It's the dominant moral code, basically. But we're comfortable with other approaches as well. Live and let live and all that. I think that's basically Jeff's point. Marriage is hard enough for heterosexual couples that you should probably not expend too much energy worrying about whether homos should or should not be doing it. Plenty of humans on the planet as well, so no real worry there about lack of reproduction either.
ReplyDeleteOkay, back to the dice!
Over here in Germany, Christianity and Gay Marriage coexist peacefully. But hey, what do I know...
ReplyDeleteCheers, Marcus
In an effort to unite us all, I will state that I support gay marriage, but only if both chicks are hot.
ReplyDeleteNow you all hate me!
OK. I'm going to settle this once and for all...gamer style!
ReplyDeleteGay marriage should be...
(rattle of dice)
(flipping of pages)
legal.
> But I do believe that marriage is meant to unify a man and a woman.
ReplyDeleteWait...a woman?
Man, don't let the Mormons hear you say that, you'll lose your funding.
If Marriage is defined by the bible in accordance with God's will, then the government has no business issuing marriage certificates.
ReplyDeleteWhatever your belief about the status of homosexual marriages under god's law, the question of how they are to be treated under the laws of this country are a separate issue.
Seriously - the state doesn't grant annulments, they grant divorces.
If the courthouse stopped issuing Marriage Licenses and issued Civul Union licenses or whatever, this argument could be returned to the churches & seminaries where it belongs.
With all due respect, Rotwang, I remember the part where I was called a bigot, which isn't too flattering, according to Webster up there.
ReplyDeleteBelieving that something is wrong and unhealthy and should be discouraged rather than encouraged isn't hatred, or fear, or any of the other terms people like to trot out to label and dismiss those who disagree with them.
Biff, there's no comparison to interracial marriage. This isn't ethnicity we're talking about, it's behavior. Regardless of whether a person is born with a homosexual orientation or whether they develop it as a result of stimuli, people have the ability to choose how they behave. We do it all the time. Likewise, Jesus never told us not to worry about the sins of others. He told us to see to our own first, and then we would be able to see to others' clearly; Matthew 7:1-5 is a warning against hypocrisy and harshness, not an admonition to ignore what others do.
James, I don't believe that homosexual behavior should be a crime; neither do I believe it should be encouraged by the government. That's "tolerance", as opposed to "acceptance". Our stance makes plenty of sense.
The goal of this campaign seems to be to force society to bestow its benediction on alternate lifestyles. What consenting adults do in their own bedrooms is their own business, I agree; what they arrange legally is likewise their own - civil unions already exist. But we're being asked to give our blessing to homosexual marriages - to consider it marriage, on an equal footing as heterosexual marriage, as if there were no difference between the two. This is one reason why traditional marriage requires "protection"; as an institution in North America, marriage is eroding. Two generations ago, Bertrand Russell's Marriage and Morals faced strong public opposition because it advocated "trial marriages". At this point in time, 'living together' and premarital sex are the norm and 'waiting until marriage' is seen as aberrant (according to any amount of popular media, anyway). It's a gradual wearing away of a core societal cohesive structure that doesn't appear to offer much benefice in its place. The concept of marriage is being reduced to a mere partnership or contract rather than something sacred and integral to society. Traditional marriage becomes devalued in the public eye and results in all sorts of problems: marital separations and broken homes, spousal abuse, child abuse, etc. It becomes more acceptable to engage in such behaviors, because it's considered "normal". I don't think you can point to any single element and say "This is to blame for our problems." This stuff is interconnected.
What Prop 8 does is formally state what has been traditionally understood to be marriage throughout history, and keeps the slippery slope scenarios (from homosexual unions to other alternate arrangements such as polygamy) from occurring.
Public acceptance of homosexual behavior depends also upon squelching the voice of opposition to it. Roll your eyes if you want, but I don't think it an unlikely scenario that the ACLU or other groups will bring legal pressure to bear against individuals and/or churches who refuse to perform gay marriages or who speak out against them. It's coming up in other countries, so why not here? After all, we're already "bigots" and "hatesworn monotheists", right? How much needs to be done before we can be convicted of hate crimes for publicly saying that homosexuality is a sinful behavior?
In any case, there is also the underlying principle that when a judge decides traditional marriage needs to be redefined and changes the law to reflect it, that isn't democratic.
It is the same bigotry. Miscegnation is a behavior and it was illegal because of bigotry. People had a choice not to have sex with a person of a different race and something was considered wrong with you if you wanted to. And it all had religious justification. It is EXACTLY the same.
ReplyDeleteLook nobody says you have to accept it personally, the question is whether you can compel others in accordance with your desires. Two gays getting married is their business, not yours.
And Jesus never said a word about gay marriage. He did say a lot about helping the poor, so why aren't you fighting for more public assistance? He said a lot about not judging others, so why aren't you fighting for an end to the judicial system? He said to render unto Caesar, so why aren't you fighting for higher taxes?
If you are really concerned about God word, why are you ignoring those? It is always easier to look at the sins of others rather than our own. Its always easier to try to force other people to behave in a certain way if you don't want to behave in that way yourself anyhow.
And really, what does it matter what the government does if it isn't hurting anyone. God's word doesn't need government backing, it stands all on its own.
Now if the government tries to force you into a gay marriage, you would have a point. If the government banned heterosexual marraige, hey, sure, you would be right.
There is nothing in the bible about Jesus condemning gays, there is plenty about him condemning those that use religion to teach hate and bigotry.
Korgoth: Jeff's post didn't say anything about approving or disapproving of homosexuality. His post was about the idea that het marriages need "protecting" from gay marriages. And you respond with the Bible?
ReplyDeleteUm. Huh? Chapter, please? Verse?
If you have a version of the Bible that says that het marriages need to be protected from gays, I can't help but wonder if it's the same version of the Bible that says that D&D is a devil-game?
Because none of the versions of the Bible I have here at my house say either of those things.
The Bible I have handy mentions marriage a couple of dozen times or thereabouts, and when it does mention marriage it's about fun things like slaughtered fatlings. It does point out that those who rise from the dead don't get married, which is kind of cool.
On the other hand, the Bible does say that marrying a divorcee counts as adultery ...
And there are multiple instances of rules involving brothers taking over for dead husbands. I guess we really should legislate that, too, since that's what the Bible actually does say about marriage ...
If you're going to cleave to God's word, Korgoth, maybe (just maybe) someday take the time to actually read it.
So, S. John, you and I disagree and there *I haven't read the Bible*? Seriously? I guess I was wrong to have respect for you. Because now you're talking like a punk. It doesn't suit you.
ReplyDeleteThe Bible, the word of God, condemns homosexuality:
Genesis 2:24-25 - defines marriage
Leviticus 18:22 - defines homosexuality as an abomination
Leviticus 20:13 - reinforces that homosexuality is a grave sin
Romans 1:26-27 - homosexuality is a sin and unnatural
1 Corinthians 6:9 - practicing homosexuals excluded from the Kingdom
Hebrews 13:4 - the goodness of marital sex distinguished from the evil forms of sex
Jude 1:7 - Sodom and Gomorrah punished for evil forms of sex
Oh, I'm sorry S. John... that was from the real Bible, not the plush rainbow-colored Bible issued to insult-slinging liberal ideologues. Hopefully a little dose of truth isn't too painful for you.
Note: By "homosexuality" I mean those who commit homosexual acts; being tempted to commit them is no worse than being tempted to commit fornication or onanism... you just have to resist the temptation.
Here's Deuteronomy 22:13-30. I agree with S. John. Let's legislate virginity requirements. And stoning. That's marriage the way God intended.
ReplyDeleteIf a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, "I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity," 15 then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. 16 The girl's father will say to the elders, "I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. 17 Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity." Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver [b] and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.
20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house. You must purge the evil from among you.
22 If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.
23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife. You must purge the evil from among you.
25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders his neighbor, 27 for the man found the girl out in the country, and though the betrothed girl screamed, there was no one to rescue her.
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. [c] He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
30 A man is not to marry his father's wife; he must not dishonor his father's bed.
The divorce rate in Bible-belt states exceeds that of the nation as a whole, so I think it's high time we consider restrictions on marriage for those of the Christian faith. If anyone should have their suitability for matrimony questioned, it's these God-fearing knuckleheads who clog our civil courts with the shameful detritus of their failed marriages.
ReplyDelete> What Prop 8 does is formally state what has been traditionally understood to be marriage throughout history, and keeps the slippery slope scenarios (from homosexual unions to other alternate arrangements such as polygamy) from occurring.
ReplyDeleteJust a tip - don't talk about "a return to traditional understandings of marriage" around your Mormon sponsors :)
"So believing that the Bible is God's word makes me a bigot. That's nice, Jeff."
ReplyDeleteYou cite the verse where Christ tells us to actively protect marriage and I'll apologize for offending you. Last time I read the gospels (which has been a while, I've been puttering more with the OT lately) it struck me that the J-man talked more about divorce than he did homosexuality.
Either way I'm pretty confident that the odds are you've never personally done much to try to protect my marriage, but show me a verse and I'll apologize anyway.
PS Or Republicans, who I'm given to understand believe that marriage is a contract between a woman, a man, the man's interns, and a series of male prostitutes.
ReplyDeleteKorgoth, sounds like you're still having difficulty with your reading.
ReplyDeleteLet's spell it out simply for you: the word of money-grubbing politicians is not the word of God. The word of money-grubbing televangelists is not the word of God. The word of ignorant bigots who worship money-grubbing televangelists and politicians in lieu of God, is not the word of God.
And those are the only three groups insisting that het marriage needs protecting from gay marriage.
If it's in the Bible, you still haven't told us where.
Let me put this into gaming context:
ReplyDeleteREAL LIFE RPG (TM)
Character Creation:
In the Real Life RPG(TM), you roll your character's physical traits and choose the attitudinal ones.
PHYSICAL TRAITS
Attributes
There are six attributes in the RL-RPG: Strength, Dexterity, Health, Willpower, Intelligence, and Perception.
Roll 3d6 for each and assign as desired.
Race (1)
Roll percentage and consult table:
1-68 White
69-83 Hispanic
84-95 African American
96-100 Asian American
Gender (2)
Roll percentage and consult table:
1-51 Female
51-100 Male
Based on your gender, roll your sexual orientation (3):
Female
1-95 Heterosexual
96-100 Homosexual
Male
1-90 Heterosexual
91-100 Homosexual
Comeliness (4)
Roll percentage and consult table:
1-10 Ugly
11-90 Average
91-100 Handsome/Beautiful
ATTITUDINAL TRAITS (5)
Choose the attitudes you want your character to display during the game from the following lists.
Religion
Choose one of the campaign's existing religions, or make up one of your own, taking into account that the prevailing religions will try to suppress competing ones.
Tolerance
• Extremely Bigoted - Your negative opinion on (choose one or more: race/creed/gender/sexual orientation) are inflexible; you base all your attitudes toward any individual on this distinction
• Bigoted - Your negative opinion on (choose one or more: race/creed/gender/sexual orientation) are unlikely to change; you base all your attitudes toward groups on this distinction, though your opinion on an individual may change based on their behavior
• Accepting - You base your opinion on the individual, taking into account the attitudes generally displayed by members of that (choose one or more: race/creed/gender/sexual orientation)
• Very Accepting - You base your opinion on an individual's behavior regardless of their race, creed, gender, or sexual orientation
(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_demographics_of_the_United_States#Projections
(2) http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2001/cb01cn181.html
(3) http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080417160636AAw91WY
(4) Made this up
(5) YOU choose this -- choose wisely
A bit of comment necromancy here, but *HIGH FIVE* for Jeff!
ReplyDelete