Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Do you agree with Same-sex marriage? watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Do you agree with Same-sex Marriage?
    Yes!
    355
    77.34%
    NO!!!
    104
    22.66%

    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    I'm the same. I used to be against it because of how I was raised and I thought it was 'unnatural' and all that crap, but then someone raised a good point about how heterosexual couples can still be unable to conceive naturally (or perhaps don't even want kids) , yet they are not condemned to marry. I'm also a strong believer in that you cannot choose who you fall for, and so if two people are happy together, they should be together regardless of what's in between their legs.

    I don't like any PDA that involves playing tonsil tennis, even with straight couples, but whatever people do behind closed doors is none of my business. Just my two cents
    It was more or less the same for me...I never really met a gay person until like a year ago, which is also when I changed my view of them.

    Back home, being gay is still treated "wrong" and phrases like "thats so gay" are used a lot and have negaitve meaning. I was raised thinking that gay people are somehow worse than us. I think meeting gay people and seeing they are no different to me and in fact are even nicer than majoirty of straight people was the biggest trigger for me to change my mind about them.
    And then, if you support gays then you also have to support their right to marry
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SignFromDog)
    What made you change your mind?
    There you go:
    (Original post by Nottie)
    It was more or less the same for me...I never really met a gay person until like a year ago, which is also when I changed my view of them.

    Back home, being gay is still treated "wrong" and phrases like "thats so gay" are used a lot and have negaitve meaning. I was raised thinking that gay people are somehow worse than us. I think meeting gay people and seeing they are no different to me and in fact are even nicer than majoirty of straight people was the biggest trigger for me to change my mind about them.
    And then, if you support gays then you also have to support their right to marry
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Really? Is that all you got?

    What about the other aspects? Like shaving your hair? Why did you ignore these?

    I could go on to say why homosexuality is NOT condemned by St Paul, but I have done numerous times on here and i doubt you'd understand either way. Unless you have the very original test itself, you cannot use these arguments
    Im regards to shaving and shellfish and fabric rules it depends on interpretation. Christians hold different view regarding the old covenant. Most support fulfilment theology, which states that Jesus fulfilled the old covenant and the new supersedes it. People who hold such a view create a distinction between the rules of the Old Testament, ceremonial, cleanliness and moral rules. Ceremonial and cleanliness rules are no longer applicable but moral rules remain in place. Hence shellfish okay to eat but homosexual relations are not allowed. Of course it depends on how you interpret the Old Testament condemnation of homosexuality. Even if we assume it talks about relationships between the same sex some argue the restriction is one based on cleanliness/ceremony and not a moral ruling and therefor it no longer applies.

    And that is without arguing about what the New Testament says in regards to homosexuality.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    There should be a third option that states 'my opinion is irrelevant'. The government should have no say in the regulation of marriage.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WokSz)
    There should be a third option that states 'my opinion is irrelevant'. The government should have no say in the regulation of marriage.

    Or a 4th that says 'The faithful should have no say in the regulation of marriage.'
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by garfeeled)
    Im regards to shaving and shellfish and fabric rules it depends on interpretation. Christians hold different view regarding the old covenant. Most support fulfilment theology, which states that Jesus fulfilled the old covenant and the new supersedes it. People who hold such a view create a distinction between the rules of the Old Testament, ceremonial, cleanliness and moral rules. Ceremonial and cleanliness rules are no longer applicable but moral rules remain in place. Hence shellfish okay to eat but homosexual relations are not allowed. Of course it depends on how you interpret the Old Testament condemnation of homosexuality. Even if we assume it talks about relationships between the same sex some argue the restriction is one based on cleanliness/ceremony and not a moral ruling and therefor it no longer applies.

    And that is without arguing about what the New Testament says in regards to homosexuality.
    How is gay sex a moral issue and eating shellfish not, when one makes no difference to non-participants and the other involves killing a creature God created?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Romula)
    How is gay sex a moral issue and eating shellfish not, when one makes no difference to non-participants and the other involves killing a creature God created?
    Because they like Shellfish and mixed fibers but don't like gays
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Because they like Shellfish and mixed fibers but don't like gays
    Alert the media. We have SOLVED RELIGION.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Romula)
    Alert the media. We have SOLVED RELIGION.
    I know right

    Cherry picking has always been part of the faithfuls tool box

    It's be funny if it didn't have such horrible consequences
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Romula)
    How is gay sex a moral issue and eating shellfish not, when one makes no difference to non-participants and the other involves killing a creature God created?
    That would be more a question to ask God. From an intrachristian view point it is in the manner that god banned it, and the whole abdication of the rule, for lack of a better term, in the new testement.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Skeptique)
    Bull****! the heterosexuals in the African 'epidemic' are 'intravenous drug users' by virtue of the improperly performed vaccination campaigns that spread HIV in Africa. Besides I wasn't talking about global statistics only UK where gays are 10x more likely to contract HIV/Aids.
    Really? Intravenous drug users? Then why have campaigns like ABC (Abstinance, Be faithful and Correct use of Condoms) dramatically reduced the number of cases? None of these behaviour are to do with drug use and in some countries more than halved the number of cases in 10 years.

    And that 10 times likihood is false. Gay men in london are 10 times more likely, gay men outside of london have lower instances, gay women have much lower incidences.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    to be honest i dont mind , people can do what ever they want , but all religions dont allow same-sex marriage.
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nageen1998)
    to be honest i dont mind , people can do what ever they want , but all religions dont allow same-sex marriage.
    most, if not all, religions dont allow sex before marriage, living with your partner before marriage, cheating, swearing etc...but religious people don't seem to mind these!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by garfeeled)
    Im regards to shaving and shellfish and fabric rules it depends on interpretation. Christians hold different view regarding the old covenant. Most support fulfilment theology, which states that Jesus fulfilled the old covenant and the new supersedes it. People who hold such a view create a distinction between the rules of the Old Testament, ceremonial, cleanliness and moral rules. Ceremonial and cleanliness rules are no longer applicable but moral rules remain in place. Hence shellfish okay to eat but homosexual relations are not allowed. Of course it depends on how you interpret the Old Testament condemnation of homosexuality. Even if we assume it talks about relationships between the same sex some argue the restriction is one based on cleanliness/ceremony and not a moral ruling and therefor it no longer applies.

    And that is without arguing about what the New Testament says in regards to homosexuality.
    You just defeated your own argument. On one hand, you say whatever you do is open to interpretation, on the other whatever you don't like it suddenly certain. The rather common hypocrisy of some Christians I suppose.

    How are you sure about the interpretation of homosexuality in the NT? Do you know when the tern was devised and when these were written? Do you know the original word, which is arsenokoites (in Greek) does NOT translate to homosexual directly? Do you know the era that these were written in and how people ran naked, had rituals and had sex during these? How do you know St Paul is referring to all homosexuals and not just those who had what we call devious practices today (ie above - running naked and having sex in rituals?). How do you know his exact words when it's known that the original writings were edited, altered and translation thousands if times?

    I'm certain you know anything about the above - don't make qualified statements acting as an expert.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nottie)
    most, if not all, religions dont allow sex before marriage, living with your partner before marriage, cheating, swearing etc...but religious people don't seem to mind these!
    I mind them..(please don't attack me I'm just saying I would uphold most of these values). Tbh I don't really care what other people do with their personal lives, how do you feel about it?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by garfeeled)
    Im regards to shaving and shellfish and fabric rules it depends on interpretation. Christians hold different view regarding the old covenant. Most support fulfilment theology, which states that Jesus fulfilled the old covenant and the new supersedes it. People who hold such a view create a distinction between the rules of the Old Testament, ceremonial, cleanliness and moral rules. Ceremonial and cleanliness rules are no longer applicable but moral rules remain in place. Hence shellfish okay to eat but homosexual relations are not allowed. Of course it depends on how you interpret the Old Testament condemnation of homosexuality. Even if we assume it talks about relationships between the same sex some argue the restriction is one based on cleanliness/ceremony and not a moral ruling and therefor it no longer applies.

    And that is without arguing about what the New Testament says in regards to homosexuality.
    Basically, Christians cherry pick. They do it all day long. That's the long and the short of it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    You just defeated your own argument. On one hand, you say whatever you do is open to interpretation, on the other whatever you don't like it suddenly certain. The rather common hypocrisy of some Christians I suppose.

    How are you sure about the interpretation of homosexuality in the NT? Do you know when the tern was devised and when these were written? Do you know the original word, which is arsenokoites (in Greek) does NOT translate to homosexual directly? Do you know the era that these were written in and how people ran naked, had rituals and had sex during these? How do you know St Paul is referring to all homosexuals and not just those who had what we call devious practices today (ie above - running naked and having sex in rituals?). How do you know his exact words when it's known that the original writings were edited, altered and translation thousands if times?

    I'm certain you know anything about the above - don't make qualified statements acting as an expert.
    I have a question, which one has more bearing, the New testament or the Old one?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    You just defeated your own argument. On one hand, you say whatever you do is open to interpretation, on the other whatever you don't like it suddenly certain. The rather common hypocrisy of some Christians I suppose.

    How are you sure about the interpretation of homosexuality in the NT? Do you know when the tern was devised and when these were written? Do you know the original word, which is arsenokoites (in Greek) does NOT translate to homosexual directly? Do you know the era that these were written in and how people ran naked, had rituals and had sex during these? How do you know St Paul is referring to all homosexuals and not just those who had what we call devious practices today (ie above - running naked and having sex in rituals?). How do you know his exact words when it's known that the original writings were edited, altered and translation thousands if times?

    I'm certain you know anything about the above - don't make qualified statements acting as an expert.
    1 not a Christian,
    2 I am gay.
    3 I am pro gay marriage

    Any who, I am aware of the debate surrounding the new testement statements about homosexuality. I dont claim to be an expert but I am aware of a bit about this stuff. Truthfully I have seen some convincing arguements for a more liberal interpretation of the new testement.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nottie)
    most, if not all, religions dont allow sex before marriage, living with your partner before marriage, cheating, swearing etc...but religious people don't seem to mind these!
    Religious people tolerate this and not encourage it. Religious people tolerate gay people but we don't encourage gay marriage. It's not like they are banning gay people from attending church or mosques. (In the UK)


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    "Yes if [homosexuality] is present but not the persons choice then its a sickness" - you can put as many disclaimers on it as you want, but you explicitly called it a sickness.
    .
    Yes, to that individual who is suffering from an unwanted sexual attraction; to them it is a sickness. But in another case if the person wishes to be a homo then it is merely a syndrome. Your taking umbrage at what I posted because you thought I meant homosexuality as a global phenomena is a sickness. I did not say that!

    To those who have such misfortune to be suffering from this dreadful condition of wanting to be hetero but not being able to be free of same sex attraction they are sick and are in need of a way out - a cure.
 
 
 
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.