So, the only 'harm' in gay marriage is being demonstrated here by fear of what would come next? It's called a slippery slope, and it is the exact same kind of ungrounded thinking based upon personal opinion completely unsupported by fact(s) that got us involved in The Vietnam War/Conflict. Our government illogically and fearfully thought that if we allowed the communist North to invade the south, then all of the area would eventually be 'turned' into communist countries.

Didn't happen, and the mistake was obviously had in basing our actions upon the fear of what could be future negative consequences. Those future predictions were invalidly conceived in thought. We had no way to calculate their probability. That mistake caused much more *REAL* harm than it ever attempted to prevent. The thought process which drew that conclusion assumed a whole slew of things which cannot be known. There is always the possibility for the actualization of negative consequences directly stemming from our action(s).

We make mistakes, however, fearful oppression that is instantiated through illogical means is *very very dangerous*. Not allowing another to marry a life-long partner simply because one has been taught that same sex relationships are 'wrong' has absolutely no more logical grounding regarding the moral aspect of marriage than the argument it opposes.

That is a brute fact.

The argument has thus been layed, if we allowed gay marriage, "What would stop us from allowing incestual marriage, bestiality accompanied by marriage, etc." These points are fear tactics stemming from those who not only want to keep their religious ideology/moral intact(which is fine be me), but also want to embolden the very presence of it by forcing everyone else to follow it's moral constructs/beliefs as well.

Here is *the* problem which opponents of gay marriage musteventually face...

No matter how clearly one can prove what *is*, one cannot prove why it ought to be that way rather than another. We can prove that a stop sign *is* red, but we have no way of proving why it ought to be. Utterances of 'ought' are nothing more than projecting one;s own belief. Therefore, the underlying factor which does not allow gay marriage is this, "We ought not allow same-sex marriage" and it *is* based purely in one's own belief. *If* we have freedom of belief and there is are supposed to be no religious-based laws, then why ought we deny same sex marriage couples the ability to live as equals in a marriage contract?

The arguments thus far miserably fail to answer the relevent question above. It *does not* follow that if we honor the intepersonal dedication between the members of same-sex relationships by allowing them the right/privelege to legally be bound be marriage that incest, donkey sex, or anything else of that nature will happen. The argument does not hold water.

Those fear-mongering illogical tactics are - as Di has already suggested and I am actively supporting - completely unrelated issues.

Yes it is everyone's choice to believe anyhow they wish. And no one can take that away. What you do today will effect you tomarrow, and there are no second chances, we will be judged of our actions. So choose wisely and recheck if you've chosen wisely.

Hi Creative

Hope all is well with you.

Great post! I agree.

Hey there young-un! Howzit?



All is tolerable. Thanx for the welcome. Excellent OP! I've always wondered why those who oppose same-sex marriage based upon religious moral grounds insist upon doing 'Gods' work.

Let God be the judge regarding acts such as this.

I would have to disagree..

How do you think this type of relationships came about to begin with?

You do not believe another agenda led to gay marraige?

Then if we go back in time when every one had heard of San Franscico as the Gay city of America.


We allowed the behavior and everyone said let them have it as long as its not around me.. Right?


Now its not everywhere but heading thier.

What if i want to move to Utah and everyone gets together and will not sell to them or hire them we do not want to be around Gay people.


What is going to happen?

They will be crying Foul yet i have the right to hire or sell to whoever i want.

Is not that not my right?

See no it would not be because now the rights of Gays move in to whoevers religion?

So where is religious freedom?


So what happens the Law of the land takes over and trumps all religious freedoms/laws someone may feel they have.

Where does it end. It all comes down to just as the Scriptures have said.

It will come when EVIL WILL BE GOOD AND GOOD WILL BE EVIL.

I have been asking religious folks this question for a while now.

They believe they are "saving" others from themselves.

Talk about a slippery slope.

You missed the point of why I brought up those subjects. It was NOT scare tactics as to what may happen if we allow gay marriage, but to show the hypocrisy of the reasoning being applied.


I've heard "previous laws" being cited for a few of them.
I've heard "immediate harm".
I've heard of "possible birth defects".
I've heard "gender and roles"

If a person can dismiss legalising incest with no more than "previous laws" and "possible or immediate harm" then anyone who wishes to, should be allowed to use those same reasons against that person's push for gay marriage.

Would you oppose incestuous marriage? If so, on what grounds?
What about a 12 or 14 year old being allowed to marry a 50 year old man or woman? Again, if so, on what grounds?




And I loved how you used fear tactics to warn of the dangers of using fear tactics "*very very dangerous*".....

Can we discuss gay marriage without any reference to incest or pedophilia since there is no significant comparison there?

No significant comparison? How so, they are all unproductive immoral actions......... seems like they have quite a bit in comparison.

Miles,

Good to 'see' you miles, it's been a while... Hope you are well! Let's see if I can engage the questions to your satifaction.



Are you suggesting that San Fransisco's position in the equal rights movements are somehow 'responsible' for the existence of gay relationships? I would disagree on reasonable grounds. It is, in my opinion of course, much more reasonable to think that the gays went to San Fransisco because of their ability to live their life unimpeded by stereotypical haters. That's just me though. I mean, I'm defintitely not gay, however, if I were while living in the 60's and early 70's and I were looking for a place to live where i would not have to worry as much about beig harrassed on a daily basis, I would look at places such as S.F. because it was known to be representative of the equal rights movement.

Gays existed long before then my friend. Brutal hatred, religious intolerance, and fear of being ridiculed and literally attacked constituted very good reason for the gays having to keep it 'to themselves'. Now, thankfully, we are further along with religious/morality tolerance - thanks much in part to the movement based in S.F. - and so(based upon the concepts of freedom and acceptance) it has become necessary for the society in general to not be so hateful of those who do not share the same moral/religious belief.



Well my friend, if by "everyone gets together and will not sell to them or hire them" you are openly suggesting that you're planning on discriminating against them for their sexual preferences. No worries as of yet Miles. As it stands the laws are largely in favor of the employers over the employees when it comes to conflict.

Collaboration, however, *is* against the law if I am not mistaken as is blatent hate crimes and discrimination.



There are federal hiring guidelines Miles - for very good reason. Discrimination is a serious offense. Thankfully, we are gradually overcoming that. I mean, it has been clearly shown and the consensus agrees that such a thing constitutes being a violation of humanity. We are traditionally a reasonable people, who unfortunately have become rather puppetic in general. The machine.

Religious freedom does not involve your being able to freely impede another in their pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness based on the fact that you do not agree with their personal life choices.



Miles, I realize that you have deeply held religious convictions. Honestly, I do not think anything short of my accidentally offending you could happen if I addressed this portion of your response so I will pass over it in silence.

All I can say, is that I do not have a fear of accepting the fact that everyone's moral grounds are equally subjective, and in that I can place an equal base value upon them. None can be proven as being true. Therefore, the safest way to proceed is in the identification of a universal common denominator had in all belief systems. That *is* that each of us must trust that we are learning is true(an accurate reflection/correspondence of/to reality) during our early formative years. We can also know that we have been mistaken in our beliefs/knowledge through merely quickly glancing through and looking at history.

It was once quite common for us to burn a woman at the stake for 'being a witch' if a black cat was seen near her or her house simply because we thought that witches were evil. It was once common in the south to beat slaves and rape the female ones, because they were considered less than human. I have literally heard and seen that belief(blacks were less than whites) supported by scripture.

The truth Miles, is that we are in depserate need as humans to accept the differences in others and not hate them because they are different. All it takes is one hater with a nuke.

Will that be good?

Pan,

Again, long time no 'see'... How are you? Do not get your hopes up that I will be participating in what throughout our history has been pointless arguing. I'll be direct here.

You said:



I'm afraid you've missed the point. Here it is again. If you cannot answer this question, I cannot continue the conversation, because this is not about what I may or may not find to be reasonable grounds to object to incest or donkey sex. It is about this:



Should you give my argument a more deserved amount of consideration, I will be more than glad to answer your questions. I, however, did not quote nor engage you. You engaged I, and in doing so also quoted my post. It is just 'good manners' to give it it's just due. Likewise.

God is the judge and the jury.God also told those who follow and believe in him to preach the gospel.Preaching the gospel includes what God considers abominations,destructive,offensive,and stories including the destruction of a entire city for sodomy and sexual sin.

It is not up to God but up to his people to educate the idiots out there who don't have enough brains to read a bible from start to finish to know how God and Jesus feels about these issues.

very good way of putting it Thomas :)

I agree 100%, please... step outta the jury box!

No one is judging anyone here. Only teaching what is an abomination. What is wrong and against God's will. We're not saying any particular person is going to hell, or anything...... just stating the general law God has given us.

Define "immoral", so that everyone here can know what it is that you're talking about. That way the particulars will be much clearer.

Moral = God's will, best for mankind....... immoral = Against God's will, destructive to the human race.

When asked to define immoral, cowboy wrote:



How do we know what God's will *is* cowboy?

Try reading the bible from start to finish!

Good to see u here too.

I believe most of what we hear and see on our media ia a farse.

a hater with a nuke.. is another scare tactic..

I know 2 much about all this to know the propoganda our govt. puts out.

Just like going to Iraq in the 1st place.

Why did we give Pakistan a 2 hour notice before we sent a cruise missle to Bin landens meeting he was having in Aphgan?

He left remember before it got thier during those 2 hours yet we found Hussien hiding in a hole.. Yea right.

The gay marraige is not a big deal to me as it must come as i see it.

its just a means to an end. a scapegoat for everyone to worry about while the real evil is going on behind closed doors.

thats why i have been away from here because it is a scapegoat and u see what people are talking about and u get a jist of whats on peoples minds.

I look at things in a total different light than most looking deep into a clysym of clusters and try to see where things are coming from.. Like the computer bot that searches for phrases on the net that then is able to predict the future.. It predicted 911 or at least something very bad was about to happen then. and now 2012 it says is eye opening now.

I look to the scriptures as my guide to a happy and peaceful life now and to come.

As I am sure you know i do not look at it the same as christians in almost everything.

This is probally because at age 8 i refused to ever step foot in another church until i did at 19 looking for more answers to why i left.

They just confirmed at 8 i had good reason to leave. so u know why.. i was being taught the 10 commandment and when it came to the 7 day sabbath i questioned why we worshipped on sunday and was given the age old answer of the resserection yet when i asked when the messiah worshipped they said the 7th day on our saturday.. at 19 and for 11 more years of searching not one minister could say in good conscience that changing the 7th day sabbath to sunday was correct.

not 1 in 11 years told me yes this is for real i would bet my life on it.. no they all said its just the way it is.. the people would be confused.

anyway just wanted to say that to let u see i was looked as a deciever a rebeller trying to teach people a lie when they admitted they were lieing yet would attack me.. made me stronger.


so i do understand wether it be gay people or anyone else about people or using the word as a hammer to protect thier flocks from someone they seen as a threat to thier paychecks.

this is ussually what it comes down to and its sad that this is true.

gays and gay marraige is a small stone in the mind of the elite who are behind the scenes.

I find most everything that is done is done for a purpose.

hitler said and is very true the last 30 to 50 years i believe is just his plan being scrutinized closer so that it comes so material that our minds will never recongnize it.

Hitler said in 1929 i believe before he came to power give me a generation and i will rule the world with them by my side.

They will be my pawns on the world chess board that will die protecting the king (Hitler) and his queen those4 he chooses to protect him in his inner circle.

This is what has been taking place and what we see are the pawns.

I worked in a field the govt. said did not exist. Still claims things do not exist that i know did in 1984.

Why do you think the real reason is Russia fell?

Do u really think we are worried about a Nuke?

Go to Alaska and try to figure out why we have hundreds of thousands of acres of wire mess 30 foot above the ground.

We are really at war here with ourselves and we have not a clue.

Bait and switch has been a game our govt. uses with our media for a very long time.. watch a white house briefing where journalists are thier.. See if they are asking questions that really seem like a good journalist should be asking or if it seems like anything else.

we need to wake up but we are so far gone they are very good at public opinion and gay rights , sex offenders, make journalists and law enforcement move up the ladder very quickly.. hate and and division of sects of people sells not only in money but in the how public opinion is shaped for the ones who really rule us.