Ken Starr and his homophobic agenda.

[Agathon]

Agathon is certainly right about New Testament trumping the Old for Christians, and while I don't know Greek, I trust his understanding of it. Matthew 19 is undeniably critical of divorce and polygamy, attributing the Old Testament rules to the hard hearts of men (NIV).

It was worth translating just for σκληροκαρδίαν (sklerokardian - hard hearted), which is now my word of the week.

[Felch]

sklerokardian



Sclerosis + cardio = hard heart

Greek is very cool.

[MrFun]

My argument is that warm fuzzy pictures of happy gay couples have NOTHING to do with the question of whether or not Starr's suit has merit.

This is also DinoDoc's argument.

Okay, I understand the point you and Dino made.

My point though with presenting real examples of gay and lesbian married couples was to show that there are real families that are threatened by Starr's suit. Starr is basically saying that gays and lesbians are inferior and ought to be prohibited from having any healthy, stable family structure in their lives. I wanted to counter such bigoted thought by showing the human faces of the people who would be targeted by Starr's suit.

So the video/slide show is not necessarily meant to be a direct refutation of the claim that Starr's suit has merit.

The way I tried to refute Starr's claim to legitimate merit is by using the Supreme Court ruling on interracial marriage. But others have said here that marriage was not established as a civil right. In that case, I do not see how prohibiting interracial marriage could have been ruled to be unconstitutional at the time.

And about your statement about how the U.S. Constitution amendment process works differently from that of California, yeah you're correct. But hypothetically I wanted to use the example of the 14th Amendment with popular referendum to illustrate a frightening scenario of how the majority could take away other people's rights. But yes, in reality, our system would not allow for that on the federal level.

[RGBVideo]

Push polling is when you ask a specific question in the hopes of getting the answer that you want.

No it's not.

[Arrian]

A push poll is a political campaign technique in which an individual or organization attempts to influence or alter the view of respondents under the guise of conducting a poll.

Wiki, but I think that's right.

-Arrian

[Agathon]

sklerokardian



Sclerosis + cardio = hard heart

Greek is very cool.

My favourite Greek moment is the time that someone I know complained that the "Milky Way" was a stupid name for an astronomical formation, and that we should use a technical term like "galaxy".

/facepalm

[RGBVideo]

Wiki, but I think that's right.

-Arrian

Yup.

What's funny is how Ben thinks he has any credibility at all in portraying himself to be an expert on political terms after getting caught of simply making **** up in almost any political discussion he becomes a part of

[MrFun]

I forgot one more point. The 14th Amendment states that it's unconstitutional to discriminate against people based on race.

But if marriage is not a civil right, then prohibition against interracial marriage did not violate the 14th Amendment because if marriage is not a civil right as others have argued here, then there was no civil rights violation insofar as the 14th Amendment is concerned.

Here is part of the text of the 14th Amendment:
"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

If we can establish however, that marriage is indeed a civil right but just does not apply to gays and lesbians then we are violating the 14th Amendment's law. Gays and lesbians born or naturalized in United States are citizens of the United States. Yet, they suffer from unequal abridgement of privileges and civil rights (one of them being marriage).

[Q Classic]

Again, it doesn't stand up to Ockham's razor which says the simplest explanation is best. If God sincerely intended for men and men to be together, why are there men and women? If as you say complexity is the desire, then why not 4 or 5 sexes?

Actually, to be pedantic, there are multiple ways of determining sex throughout nature, not just the XY system found in humans--which, mind you, may not be extant that much longer, since the Y chromosome is shortening with every generation and will disappear in the future.

(Which, then, if you go by the notion that a God made humans exactly the way they were, he did make two, realized his mistake, and created a self-correcting mechanism for the mistake to eventually disappear).

Additionally, what explains the instances of homosexuality that do appear in the animal kingdom?

[Ben Kenobi]

This passage absolutely and unambiguously upholds marriage to be between one man and one woman, or a lot of what Jesus says does not make sense. He does not say that consubstantiality can never be invalidated, but only that it ought not to be invalidated and that if it is invalidated, then divorce is permissible.

Thanks Agathon! I appreciate your analysis, and your translation is pretty much on the mark. NIV uses "cleaves to his wife" instead of "joined together" but for the most part yours is word to word.

The only point I would disagree with is Christ's argument about why what worked for Moses is not right, because as he says "it was not like this in the beginning". Which implies that man is fallen and has continued to fall. This is why Christ says that he is upholding the Law, because he sees marriage as an ideal. Christians would say that Christ has gave his life for our sins to help us keep to his "new law", which is simply older then the "Law" in itself.

This is why I feel it's not an appropriate secular law because non-Christians don't have Christ to help him keep to the law.

[Ben Kenobi]

Actually, to be pedantic, there are multiple ways of determining sex throughout nature, not just the XY system found in humans--which, mind you, may not be extant that much longer, since the Y chromosome is shortening with every generation and will disappear in the future.

Yes, I realise that which just reinforces the questions, as to why men and women were created, and not some alternative arrangement?

Additionally, what explains the instances of homosexuality that do appear in the animal kingdom?

There are many things which animals do that we don't consider permissible in civilised society. I don't really see why your argument is that we should emulate animals in all things. Animals kill each other and eat each other. Why then the ban on killing and eating other people?

[Asher]

I don't really see why your argument is that we should emulate animals in all things.

oh my ****ing god....

[Ben Kenobi]

Adultery is the opposite of the essence of "marriage", marriage is about commitment and gays and polygamists can be committed just like anyone else. Thats why Jesus limited divorce to infidelity...

You miss the point, which Agathon understood completely.

The reason why marriage can only be between the man and the woman is because of the "one flesh" or consubstantiality (which, by the way, agathon, is also used in reference to the godhead, which is what Paul says in Ephesians....)

This consubstantiality is not present in sodomy. Thus, you cannot have gay "marriage" because the bond is not there in the first place. This is why I said divorce does not mean you have never been married, it is simply the breaking of the existing bond. Sodomy means that there never was the proper bond in the first place.

[Elok]

Asher explodes in five...four...three...

[Asher]

Asher explodes in five...four...three...

It seriously upsets me that someone can be so stupid. I've seen more intelligent posts appear as comments beneath gangster rap videos on YouTube.