There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.

Religions > Bible > There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 15 of 24

Topic:	Religions > Bible
User:	"Craig Chilton"
Date:	09 Feb 2004 09:43:56 PM
Object:	There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.

For months, now, I have challenged the Anti-Gay-Rights
bigots to produce so much as even ***ONE FACT*** that
supports their loathsome and hateful stance against this
reasonable and sensible human right.
NO one has been able to do that.
So their ONLY possible reason is homophobic bigotry.
Which is worth precisely as much as racial bigotry.
Not a plugged Confederate penny.
-- Craig Chilton

User: "Al Ongapo"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	26 Feb 2004 12:39:17 AM

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 16:55:03 -0800, --sexkitten--
<ladyhawk_twonospam@hotmail.com> wrote:

AL wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:16:19 -0500, "L. Michael Roberts"
<L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> wrote:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:16:12 GMT, Elmo
<elmo3321@yahoo.com> spake thusly:

In article <u9dp301dtocf6kgdra36oeqqt8jrkphlf0@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave
<nospam*-*pastordave38@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

2) Jesus clearly stated that God created man and woman
and that marriage consists of a man and a woman.

Cite chapter and verse.

It wasn't said at a press conference. He make the comment in a casual
conversation with friends. Consequently, while it's been reported by
reliable source and is generally known, because it was stated in a
friendly conversation at which no media people were present there is
no record of it in any media, including the Bible. You can understand
that can't you...

Then how in the hell do you know about it?

Can't tell you that -- The reliable source spoke only on the
condition of anonymity.

What's more, how can any reasonably intelligent person be expected to
believe that the undocumented musings of a guy dead for 200 years are
either true or relevant?

Damn, girl! What year are you posting from?
.

User: "David Barnes"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	25 Feb 2004 09:19:23 PM

In article <b91230e36c32221cd923f5288667572f@news.teranews.com>, AL
Ongapo wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:16:19 -0500, "L. Michael Roberts"
<L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> wrote:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:16:12 GMT, Elmo
<elmo3321@yahoo.com> spake thusly:

In article <u9dp301dtocf6kgdra36oeqqt8jrkphlf0@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave
<nospam*-*pastordave38@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

2) Jesus clearly stated that God created man and woman
and that marriage consists of a man and a woman.

Cite chapter and verse.

So what makes you think it was said?
.

User: "AL Ongapo"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	26 Feb 2004 12:56:10 AM

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 19:19:23 -0800, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:

In article <b91230e36c32221cd923f5288667572f@news.teranews.com>, AL
Ongapo wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:16:19 -0500, "L. Michael Roberts"
<L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> wrote:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:16:12 GMT, Elmo
<elmo3321@yahoo.com> spake thusly:

In article <u9dp301dtocf6kgdra36oeqqt8jrkphlf0@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave
<nospam*-*pastordave38@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

2) Jesus clearly stated that God created man and woman
and that marriage consists of a man and a woman.

Cite chapter and verse.

So what makes you think it was said?

Because it was reported by a reliable source (who did so under the
conditions of anonymity) and is generally known. Common knowledge,
so to speak. You know like the stuff Socrates and Homer said. You are
aware that much of what was known and written from ancient times was
destroyed in the burning of the Library at Alexandria.
The individual blamed for the destruction is the Moslem Caliph Omar.
In 640 AD the Moslems took the city of Alexandria. Upon learning of "a
great library containing all the knowledge of the world" the
conquering general supposedly asked Caliph Omar for instructions. The
Caliph has been quoted as saying of the Library's holdings, "they will
either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they
will agree with it, so they are superfluous." So, allegedly, all the
texts were destroyed by using them as tinder for the (homosexual?)
bathhouses of the city. Even then it was said to have taken six months
to burn all the documents. But these details, from the Caliph's quote
to the incredulous six months it supposedly took to burn all the
books, weren't written down until 300 years after the fact. These
facts condemning Omar were written by Bishop Gregory Bar Hebr�us,
.

User: "Ray Fischer"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	26 Feb 2004 11:15:10 AM

<AL Ongapo> wrote:

David Barnes

Ongapo wrote:

"L. Michael Roberts"

2) Jesus clearly stated that God created man and woman
and that marriage consists of a man and a woman.

Cite chapter and verse.

So what makes you think it was said?

Because it was reported by a reliable source (who did so under the
conditions of anonymity)

Then it's not a reliable source.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.

User: "David Barnes"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	26 Feb 2004 04:13:34 PM

In article <cb5485a5396e257f7ae4c2c8249a87e2@news.teranews.com>, AL
Ongapo wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 19:19:23 -0800, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:

In article <b91230e36c32221cd923f5288667572f@news.teranews.com>, AL
Ongapo wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:16:19 -0500, "L. Michael Roberts"
<L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> wrote:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 18:16:12 GMT, Elmo
<elmo3321@yahoo.com> spake thusly:

In article <u9dp301dtocf6kgdra36oeqqt8jrkphlf0@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave
<nospam*-*pastordave38@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

2) Jesus clearly stated that God created man and woman
and that marriage consists of a man and a woman.

Cite chapter and verse.

So what makes you think it was said?

Because it was reported by a reliable source (who did so under the
conditions of anonymity) and is generally known. Common knowledge,
so to speak.

I see. Well, I have it on a reliable source that Jesus didn�t state
it, and that source too is anonymous. Now what?

You know like the stuff Socrates and Homer said. You are
aware that much of what was known and written from ancient times was
destroyed in the burning of the Library at Alexandria.

Yeah - so what? Is that your idea of proof?

The individual blamed for the destruction is the Moslem Caliph Omar.
In 640 AD the Moslems took the city of Alexandria. Upon learning of "a
great library containing all the knowledge of the world" the
conquering general supposedly asked Caliph Omar for instructions. The
Caliph has been quoted as saying of the Library's holdings, "they will
either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they
will agree with it, so they are superfluous." So, allegedly, all the
texts were destroyed by using them as tinder for the (homosexual?)
bathhouses of the city. Even then it was said to have taken six months
to burn all the documents. But these details, from the Caliph's quote
to the incredulous six months it supposedly took to burn all the
books, weren't written down until 300 years after the fact. These
facts condemning Omar were written by Bishop Gregory Bar Hebr�us,

Jesus never said it.
.

User: "Al Ongapo"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Polygamous Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	25 Feb 2004 06:34:14 PM

Polygamous marriage is as logical, even more so, than is homosexual
"same sex marriage." If homosexual marriage or even civil union is
allowed by any state or political subdivision of a state, then
polygamy must also be allowed.
.

User: "--sexkitten--"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Polygamous Marriage. NONE,whatsoever.	25 Feb 2004 06:49:10 PM

Al wrote:

Yes. And?
.

User: "Krisblake"
Title: Re: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	25 Feb 2004 09:04:41 AM

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:00:47 -0500, Pastor Dave
<nospam*-*pastordave38@yahoo.com> wrote:

On 22 Feb 2004 16:26:22 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<oahh30hh0jksp2s5e8us73cpr5q0b1d3fj@4ax.com>...

On 21 Feb 2004 17:33:22 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

I've done much snippage here. The reason is that I
just want to deal with the points and this post is
getting to be book size. :)

So you tell stories involving your gay partner, instead
of a heterosexual one. That equals a change of
lifestyle.

How do we define any "lifestyle"?

Now you're being evasive.

Am I?

Yes.

You also keep a different circle of
friends. Gay friends that you would probably never
have met, if you were not homosexual.

Now we're talking!

Finally, an admission. I've snipped the attempt to
explain it away. The point is, that what I said is
accurate. The fact is, that you said that it didn't
make any difference in your lifestyle and yet, it does.

Does having gay friends constitute a significant change in lifestyle?
I don't think so.

Then you are not honest, because it's more than just
knowing gay people. We've been over this. You're
running in circles here.

Absolutely, but I am not alone. I am only echoing what
God has said on the matter. I happen to agree with
Him. :)

God's word never said anything about a homosexual lifestyle, at least
nothing that is recognizable today.

God's word stands forever and the Bible clearly
condemns homosexual acts.

It is clear in the modern translations, perhaps, but the original
sources, call that into question. This is treading close on a
completely different thread, since the core of this thread is civil
marriage, not religious.

The original sources don't call it into question at
all. In fact, if you think they do, then tell me
exactly which passages you're discussing and we can
deal with them. I would welcome such a conversation.

There are several versions of the Bible that actually use the word
"homosexual" (1 Corinthians and Timothy) in a list of offenders, to
support the view of homosexuality being a sin. We both know what
passages are being referred to. We have the Leviticus codes that
people like to employ in their position. The extremists seem to
inconsistently apply those codes like a choose-your-own-adventure
novel, discounting the fact that many of the rules dictated here have
faded to irrelevancy in modern times, and had a specific purpose at
the time they were given to the people.

God's word stands forever and homosexual acts are not
new, so it still applies. What you're really saying,
is that modern society accepts homosexuality. That
isn't true either. Some people do and guess what,
there were more people back then who did. It was
considered part of life in many cultures and yet, the
Bible says what it says, so the times are irrelevant.

Then there's the S&G story(Genesis 19), which I believe has no
description of any homosexuals I have ever ever known. One would have
to disregard the traditional uses of the Hebrew in order to believe
that this is a condemnation of homosexuality.

That's a ridiculous statement. You'd have to twist it
pretty badly, to make it say anything other than a
condemnation of homosexual acts.

Through the ages the
story has changed its flavour from its original intent and purpose,
more tinged with cultural pollution stemming from about the 13th
Century. As soon as historical and Biblical context is added in, the
apparent meaning changes.

That's an accusation, not a fact. But see, here is
where the homosexual tries to protect himself. Just in
case I do prove that it is condemning homosexual acts,
you'll tell me that it has changed anyway.

Other references to that story do not mention homosexuality at all
when referring to the crimes of the cities. Even the very use of the
word 'sodomy' that some people use to describe a homosexual(male) act,
is an invention that stems from cultural influences, rather than true
Biblical foundations.

Wrong. Jude references the events told in Genesis and
tells us it was sexual sin...

"Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them
in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication,
and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an
example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."
- Jude 7

Lastly, the passages from Romans 1:26-27. Paul's writings are
challenging at best, using familiar words in unfamiliar ways. The
people he is describing were not homosexuals, or, at very least,
unlike any homosexuals alive today. This passage is describing some
type of idolatrous ritual/worship for which there is no modern
equivalent, but would have been clearly understood by the people of
the time. If Paul were around today, he might write a proscription on
a modern type of idol worship, internet porn addiction, which is
completely understood by any of us today, but if applied to the people
of Paul's time, would be completely irrelevant. It simply didn't
exist. Just as the practices that Paul describes here don't exist
today.

Paul describes what started in idolatry. His
statements tells us that. He is not limiting it to
that. He tells us where it started.

Of course I agree with you, but we are not talking
about "many things". We are talking about men dressing
up as women, dancing half naked down the street.

It's sensationalism, and unnecessary.

It is morally wrong, but it is an accurate reflection.

I think you mistake acceptance of people who are
different, with accepting everything that they do.

In terms of homosexual acts, you do not have to approve of what they
do, you are not privy to those things which you object to. If I was
one of the biblical literalist-extremists, I could conceivably
disapprove of heterosexuals having any sort of non-procreative sex,

That's not what the Bible says. Having sex out of
wedlock is fornication though and that is what
homosexuals do.

"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman
to lust after her hath committed adultery with her
already in his heart." - Matthew 5:28

According to that line, practically everyone is guilty of sin in the
same degree.

Yes, that's true. But we aren't talking about
"everybody".

So if I would get myself married to a woman, and have heterosexual
relations with her, yet the whole time be thinking of being with a
man, I have already committed the 'sin' of homosexuality, which is the
same as actually doing it.

You would be guilty of lust.

I was implying that you might approve of a homosexual male couple that
doesn't have anal sex, and only kisses and holds hands.

No, I wouldn't.

Basing it on the modern Bible, it doesn't show anything that clearly
forbids the above, does it? Why would you not approve, if you could
know for sure that the couple doesn't engage in sex? ('lie' with one
another as they do with women)

It doesn't specifically condemn cocaine. Does that
mean it's okay? What the Bible does condemn, is
homosexual sex.

Please show me where homosexual sex is condemned in the Bible.

You already mentioned some relevant passages. Would
you like to discuss them?

Adultery is hurtful to the parties involved, whether they know or not.

And I believe that homosexual acts are as well. The
Bible teaches that. Read Romans 1. Homosexual acts
and lusts are the result of man worshipping false gods,
many years ago.

The concepts referenced in Romans 1 involve practices and consequences
that no longer exist today, and haven't existed for centuries. Those
people were immersed in evil, doing all kinds of evil without any
remorse.

No, Romans 1 starts with those practices. It does not
end the discussion there.

Romans 1 starts with idolatrous practices, and ends with people going
against their natures, sinking deeper and deeper into crazed evil
lunatics that have no regard for anything good. I've seen people
using Romans 1 to conclude that God sent HIV/AIDS to homosexuals as
fulfillment of Romans 12:26-27, a laughable premise at best.

Romans 1 does not end up with people going against
their nature. I can see you have been reading the
typical homosexual propaganda. :) Romans 1 deals with
people going against nature, period. As I said, we can
discuss it. I have no problem with that, as I'm sure
you guessed. :)

I'm sorry that we don't meet on that point. I may be guilty of
certain sins at certain times, but my life is not full of sin. My life
is full of love, friendship, peace, joy, pain, uncertainty, fun,
creativity, and family. I have been blessed with having the best
friends, health and family a guy could ask for, and I thank God for it
every day. How do I show it? I try to impart the same feelings to
everyone I meet in the course of my life, so that others may have
similar. But at the end of the day, we are all sinners in one way or
another. I truly seek to live my life by the golden rule, which I
believe to be a universal truth

You see yourself as a good guy.

I would like to think that I try not to do wrong to anyone, and I hope
to be treated in a similar fashion.

You do wrong. We all do wrong. The problem is that
man doesn't admit it to himself.

Mark 12:

30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with
all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this
is the first commandment.

31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour
as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these

Loving your neighbor does not, nor has it ever
consisted of approving of their sin. You are misusing
Scripture here.

You don't truly know your neighbour's sins, that is between God and
the person committing it, unless that sin affects someone negatively,
such as in the case of rape, stealing, murder or deception. Even if
having a specific type of sex is a sin, you will likely not be privy
to such encounters, be it salacious details or direct observation,
again unless it was a crime like rape.

When someone has a homosexual relationship going on,
then yes, I do know my neighbors sins. :)

Do you spy on your neighbours, often?

.

User: "L. Michael Roberts"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	21 Feb 2004 11:00:32 AM

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 19 Feb 2004 08:10:27 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<uqh73057bhd5qpijjapvgv9752ckd7nfbu@4ax.com>...

On 18 Feb 2004 08:22:50 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

<snip>

I am
repulsed by the sin, but I love the sinner.

What a coincidence! I am repulsed by the cult but I love the Cultist.
[Note: ALL religions are by definition cults.]
<snip>
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.

User: "L. Michael Roberts"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	18 Feb 2004 11:20:03 PM

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 17 Feb 2004 11:29:25 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<3g5430thk1o72kr5hg5956lvr8uka2t4mm@4ax.com>...

On 16 Feb 2004 16:36:51 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<gms130d3r55srr8icndtils1mkf8d1ejlf@4ax.com>...

On 15 Feb 2004 12:24:09 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<7b5v20181n3d5qrcm2tevh6c2nfufal2ih@4ax.com>...

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:35:08 GMT,

(Craig Chilton) spake thusly:

<snip>

Look at the gay lifestyle, for one thing.

Yes look at the "gay lifestyle" What "gay lifestyle". Even if there
was a "lifestyle" common to all gays, the "lifestyles" of married gays
would be as different from the "lifestyles" of unmarried gays as the
"lifestyles" of married straights are different from the "lifestyles"
of unmarried straights.

Untrue. The stats have been posted more than once.

Please post links to said "stats" regarding the above. I submit that
there IS NO GAY LIFESTYLE.

You've read them and yes, there is.

Bearing false witness again... tisk, tisk!

I don't have sex
with men. Gay males do.

What about gay males who are virgins and have not yet had sex with
another man? Are they part of the "gay lifestyle".

I don't have heterosexual
pride parades. Gays have homosexual pride parades and
dance down the street, with men dressed up as women,
etc..

I know a number of gay couples who live happily in the suburbs pursuing
professional careers and would never dream of attending a gay pride
parade? Are they living the "homosexual lifestyle"?
I know some heterosexual men who have dressed up as women. Are they
part of the "gay lifestyle"?
<snip>

Whether or not atheists believe in God, does not define
right and wrong.

Yet atheists still have a sense of right and wrong, and still respect
others' rights to practice their chosen religions.

No, they don't do either.

I know a number of atheists who strongly support freedom of and from
religion. Once again, bearing false wittiness against your neighbours.
Enjoy your eternal vacation in the lake of fire... unless you think
that Jesus approves of your lying on his behalf.
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.

User: "L. Michael Roberts"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	17 Feb 2004 12:28:16 PM

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 16 Feb 2004 16:36:51 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<gms130d3r55srr8icndtils1mkf8d1ejlf@4ax.com>...

On 15 Feb 2004 12:24:09 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<7b5v20181n3d5qrcm2tevh6c2nfufal2ih@4ax.com>...

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:35:08 GMT,

(Craig Chilton) spake thusly:

<snip>

Untrue. The stats have been posted more than once.

Were those stats form a reliable, recent, peer reviewed scientific
source? You would not want to be bearing false witness against your
neighbour now would you?
<snip>

The intentions of God are not yours. However I will say that atheists
can and do get married, and they could care less about what God said,
yet there is no prohibition on those marriages. We are talking about
civil marriages, not religious ones for one matter. To get into
theological talk, well, honestly, that's another discussion entirely.

Whether or not atheists believe in God, does not define
right and wrong.

However, atheists and those who do not believe in your deity routinely
have CIVIL weddings which does not affect your religious beliefs in any
way. Why would allowing a same-sex couple CIVIL marriage affect *your*
religious beliefs and the beliefs/dogma of *your* religion?
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.

User: "Craig Chilton"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	17 Feb 2004 07:50:51 PM

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:28:16 -0500,
L. Michael Roberts wrote:

"Pastor" Dave wrote:

Brent Norman <nelliganemile@hotmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

Untrue. The stats have been posted more than once.

Were those stats form a reliable, recent, peer reviewed scientific
source? You would not want to be bearing false witness against your
neighbour now would you?
<snip>

Whether or not atheists believe in God, does not define
right and wrong.

However, atheists and those who do not believe in your deity routinely
have CIVIL weddings which does not affect your religious beliefs in any
way.

Not to mention the literally millions of people who ARE religious,
but don't bother with fancy church weddings, but instead are married
by justices of the peace, Las Vegas wedding chapels, etc.

Why would allowing a same-sex couple CIVIL marriage affect *your*
religious beliefs and the beliefs/dogma of *your* religion?

LOL!!! Good luck getting a straight answer from him
to THAT question!
-- Craig Chilton

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	17 Feb 2004 05:52:14 PM

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:28:16 -0500, "L. Michael
Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> spake
thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 16 Feb 2004 16:36:51 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<gms130d3r55srr8icndtils1mkf8d1ejlf@4ax.com>...

On 15 Feb 2004 12:24:09 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<7b5v20181n3d5qrcm2tevh6c2nfufal2ih@4ax.com>...

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:35:08 GMT,

(Craig Chilton) spake thusly:

<snip>

Untrue. The stats have been posted more than once.

Were those stats form a reliable, recent, peer reviewed scientific
source? You would not want to be bearing false witness against your
neighbour now would you?

You mean the ones that say what you want, because you
will reject all others. Strange that no one could
dispute them when they were posted.

<snip>

Whether or not atheists believe in God, does not define
right and wrong.

Marriage was created and ordained by God. That makes
it an issue for what God says.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose
you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which
your fathers served that were on the other side of the
flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye
dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the
LORD. - Joshua 24:15
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
.

User: "Thore Schmechtig"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	18 Feb 2004 12:30:37 AM

Were those stats form a reliable, recent, peer reviewed scientific
source? You would not want to be bearing false witness against your
neighbour now would you?

You mean the ones that say what you want, because you
will reject all others. Strange that no one could
dispute them when they were posted.

Hello? (knocking on fundie boy's skull) Anyone alive in there?
(listening to the echo of the knocks) I thought so.
Though I doubt that you will ever learn, as you'd have to start
THINKING after learning it, babbling "there's no evidence at all" IN
FRONT OF the evidence does NOT make it disappear. Live with it.
In this case, the evidence is that there is NO proof for your
anti-homosexual hatred propaganda being true. No scientifically valid
proof, that is. All you bigots have is your personal hatred, and you
have no right to shove it down everyone's throat.

Marriage was created and ordained by God. That makes
it an issue for what God says.

Attempt at evasion noted and ignored. Answer his question, or admit by
not answering that you have to agree with him.
.

User: "Brent Norman"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	17 Feb 2004 08:30:23 PM

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<r7a5309icvu16ougg6o9cm08pfc1s8hp9g@4ax.com>...

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:28:16 -0500, "L. Michael
Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> spake
thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 16 Feb 2004 16:36:51 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<gms130d3r55srr8icndtils1mkf8d1ejlf@4ax.com>...

On 15 Feb 2004 12:24:09 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<7b5v20181n3d5qrcm2tevh6c2nfufal2ih@4ax.com>...

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:35:08 GMT,

(Craig Chilton) spake thusly:

<snip>

Untrue. The stats have been posted more than once.

Were those stats form a reliable, recent, peer reviewed scientific
source? You would not want to be bearing false witness against your
neighbour now would you?

You mean the ones that say what you want, because you
will reject all others. Strange that no one could
dispute them when they were posted.

<snip>

Whether or not atheists believe in God, does not define
right and wrong.

Marriage was created and ordained by God.

Actually, no. There are even some religions that not regard marriage
as a sacrament. There is plenty of other sources that would agree
with that assertion.
.

User: "L. Michael Roberts"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	18 Feb 2004 11:10:41 PM

Pastor Dave wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:28:16 -0500, "L. Michael
Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> spake
thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 16 Feb 2004 16:36:51 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<gms130d3r55srr8icndtils1mkf8d1ejlf@4ax.com>...

On 15 Feb 2004 12:24:09 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<7b5v20181n3d5qrcm2tevh6c2nfufal2ih@4ax.com>...

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:35:08 GMT,

(Craig Chilton) spake thusly:

<snip>

Untrue. The stats have been posted more than once.

Were those stats form a reliable, recent, peer reviewed scientific
source? You would not want to be bearing false witness against your
neighbour now would you?

You mean the ones that say what you want, because you
will reject all others.

No I meant the ones that come for peer-reviewed scientific journals.
As a scientist, I want to see the study methodology and data for myself.
So do you have any peer-reviewed studies from the scientific literature?

Strange that no one could
dispute them when they were posted.

Apparently I did not see these. Please feel free to re-post citations
form the recent peer-reviewed, scientific journals so that I can review
the data for myself... I hope you are not bearing false witness in this
matter.
<snip>

Marriage was created and ordained by God. That makes
it an issue for what God says.

RELIGIOUS marriage may or may not have been ordained by your deity. I
have no quarrel with that and I fully support the rights of all
religions to definer marriage for their followers as they see fit.
Which brings up and interesting question; what about those Christian
religions who *do* perform same-sex marriages? Are they not also
entitled to their dogma/beliefs?
When it comes to CIVIL marriages, we have separation of church and
state. If you want your religion to dictate the content of CIVIL laws,
that give the government the right to set religious policies and how do
you know they won't come after *your* church and tell them what a=to do
and how to do it? It is best that religion and government be well
separated.
I notice you completely avoided the question "Why would allowing a
same-sex couple CIVIL marriage affect *your* religious beliefs and the
beliefs/dogma of *your* religion?" That is a lie of omission! Repent
hell-bound sinner!!
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	19 Feb 2004 06:38:53 AM

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:10:41 -0500, "L. Michael
Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> spake
thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:28:16 -0500, "L. Michael
Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> spake
thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 16 Feb 2004 16:36:51 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<gms130d3r55srr8icndtils1mkf8d1ejlf@4ax.com>...

On 15 Feb 2004 12:24:09 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<7b5v20181n3d5qrcm2tevh6c2nfufal2ih@4ax.com>...

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:35:08 GMT,

(Craig Chilton) spake thusly:

<snip>

Untrue. The stats have been posted more than once.

Were those stats form a reliable, recent, peer reviewed scientific
source? You would not want to be bearing false witness against your
neighbour now would you?

You mean the ones that say what you want, because you
will reject all others.

Like I said...

Strange that no one could
dispute them when they were posted.

Marriage was created and ordained by God. That makes
it an issue for what God says.

RELIGIOUS marriage may or may not have been ordained by your deity.

When God created man and woman and created and ordained
marriage, there was no religion.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
.

User: "Clay Colwell"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	19 Feb 2004 02:11:36 PM

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<lhb9305s0bnr0u516kdh6b6qrn7smudj86@4ax.com>...

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:10:41 -0500, "L. Michael
Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> spake
thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:28:16 -0500, "L. Michael
Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> spake
thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 16 Feb 2004 16:36:51 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<gms130d3r55srr8icndtils1mkf8d1ejlf@4ax.com>...

On 15 Feb 2004 12:24:09 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<7b5v20181n3d5qrcm2tevh6c2nfufal2ih@4ax.com>...

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:35:08 GMT,

(Craig Chilton) spake thusly:

<snip>

Untrue. The stats have been posted more than once.

Were those stats form a reliable, recent, peer reviewed scientific
source? You would not want to be bearing false witness against your
neighbour now would you?

You mean the ones that say what you want, because you
will reject all others.

Like I said...

That is what is known as a dodge.
You claim that the stats have been posted more than once. Go ahead
and provide a couple of Message-IDs from those postings. And Mr.
Roberts' request that they be peer-reviewed studies from scientific
literature is quite legitimate; after all, would you accept a
citation from me that the world was created from a lump of unicorn
dung, just because I saw that written on a piece of paper somewhere?
.

User: "L. Michael Roberts"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	19 Feb 2004 11:35:50 AM

Pastor Dave wrote:

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:10:41 -0500, "L. Michael
Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> spake
thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:28:16 -0500, "L. Michael
Roberts" <L_Michael_Roberts@NoSpamThanks.net> spake
thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 16 Feb 2004 16:36:51 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<gms130d3r55srr8icndtils1mkf8d1ejlf@4ax.com>...

On 15 Feb 2004 12:24:09 -0800,
nelliganemile@hotmail.com (Brent Norman) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<7b5v20181n3d5qrcm2tevh6c2nfufal2ih@4ax.com>...

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:35:08 GMT,

(Craig Chilton) spake thusly:

<snip>

Were those stats form a reliable, recent, peer reviewed scientific
source? You would not want to be bearing false witness against your
neighbour now would you?

You mean the ones that say what you want, because you
will reject all others.

No I meant the ones that come from peer-reviewed scientific journals.
As a scientist, I want to see the study methodology and data for myself.
So do you have any peer-reviewed studies from the scientific literature?

Like I said...

You have no scientific facts to back up your assertions. Enjoy your
eternal vacation in the lake of fire!

Strange that no one could
dispute them when they were posted.

Your silence and failure to post these citations shows you are not
interested in honest debate on the issues but rather in dishonestly
bearing false witness against your gay neighbours.
<snip>

Marriage was created and ordained by God. That makes
it an issue for what God says.

RELIGIOUS marriage may or may not have been ordained by your deity.

When God created man and woman and created and ordained
marriage, there was no religion.

Then religions should butt out of the CIVIL marriage issue!!
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.

User: "Steve"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	10 Feb 2004 03:18:04 AM

Decided to do a little research of my own (and not Sharon's word for
it)
American Psychological Association
http://helping.apa.org/daily/answers.html
"There are numerous theories about the origins of a person's sexual
orientation; most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is
most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental,
cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation
is shaped at an early age. "
(So, who said it was all hereditary???- Maude)
"It is likely the incidence of domestic violence among gay men is
nearly double that in the heterosexual population. As many as 650,000
gay men may be victims of domestic violence each year." (p. 14) The
researchers estimate that battery occurs in 50 percent of gay male
couples (p. 12). (Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them, by David Island
and Patrick Letellier, co-editors of the National Lesbian & Gay
Domestic Violence Network newsletter)
"One in five urban gay men is battered by his partner, a new study by
Georgetown University's School of Nursing and Health Studies shows."
(homosexual activist website 365gay.com, January 29, 2003)
"(P)eople with same-sex sexual behavior are at greater risk for
psychiatric disorders." (Journal of the American Medical Association
report: Archives of General Psychiatry, 2001, based on
the "Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study").
"Homosexual men are at significantly increased risk of HIV/AIDS,
hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea and gastrointestinal infections as
a result of their sexual practices. ...Women who have sex with women
are at significantly increased risk of bacterial vaginosis, breast
cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women." (Executive
Summary, "Health Implications Associated with Homosexuality," 1999,
by Medical Institute of Sexual Health; contact MISH through its
website or call (800)892-9484 to request a copy of the report.)
"[L]ife expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to
20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were
to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men
currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday."
(Source:International Journal of Epidemiology, Oxford University)
"Among young gay and bisexual men in Vancouver, the HIV/AIDS epidemic
has reduced life expectancy by up to 20 years." (Canadian Medical
Association Journal)
--=20
Steve
http://www.dnspad.com/
http://www.dnspad.com/mm/
http://www.thechurchofgod.org/
"Craig Chilton" <

> wrote in message =
news:40305143.12432376@netnews.mchsi.com...

=20
For months, now, I have challenged the Anti-Gay-Rights=20
bigots to produce so much as even ***ONE FACT*** that=20
supports their loathsome and hateful stance against this=20
reasonable and sensible human right.
=20
NO one has been able to do that.
=20
So their ONLY possible reason is homophobic bigotry.
=20
Which is worth precisely as much as racial bigotry.
=20
Not a plugged Confederate penny.
=20
=20
-- Craig Chilton

User: "ZenIsWhen"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	10 Feb 2004 09:38:08 AM

"Steve" <sclocksmith@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:102h8f3p1d7ss48@corp.supernews.com...
Decided to do a little research of my own (and not Sharon's word for
it)
American Psychological Association
http://helping.apa.org/daily/answers.html
"There are numerous theories about the origins of a person's sexual
orientation; most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is
most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental,
cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation
is shaped at an early age. "
(So, who said it was all hereditary???- Maude)
(pssst ... sexual orientiation happens while one is in the womb)
"It is likely the incidence of domestic violence among gay men is
nearly double that in the heterosexual population. As many as 650,000
gay men may be victims of domestic violence each year." (p. 14) The
researchers estimate that battery occurs in 50 percent of gay male
couples (p. 12). (Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them, by David Island
and Patrick Letellier, co-editors of the National Lesbian & Gay
Domestic Violence Network newsletter)
And?
Is there any evidence that the violence is directly connection being gay?
Statistically, there is more violence in minority racial mariages, as
opposed to white .... should we outlaw those?
Statistically,, there is more violence in the black community than the
white..........should we outlaw blacks?
Statistically, (for the sake of the argument) there is more inner
relationship violence in New York City than there is in Small Town U.S.A.
........should we outalaw New York marriages?
"One in five urban gay men is battered by his partner, a new study by
Georgetown University's School of Nursing and Health Studies shows."
(homosexual activist website 365gay.com, January 29, 2003)
"(P)eople with same-sex sexual behavior are at greater risk for
psychiatric disorders." (Journal of the American Medical Association
report: Archives of General Psychiatry, 2001, based on
the "Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study").
Why?
This is akin to saying there are more psychological problems amonmg people
who were bullied than the average population ........ now there's a big
surprise!!!!
If you were one of the few short people in a world filled with biggoted tall
people - don't you think YOU'D have some emotional problems?
"Homosexual men are at significantly increased risk of HIV/AIDS,
hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea and gastrointestinal infections as
a result of their sexual practices. ...Women who have sex with women
are at significantly increased risk of bacterial vaginosis, breast
cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women." (Executive
Summary, "Health Implications Associated with Homosexuality," 1999,
by Medical Institute of Sexual Health; contact MISH through its
website or call (800)892-9484 to request a copy of the report.)
That is a health problem - NOT a sexual preference problem!
In all of those areas:
poor people suffer more than rich people,
uneducated people sufer more than educated people,
(I would assume) high school educated people suffer more than college
educated people,
people who live in "Appalacia" sufer more than people who live in Boston.
"[L]ife expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to
20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were
to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men
currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday."
(Source:International Journal of Epidemiology, Oxford University)
Again, a health problem.
"Among young gay and bisexual men in Vancouver, the HIV/AIDS epidemic
has reduced life expectancy by up to 20 years." (Canadian Medical
Association Journal)
--
Steve
http://www.dnspad.com/
http://www.dnspad.com/mm/
http://www.thechurchofgod.org/
You have give great reason why the health issues of gay people should be
addressed.
You have not given ANY reason why gay people should not marry!
.

User: "Matt"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	12 Feb 2004 08:47:36 AM

ZenIsWhen wrote:

There was an interesting study regarding hormones and development in the
womb. IIRC, they found that women who identified themselves as lesbians,
during their development in the womb, there was a rapid increase in
testosterone during the pregnancy.
Assuming that hormones play a factor in the development, one can then
assume that a gay male would exhibit all the natural mate selection that
a female would.
Also, it was shown that in a heterosexual female, during the
menstruation cycle, that is, when they're most likely to get pregnant,
when searching for a mate, they tended to go with the more masculine
male however, when they weren't in that cycle, they tended to prefer
more feminine males. Along with this, they also demonstrated the amount
of infidelity that does occur in the heterosexual world, its close to
40% of children born are not the children of the partner.
Matt
.

User: "Craig Chilton ... ABB on November 2nd!!"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	10 Feb 2004 04:31:15 AM

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 04:18:04 -0500,
"Steve" <sclocksmith@hotmail.com> wrote:

Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:

For months, now, I have challenged the Anti-Gay-Rights
bigots to produce so much as even ***ONE FACT*** that
supports their loathsome and hateful stance against this
reasonable and sensible human right.

NO one has been able to do that.

So their ONLY possible reason is homophobic bigotry.

Which is worth precisely as much as racial bigotry.

Not a plugged Confederate penny.

None of this makes the slightest argument against same-sex
marriage. The likelihood would be that if couples could have the
ADDITIONAL level of commitment that goes with marriage, the
incidences of domestic violance probaly would not increase, and
very well might DEcrease

"(P)eople with same-sex sexual behavior are at greater risk for
psychiatric disorders." (Journal of the American Medical Association
report: Archives of General Psychiatry, 2001, based on
the "Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study").

And they'll have that sexual behavior whethr or not they're married.
But marriage would be an additional incentive to be monogamous,
which might reduce such disorders, and/or their severity.

"Homosexual men are at significantly increased risk of HIV/AIDS,
hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea and gastrointestinal infections as
a result of their sexual practices. ...Women who have sex with women
are at significantly increased risk of bacterial vaginosis, breast
cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women." (Executive
Summary, "Health Implications Associated with Homosexuality," 1999,
by Medical Institute of Sexual Health; contact MISH through its
website or call (800)892-9484 to request a copy of the report.)

"[L]ife expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to
20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were
to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men
currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday."
(Source:International Journal of Epidemiology, Oxford University)

"Among young gay and bisexual men in Vancouver, the HIV/AIDS
epidemic has reduced life expectancy by up to 20 years." (Canadian
Medical Association Journal)

All of which is an excellent reason to LEGALIZE same-sex marriage...
which would encourage monogamy... which would, in such cases,
hugely reduce the risk factor for contracting and spreading STDs.
Thus -- we STILL await the presentation of ANY fact that would
make a good argument against legalizing same-sex marriage.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
.

User: "Peacenik"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	10 Feb 2004 12:30:24 PM

"Craig Chilton ... "ABB on November 2nd!!"" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in
message news:402eafd4.36645716@netnews.mchsi.com...

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 04:18:04 -0500,
"Steve" <sclocksmith@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Among young gay and bisexual men in Vancouver, the HIV/AIDS
epidemic has reduced life expectancy by up to 20 years." (Canadian
Medical Association Journal)

All of which is an excellent reason to LEGALIZE same-sex marriage...
which would encourage monogamy... which would, in such cases,
hugely reduce the risk factor for contracting and spreading STDs.

And all these reasons, if presented as arguments against gay marriage, can
also be used as arguments against straight marriage.

Thus -- we STILL await the presentation of ANY fact that would
make a good argument against legalizing same-sex marriage.

Don't hold your breath. I have been waiting for years for such facts, and
receive nothing but easily-debunked fallacies. They will never be able to
present such a reason for the simple fact that no such reason exists.
--
Peacenik
.

User: "Thomas Trust"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	10 Feb 2004 01:07:31 PM

"Peacenik" <criskity999@com999cast.removeallnines.net> wrote in message
news:4r9Wb.272350$xy6.1382485@attbi_s02...

"Craig Chilton ... "ABB on November 2nd!!"" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in
message news:402eafd4.36645716@netnews.mchsi.com...

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 04:18:04 -0500,
"Steve" <sclocksmith@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Among young gay and bisexual men in Vancouver, the HIV/AIDS
epidemic has reduced life expectancy by up to 20 years." (Canadian
Medical Association Journal)

All of which is an excellent reason to LEGALIZE same-sex marriage...
which would encourage monogamy... which would, in such cases,
hugely reduce the risk factor for contracting and spreading STDs.

And all these reasons, if presented as arguments against gay marriage, can
also be used as arguments against straight marriage.

Thus -- we STILL await the presentation of ANY fact that would
make a good argument against legalizing same-sex marriage.

You have been given valid reasons, you haven't effectively debunked the
slippery slope one for example. You 'say' you debunk them but the simple
fact is you just claim to do. All talk, no real rebutt. The bottom line is
you want the change the definition of marriage, 'just because.' There is no
valid reason to change the definition just so you can put a badge on your
shirt of agenda. There is no discrimination in terms of equality by not
allowing for a change in definition, as you have civil unions. You change
the definition and you do in fact open up a Pandora's box of ills, but you
folks don't care about that in your self-serving mindsets...... you only
care about what's in it for you.
.

User: "Peacenik"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. NONE, whatsoever.	10 Feb 2004 11:04:07 PM

"Thomas Trust" <ThomasTrust@newsworthy.com> wrote in message
news:TZ9Wb.266906$I06.2854835@attbi_s01...

"Peacenik" <criskity999@com999cast.removeallnines.net> wrote in message
news:4r9Wb.272350$xy6.1382485@attbi_s02...

"Craig Chilton ... "ABB on November 2nd!!"" <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote

message news:402eafd4.36645716@netnews.mchsi.com...

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 04:18:04 -0500,
"Steve" <sclocksmith@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Among young gay and bisexual men in Vancouver, the HIV/AIDS
epidemic has reduced life expectancy by up to 20 years." (Canadian
Medical Association Journal)

All of which is an excellent reason to LEGALIZE same-sex

marriage...

which would encourage monogamy... which would, in such cases,
hugely reduce the risk factor for contracting and spreading STDs.

And all these reasons, if presented as arguments against gay marriage,

can

also be used as arguments against straight marriage.

Thus -- we STILL await the presentation of ANY fact that would
make a good argument against legalizing same-sex marriage.

Don't hold your breath. I have been waiting for years for such facts,

and

receive nothing but easily-debunked fallacies. They will never be able

present such a reason for the simple fact that no such reason exists.

You have been given valid reasons, you haven't effectively debunked the
slippery slope one for example.

The slippery slope fallacy is a FALLACY. Fallacies are self-debunking.
--
Peacenik
.

User: "curtsybear"
Title: Re: There is NO Valid Reason to Block Same-Sex Marriage. N