Draw the Line

[62613666x3ldg]

Lets look at some definitions! "Marriage (or wedlock) is a social union or legal contract between people that creates kinship."

[RaynorGo]

Too scared to allow ratings. I wonder why.

[ThanksSaintJoseph]

These people have been raised in a contraceptive culture. That's why they can't see the truth of the natural order. They've lived in a culture that unnaturally separates sex from pro-creation. Winning the war against sodomy and abortion is futile unless we oppose contraception.

[arklowrockz]

Ah the Slippery Slope fallacy, how predictable.

For the record (as Jason would say) polygamy is referred to throughout the entirety of the Old Testament, so where does that leave your argument?

[ThanksSaintJoseph]

@arklowrockz Everytime polygamy happens in the Old Testament it is DISASTEROUS! Abraham and Hagar, David and Bathsheba and his 300 wives, Solomon and his 700, etc... Just because it's "referred to" doesn't make it good.

[arklowrockz]

@ThanksSaintJoseph What an idiotic comment. The Old Testament references to polygamy in the bible are all centered around the characters multile progeny and who begat whom all which is endorsed by The Big Guy himself in Genesis, remember "go forth be fruitful, multiply". So stop peddling your shallow analysis of scripture. Off with you and wage your war against sodomy and abortion, you child.

[ThanksSaintJoseph]

@arklowrockz Again you are reading your distorted views into Scripture. That's what happens when one tries to interpret scripture apart from the infallible institution God gave to interpret it, the Church. "Be fruitful and multiply" does not include "by polygamy". In fact the first time this phrase is used by God, polygamy would have been impossible because there was only 2 people, Adam and Eve. Can you find on single instance where God explicitly commands polygamy?

[arklowrockz]

@ThanksSaintJoseph Since we are on the subject where may I ask did the wives for Seth and Cain materialize from in Genesis, a few more ribs from Adam? He must have been suffering a pneumothorax at that point.

Can I assume, therefore, that you accept the account of Genesis as literal truth. Adam lived for 800 years. All the progeny of Adam, Seth and Cain lived for hundreds of years, and that Noah and his wife and 3 sons and their wives repopulated the world after a global flood killed all others

[arklowrockz]

@ThanksSaintJoseph Wait a minute!! Sodomy!?!?! So...how, exactly ,would you characterise the relationship between David Son of Jesse and Jonathan Son of Saul in First Samuel ".....the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" "..and they kissed one another and they wept together" " "...your love was wonderful to me, surpassing the love of women" I mean this is the anointed King of Israel we are talking about here....

[ThanksSaintJoseph]

@arklowrockz I would characterize that passage as a description of the love between two men. It doesn't mention sodomy. I believe you've read into the passage what you want to see. Just because they kissed doesn't mean they were sexually involved. The men in my wife's Italian family kiss each other on the cheek. Love does not necessarily mean sex.

[arklowrockz]

@ThanksSaintJoseph Jesus Wept. Where in the Bible are there any explicit references to sex?? There are none. We infer it from "He knew her" "He went into her" "She was humbled". So the relationship between David and Jonathan is clearly homosexual even with the coy references to knitting their souls.

[ThanksSaintJoseph]

@arklowrockz We know from phrases like "he knew her" that it was sexual relations because: 1) the very next phrases include "and she conceived and bore a son". In addition, from studying other sources of the language we know that other phrases indicate sexual relations. If you want me to believe that David had sex with Johnathan you'll need to produce more than your eisegesis. Has any reputable scripture scholar from antiquity interpreted the lines as u do?

[arklowrockz]

@ThanksSaintJoseph I'm not finished with you yet. You speak of context in your previous post: what other context would have supported the obvious homosexual references in First Saul?? Would you be convinced if David and Jonathan had put some Donna Summers on the stereo and started disco dancing with each other??

Hows that for eisegesis?

I know I know I'm using sarcasm, I might as well be speaking swahili for all the good it will do....

[ThanksSaintJoseph]

@arklowrockz If David and Jonathan started dancing to Donna Summers I say "Donna Summers? At least you could get some Village People!" (Pun completely intended!) And that IS some big eisegesis!

But seriously, does one have to have sex to say their "souls are knit"? If i ever wrote my biography I would express similar sentiments for those who adopted me and I've never had sex with any of them! can you demonstrate any EXogesis on the subject?

[eternalwolf777]

Excellent video... you made some great points. Keep them coming.

[Cypherfall]

i honestly dont get what the big deal about extending marriage rights to gays. if you actively prohibit someone from enjoying the same benefits of life available to yourself then that is discrimination. most people seem to support this - prop. 8 was repealed after all and the campaign against it was the highest earning of its kind in the nation.

[darpachief]

loooool @ "you dont want 3 guys" 8-O

[sabboth42]

Where in the constitution does it say that marriage is between a man and woman? Hmm...nowhere. Where does it say that polygamy is illegal? That would be federal law. So there is an argument against polygamy here.

[fakeaclone]

Let's put a vote to the people living in the castro district of San Francisco,

on whether extreme right wing religious nutbags like James Mitchell and Fred Phelps should be allowed to remain married.

[deliciousmorton]

Jesus lived with 12 guys.

[darpachief]

@deliciousmorton ....NO he lived with his mother, Joseph and his siblings. Spent 3 years in ministry with the disciples.

[deliciousmorton]

@darpachief the "disciples" were twelve guys. he ate with them, he slept with them, and he even shared his fetish with them by washing their feet.

[darpachief]

@deliciousmorton ....also died for them

[deliciousmorton]

@darpachief actually, he died BECAUSE of them. one ratted him out, and the other eleven did nothing to protect him.

[darpachief]

@deliciousmorton ...JOHN 10 = The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again.

No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord.

I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again.

This command I received from my Father.

[deliciousmorton]

@darpachief ok, his father allowed him to be killed too.

[darpachief]

@deliciousmorton ...all authority has been given to him. hate on that :-p

[deliciousmorton]

@darpachief ...all life has been taken from him.

why hate? it's just a waste of time.

[darpachief]

@deliciousmorton ....he will rule righteously forever.

'For to us a child is born, to us a son is given: and the government shall be on his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.' Isaiah

[deliciousmorton]

@darpachief sorry, i don't read fiction.

[darpachief]

@deliciousmorton ...BTW...everyone reads fiction DUH....loooool XD

[deliciousmorton]

@darpachief perhaps, but not by choice. for example, i was forced to read a lot of fiction when i was younger, because my parents made me go to sunday school. if you're looking for fiction, you can't go wrong with a bible.

[HomageofReason]

Molotov Mitchell is such an idiot. I am suprised someone has not forced him to have a lobotomy done by now.

"What about 3 guys?"

Are you serious??? That is not an argument. Polygamy is a totally different subject. It has been around since long before the gay marriage debate and usually stirs a fair amount of controversy whether you're applying it to straight people OR gay people. I might also mention that polygamy is mostly practiced by certain fundamentalist strands of CHRISTIANITY.

[unhallowed45]

Wow this guy is FUCKING IDIOT! 'Would you let 3 guys marry?'. What the fuck is that shit? He's clearly opposed to it just for the sake of being opposed to it. Someone run this guy over with a pink bus!

[compter2008]

I don't care how many people marry each other. I mean how does one define love? As long as there is a legal document binding those people together and is signed, then thats fine.

And if the bible is true and if Adam and Eve were the only people on earth to begin with, then there HAD to be incest. I'm fine with polygomoy and incest. I feel the capacity to love more than one individual is fine.

[LMGunslinger]

Ya know, its kinda intresting that folks who agree to gay marrige dont agree to polygamy? I wonder if this is somehow based on what norms they were tought growing up from the public school system? I mean if there logic is gay marriage is okay if there is love, then if 3 guys love each other why shouldnt they be allowed to marry?

The answer is there opinion is based on what they were told, not with actual thinking.

[trebby2]

#1 1 man and 1 woman was NOT always the norm. Polygamy was once very common - and still is in some parts of Utah. #2 Marriage between brothers and sisters is illegal because their children would have birth defects. It's not a moral issue, it's a genetic issue. #3 Allowing gays to marry means directly the opposite of anything goes. It means that more gays would be living in monogamous relationships, rather than with multiple partners.

[cactuslightpole]

Hey Guess what people? What you're failing to understand is that gay marriage HAS ALWAYS BEEN legal in California because the state's constitution was ambiguous so far as the gender of the couple looking to get married. It wasn't illegal until californians voted to amend the constitution. If something's unconstitutional then change the constitution right? So I think the real question here is this: once you vote to strip a minority of it's rights then where do you "draw the line"?

[kateeamon]

Jason Mitchell is a clown, a fool , and a maker of myths. He has repackaged his brand of snake handler cracker religion as common sense.

[slugga06]

ok u les...

[HuckFaters8]

there is one rightful marriage and everyone knows what that is...everyone else looking for any other kind of marriage needs some jesus and a bible to read! i'll help get you started. Genesis chapter 19. read up to all you sick minded peasants!

[cactuslightpole]

Hey I did pick up the bible! Genesis 4:19 "Lamech married two women, one named Adah and the other Zillah." Is this "one rightful marriage" called polygamy?

[danco35]

Yes, this is the future... I can only look at their parents and shake my head with somber disappointment.

[VirginianAmerican]

WOW so there is a line for everyone...Sadly each one of these people think they have the right to decide where that line is. Society depends on definitive lines being drawn that we can all live by.

Pretty sad stuff to see where our country is headed

[flagwaver1969]

Wow...that's the future of America? These are college students of today? Imbecilic!

[xWxPxHx]

well then why can't marriage be between TWO PEOPLE? let people live their own lives. separation of church and state. equal rights. all citizens should be allowed to marry.

[cactuslightpole]

Pretty disingenuous playing the "plural marriage" card when that's not even what gay people are asking for. Plus I wonder why everybody is so opposed to plural marriage when it is perfectly acceptable in Utah if you're a Mormon. Oh I know why, because the scenario used was several men, not one man and several women. It's just a game of switching the sexes around to tap into people's homophobia and to not actually address issues of different types of marriage.

[acerusso]

utah and the mormons dont allow plural marriage. those are cult members

[slugga06]

he's making the point that there is only ONE marriage, and that is between a man and a woman. If you change it to man and man or woman and woman, then you are changing that definition, and by doing so where do you draw the line? YOU CANT CHANGE IT... ITS NOT MARRIAGE.

[cactuslightpole]

Most state constitutions in this country define marriage as between 2 adults, not one man and one woman, so same sex marriage is already allowed. It's the amending of these constitutions (such as prop 8) which would change the definition of marriage to one man and one woman, and apparently by your logic: "YOU CANT CHANGE IT... ITS NOT MARRIAGE." If it's the terminology you're concerned about then you better fight to keep these amendments from changing the constitutional definition of marriage.

[slugga06]

marriage is something of the Church, not government. I dont care if homosexuals want legal binding were they can take advantage of less taxes and be able to see each other in hospitals, but having the the title of marriage... NO.

[cactuslightpole]

Ah and here you were hiding your bigotry behind your concerns with terminology. If marriage is something of the church and not of the government then how can people get legally married by a justice of the peace without a church led ceremony? Why do people apply for a wedding license at city halls and not churches?

[muckypuck]

cactuspolesmoker:1)Ambiguity is reason for amendment 2)gays can't be classified with women or races regarding "minorities". Homosexuality is an action/mentality, race or gender is a biological denomination 3)Polygamy Old Testament, not New 4)Show us proof majority of states' constitutions define marriage as merely between 2 adults.

[muckypuck]

Our Constitution is a proclamation for INDIVIDUAL rights, never for GROUP rights. This is why the new "hate crimes" legislation is unconstitutional and why the introduction of a "minority" stigma has reaped less freedom by way of exclusivity for the rest of us.

[cactuslightpole]

And that's why this case has to do with INDIVIDUALS wanting to marry other individuals, not groups wanting to marry other groups. Luckily our constitutions are set up to guarantee equal rights to ALL individuals and to protect individuals from the majority, that is until the constitutions are amended.

[cactuslightpole]

Muckyfuck: Gays fall under the definition of minority based on their numbers, not gender or race. I was classifying them as a minority, not a race or gender. What's your point of trying to do otherwise? People's rights aren't under question unless they're of a different race or sex? Plus Old Testament laws are useless? I think Jesus would disagree (Matt 5;18-20). If you have Wikipedia I suggest you search through the us state's constitutions for the marriage clause, look for yourself.

[cactuslightpole]

How can marriage be of the church when non believers can go to a courthouse and get married by a justice of the peace outside of a church and without a minister? Plus why must a couple who does get married in a church need to register with the state for a marriage license? By the way which church are we talking about? Christian (where you can marry one woman) or Islam (where you can marry up to 4 women)? Which of these churches "owns" marriage?

[Gulfporter]

Fortunately, the Supreme Court even with its Reagan and Bush appointees knows what the principles of the Constitution are.

Funny how I didn't see ANY Yes2marriage signs in the windows of businesses and damned few on lawns compared to the number of No On 2 signs. What are you people afraid of? A bunch gay people?

[FinalJusticeMovement]

We also didn't see the houses with "No On 8" signs vandalized or violated, War-soldier.

Yours In Truth,

--The Final Justice

[Gulfporter]

I watched your intro video. I don't understand the association you make between gay people and misandry. The funny thing is that I agree with you about the negative messages put out there about men and boys. I have called it the War On Boys as it manifests in schools.

SO if you would lose the anti-gay crap and the horror movie sound track, people might listen to you.

[FinalJusticeMovement]

GP,

Apparently YOU'VE heard me.

And so, I'll explain.

Misandry is one of the key resulting factors of the institutionalization of homosexuality.

The more males are mentally and otherwise physically abused as boys, by families and peers (specifically those who feel unloved), the more likely they may either engage in homosexual practices to fill the void, or get involved in crime, or commit suicide as they grow.

(To Be Continued)

--The Final Justice

[FinalJusticeMovement]

You call it the "War On Boys", and that it is.

Boys need to learn how to live as males and be proud of who they are. They need to learn strength in dealing with the female gender, because despite what feminaziism teaches us, MEN AND WOMEN need each other.

Feminists are hellbent on demonizing and criminalizing males, further butchering our inalienable rights to live, love (women) and prosper, and they would rather see us turn to each other for affection and love.

(TBC)

--The Final Justice

[FinalJusticeMovement]

And as far as the "horror movie soundtrack" reference, I would probably rather wake up in a hall of mirrors with Pinhead's face all around me, than to wake up in a society where there's a female homosexual couple in the house next door with the potential of teach my friends, my woman, or worse -- my CHILDREN --how to hate men.

I refuse to let feminism and the homosexual agenda infect my society with the poison of social destruction.

You have yet to realize how REAL the horror really is.

--FJ

[Bravhrt79]

Amen!!!

[Cypherfall]

@FinalJusticeMovement

dude im a guy. im straight. dont try and victimize yourself just because human society is built for you.

[xcashinginx]

what's next? a toaster!?

[whocouldibe123]

We won! Amendment 2 passed! Our children are saved! Marriage is Man and Woman. End of discusstion. Homos get back in the closet!

[sweatintotheoldies]

I'm sorry to report that our children are not safe. If guns are outlawed-only outlaws will have guns.

And prohibiting gays to marry is a human right issue. It's like not letting them vote. They should be given the same rights to a partner as we are.

[whocouldibe123]

I think it is a fair comparison to compare man marrying dog, to man marrying man. lol. If we let homos marry, then we just open the door for more crazy things people want to do, and lead us on the path to self destruction. I want to be able to drive 90mph, why not allow that? What if I'm 19 and want to have sex with a 15yr old girl who I'm in love with and she loves me...why not allow that? I want to be naked in public, I'm not hurting anybody right...why not allow that?

NO GAY MARRIAGE!

[xJimboTheHippox]

wow your ignorant. Good luck trying take our culture to the dark ages

[xlonelypandax]

you just made me LOL.

[PistoLP09]

First of all, you can drive 90 mph all you want. Just be prepared to suffer the consequences if you lose control and hit another object. You can also be 19 and have sex with a 15 year old. No cops are going to go after you. You can be naked and public but if a cop sees you you'll get arrested. All of those acts are POSSIBLE, despite being unlawful, but gay marriage is NOT. It will not be recognized as legal in 47 states and those gay couples will not receive the rights that they deserve.

[PistoLP09]

Second of all, introduce me to one person you know who genuinely wishes to marry his dog, and then we'll talk.

Quit making up these ridiculous counterarguments just because you're scared of losing power over the gay community.

[whocouldibe123]

That's it! People have lost thier minds! What's next, man marries dog?!

YES ON ADMENDMENT 2! Marriage is a Man and a Woman! The End.

[ChristineDaae]

...Man marries dog? How can you even compare that?

[latinagirl8]

I do believe we have to draw a line....Marriage should be a Woman and a Man. not too Man or two Woman.

[ChristineDaae]

I agree with sunguygal. I don't understand how homosexual marriage can lead to polygamy. I don't believe in polygamous marriage, but I'm gay. It's not at all the same thing.

By this guy's logic, if heterosexuals can get married, what's stopping two heterosexual couples from becoming polygamous and all getting married?

It all stems from the idea that if you're gay or bisexual, you're promiscuous and are interested in relations with EVERYONE. It's simply not true.

[littlekidwithdahat]

Gay people are so wrong. A marriage shouldn't ever happen at all. God says that a man should marry a woman and a woman should mary a man. I doesn't say that in the exect words but it means the same thing. Anyway, I think that gay marriages are disgusting.

[ChristineDaae]

God doesn't say that. God never defines marriage, just as we shouldn't. If you think it's disgusting, it's this simple -- don't have one! It has nothing to do with you, clearly, so why should you decide?

[littlekidwithdahat]

Leviticus 18:22 says very clearly

"Don't have sex with a man as one does with a woman. That is abhorrent.

That is from "The Message" translation and thats as simple as it gets. Gay marriages are Biblicaly wrong, moraly wrong and should be legally wrong. What I meant to say in the previous comment is that a gay marriage should't ever happen. I'm perfectly fine with marriage as long as it is done the way God meant for it to be.

[ChristineDaae]

Funny, that doesn't say anything about gay marriage.

Divorces and adultery and also BIBLICALLY wrong, and yet they are performed. Where do we draw the line?

And nothing in the Bible is clear. Books have been added, taken away, and it's been through numerous translations.

Also, that says nothing about lesbians.

Laws can't be made from the Bible, littlekid, otherwise we'd be allowed to sell people into slavery. Even Jesus said that ancient laws need to be updated and change with the times.

[littlekidwithdahat]

It means don't have sexual relations with someone of the same sex. Lesbian is when two people of the same sex get married. Thats the same as gay marriage. A man and another man or a woman and another woman. Dicorces and adultery are also legal, but that is America's law, not God's. God says it very clear in the 7th commandment that it is wrong. Laws can be made from the Bible. This entire country was formed so that people could worship God. Marriage is for ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN.

[ChristineDaae]

That's not what that means.

This should also be America's law. You don't take the whole Bible into consideration -- do you sell people into slavery? Do you think that's okay? You can't pick and choose what to believe from the Bible and then disregard other things. Who are YOU to say that it's wrong? Even God says that it's blasphemous to judge people.

You're just throwing stones from glass houses.

[littlekidwithdahat]

Of course I don't sell people into slavery!. I don't at all pick and choose parts from the Bible. That sounds more like what you are doing. LEV 18:22 says Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman;that is detestable. If you just read that then you ar picking and choosing. I believe that gay marriage is wrong. I am by America's law,but by God's law first. Just because being gay is legal doesn't mean I am or ever will be. I am not trying to judge you one bit, I just want to make a point.

[ChristineDaae]

Selling people into slavery is in the Bible. So therefore, you're choosing not to follow it.

I'm actually not picking and choosing. I'm not a Christian; I don't believe that the Bible is God's word, so therefore, nothing that you're saying holds true to me at all. I'm just arguing from your point of view.

You are vain to think that you know what God's law is. The Bible has a LOT of things in it that we don't follow anymore -- you are NOT one to judge.

[sunguygal]

the argument is stupid, polygamy and incest is illegal between heterosexuals, so why would it be okay with homosexuals? the logic is totally flawed and still shows no reason for secular marriages between consenting adults that have same sex preferences, just like consenting adults that have opposite sex preferences.

[lithiumbatteries13]

Nice job....probably gave those interviewees something to think about too....

[ChristineDaae]

I think the interviewees were just confused about why the guy draws such a random comparison between gay marriage and marriage between polygamists.

[momoissoso]

A connection between polygamy and gay marriage is ridiculous. It is understood that marriage is the bond between two people that love each other. Anytime a person or group draws the comparison, it's clear they look at homosexuals as subhuman. If the meaning of marriage is so important, why is no one promoting a law to prevent divorces?

[jyggyhobyt]

who says that polygamists don't love each other in the same way gay couples love each other?

[momoissoso]

seeing how it is illegal and people aren't born with a need to enter into social agreements, the comparison between gays and polygamists is worthless. Also try attacking the Mormon religion and cultures that promote polygamy. they're more a threat than gays to marriage.

[caseT23]

I may be wrong, but my guess is that you don't believe in a moral law except one that which you've created yourself, one that you believe to be instinctual. Am I right?

[jyggyhobyt]

what?!! what does it being illegal have to do with anything? gay marriage is illegal too. and who says that polygamy is any more a threat than gays to marriage?

[ChristineDaae]

Who says that polygamists don't love each other in the same way as straight couples love each other? Does that mean straight people shouldn't get married either?

[caseT23]

The legality of marriage itself is a law to prevent divorce. It's an institution upheld by the law

[momoissoso]

what? that makes no sense seeing how there is nothing to stop a married couple from divorcing.

[caseT23]

I know what you mean and I agree. I just mean that you can't just stop being married, you have to go through a legal process to have it terminated. I've had friends that said the process was a pain in the arse. Obviously it's not hard anough given the volume of divorces in this society, but I imagine that difficulty is a feeble attempt to prevent them from happening.

[caseT23]

I think moral decay is unavoidable so long as folks aren't willing to believe in a good and an evil which is exactly what is happening in this age. There's too faint of a line between right and wrong.

[BamaBlake1]

Great job framing the issue correctly and showing the slippery slope that we are on.

[WhatJeffsEating]

I love it. Sharp as a scalpel.

P.S. Why are the ratings disabled? Well, I give it 5 out of 5.