bans on interracial marriage were about keeping the races apart so one race could dominate another and that was racist. when we lifted up the bans, it not only integrated the races but it integrated the sexes as well which is what marriage has always been about sense the beginning of history ; uniting the great halves of humanity. Our side simply wants to sustain and maintain that idea of integration, but same sex marriage repudiates that idea and celebrates the idea of separation.
WRONG. Historic fact, some of which is found in the best seller "The Holy Bible", shows that Marriage was about OWNERSHIP. A man adding to his house. Not "integration". If this is indeed your aim, then new ideas and ways of doing things in life should be included in this ideal. A persons right to share life and love with another, whoever they are, is a basic human right. If this is truly not a religious issue then I see no valid reason anyone would oppose love, in a time where hate runs wild.
There may have been trends of homosexuality, polygamy, or different social customs and restrictions within cultures (or in our own country) from time to time, but these trends never turned into full fledged traditions that lasted for hundreds of thousands of years like marriage between a MAN and a WOMAN . This is because, throughout history, societies that have abandoned absolute monogamous marriage between a man and a woman have unraveled and ultimately collapsed. this is a historical fact.
Again your own words kill your arguement. Homosexuality is not a tradition? I would say that since it has survived thousands of years as well that it qualifies. Also, did you know that Nature often uses homosexuality to thin out over population in a species? That then, considering out own over population would lend to our arguement that it is natural. But the fight is not over sexuality, but rather legal recognition under the law. No matter the law, homosexuality and gay love are here to stay.
When someone has to use "tradition" to support their argument, that's a desperate measure imo. They're saying, "because we've always done it this way".
I agree that "tradition" does not always mean "right"....the same can be said for the words in the Bible, another tool used in this debate. The Bible has a long tradition of slavery and men with many wives. Some things change. Just because something has always been, does not mean it should always be. As your comment addressed "Tradition" and both ken and I used it in our arguement, I am unsure of your position on this issue. Would you care to make a stand?
I agree with you that looking at the world in "halves" is an overly simplistic and stunted way of doing things. God created many many people, and just as many ways of living life. I find that rarely in life does something fit into the little box that we as people insist on creating for the things. The Bible ( I John ch. 4 vs 7) says "God is Love" Not God is Love between a man and a woman only.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
your analogy to homosexuality and race is misguided. being gay may or may not be a choice but living the gay lifestyle is a choice and that's why we are here. the government doesn't ask you whether you are gay or straight. sexual orientation has nothing to do with the issue.you cant compare an immutable characteristic (race, gender, etc) to somebody's behavior. A lifestyle is not a minority. Jews, blacks and women were discriminated against for who they were not for who they were having sex with
Again, WRONG. Your own post allows for the fact that " being gay may or may not be a choice" our point is just that, it is not a choice, it is how God made us. So it is the same thing. As for people having not been discriminated against for who they were having sex with, think again. Ask a interracial couple in the 40's, 50's, 60's. 70's, 80's 90's and even in the 21st century. It may not be as wide spread, but you are an idiot or a liar if you say it does not still exist.
no on 1!
zap226 2 years ago 4
bans on interracial marriage were about keeping the races apart so one race could dominate another and that was racist. when we lifted up the bans, it not only integrated the races but it integrated the sexes as well which is what marriage has always been about sense the beginning of history ; uniting the great halves of humanity. Our side simply wants to sustain and maintain that idea of integration, but same sex marriage repudiates that idea and celebrates the idea of separation.
kenballer00 2 years ago
WRONG. Historic fact, some of which is found in the best seller "The Holy Bible", shows that Marriage was about OWNERSHIP. A man adding to his house. Not "integration". If this is indeed your aim, then new ideas and ways of doing things in life should be included in this ideal. A persons right to share life and love with another, whoever they are, is a basic human right. If this is truly not a religious issue then I see no valid reason anyone would oppose love, in a time where hate runs wild.
bigboy9168 2 years ago 2
There may have been trends of homosexuality, polygamy, or different social customs and restrictions within cultures (or in our own country) from time to time, but these trends never turned into full fledged traditions that lasted for hundreds of thousands of years like marriage between a MAN and a WOMAN . This is because, throughout history, societies that have abandoned absolute monogamous marriage between a man and a woman have unraveled and ultimately collapsed. this is a historical fact.
kenballer00 2 years ago
Again your own words kill your arguement. Homosexuality is not a tradition? I would say that since it has survived thousands of years as well that it qualifies. Also, did you know that Nature often uses homosexuality to thin out over population in a species? That then, considering out own over population would lend to our arguement that it is natural. But the fight is not over sexuality, but rather legal recognition under the law. No matter the law, homosexuality and gay love are here to stay.
bigboy9168 2 years ago 3
When someone has to use "tradition" to support their argument, that's a desperate measure imo. They're saying, "because we've always done it this way".
owheydusoapsk 2 years ago
I agree that "tradition" does not always mean "right"....the same can be said for the words in the Bible, another tool used in this debate. The Bible has a long tradition of slavery and men with many wives. Some things change. Just because something has always been, does not mean it should always be. As your comment addressed "Tradition" and both ken and I used it in our arguement, I am unsure of your position on this issue. Would you care to make a stand?
bigboy9168 2 years ago
Voting "no". I've done a couple vids on it.
owheydusoapsk 2 years ago
so basically you're saying that it's not ok to discriminate against races but its ok to discriminate against sexual orientation?
you do realize that you are still talking about discrimination right?
this is binary thinking, people cannot be divided into halves. there are way to many categories for people to fall into.
krispykritta 2 years ago
I agree with you that looking at the world in "halves" is an overly simplistic and stunted way of doing things. God created many many people, and just as many ways of living life. I find that rarely in life does something fit into the little box that we as people insist on creating for the things. The Bible ( I John ch. 4 vs 7) says "God is Love" Not God is Love between a man and a woman only.
bigboy9168 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
your analogy to homosexuality and race is misguided. being gay may or may not be a choice but living the gay lifestyle is a choice and that's why we are here. the government doesn't ask you whether you are gay or straight. sexual orientation has nothing to do with the issue.you cant compare an immutable characteristic (race, gender, etc) to somebody's behavior. A lifestyle is not a minority. Jews, blacks and women were discriminated against for who they were not for who they were having sex with
kenballer00 2 years ago
Again, WRONG. Your own post allows for the fact that " being gay may or may not be a choice" our point is just that, it is not a choice, it is how God made us. So it is the same thing. As for people having not been discriminated against for who they were having sex with, think again. Ask a interracial couple in the 40's, 50's, 60's. 70's, 80's 90's and even in the 21st century. It may not be as wide spread, but you are an idiot or a liar if you say it does not still exist.
bigboy9168 2 years ago 3