|
07-03-2006, 06:03 AM | #1 |
Senior Member
|
Agree or disagree?
I came across this statement and I'd like to throw it out for discussion:
"Several states have had a referendum on the question of redefining marriage to include other forms of sexual groupings. In every state where such an election has been held, the people have spoken clearly. They do not want to redefine marriage. The average majority has been greater than 70%. Yet judges in those states have subsequently rendered individual decisions that have overturned the will the people. If their decisions stand—even in one state—reciprocation with other states would mean the end of marriage as we now know it. Such a redefinition would not only impact the institutions of marriage and family, but it would ultimately challenge quality of life and freedom of religion. Immoral behavior, now increasingly tolerated by society, would (if marriage is redefined) become legally protected. Then government would be in the untenable position of protecting immorality and sin. Then servants of the Lord would no longer be able to teach the doctrines of God without legal challenge. Then families would diminish and children would become only incidental byproducts of adult autonomy. Then the purposes of the Lord to exalt the family would be completely frustrated. That briefly summarizes why this matter is so very important. The process of amending the constitution would provide the only legal base that individual judges could not overturn. The amendment process, though lengthy, would provide for this issue to be decided by the will of the people and not by activist judges." Thoughts?
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
07-03-2006, 07:14 AM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
Second, I take issue with the slippery slope argument presented. The author states that after marriage is redefined, the government will be in the "untenable position" of protecting sin and immorality. Doesn't the government do that now? Is gambling immoral? Probably, but it is legal in Las Vegas and on many rivers. Is adultery immoral? Yes, but it is legal (and I doubt sincerely that a legal restriction could actually be enforced criminalizing adultery). Is excessive alcohol consumption immoral? Probably, but as long as you do it in the right place, it is protected. The world hasn't ended yet as a result of our ability to engage in these activities. I am also quite confused as to why families and churches (according to the author) would be unable to fight homosexual marriage without legal challenge. They are free to say what they want about homosexual marriage, regardless of what the law says allowing it. This is the ultimate slippery slope argument: if you allow gay marriage, nobody will ever be allowed to combat it! I am not clear on how that is supposed to work. Have churches been inhibited in their ability to say adultery is immoral or any number of other things? People make the gay marriage debate appear like society will be destroyed if it is allowed. In reality, it involves a simple question with no clear answer: at what point should the government legislate morality? This is the nature of the debate. |
|
07-03-2006, 01:07 PM | #3 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Bluth Home
Posts: 3,877
|
I think a trap has been laid for you hoya, I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop on the identity of the author of that quote.
Quote:
Quote:
With respect to our ability to say what we want, I don't really see how it could be stopped. I am virtually certain, however, that some locality will try to pass a "hate speech" ordinance forbidding it. Of course they can't get away with that. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. -Galileo Last edited by UtahDan; 07-03-2006 at 01:09 PM. |
||||
07-03-2006, 01:46 PM | #4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
A good post. It is nice to hear someone actually debate on the issues. I don't see the same problem you see with legalizing gay marriage. First, it is the homosexual conduct that many find repugnant, not necessarily the marriage itself. That conduct is already legal (and constitutionally protected). I don't think most people then conclude the government promotes homosexuality. I also don't think legalizing something necessarily makes it harder for you to teach your children the activity is inappropriate. Did you ever think growing up that drinking was appropriate? How about smoking? Do most Mormons think gambling is appropriate or have a more difficult time teaching their children it isn't because it is legal? The issue is debatable, and I haven't actually ever seen any scientific evidence on the point (though I would imagine some exists). If you are aware of something, I would enjoy reading it. From personal experience, I have a hard time accepting your premise, however. OTOH, for those growing up in an atmosphere that doesn't contain church teachings or a similar foundation, perhaps societal norms are the measure of what is and what is not appropriate. Again, I don't know. But I haven't seen any evidence of your claim. |
|
07-03-2006, 01:54 PM | #5 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
__________________
Masquerading as Cougarguards very own genius dumbass since 05'. |
|
07-03-2006, 02:03 PM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 3,059
|
Quote:
__________________
Get your stinking paws off me, you damned, dirty Yewt! "Now perhaps as I spanked myself screaming out "Kozlowski, say it like you mean it bitch!" might have been out of line, but such was the mood." - Goatnapper "If you want to fatten a pig up to make the pig MORE delicious, you can feed it almost anything. Seriously. The pig is like the car on Back to the Future. You put in garbage, and out comes something magical!" - Cali Coug |
|
07-03-2006, 04:33 PM | #7 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
But you're right, I should probably and will refrain from making comments about this topic in the future as I've made it clear where I stand. Like I've said before it's a shame that too many are too chicken to stand with direction that has come directly from the Savior. If you choose to ignore me, go ahead.
__________________
Masquerading as Cougarguards very own genius dumbass since 05'. |
|
07-03-2006, 04:41 PM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,506
|
Quote:
a. Love God above all things b. Love your neighbor like you love yourself Now if we personally love God, we personally will strive to do what we 'should' do, but if we love our neighbors, we will extend them friendship, brotherhood, courtesies, devotion, love, kinship, etc, even if we aren't comfortable with the decisions they make. That's the part that people don't understand about that passage, the first part is personal, and deals with us individually, the second part is universal, and deals with mankind. |
|
07-03-2006, 05:56 PM | #9 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
I'm sure some will mis-interpret me based on my feelings on the subject and that's fine.
__________________
Masquerading as Cougarguards very own genius dumbass since 05'. |
|
07-03-2006, 06:00 PM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,506
|
Quote:
That's the beauty of the gospel, we can have people like hoya, homeboy, archaea, myself, and we can all think drastically different and still congregate under the same tenent of love and worship. So you can personally believe that homosexual marriage is evil, I can believe it's not that big of a deal, and we can both follow and love Jesus the same. |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|