Politics & Stuff

[Dion 2,476]

That's the thing.

I have no problems with this.

But that's not what's happening is it?

I already brought about cases where business owners are getting harassed and fined because they don't want to cater to gay weddings.

I was not saying you, Fernando, just a hypothetical person who believes it is a sin.

As they should. If business owners are refusing to perform gay weddings simply because they are gay weddings they should be taken to court, just like if they were refusing to perform weddings between blacks or any other sort of stupid reason people will find to discriminate.

By the way, doesn't the Bible say God is the only judge or something like that? If that is so, religious people should abide to that and treat everyone equally and let the sinners burn in hell later or whatever. Anyhow I find the argument of sin very silly because I don't see any laws that prohibit eating competitions or people becoming obese despite gluttony being one of the seven deadly sins. I could spend all day listing sins that are not as frowned upon as homosexuality. It just strikes me as a strange reasoning really.

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

The gay wedding cake what the fuck?. If the geezer didn't want to bake it all he had to say was sorry i'm to busy you'll have to go elsewhere. What is there to object to it's a fucking cake!.His business is now suffering and as a baker i'm sure he knead's the dough (sorry about that one). But what did he actually object to that it had a couple of plastic men or women on the top?. But it's almost beyond parody a gay wedding cake did he object that he couldn't get hold of enough pink colouring. I'm pretty sure if someone said it's my mate's birthday male or female i want the cake in the shape of a cock and balls he would have done it.

It's his business and he can run it how he likes but with all the negative media he's getting he's not exactly a visionary is he?.

[Fernando 6,585]

I was not saying you, Fernando, just a hypothetical person who believes it is a sin.

As they should. If business owners are refusing to perform gay weddings simply because they are gay weddings they should be taken to court, just like if they were refusing to perform weddings between blacks or any other sort of stupid reason people will find to discriminate.

By the way, doesn't the Bible say God is the only judge or something like that? If that is so, religious people should abide to that and treat everyone equally and let the sinners burn in hell later or whatever. Anyhow I find the argument of sin very silly because I don't see any laws that prohibit eating competitions or people becoming obese despite gluttony being one of the seven deadly sins. I could spend all day listing sins that are not as frowned upon as homosexuality. It just strikes me as a strange reasoning really.

But see you can't put the same category of black and homosexual. Black is out of racism, homosexuality is out of religions beliefs.

However you point to a great fact. That is that people tend to treat the sin of homosexuality as the greatest which is wrong.

A sin is a sin. No difference then lying, cursing, pre marital sex, adultery and such.

So yes there is a lot of hypocrisy there.

[DavidEU 2,023]

But see you can't put the same category of black and homosexual. Black is out of racism, homosexuality is out of religions beliefs.

It's nothing to do with religious beliefs. It's to do with some people in this world just being fucking stupid.

[Dion 2,476]

But see you can't put the same category of black and homosexual. Black is out of racism, homosexuality is out of religions beliefs.

However you point to a great fact. That is that people tend to treat the sin of homosexuality as the greatest which is wrong.

A sin is a sin. No difference then lying, cursing, pre marital sex, adultery and such.

So yes there is a lot of hypocrisy there.

To be honest, I think the religious argument is just a cop out for a discrimination that already exists, this is the reason why you don't see the same hate against other sins. Also, justifying a discrimination with religion has happened before, even with the example of blacks. In the past people tried to justify the existence of black skin and slavery in the bible too, they used the curse of Ham that time. I find it funny how religion is often used to oppress other people or justify terrible actions. Regardless of that, even if it is purely out of religion beliefs, it still doesn't make it right. It is not right to force your beliefs on others, especially when their actions cause 0 harm to you.

[Fernando 6,585]

To be honest, I think the religious argument is just a cop out for a discrimination that already exists, this is the reason why you don't see the same hate against other sins. Also, justifying a discrimination with religion has happened before, even with the example of blacks. In the past people tried to justify the existence of black skin and slavery in the bible too, they used the curse of Ham that time. I find it funny how religion is often used to oppress other people or justify terrible actions. Regardless of that, even if it is purely out of religion beliefs, it still doesn't make it right. It is not right to force your beliefs on others, especially when their actions cause 0 harm to you.

From a biblical point stand homosexuality is a sin. But it's not a case to put a person as an outcast. You suppose to love them, not reject them.

However we should let them know, hey this is what the bible says and that's wrong. Just like it's wrong to lie and do all the other stuff I mentioned.

That being said I believe in the bible and believe this is wrong.

But I will love them and forgive them.

Even when some homosexual offend my religious belief like this:

The true power of the gospel is this. To love your enemy and pray for them that they might convert.

Like the guy in South Carolina. He killed church members but the real power of the life changing gospel stood up and said we forgive this guy and we will pray for him that he will come to know the lord.

Or like this widow that forgives and pray that the ISIS member that martyr his husband will come to repentance.

Widow's Joy: He Didn't Deny Christ When Beheaded

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2015/June/Widows-Joy-He-Didnt-Deny-Christ-When-Beheaded/

[Dion 2,476]

From a biblical point stand homosexuality is a sin. But it's not a case to put a person as an outcast. You suppose to love them, not reject them.

However we should let them know, hey this is what the bible says and that's wrong. Just like it's wrong to lie and do all the other stuff I mentioned.

That being said I believe in the bible and believe this is wrong.

But I will love them and forgive them.

Even when some homosexual offend my religious belief like this:

The true power of the gospel is this. To love your enemy and pray for them that they might convert.

Like the guy in South Carolina. He killed church members but the real power of the life changing gospel stood up and said we forgive this guy and we will pray for him that he will come to know the lord.

Or like this widow that forgives and pray that the ISIS member that martyr his husband will come to repentance.

Widow's Joy: He Didn't Deny Christ When Beheaded

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2015/June/Widows-Joy-He-Didnt-Deny-Christ-When-Beheaded/

I'm not saying those portrayals of Christ are right or anything, but you must see that in context. Homosexuals as of today are a minority and they are discriminated. This is a fact. It is also a fact that one of the main obstacles they face is the religious lobby against them, as such it is no wonder that they are attacking what they see as one of their main enemies. If Christianity wasn't threatening their existence and their legal rights I don't think they would have done that. Seriously doubt it. I can't even imagine what it must be like for them. I mean, it annoys me enough that people are against homosexuality for seemingly no valid reason at all, I'd probably be burning down churches if I was being denied civil rights for being gay on top of that.

[iseah100 5,612]

Well there's other problems that bother me.

If I don't believe in gay marriage then how does it feel when they teach this as Okay in the school for kids?

This leads no choice but to go to some private school or home school since public schools are teaching things that go against my belief.

So that thing annoys me already.

It is okay. That's why.

It's nothing to do with religious beliefs. It's to do with some people in this world just being fucking stupid.

[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji122] [emoji122] [emoji122]

[NishC300 1,865]

Lol I think, really you know that Israel is a bullying state inflicting holocaust on the Palestinians, slaughtering women and children with high tech weaponry

ah a BDS lover.

That's not really answering the points, to be honest. You'd of thought that if Scalia thinks that the justice system and the way the supreme court works is an "attack on democracy" he would not have become a judge...

Anyway, let's stop pretending it's about how it happened because there is a very clear fear in your posts that make it evident that it is not. Whether it is fear of the unknown or due religious beliefs or some other reason I do not know but it is very irrational.

Yes they have and continue to be although I really don't understand why that needs to be a 'prerequisite' to them getting their human rights. They are humans and humans have the right to equality under the law and the right to marry. Hence their human rights were being violated prior to the ruling on Friday(?).

No, that's incest and that has nothing to do with homosexuality as you can easily replace that example with a brother and sister. Incest is illegal and will remain so because because it is not a human characteristic. No one is born incestuous, a lot of people are born homosexual. That is a scientific fact.

Anyway, that is some incredible piece of fear-mongering. What you are scared of literally has NOTHING to do with homosexuality. What happens now that gay marriage is legal? Well it really doesn't take a fortune teller to answer that, just look at the TENS of countries that have long since legalized it. I'm happy to tell you that the sky has not fallen in any of them.

The rest of the post is more of the same along with victimizing homphobes, so let me try to make it very simple:

If you are interested only in a 'traditional marriage' then gay marriage does not affect that in any possible manner. That is simply a fact. You're calling the continued brutal attack on the rights and freedom of LGBT people a 'defense of traditional marriage' even though traditional marriage literally and demonstrably has nothing to do with this. I'm sorry that those homophobes don't get to persecute and marginalize this minority that they are so used to abusing and mistreating, but if we are to live in democratic states based on equality then that it simply not possible.

No one can be 'brainwashed' into homosexuality. Unless you are born with that sexual orientation you can't be 'talked into it'. That is a scientific fact. Kids are being 'brainwashed' to accepting homosexuals for what they were born as in hopes that the abuse they get decreases. Too radical, I know...

Usually in controversial 'issues' there are valid points for both views. This is NOT one of those issues. There simply is NO case for preventing a minority from practicing their basic human rights that do not affect you, your rights and freedom in any possible way just because it doesn't conform with your version of morality.

So please STOP.

So for starters yes, I am a believer in traditional marriage and no, my original point was regarding the SCOTUS. As for this 'fear mongering' homophobe nonsense, I didn't know voicing genuine concerns about how people could exploit, turning the definition of marriage from the union of a man and a woman to "2 people who love each other" is considered homophobic or voicing concerns about how this may result in people losing their religious freedom. I'm guessing you consider people like Ryan Anderson (not the NBA player) homophobic too.

In that case I think you clearly don't know the definition of 'homophobe'. Homophobes are those people who go around making banners like "God Hates Fags" not people who are concerned and wish to have civilised discourse regarding the situation. If anything it's those who believe in traditional marriage who are behaving in a more civilised manner. Gay rights activists freely go around labeling anyone they disagree with 'homophobes' while despite all this demonisation of traditional marriage believers, they have kept their calm and continue to engage in civlised discourse.

Ever heard anyone say anything about Dan Savage's countless hateful comments? I'm guessing the fact that numerous gay rights activists openly display bigotry towards those who disagree with them is of no concern to you, but however a baker who kindly declines an offer for a cake is a bigot to you.

Just think about this for a moment, imagine if someone stood up and cracked a joke on religion or even went as far as insulting religion. No would even bat an eyelid as a matter of fact people freely and fearlessly insult religion. Almost all the major comedians do. However, imagine if that same person cracked a joke on let's say...................... homosexuals? People would rage with their 'politically correct anger', pretending to gasp and being highly offended on behalf of someone else. Forget that, you're labeling people homophobes for politely declining an offer to bake a cake!!!!! Wonder which side is bigoted here.....

I'm guessing ofc you have no problem with a priest getting spat on in a gay parade (what's beautiful though was that the priest actually forgave them for that). I guess you don't have a problem with some of the ways that bakers are being bullied and having their religious freedom infringed upon. I guess you don't have a problem with some of the pictures which @Fernando posted.

But ofc none of that is hateful but those who want to find a solution to this issue through civilised discussion are bigots, homophobes etc.

As for the how you claim it won't affect traditional marriage believers, well that's wrong as it has - in Canada. This is being used as a mechanism to bully religious institutions and you can check out this video where Brian Lilley talks about some of them (as well as something he doesn't mention about the new sex-ed program in place in Canada).

And yes there are valid points for both sides, it's not my fault if you haven't researched them and don't read both side's point of views.

As for why I believe in traditional marriage? It has nothing to do with my religion - as I stated earlier, Hinduism makes no reference to homosexuality. Furthermore, many gay rights activists claim that it tolerates it. My views are entirely my own. They have been crafted through research and reading what each side has to say until I made my own opinion. Additionally, I'm not someone who'll just believe what 'everyone else does' like some lamb (there is a Greek saying about that) because I'm more than capable of thinking for myself.

As for this myth that 'only religious people' believe in protecting traditional marriage because 'some book orders them to' is an utterly false notion. There are many secular cases to protect traditional marriage and I know some atheists/agnostics personally who believe in traditional marriage.

[Fulham Broadway 17,332]

ah a BDS lover.

Whats BDS ?

[kellzfresh 7,229]

Well there's other problems that bother me.

If I don't believe in gay marriage then how does it feel when they teach this as Okay in the school for kids?

This leads no choice but to go to some private school or home school since public schools are teaching things that go against my belief.

So that thing annoys me already.

A USA senator has already brought up part of the Constitution which states that the church should not be taxed as long as it keeps giving to charity and doesn't support gay marriage. So he wants the church to face taxes now in the USA since gay marriage is now legal.

I won't be shocked to see this pick up steam....

Fernando;

Rule one of modern day life: don't believe everything you read on the Internet.

Me and my partner are as normal as pie. We have a home together, we go on holidays together, and we're planning our lives together. My love for him is equal to how I could ever love a woman if I was straight. And neither of us have any desire to violate children. We just want to make each other happy.

I hope that makes things abit clearer.

I don't think Gays are bad people, anyone who says that is wrong. But, Christians are always going to be obliged by their religious rights of the founding fathers of America to say how they feel about being gay. They are never going to kill a gay couple, but there's nothing wrong with them saying their opinions.

The problem going on in the USA is Christians should have a right to talk without being sued or ridiculed on the media till they lose their jobs. It's turning to witch-hunting of religion at this rate.

[NishC300 1,865]

Whats BDS ?

Boycott Divestment Sanctions.

[Fernando 6,585]

I'm not saying those portrayals of Christ are right or anything, but you must see that in context. Homosexuals as of today are a minority and they are discriminated. This is a fact. It is also a fact that one of the main obstacles they face is the religious lobby against them, as such it is no wonder that they are attacking what they see as one of their main enemies. If Christianity wasn't threatening their existence and their legal rights I don't think they would have done that. Seriously doubt it. I can't even imagine what it must be like for them. I mean, it annoys me enough that people are against homosexuality for seemingly no valid reason at all, I'd probably be burning down churches if I was being denied civil rights for being gay on top of that.

Already gave you the reason.

No point in continuing that if you believe acting out against is a justifiable cause.

This is the way to do it:

[CHOULO19 24,332]

So for starters yes, I am a believer in traditional marriage and no, my original point was regarding the SCOTUS. As for this 'fear mongering' homophobe nonsense, I didn't know voicing genuine concerns about how people could exploit, turning the definition of marriage from the union of a man and a woman to "2 people who love each other" is considered homophobic or voicing concerns about how this may result in people losing their religious freedom. I'm guessing you consider people like Ryan Anderson (not the NBA player) homophobic too.

In that case I think you clearly don't know the definition of 'homophobe'. Homophobes are those people who go around making banners like "God Hates Fags" not people who are concerned and wish to have civilised discourse regarding the situation. If anything it's those who believe in traditional marriage who are behaving in a more civilised manner. Gay rights activists freely go around labeling anyone they disagree with 'homophobes' while despite all this demonisation of traditional marriage believers, they have kept their calm and continue to engage in civlised discourse.

Well that's because none of those concerns are even remotely rational as has been thoroughly demonstrated in this thread. Fine, let's leave the term 'homophobe' out of it even though it is very clear from your posts that your motivation is fear of homosexuality.

I'll repeat what everyone has already said: What changes in your life as a straight man (I'm assuming) now that gay marriage is legal is: Absolutely NOTHING.

Your 'concerns' over this are completely irrational and irrelevant. Homosexuality has absolutely nothing to do with incest and exploitation of marriage happens all the time in 'traditional marriage' for getting citizenship, tax evasion...etc.

You use a lot of calculated terms to falsely describe reality, but 'Protectors of traditional marriage' is some incredible bullshit. What it actually means is people who want to force their sexual orientation on everyone else and stop people from getting married to who they want to even though it has absolutely nothing to do with them.

Ever heard anyone say anything about Dan Savage's countless hateful comments? I'm guessing the fact that numerous gay rights activists openly display bigotry towards those who disagree with them is of no concern to you, but however a baker who kindly declines an offer for a cake is a bigot to you.

"a baker who kindly declines an offer for a cake" again, that's just incredible. What it actually means is a baker who discriminatorily refused to bake a cake based solely on someones sexual orientation.

Just think about this for a moment, imagine if someone stood up and cracked a joke on religion or even went as far as insulting religion. No would even bat an eyelid as a matter of fact people freely and fearlessly insult religion. Almost all the major comedians do. However, imagine if that same person cracked a joke on let's say...................... homosexuals? People would rage with their 'politically correct anger', pretending to gasp and being highly offended on behalf of someone else. Forget that, you're labeling people homophobes for politely declining an offer to bake a cake!!!!! Wonder which side is bigoted here.....

What planet do you live on? Gay jokes are probably the most used jokes in the world. Again, your concerns have no roots in reality.

Also, it's quite astonishing how you manage to victimize yourself while attacking someone else's freedom and rights!

I'm guessing ofc you have no problem with a priest getting spat on in a gay parade (what's beautiful though was that the priest actually forgave them for that). I guess you don't have a problem with some of the ways that bakers are being bullied and having their religious freedom infringed upon. I guess you don't have a problem with some of the pictures which @Fernando posted.

What does that have to do with anything? Someone spitting on anyone else is a jerk pretty much regardless of the circumstances and certainly regardless of his sexual identity or orientation. Are you really saying that LGBT people should not get their right to marry because a homosexual person spit on a priest?!

And NO it's not religious freedom to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation just like it is not religious freedom to discriminate against Hindus for example because they have not accepted Christ as their savior and thus are all sinner. That's like saying stopping Al Qaeda attacks is infringing on their religious freedom because they believe that their religion tells them to blow people up!

Religious freedom stops when the freedom of others start. Meaning you have all the religious freedom in the world when the actions affect you and you alone. But when your religious actions start affecting other people without their consent and infringing on their freedom and rights, you don't have the freedom to do that anymore. When you refuse to sell someone a cake based on their sexual orientation, or religious beliefs, or race...etc. then you are infringing on their rights and are guilty of discrimination.

As for the how you claim it won't affect traditional marriage believers, well that's wrong as it has - in Canada. This is being used as a mechanism to bully religious institutions and you can check out this video where Brian Lilley talks about some of them (as well as something he doesn't mention about the new sex-ed program in place in Canada).

'Bullying religious institutions' So much for forming your own opinions, all your terminology is straight off the propaganda machine!

Yes, religious institutions are being bullied into stopping their thousands of years worth of discrimination, persecution and abuse of a minority based on the sexual orientation that they are born with. It's just heartbreaking...

And yes there are valid points for both sides, it's not my fault if you haven't researched them and don't read both side's point of views.

Again: There simply is NO case for preventing a minority from practicing their basic human right to marry which does not affect you, your rights or freedom in any possible way just because it doesn't conform with your version of morality.

[DavidEU 2,023]

I don't think Gays are bad people, anyone who says that is wrong. But, Christians are always going to be obliged by their religious rights of the founding fathers of America to say how they feel about being gay. They are never going to kill a gay couple, but there's nothing wrong with them saying their opinions.

The problem going on in the USA is Christians should have a right to talk without being sued or ridiculed on the media till they lose their jobs. It's turning to witch-hunting of religion at this rate.

How do you not realise how utterly ridiculous that is, especially the two sections I have bolded? Stop preaching religion and adopt the mindset that this world would be a better place if we were all just less horrible to one another. No one has the right to criticise or attack someone over race, gender or sexuality. No one.

Suicide amongst the LGBT community, especially in America and especially amongst teenagers is a crisis. Do you not realise that Homophobia spreads the message to these people that it's wrong and indifferent to be gay? Which leads to these suicides and cases like Mathew Shephard a number years ago. The message of homophobia is toxic in a society that revolves around stereotypes and beliefs on what people can and can't be. We need to change that message. We are changing that message.

But how on earth can you say that Christians can say what they want and it's not doing any harm?

[kellzfresh 7,229]

How do you not realise how utterly ridiculous that is, especially the two sections I have bolded? Stop preaching religion and adopt the mindset that this world would be a better place if we were all just less horrible to one another. No one has the right to criticise or attack someone over race, gender or sexuality. No one.

Suicide amongst the LGBT community, especially in America and especially amongst teenagers is a crisis. Do you not realise that Homophobia spreads the message to these people that it's wrong and indifferent to be gay? Which leads to these suicides and cases like Mathew Shephard a number years ago. The message of homophobia is toxic in a society that revolves around stereotypes and beliefs on what people can and can't be. We need to change that message. We are changing that message.

But how on earth can you say that Christians can say what they want and it's not doing any harm?

I guess the way I said it didn't explain it well. Let's put it this way...

If I say I don't think I want to let a gay couple wed in my church or if I say I don't want to let my kids see a gay couple kiss their partner publicly, should I be sued/witch-hunted???

If the answer is yes like in the USA then that's a problem...

[DavidEU 2,023]

Let's put it this way...

If I say I don't think I want to let a gay couple wed in my church or if I say I don't want to let my kids see a gay couple kiss their partner publicly, should I be sued/witch-hunted???

If the answer is yes like in the USA then that's a problem..

I think you should teach your kids about equality and to not be judgemental.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

They are never going to kill a gay couple,

Here's a small list of some of the history of violence against LGBT people in the US as a direct result of their sexual identity and orientation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_violence_against_LGBT_people_in_the_United_States

Add to that the incredibly high suicide attempt rates for LGBT people, especially teens in the US due to bullying and discrimination against them.

I guess the way I said it didn't explain it well. Let's put it this way...
If I say I don't think I want to let a gay couple wed in my church or if I say I don't want to let my kids see a gay couple kiss their partner publicly, should I be sued/witch-hunted???
If the answer is yes like in the USA then that's a problem...

You have to look at it both ways, from the perspective of LGBT people. That kind of intolerance only alienates them further. I promise you, tolerance will not hurt your kids; intolerance will hurt LGBT people and possibly your kids as well.

[kellzfresh 7,229]

Here's a small list of some of the history of violence against LGBT people in the US as a direct result of their sexual identity and orientation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_violence_against_LGBT_people_in_the_United_States

Add to that the incredibly high suicide attempt rates for LGBT people, especially teens in the US due to bullying and discrimination against them.

You have to look at it both ways, from the perspective of LGBT people. That kind of intolerance only alienates them further. I promise you, tolerance will not hurt your kids; intolerance will hurt LGBT people and possibly your kids as well.

I cannot classify ISIS as Muslims because I live mostly around Muslims and they are my friends. So if some radicals kill gays when being a Christian means you shouldn't kill anyone, then in my opinion they are not Christians. Just like that Charleston shooting kid is not a Christian in my eyes.

I love your advice about tolerating it. I tolerate free minded people, Hindu, Islam, Muslims, atheists and gays. But I don't tolerate witch-hunting on my religious rights, that is where my problem lies. For example, If I work as the CEO in Google and on twitter, I say "Jesus can suck my dick" its fine. But if I say I won't take my kids to that school because they have gay classes there, I'll be targeted on twitter and consequently fired.

That is a problem.

[Dion 2,476]

I cannot classify ISIS as Muslims because I live mostly around Muslims and they are my friends. So if some radicals kill gays when being a Christian means you shouldn't kill anyone, then in my opinion they are not Christians. Just like that Charleston shooting kid is not a Christian in my eyes.

I love your advice about tolerating it. I tolerate free minded people, Hindu, Islam, Muslims, atheists and gays. But I don't tolerate witch-hunting on my religious rights, that is where my problem lies. For example, If I work as the CEO in Google and on twitter, I say "Jesus can suck my dick" its fine. But if I say I won't take my kids to that school because they have gay classes there, I'll be targeted on twitter and consequently fired.

That is a problem.

Those two have different magnitudes. Jesus can suck my dick is akin to saying being gay is unnatural or an aberration, whereas not taking your kids to a school that has gay classes is more akin to an owner of a business refusing to serve you because you are a christian. Just like those images of Christ in those gay parades are in a whole different magnitude to denying a minority a civil right. Those are not comparable.

And even if you compare wrongs of the same magnitude, the one against the minority will stand out more and be worse because they are naturally oppressed by being a minority, they're the weaker party. There's a saying in Law which I'm not sure I can translate properly but it is somewhat like this, treat equals equally and unequals unequally in accord to the intensity of that inequality - only then you'll have true justice. Minorities need certain privileges and rights in order to be able to withstand the rule of the majority. That's like one of the major founding basis of the human rights.