I'm sure you read all that in one of them fancy shmancy faggotty liberal text booksHere's a challenge to people who might think that education and texts are somehow altered by the insidious left wing...name 3 lies from 3 "liberal" text books, vebatim, used in schools within the US and identify the text by name and school distric.Then, present the evidence that they are lies and also cite sources.
-
Totally speechless
-
Change the word "lies" to "omissions" and I'll take your bet. What are you willing to part with?
-
sureif you can cite the omissions and the evidence verbatim with sources, you're on.I would be happy to mail you one of our colourful $20 bills
-
Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: Dantekso if you want the government to stay out of it, that means gays should be allowed to marry and hold the same rights and recognition because the law shouldnt be allowed to intervene,thus prohibit the marriage of homosexuals right?That's right...so long as it's not a Christian marriage. This would require (as I've already stated) for them to establish their own religion...and leave Christianity to the Christians. Are you implying that gay people can't be Christians? I don't expect so, but I wanted to verify. What if there were to be a new sect of Christianity founded that supported gay marriage?Also, from what I've read of your posts, it seems to me that you don't have anything wrong with same-sex couples getting the same rights as those who are married. Is this correct?
-
Of course, it would be far easier for one to go through the old textbooks that you say are superior and cite many many examples of omissions. One easy example is the Sand Creek Massacre.
-
Originally Posted By: CiderAre you implying that gay people can't be Christians? I don't expect so, but I wanted to verify. What if there were to be a new sect of Christianity founded that supported gay marriage?Sure they can be Christians...but they can't get married to each other. A new sect of Christianity that goes against what you find in the Bible would not be Christian...it would be something else, regardless of what name you wanted to slap on it. Quote:Also, from what I've read of your posts, it seems to me that you don't have anything wrong with same-sex couples getting the same rights as those who are married. Is this correct? Correct...I think. As far as I know, they already have the same rights. I think you're talking about financial benefits of married couples. If so, then yes, let them have that if they want. Let them have civil unions if they want. But don't call it marriage...that's not what marriage is no matter how many laws you try to change.
-
Originally Posted By: Cider
Of course, it would be far easier for one to go through the old textbooks that you say are superior and cite many many examples of omissions. One easy example is the Sand Creek Massacre.
Yes it would be. But my point is that they've taken out that which shows the Christian heritage of this country...specifically, any references to God. We'll start here:
"Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
From Patrick Henry's speach on March 23, 1775. But you won't find any reference to God in any modern-day textbooks...you WILL find it in older ones, though.
You see, they've got a collection somewhere with thousands of original correspondences from that time between the original Constitutional framers (including Patrick Henry). 2/3 of them reference, somewhere in the text, God (directly) or the Bible. Talk of God was commonplace and a normal part of everyday speach for those folks. THAT has been erased from our textbooks. Gee...I wonder why?
-
But what you don't seem to understand is that MARRIAGE is just a word, it’s not a definition. Marriage is about love and commitment to one person, to cherish them until the day you die. That’s all we want, but selfish people like yourself wish to hold on to a simple word. We are not second-class citizens we deserve the same rights.As I have said before, you don’t want to give us the simple word Marriage? Fine, give me a civil union, which has the same IDENTICAL benefits of Marriage. Personally, heterosexuals have already destroyed the meaning and sanctity of marriage, I’m not even sure I want to carry the word marriage. And you bet your bottom dollar when the times comes that we should get Civil Unions, I will have the ceremony is a Church and preformed by a man/woman of God. So keep the word marriage, God doesn’t care about a word; he cares about the love between two people. What drives me insane about you Thor is that you talk down about homosexuals like we are a piece of trash. Talking about how we need to find our own religion, how incredible insensitive and ignorant of you. My love for God is not less than yours because I am gay. I did not choose to be gay, this is how I was made and I know God loves me for who I am for he created me. I pray Thor that if you have any kids or have kids in the future they never turn out Gay. I could not imagine having to grow up around a parent that is so close-minded and discriminate against a sector of people who just want equal liberty in a country that is supposed to be “free”.
-
exactly. How are you supposed to live in
the land of the free if you cannot even BE free. Maybe they should call it the land where "some can be free!"BTW. Looked up the definition of marriage. Here it is for all of you to know/
Main Entry: mar*riage
Pronunciation: \ˈmer-ij, ˈma-rij\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry
Date: 14th century
1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage b: the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c: the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected ; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3: an intimate or close union -
Originally Posted By: StephieJ
exactly. How are you supposed to live in
the land of the free if you cannot even BE free. Maybe they should call it the land where "some can be free!"I'm sorry, but that's rediculous. I'm not free to kill somebody am I? Having freedom and being free to do whatever you want regardless of anything else are two different things. Freedom always comes with a price tag.
And if you want a definition of a Christian marriage, you need to look in the Bible...not a dictionary.
-
Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyselfBut what you don't seem to understand is that MARRIAGE is just a word, it’s not a definition. Marriage is about love and commitment to one person, to cherish them until the day you die. You say it's a word and not a definition, then go on to define it (according to your own ideas, of course). The truth is, it's both a word AND a definition. And in this country, the definition comes from the Bible...not the Koran or any other religious book, the Bible. And that definition states it's between a man and a woman. Adam and Eve...not Adam and Steve. That's all. Quote:That’s all we want, but selfish people like yourself wish to hold on to a simple word. We are not second-class citizens we deserve the same rights.I suppose that means somebody is a second-class citizen because they were born blind, and are being descriminated against because the state won't let them have a driver's license? No...I don't buy either one. And BTW, marriage is NOT a right.
-
If you look at the definition of marriage BEFORE it was changed to suit the churches need it simple said something along the lines of “two people in love under the unity of god.” It never said anything about a man and a woman. The church to suit their needs changed that. Don’t believe me? Go research it yourself you might be amazed.And trying to compare gay marriage to murdering someone? Now THAT is ridiculous.
-
Marriage IS a right! Its my right to love someone and be in a union where I get the SAME benefits as every other united stated citizen.And comparing gay people to blind people?? God help us! LoL. Gay people ARE NOT HANDICAPED! Blind people cannot drive because they cannot see and would cause harm to people being behind the wheel of a car (now that I am done stating the obvious lol). Gay people marrying someone they love WILL NOT hurt anyone. How many months did they allow gay marriage in California (Not to mention the other states that have allowed gay marriage for a couple years now)? Not ONCE did it hurt a person, the world did not come to an end, frogs didn’t drop from the sky, cities didn’t swarm with locuses, straight couples still love each other etc etc. Allowing gay people to marry will not hurt a single person, its been proven over and over. Quote: And in this country, the definition comes from the Bible...not the Koran or any other religious book, the Bible. And that definition states it's between a man and a woman. So the people who believe in the Koran, in this country should they be allowed to get marriage? Should they be allowed to us the word marriage? Do they need to make up their own form of marriage, but call it something else?Again, research what the definition of marriage really said in the bible before the Church changed the wording. It amazes me how many people want to use the bible as their proof but don’t even know the facts themselves. Quote:Adam and Eve...not Adam and Steve Yup, god created Adam and Eve… what’s your point? God also created penguins, which have been know to have homosexuals in their flocks. The gay penguins “mate” for life just like heterosexual penguins. Guess what else? God also created dolphins, and yup there are also gay dolphins in the wild, who also mate for life. Do I really need to go on to make my point?
-
Originally Posted By: RadABC News stated this evening that the Evangelical right is sorely afraid because they realize they are losing control.One of "them", Bush is on his way out. I don't think that ABC News and most other mainstream media outlets (and apparently a lot of folks here) understand the difference between the "Evangelical right" and the yahoos that have been running the Republican party for the last 8-12 years. They are the same thing in the same way zebras and ostriches are the same thing. That's why the current crop of ostriches are losing control. Quote:Many of their elected members have been replaced in the legislature.Whose elected members? The E-right? Like I said... Quote:White Anglo Saxon Idiots are increasingly in the minority in all areas of the US.Nice...Racist much? Quote:The thing is, they can be nasty when they feel powerless and will do many things to feel powerful.Yeah, cause liberals/Democrats have been anything but nasty over the past 8 years. Right... Quote:Witness the KKK and other white supremacist in action.Are you intentionally laying your credibility at the alter of stupidity, Rad? Really? Equating the Evangelical Right with the KKK and white supremists? Nice... Quote:Thor, hopefully you're finished in this country.If by "Thor" you mean the Evangelical Right or, more fairly Christians who vote conservatively, you couldn't be more wrong. But if you and yours want to delude yourself like that, go right ahead. It only plays into our evil plans. Quote:We don't want to control you...we just don't want you to control us.That might be true for you, but it certainly is not the case with the folks who are about to take power. They don't have a really good track record in how they deal with people who speak out against them, or question them, or don't support them.
-
Originally Posted By: NtroducingMyselfAnd comparing gay people to blind people?? God help us! LoL. Gay people ARE NOT HANDICAPED! Blind people cannot drive because they cannot see and would cause harm to people being behind the wheel of a car (now that I am done stating the obvious lol). Gay people marrying someone they love WILL NOT hurt anyone. How many months did they allow gay marriage in California (Not to mention the other states that have allowed gay marriage for a couple years now)? Not ONCE did it hurt a person, the world did not come to an end, frogs didn’t drop from the sky, cities didn’t swarm with locuses, straight couples still love each other etc etc. Allowing gay people to marry will not hurt a single person, its been proven over and over.You follow right down the liberal path of not paying attention to future long-term ramifications of what you attempt to claim as a "right"...although it's easy for you to see the short-term ramifications of the blind person trying to drive. You'll not allow him his equality and demand it for yourself...is that it? We already have AIDS...isn't that enough? Look at what happened to Soddom and Gamorah (you did say you were Christian, didn't you?) Quote:So the people who believe in the Koran, in this country should they be allowed to get marriage? Should they be allowed to us the word marriage? Do they need to make up their own form of marriage, but call it something else?Their marriage is recognized...but is not Christian. As I said before, go create your own religion and get married there, if something you claim you don't really need is so important to you. Just leave Christianity alone. Quote:God also created penguins, which have been know to have homosexuals in their flocks. The gay penguins “mate” for life just like heterosexual penguins. Guess what else? God also created dolphins, and yup there are also gay dolphins in the wild, who also mate for life. Do I really need to go on to make my point? And what is your point, and how does it pertain to marriage?
-
Quote:Look at what happened to Soddom and Gamorah (you did say you were Christian, didn't you?) why do people keep equating the old testament with Christianity? Possibly you're not reading very carefuly
-
Originally Posted By: unsupervised Quote:Look at what happened to Soddom and Gamorah (you did say you were Christian, didn't you?) why do people keep equating the old testament with Christianity? Possibly you're not reading very carefuly Or, possibly the athiest needs to acknowledge that just maybe the Christian knows a little bit more about the Bible than he does. You think?
-
Originally Posted By: albeitmyself Quote:We already have AIDS...isn't that enough? Are you ACTUALLY trying to say that homosexuals caused AIDs?Evidence, please. And you are making a positive assertion so the onus lies on you to provide proof. They brought it to this country from Africa back in 1972 via a gay airline steward, according to as much as they could figure out. But whether that's the case or not, the disease is many times more rampant in the homosexual community than in any other demographic you care to choose. So maybe a gay man brought it to the US, and maybe not...but the gays are most responsible for spreading it, even if it is largely amongst themselves. I consider them as part of the human population...don't you?
-
I'm baffled.. and not even sure where to start... but trust me I will start... Quote:We already have AIDS...isn't that enough? Are you seriously saying AIDs is a homosexually formed disease? You are soo misguided and preaching something you no NOTHING about. Do your damned research before you spout ignorant propaganda like this. I cannot even believe you would say something so ignorant. My jaw literally dropped when I read that. You sir, no zero about this topic, and you just proved it right there. Quote:Look at what happened to Soddom and Gamorah (you did say you were Christian, didn't you?) Yes I am a Christian, and I think you need to read the story of Soddom and Gamorah again. God did not destroy the city because of homosexuals; it was because of rape and incest. They were sex crazed. Were there homosexual acts being done, absolutely. But there were also heterosexual acts as well. It was about rape, incest and the like... not about sexual orientation.And incase you forgot the old saying “Learn from the Old Testament, but live your life by the New”. To me, personally, a lot of the Old Testament is a bunch of hand-me-down stories. Quote:Their marriage is recognized...but is not Christian. As I said before, go create your own religion and get married there, if something you claim you don't really need is so important to you. Just leave Christianity alone. You keep contradicting yourself. You keep saying marriage is a Christian sanctioned ceremony, but than in the next breath say its okay for non-Christians to use marriage. Now what is it, a Christian based sanction or can any citizen get married? You cannot have it both ways. THAN also say gay Christians cannot get married, and even go as far as to say we should make up our own religion. What kind of Christian are you?? "I'm sorry my God is to good for you... go makeup your own!" Seriously??? Quote:And what is your point, and how does it pertain to marriage? I thought my point was obvious. God made all creatures on earth; humans are not the only creatures God created that develop homosexuality. What I find amazing in the animal kingdom, they don't judge. They are not kicked out of the flock or the pod. They are embraced as another of their kind and treated equally. We human can certainly learn a lot from the animal kingdom.