<p>Okay, so CC kinda sucks at this point in the year and people seem to be running out of stuff to ask about schools. So how about... POLITICS?</p>
<p>Let's start with same-sex marriage, shall we? I'll start.</p>
<p>I wholeheartedly agree with the idea and am ever so happy that there are now four states that support this civil rights movement, because it is a civil right. Naysayers say that giving gay men and women the right to marry members of the same sex would not be granting them equality, but giving them additional rights, since they technically already have the right to marry - someone of the opposite sex. But, uhh, why would they want to?</p>
<p>I believe that although marriage is a sacrament of the Catholic church, the church’s powers should not go beyond it’s own domain. In America, we are a diverse and very free country. Although marriage between same sex marriage is not allowed in the Church, it should not be applied to SECULAR decisions in the United States.</p>
<p>Marriages are performed in every religion, not just in Catholicism, but you’re right. Last time I checked, atheists were allowed to marry in the courthouse rather than the church if they chose. So why not gay couples? It really is too bad that in a country in which church and state are supposedly separate, religion still governs major decisions that don’t necessarily even deal with religious issues.</p>
<p>Although I hate the expression, “History repeats itself,” it’s quite true. I mean, look at European History. If the Church wasn’t so corrupt, and so insisting on dominating the secular rulers within the Holy Roman Empire, MAYBE IT WOULDN’T HAVE COLLAPSED. I mean, just look how well that turned out. Pff.</p>
<p>Hmm - in AP Euro this year, I think I remember learning that the Holy Roman Empire collapsed because it was based around the election of Holy Roman Emperor, which was done by the princes of the various HRE states, who intentionally elected weak rulers thereby giving themselves more power. But I’m sure it also was largely due to the corruption of the church, too. And that class effectively finished in May, so I’ve probably forgotten everything.</p>
<p>Same sex marriage saddens me. Why would ANYONE, in a country that is supposed to be free, deny people basic rights? What happened to all men (and women) are created equal? We all deserve the same rights no matter what religon you are. As a matter of fact, I read an article in psychology today about the gay GENE, that is believed to help people become more attracted to the opposite sex. So why are we denying rights to people because of something they cannnot control? I get confused at that point. Does anyone know of a reason besides gay being against the Church? That is the only argument I have heard regarding gay marriage, and I wonder if their is another reason? Or is the Catholic church just very controlling?</p>
<p>hahahaha hockeykid. i am one of three democrats in a medium sized southern public school. can’t say anything political without starting a protest. :D</p>
<p>Haha, hockeykid, I, too, was hoping that this topic would be a little more controversial. But, admittedly, I’m happy the next generation is so open!</p>
<p>Jasmyn, you can say that, but to many people (myself included) marriage is a little more than just a ring and financial benefits. It’s symbolic, as you said - but in a huge, huge way. 50% of marriages may now end in divorce, but that doesn’t necessarily weaken the things that marriage stands for. To deny this “privilege” to a large minority (some estimates say one in ten are gay) shows a lack of respect for different sexualities. Really, religion is the one thing holding most states back from allowing same-sex marriages, which is pretty screwed up considering we live in a country that supposedly separates church from state, yes?</p>
<p>I’m curious to hear other views on this, liberal or conservative! I don’t know how many conservatives we have on this forum, but still.</p>
<p>I’ll be in New Hampshire working at a summer camp until August 8th - no internet until then! I look forward to returning and noticing that this thread has dropped to page four!</p>
<p>BiggestFoot, that’s an interesting set of personal opinions. I’d also really be interested in the theological and/or scriptural foundations upon which you’ve based those opinions.</p>
<p>Erm… this has seemed to dive toward the deep end. Eeep!</p>
<p>Here’s what I have to say:
“Marriage”, the word itself, means different things to different people. In the world to day it seems to mean so much less than what it used to mean. Marriage once was simply the last possible way for two people (of opposite sex) to show their commitment to eachother.
After King Henry the 8th switch England to a new church, one that would allow him to divorce instead of constantly beheading his wives, the protestant church was born. Now no, I am not saying the protestant church is a bad thing, I acctually attend a protestant church and I like it a lot, but the protestant church deminished the value of marriage, people were now allowed to divorce.
People divorce all the time in today’s world and the sort of thing is quite common in all of America. The meaning of the word “marriage” has been skewed and lowered, not meaning 1/10th of what it used to.</p>
<p>The reason I think that people have serious problems with gay “marriage” is that marriage (to the catholic church) means unity of a man and a woman and that anything other than that is considered wrong. If the state titled gay unity with something other than the word “marriage” I believe that it would be better tolerated and delt with because it wouldn’t be ruining the catholic churches idea of marriage.</p>
<p>biggestfoot, i agree with mainer95. i would also be interested inthe theological foundations which you have based your opinions. i was also wondering about this situation:</p>
<p>A Hindu (not trying to be offensive to any Hindus, it was just the first example that popped into my mind) is going to hell in your religon because they believe in more than one god, correct?</p>
<p>And it is wrong before the eyes of the Lord, right?</p>
<p>So a two Hindus get married. They are bonded together in their place of worship. They are not denied the right to get married because they have a religious base. </p>
<p>Two atheist come along. They are in love an want to get married. They are given the option of getting married in a courthouse because they are not affliated with a religon. So they marry in a courthouse and not denied their right to marriage even though, according to the Church, they are going to hell.</p>
<p>So let’s pretend, instead of a atheist couple, it is a gay couple that wants to get married. Shouldn’t they be allowed to marry in the courthouse like the atheist couple that wants to married. Wouldn’t it be almost the exact situation except for the fact that they are of the same gender? </p>
<p>I agree with maybe_someday also. I had a discussion once with some of my friends about how if gay marriage was actually titled something else, people would be more accepting. However, some gays may not be okay if they can be legally binded together, but cannot be “married” because some people may take offense. </p>
<p><em>please feel free to correct me if anything i say is wrong</em></p>
<p><em>please do not take offense from any of my statements. these are only examples</em> </p>
<p>anyone who follows his ways, is an enemy of God (1Peter 5:8). Satan is a deceiver and often disguises himself as someone good (2 Corinthians 11:14), but he has control over all the minds that do not belong to God. “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Corinthians 4:4).</p>
<p>Getting into heaven is not based on whether our good outweighs our bad; we will all lose out if that is the case. “And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace” (Romans 11:6). We can do nothing good to earn our way to heaven (Titus 3:5).</p>
<p>“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23).</p>
<p>“This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference” (Romans 3:22). The Bible teaches that there is no other way to salvation than through Christ. Jesus says in John 14:6, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”</p>
<p>Jesus is the only way of salvation because He is the only One who can pay our sin penalty (Romans 6:23). No other religion teaches the depth or seriousness of sin and its consequences. No other religion offers the infinite payment of sin that only Jesus Christ could provide.</p>
<p>Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, which declare that for a man to lie with a male as though lying with a woman is an abomination or detestable actin Hebrew, toevahsomething utterly repugnant to God. </p>
<p>The second set is the Apostle Pauls references to same-sex intercourse, for which the key text is Romans 1:24-27. Here he treats same-sex intercourse as exhibit Bwith idolatry as exhibit Aproving gross and deliberate human sin on the part of Gentiles against the truth about God accessible in creation or nature. </p>
<p>Also important in Paul is his reference to males who lie with males (arsenokoitai) and effeminate males who play the sexual role of females (malakoi) in the vice list in 1 Corinthians 6:9. The context here is the comparable issue of a case of incest at Corinth (1 Corinthians 5). Paul argues that the community of believers at Corinth should not deceive themselves: believers who participate in serial and unrepentant fashion in immoral sexual activitybe they participants in incest or in the solicitation of prostitutes (pornoi), adulterers, or participants in same-sex intercoursealong with believers who engage in serial and unrepentant fashion in idolatry or egregious cases of economic exploitation and the like, shall not inherit the kingdom of God.</p>
<p>I understand and certainly respect your opinions, BiggestFoot. But, as a group we are straying off topic a little. The subject is not whether it is against the Church, which we understand is true, but rather why the government is banning gays from marrying. Is it the right of the Church to ban people who are gay from marrying? Is the Church the only factor that is banning gay marriage?</p>
<p>BiggestFoot, your posts only prove that the church is, in general, against gay marriage. though i wan’t to argue religion with you (i am christian but out ideologies are very different), all i will say is that, in light of the law (separation of church and state), civil rights cannot be denied based on religion. this IS a civil right. Would you have people of other religions or atheists denied marriage as well? </p>
<p>do you really think that god is so hertless that he would create gay people just so they could go to hell? or that he wouldn’t sned his “savior” until millenia after the human race had begun? furthermore, if god loves everyone and sin is inevitable, what basis do you have for your argument? let’s put it this way, would you rather a sinful, hateful christian go to heaven or an upstanding member of the community hwo was a genuinely nice person (and was gay)?</p>
<p>The whole point is that Church should not have the governmental powers to ban gay couples from having “civil unions” or whatever you would like to call it. </p>
<p>“We are a government under God.”
This statement represents your opinion, correct? But it is unreasonable to govern a country “not” affliated with religion with a religion. No government actions should be based on a certain religion in a country where religion should be serperate from state. It surprises me how long it is taking our government to start truly following our constitution.</p>