Titanic with my parents, in a packed movie theater, at the age of 9. The WORST
Titanic with my parents, in a packed movie theater, at the age of 9. The WORST
I dont think they profess to be Christian. “And Jesus can’t save you, life begins when the church ends.”
goats be escaping.
LOL. Yes, christianity = islam. A person ignorant of religion has no basis for saying that religion poisons everything
Gotta love asia.
obviously mel kiper
it’s sad when we see the world as black and white that we assume evil looks so different than we do. look up Hitler’s leisure pictures…
Cool, people will read these and take them completely out of context.
Would it be so wrong to include a link to the speech itself (audio or text) so that we can look at it ourselves? Even if it’s pretty obvious that Obama isn’t racist, we could maybe try and understand why these people think this way instead of making about us vs them?
I think I get why this makes pro gay marriage people so mad. It’s because they can’t stomach the fact that there are normal-looking people doing normal things who believe something so abhorrent to them. You want to believe that it’s the hillbillies ruining this country, or the white fat men of this world in their double breasted suits. No, it’s normal people expressing their religious beliefs in the political and social world in perfectly legitimate ways: protesting and voting. Stop it guys. It’s obvious to all of us that you need a visually unappealing group of “homophobes” to spring-board your hatred towards people against same-sex marriage.
Being part of the machine he criticizes on his music. That’s Kanye for you.
Kanye West - All of the Lights.
So this article is about how some chinese companies made some minor enhancements to American innovations that revolutionized how we lived?
It seems to me that polygamist marriages are very possible in the future. Whether we want to believe it or not, much of our morality originated from Judeo-Christian values. Now that we have shifted to more of a utilitarian (as long as no one is hurting another)worldview, there is no reason under this belief system that consenting adults should be prohibited from this. If people are to have a right to define marriage (and morality as a whole), then as long as we stick to humanism and utilitarianism, no argument seems valid against polygamy.
I think you picked the wrong argument from your atheist grab bag. This one doesn’t really belong in an article on polygamists celebrating gay marriage.
Then both sides should continue hating each other instead of mending until one side completely overtakes and overturns the beliefs and freedoms of the other. The oppressed sure are eager to become the oppressors.
The disaster that is projecting heterosexual relationships as homosexual ones (like this article is doing with timone and pummba, and others) is that while it affirms homosexuality, it damages the legitimacy of intimate (but platonic) relationships between two people of the same sex. Now that men think it’s gay to be close to other men, that bond is completely severed and men and women suffer. There is no need to lift up homosexuality at the expense of something else.
Def a really generous donation, but to say that it’s comparable to a 50,000 person giving 2000 is misleading. Granted the numbers are right but the difference in disposable income after donation is so great that Durant is not hurt at all by that 1 mil, when normal wage earners do take a big hit by donating 2000.
Also, what is this whole issue with name calling? Why havent conservatives and liberals all got together and go like: “Alright guys, people who name call each other and use personal attacks during the course of a debate ought to just have their entire argument nullified because that is unacceptable.” There have been so many applaudable pleadings from entertainers and athletes and the people of the media to stop calling gays “fags” or “dikes,” but then if it’s a Christian, o noooo, we gotta think of all kinds of cruel things to call them. And then you laugh at Christians when they think they are being persecuted. Granted, it’s not physical, but its very emotional and intellectual and that has its own merits. So dude. Leave your assumptions and arrogance out of this. There is nothing more annoying than namecalling and personal attacks.
Ok, and im really getting tired of all that slavery and leviticus stuff being used as this all universal argument for anything. Maybe it’s a good argument to deter people from converting (once again, out of scope), or to explain why you personally dont believe in the Bible, but it’s completely irrelevant in why Christians shouldnt vote based on their beliefs. You could say you shouldnt vote based on your beliefs because your beliefs are stupid, but then again, if a Christian is dead set on voting, why use this argument? Everything is muddled together. We’re all pretty sick and tired of the slavery thing, and the cotton thing, and the adultery thing. Maybe if you actually sat down with a well versed Christian and asked politely, we could give you suitable answers.
Ok, I’m gonna attempt to respond here. 1. I don’t think I’m implying that Christians are being persecuted. I just think adults with a more developed moral thought shouldn’t be picking on kids and also putting their faces on buzzfeed for the world to see. It’s really attention whoring and arguing against straw men. So I do not think George Takei should be commended for this.
2. Second, gay marriage is the majority now, so though your argument is valid, it works for my side. Just wanted to point that out.
3. Bringing up the subject of instituting a law to lift the gay marriage ban is not in the scope of what we’re talking about. Why is it such a difficult task to simply stay on the subject of segregation of church and state and how loosely pro-gay marriage people use it to simply intimidate people of opposing viewpoints? I’m not really interested in entertaining ANY subject on gay marriage besides that one.
For one thing, you’ve probably made at least 5 incorrect assumptions about my beliefs personally, and maybe at least two about the Christian faith in general. Second, its a little frustrating that many people who argue like you do not only speak in unnecessary volume and all caps, but also muddle all of their reasoning and logic together. You’re like rambling and ranting and talking about 5 different things at one time its actually making me dizzy trying to understand everything. It would be nice if you re-read some of my previous comments and then comment.
There are so many annoying things about your two posts I don’t even know where to begin to start.
Also, can we do away with the tactic of subtlety accusing the other person of not being educated? It’s not cute. Didn’t Barrack Obama himself say on the topic of gay marriage that there are educated people on both sides of the issue? What, are you disagreeing with our president?
1. What is your point again?
2. So what are you saying, that we should make a law that prohibits Christians from interfering with gay marriage and to not vote on the issue at all? Though I think that’s really infringing on the rights of a whole people group, as long as pro gay marriage people stop using Separation to intimidate, then fine, im done with this thread. We can argue about the morality of enacting that law.
3. Thank you. I think many people don’t understand that, hence the use of the argument of separation of church and state.
4. Right. thats the point im making. but when I hear the separation argument, it seems like to me that gay marriage voters use this argument as a scare tactic: either to imply that it is some fancy law in our land that states it’s wrong to do this, or to play some silly mind game to try and get Christians to not only separate the worship and their work/school, but to separate their minds from their actions.
5. So if I am right, then don’t you think that George Takei making fun of children with undeveloped CHristian thought is a little irresponsible? If it’s their fair and honest assessment of life and country, then shouldnt honest and fair dialogue proceed, and not this silly straw man banter?
6. I totally agree with you, and not disagreeing with the facts. THis is an issue CHristians and non christians need to struggle through. I am not saying the world is black and white, and I am definitely not saying that there is some verse in the Bible telling all christians to outlaw gay marriage. I for one am mostly apatheic. I just want to make sure that the dialogue between the two sides and balanced, sincere, and courteous. I wholeheartidly hate the tactics some promarriage people use.
And Ross, just wondering…if you agree with my premise, then what are your thoughts on separation of church and state. If you say that the government should not be in the affairs of the church and vise versa, then I would agree with you. But if you say that separation ought to convince CHristians they should rethink or alter their beliefs or not vote at all because their vote is informed by their religion, then explain your own contradiction. And what do you think of your pro-gay marriage friends that think that this is a legitimate arguement that they can use to intimidate and belittle christians?
It’s sad to hear that in a postmodern society such as ours, people still believe there is a definitive definition to words. Strangely enough, postmodernism was used to “debunk” Christianity. Now you are using everything contrary to it to argue against me. When Christians first came onto the scene, they were called atheists. Many polytheistic worshippers exclaimed: “What you don’t have a temple? What you dont make sacrifices? Why is your God invisible?” So during that time, the definition of atheism was Christianity. Hopefully when you suggest to me that I ought to read other things besides the Bible, you are coming at the angle that you yourself have read the bible and constitution. And trust me. I keep God is Not Great close by my nightstand.
Yea but now you’re appealing to your morals vs my morals. For this kind of argument we have to separate: what people are allowed to vote for/do under their constitutional rights.
what the right beliefs a society should subscribe to based on their logic/reasoning/religion. You’re using the second argument to appeal to that my first one is wrong (that’s what i think you’re doing, because I havent talked about the morality of gay marriage at all in this thread) First, I’d like to say that I am completely apathetic about the issue of gay marriage. I’m fully aware that many of my christian peers both are adamantly for/against, but as Christians, we have so many other things to be concerned about (the gospel foremost) What I do take offense on is how sloppy the arguments that are being hurled to curtail and diminish the rights of my christian friends who ARE against gay marriage. (such as what you gave above) I am not here to talk about how gays have suffered at the hands of Christians - because that’s obvious that they have. I’m not really interested in having a moral debate with you, because what I have been trying to say is that one’s morality is not a basis for one’s ability to have rights and to vote, unless of course, they break a law that is already currently in place, which of course I don’t believe many earnest and sincere CHristians are doing. Does that clarify my thinking on the issue? Additionally, was it your parents denominations that forbid the marriage, or law itself. If it’s the former, then you are again not talking about the issue I was bringing up. Lastly, you do have a point that the Church has struggled in many aspects of their morals and ethics, but that doesnt diminish in any way the RIGHT of a christian to still abide by the teachings of their church.
So does that mean a Christian should not be allowed to vote solely on the basis of their beliefs of Christianity?