What are the checks on those that are "room-mates", that are men(or women)?
Times are tough, and some wouldn't care to be known as homosexuals, if they could bet a break on taxes.
I wouldn't protest to such a law here,for those gay friends or associates I have though.

 

I never said you couldn't be both Catholic and pro-choice, I said there is a conflict of interests. Many people pick and choose what they want from their religion, and most don't live up to the ideals, but there is what the church proposes, and the 'rules' it makes, and there is individual personal belief and action. If you are Catholic/Christian, one accepts that we all sin and try to better ourselves and resist the temptation to sin in the future and try to live life righteously and by example- and not by judging others.

One can have committed murder and still be Catholic, but if he/she truly believes in the message of the church, they will repent for the sin of murder, and move forward in their lives. If you believe in your churches interpretation and stance on the Bible, you are obligated not to condone the behaviors that violate its moral standing, though you are encouraged to accept and welcome your fellow sinners, and even enemies to your table in hopes of coming to an understanding.

 

To play devil's advocate, should we not outwardly display what is important to us? I have no problem with say a homosexual couple openly displaying their pride at being homosexual, so long as it does not harm or impede me. Likewise, religious people are passionate about their religion, so they should feel free to express it in the same passive and non-harmful manner.

 

We fear what we don't understand, hate what we can't conquer, I guess that's just the theory of man.

 

I agree. Once we all get comfy with one another, many problems will be solved. However, people seem to form cliques. It would be naive to assume it is a one way street though. Little Italy, Chinatown, White-Christian neighborhoods, predominantly black neighborhoods, or homosexual neighborhoods (Boystown in Chicago comes to mind) - these are all examples of groups finding common cause and walling themselves off as opposed to integrating. We all need to stop self-segregating and I think we could all get alot more comfy with one another.

 

expressing one's religious belief can rarely be done passively

 

As I said earlier....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitey44
Maybe they wouldn't scare the churches as much if they just called them gay civil unions instead of gay marriages?

It's a fucking name. Jesus Christ, why don't they act like 2 year olds?!
If it looks like a pickle, smells like a pickle, and tastes like a pickle- why hell, I think it just may be a pickle!

 

I noted that expressing ones non-religious beliefs is rarely passive, at least in here.

For a catholic to wear a cross, a jew a star or a moslem a star and cresent, are hardly intrusive.

 

It's especially strange coming from Christians....since Jesus conspicuously made no mention of gays at all. He did, however, talk quite a bit about tolerance. To no avail, apparently.

 

I might have believed you, if I had ever seen a school child wearing a widely recognized atheist symbol around her neck.

 

Would your reasoning expand to include wearing gang colors in schools?

 

Nothing mysterious about it.

I suspect it is because they are different.
And people tend to be prejudice and sometimes scared of anything that is different.

Or can you offer a better reason?

JB

 

My point was that the Catholic Church seems much more inclined to drum pro-choice people out of the church, even to the extent of telling other people not to vote for them, than they are in the case of other sins. Why the double standard? Why is abortion the trump card?

 

A 'gang' is just a structure for a collection of people who belong, so the term is not negative in itself. If one gang wears colors, openly promotes violence, and specifies that violence should be committed when another gangs colors are worn, and the opposing stance is the same, then no, it should not be tolerated.

But lets say both 'gangs' are legitimate and propose to be productive rather than harmful to society, yet one of it's misguided members insists on harming someone from the other gang, for whatever reason, and this does not represent the will and intentions of his organization - then that member is acting alone, and should be reprimanded by both the public institution, and his actions condemned by the gang.

 

You are right, passive is an inappropriate choice of words. People should be active in their beliefs, especially if they are passionate about them, but should not damage someone who does not share them emotionally or physically through over-zealous expression of them.

 

Proposition 8 signals a sad episode for California. It's a total abuse of the initiative process, and it's a victory for hatred, religious fanaticism, ignorance and stupidity, and xenophobia. It's everything we DON'T need right now. And it's also shocking that so many black people voted for it - they voted overwhelmingly for Obama because they're painfully aware of the evils of discrimination, but then they go and hoist discrimination on another group! We're gonna need the Supreme Court to give the nation a lesson on the 1st and 14th Amendments!

 

Well, first of all I suspect this is speculation based upon media coverage and not hard facts. I could be wrong though, maybe you do know how many people, and for what, were excommunicated last year, and are privy to all of the information and details relating to each case. Second, to the Church life is extremely sacred, and their identification of life and when it comes into being is different than others might be. Should they not stand by their stance and belief just as the opposing side stands by theirs? It is the manner in which this is done that I often take issue with, but sometimes the body betrays the brain and I know the Church as an institution does not propose violence or hatred as a solution.

 

I strongly agree that tolerance is one of the teachings that unfortunately is left to the wayside by many.

I'd also like to say though that often the loudest and most publicly visible people are caricatures that easily fit into a 30sec TV spot and are presented as though they represent a group. I had a roommate that HATED when people assumed Jesse Jackson was speaking for him because he was black.

I think many Christians live by example and are tolerant kind people that greatly benefit society at large, just as many (insert well-intentioned group, religious, social or otherwise here) do.

Please don't make the mistake of saying that Jesus taught to no avail. Christians give more and do more in the way of charity in this county than any other group, and when they truly follow Christ, only good comes from it, so don't be so quick to let the few rotten apples spoil the bunch in your mind.

 

It's not just religion, I think you'll find that in science, the arsehole is biologically the wrong place to put the male penis. It's not a reproductive organ at all. It's where waste comes out.

Side note: please don't confuse me for some kind of Christian backwards minded nut job. My only true beliefs are logic and reason.