ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Brannon Braga calls lack of gay Star Trek characters 'a shame'

willowtree

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1137

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 12:31 pm

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:22 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 11:47 am

>

>the right of two gay people to get married.... I find those who would deny two people that right, intolerant.

>can you please explain to me how religious people are being attacked?
Question: Why should two gay people want to get married?  What is the function of marriage?  (I actually answered this before.)  Oh... and remember that a "right" is irrespective of government or location.

I'm curious... why isn't it considered "intolerant" of gays demanding a church to marry them when the church believes otherwise?  Or demanding people to agree with them when they don't?

 

You can't see religious people being attacked?  Not even here with the name calling?  WOW!!!!  How about Obamacare demanding religious institutions to fund abortion?  How about all the times the Obama administration talks badly about Christianity?  How about the arresting of people for praying in public?  How about a lawsuit against Arlene's Flowers and Gifts for exercising their religious convictions in not participating in a gay wedding.  Or a baker in Denver who didn't want to particpate by selling a wedding cake to support a gay wedding?  And another one in Oregon.... I could go on and on and on.... and you can find many if you want searching for them.  So much for the freedom of religion.

 

Could you imagine me going into a Muslim butcher shop and demand bacon and then call them "intolerant" for refusing to fill my request?  Or go into a Muslim mosque and demand that they perform a Christian event or let a woman preacher teach?  Or go to a Pagan or Wiccan festival and demand that they accomodate something that is an afront to their beliefs?


Why did YOU get married? What was the function of the marriage for YOU? I imagine that gay people want to get married for the same reason straight people want to get married...because they are in love.  


Gay peole aren't demanding that churches marry them. They just want to get married. (you don't need a church to be married) a church has every right to turn away a gay couple. But they can still have a ceremony and have a non denominational person preside. That's actually what I did (in Vegas which was so much fun)


it's amazing to me how you can't see that you are demanding your religious beliefs to override the freedom and rights of others. It's often the case that religious people believe that their religious beliefs should be catered to, but they often forget that there is more than one religion, more than one point of view.

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46304

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 12:42 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:31 pm

>Why did YOU get married? What was the function of the marriage for YOU? I imagine that gay people want to get married for the same reason straight people want to get married...because they are in love.
You mean to have children?  As I said before, science proves that two people of the same gender cannot do this.  I can love someone and still not get married to them.  Marriage is much more than just two people living together.  (And that's not even discussing that God defined marriage.)


I do think it's interesting that so many (not all) gay people wanting to have a wedding in a church when they know that God's definition is specifically defined as one man and one woman.

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46304

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 12:53 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:31 pm

>Gay peole aren't demanding that churches marry them. They just want to get married. (you don't need a church to be married) a church has every right to turn away a gay couple. But they can still have a ceremony and have a non denominational person preside. That's actually what I did (in Vegas which was so much fun)
Actually, some are.  Please do a little research.  There was even a proposed law in Hutchinson, Kansas that would require churches do it (which is intersting since the Kansas Constitution outlaws it.)  Thankfully it didn't pass, but supporters of the bill promised that it would happen in time.

willowtree

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1137

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 12:57 pm

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:42 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:31 pm

>

>Why did YOU get married? What was the function of the marriage for YOU? I imagine that gay people want to get married for the same reason straight people want to get married...because they are in love.
You mean to have children?  As I said before, science proves that two people of the same gender cannot do this.  I can love someone and still not get married to them.  Marriage is much more than just two people living together.  (And that's not even discussing that God defined marriage.)

I do think it's interesting that so many (not all) gay people wanting to have a wedding in a church when they know that God's definition is specifically defined as one man and one woman.


So you're saying that the function of marriage is to have children, two people of the same sex can't get married because they can't biologically have children.


there's more to marriage than having children. There are straight couples who can't conceive, there are straight couples who choose not to have children, and there are straight couples who chose to adopt. By your definition they should not be allowed to get married either.

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46304

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 12:58 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:31 pm

>it's amazing to me how you can't see that you are demanding your religious beliefs to override the freedom and rights of others. It's often the case that religious people believe that their religious beliefs should be catered to, but they often forget that there is more than one religion, more than one point of view.
I'm well aware of your view - you've stated it very clearly.  But you don't seem to understand that I'm not demanding that my views "override the freedom and rights of others."  I only have a different view that they're trying to override by calling me "intolerant", etc.  Once they start calling names and making it an emotional argument, it's no longer about using logic.


I have some views that are conflicting with other people's views.  That's okay, as long as we both understand that we cannot force the other to accept / agree with the other's view.  I can believe in religion X (or non-religion) all I want, and nobody else has the right to force me to believe the other way.  As soon as anyone has the "right" (for lack of a better word) to force this, then all of our rights are gone.

Catholic.Fan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 76

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 12:59 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 10:51 am

>

>In the christian religion it's ok to sodomize a boy too. The church tends to look the other way when there are cases of priests molesting boys.

>


 


You're way out of line on this comment.  It might not do much, but this one has been reported.

willowtree

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1137

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 1:03 pm

Quote: Catholic.Fan @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:59 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 10:51 am

>

>

>In the christian religion it's ok to sodomize a boy too. The church tends to look the other way when there are cases of priests molesting boys.

>

You're way out of line on this comment.  It might not do much, but this one has been reported.


can't face a fact of your own religion? or do you deny that this happens?

willowtree

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1137

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 1:04 pm

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:58 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:31 pm

>

>it's amazing to me how you can't see that you are demanding your religious beliefs to override the freedom and rights of others. It's often the case that religious people believe that their religious beliefs should be catered to, but they often forget that there is more than one religion, more than one point of view.
I'm well aware of your view - you've stated it very clearly.  But you don't seem to understand that I'm not demanding that my views "override the freedom and rights of others."  I only have a different view that they're trying to override by calling me "intolerant", etc.  Once they start calling names and making it an emotional argument, it's no longer about using logic.

I have some views that are conflicting with other people's views.  That's okay, as long as we both understand that we cannot force the other to accept / agree with the other's view.  I can believe in religion X (or non-religion) all I want, and nobody else has the right to force me to believe the other way.  As soon as anyone has the "right" (for lack of a better word) to force this, then all of our rights are gone.


if your view is that two people who love each other can't get married simply because they're the same gender, that IS intollerant. That is denying people basic rights. Why can't you see that?

chator56

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 498

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 1:04 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 17 2013, 11:56 am

Quote: chator56 @ Jul. 17 2013, 11:43 am

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 17 2013, 9:59 am

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Jul. 17 2013, 9:22 am

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 17 2013, 9:19 am

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Jul. 17 2013, 8:36 am

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 17 2013, 5:40 am

>

>

>

>

>

>

>and people ARE born gay, that is a fact. Just as you were born straight
And that is your opinion - which you're free to have.  And many other people have the opposite view.

no, it's not an opinion. It's a fact. Just ask a homosexual person

If you read some of my posts a few pages back, you'd know that I have.  Not all LGBT say they're born that way ... some say they made a choice.

See... I think that facts are based on irrefutable evidence.  Asking someone for an opinion is not irrefutable evidence.

the sexual attraction to a person of the same gender is something a person is borth with. Whether or not they act on those feelings is a choice. I am a straight woman. I can choose to engage in sex acts with another woman. I can even live my life doing that, and marry her and live the rest of our lives together. That is a choice, but the feelings I have are not a choice. Just as a gay person can choose to live their lives as if they were straight, but they will always be gay on the inside

Catholic Fan is right on this. There is no evidence gays are "born that way". No gay gene has been discovered. There is no evidence that gender specific sexual attraction is determined at birth or pre-birth. However, Freud, who incidentally discovered, or revealed infantile sexuality to the world (prior to it was believed infants and children are not sexual, that sexuality appears at puberty) also discovered that adult sexuality is determined during childhood stages of development. He believed all humans were bisexual by nature and that gender specific attraction depended on successful interaction, progression, and transference of sexual feelings from parents.

As someone with a degree in psychology I can tell you that very many of Freud's notions are not considered valid


This is not news to me. Neither does it invalidate Freud. In every field you have professionals who disagree with each other, you have conflicting theories.

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46304

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 1:05 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:57 pm

>So you're saying that the function of marriage is to have children, two people of the same sex can't get married because they can't biologically have children.

>there's more to marriage than having children. There are straight couples who can't conceive, there are straight couples who choose not to have children, and there are straight couples who chose to adopt. By your definition they should not be allowed to get married either.
Not at all.. but the FUNCTION of marriage is propogation and has been that way for thousands of years.  To me, there is one and only one thing I can do inside of marriage that I can't ethically/morally do outside of marriage.  That's why I don't see any difference between LGBT and straight couple "living together."  There are logical reasons why God set up rules - even if we don't always understand them.  I'm not Jewish, but I love listening to Rabbi Daniel Lapin who can go through and use logic to explain the WHY (my favorite question) of God's laws.


Outside of marriage, I can legally and ethically do anything else with anyone else I choose.  I can set up a contract for survivorship to a friend or organization.  I can live with someone.

crellmoset

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 116

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 1:08 pm

Quote: Catholic.Fan @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:59 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 10:51 am

>

>

>In the christian religion it's ok to sodomize a boy too. The church tends to look the other way when there are cases of priests molesting boys.

>

 

You're way out of line on this comment.  It might not do much, but this one has been reported.


 


Reported for simply stating what is actually happening. If I point out that the priests of monotheistic religions have lied blatantly about condoms in HIV ravaged parts of the world, even going so far as to tell their victims that condoms are laced with HIV, will that get reported as well?


Ethics are arbitrary.

willowtree

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1137

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 1:09 pm

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Jul. 18 2013, 1:05 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:57 pm

>

>So you're saying that the function of marriage is to have children, two people of the same sex can't get married because they can't biologically have children.

>there's more to marriage than having children. There are straight couples who can't conceive, there are straight couples who choose not to have children, and there are straight couples who chose to adopt. By your definition they should not be allowed to get married either.
Not at all.. but the FUNCTION of marriage is propogation and has been that way for thousands of years.  To me, there is one and only one thing I can do inside of marriage that I can't ethically/morally do outside of marriage.  That's why I don't see any difference between LGBT and straight couple "living together."  There are logical reasons why God set up rules - even if we don't always understand them.  I'm not Jewish, but I love listening to Rabbi Daniel Lapin who can go through and use logic to explain the WHY (my favorite question) of God's laws.

Outside of marriage, I can legally and ethically do anything else with anyone else I choose.  I can set up a contract for survivorship to a friend or organization.  I can live with someone.


man set up those rules. If it was a rule of a god that you can't have kids until you're married then he/she would have made it impossible to do so until marriage. People can biologically have kids without being married. The restriction on being married first is a man made one.


and if as you say the function of marriage is reproduction then following that logic infertile people or people who don't want kids should not be allowed to get married

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46304

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 1:09 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 1:04 pm

>if your view is that two people who love each other can't get married simply because they're the same gender, that IS intollerant. That is denying people basic rights. Why can't you see that?
You have failed to explain why going against nature is a right.


Reversing this... why can't you can't see denying people basic religious rights are "intolerant."


Why is it that believe in the "freedom of religion" is now considered "intolerant"?

FleetAdmiral_BamBam

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46304

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 1:11 pm

Quote: Catholic.Fan @ Jul. 18 2013, 12:59 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 10:51 am

>

>

>In the christian religion it's ok to sodomize a boy too. The church tends to look the other way when there are cases of priests molesting boys.

>

 

You're way out of line on this comment.  It might not do much, but this one has been reported.

She's partially correct in this instance.  Many people in the some churches looked the other way when this happened in the past.  That doesn't mean it was "ok" as she said, but sometimes it wasn't dealt with as it should have been.

willowtree

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1137

Report this Jul. 18 2013, 1:13 pm

Quote: FleetAdmiral_BamBam @ Jul. 18 2013, 1:09 pm

Quote: willowtree @ Jul. 18 2013, 1:04 pm

>

>if your view is that two people who love each other can't get married simply because they're the same gender, that IS intollerant. That is denying people basic rights. Why can't you see that?
You have failed to explain why going against nature is a right.

Reversing this... why can't you can't see denying people basic religious rights are "intolerant."

Why is it that believe in the "freedom of religion" is now considered "intolerant"?


it is a right for two people who love each other to get married.


if you believe they are going against nature because they can't biologicaly produce a child, then by tha same logic  you should also deny the right of marriage to infertile people.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum