BlueStar said:I'm an athiest.Saken said:French are Catholics.
Therefore they believe in Adam and Little Joey the Choirboy, not Adam and Steve.
FYP
BlueStar said:I'm an athiest.Saken said:French are Catholics.
Therefore they believe in Adam and Little Joey the Choirboy, not Adam and Steve.
Saken said:BlueStar said:I'm an athiest.Saken said:French are Catholics.
Therefore they believe in Adam and Little Joey the Choirboy, not Adam and Steve.
FYP
ioukta said:what's the problem with NOT giving them the right to perform a ceremony that has religious roots and was since the begining of times MEANT for a man and a woman ONLY? Just to let you know, I looked up the rules on marriage and found nothing that says it's strictly between a man and a woman.
They survived all this time without it no? why push their views on people? In France we have the PACS which gives gay couples the same financial benefits of married couples. Still not happy?
I understand they want the "right" to get married so that they can do "everything" like heterosexuals, but getting married is not a right, it is and always was a religious ceremony that with time came with financial benefits. Marriage is not social, it's religious. Wrong! Marriage is contract with the state, religious is only a middle man
Why not have a little respect for the union that brought them to this world? the heterosexual union? Again who made that a rule?
They should just get over it IMO
BTW no one is BORN gay, until you find a chemical or genetical proof you CANNOT CLAIM you were born that way, I know of many who are former homosexuals. Google it you'll see. Several in my church too. There is evidence that people are born gay and there is evidence of people "converting" to be heterosexuals, but there is also evidence stating that those same people have depression as well often secretly still engage in homosexual behavior.
This is what nu.nl (source) also said.Lightning said:In meerdere landen in de Europese Unie is een homohuwelijk wel mogelijk, waaronder Nederland, België, Spanje, Portugal en Zweden.granville said:I changed the topic title to be a little less offensive in terms of slang.
I'm not gay, but as a supported of gay rights, this is a sad day for human freedom. Another little bit of that freedom chipped away...
It's kind of interesting though. As a small child i visited France. That was my first encounter with homosexual people. At the time, i didn't understand why two women would be kissing one another. It seemed much more open (at least at the time) and public than it tends to be over here in the US. I too am surprised about this restriction. I always thought Europe was more open minded and accepting about homosexuality in general (some countries at least, France included).
Thanks for the title change, didn´t think of it.
Holland is very open minded!
Would you please, please say 'The Netherlands' next time? Holland is the name for the provinces Noord-Holland and South-Holland.
QUOTE
If you are religious, then yes, it is strictly between a man and a woman. Those were the original rules from the very beginning of written history. In fact, Homosexuality has existed since the beginning of written history as well. Homosexuals were always persecuted as lesser beings, and they aren't. Its wrong to persecute someone for being gay. However in my views, its also wrong to push yourself into an area which was always reserved for union between a man, and a woman, and the God (or ancestors, or whatever) you worship. Like I said what society has now twisted Marriage into is wrong. Marriage should not hold any sway in society, but a document from the State you live in should.A Gay Little Catboy said:ioukta said:what's the problem with NOT giving them the right to perform a ceremony that has religious roots and was since the begining of times MEANT for a man and a woman ONLY? Just to let you know, I looked up the rules on marriage and found nothing that says it's strictly between a man and a woman.
A Gay Little Catboy said:ioukta said:what's the problem with NOT giving them the right to perform a ceremony that has religious roots and was since the begining of times MEANT for a man and a woman ONLY? Just to let you know, I looked up the rules on marriage and found nothing that says it's strictly between a man and a woman. Rules? you mean you looked in the Bible? the FIRST book that mentioned marriage? You need to be reminded of the what the word ROOTS mean?
They survived all this time without it no? why push their views on people? In France we have the PACS which gives gay couples the same financial benefits of married couples. Still not happy?
I understand they want the "right" to get married so that they can do "everything" like heterosexuals, but getting married is not a right, it is and always was a religious ceremony that with time came with financial benefits. Marriage is not social, it's religious. Wrong! Marriage is contract with the state, religious is only a middle man It did not start out that way buddy, states didn't exist in ancient times, so no that's not what marriage started out as
Why not have a little respect for the union that brought them to this world? the heterosexual union? Again who made that a rule?
yeah i know respect is not a rule anywhere, you know that don't you? but you ARE AWARE people are born out of a NON HOMOEXUAL union right?why you had to comment on that I'll never get lol
They should just get over it IMO
BTW no one is BORN gay, until you find a chemical or genetical proof you CANNOT CLAIM you were born that way, I know of many who are former homosexuals. Google it you'll see. Several in my church too. There is evidence that people are born gay and there is evidence of people "converting" to be heterosexuals, but there is also evidence stating that those same people have depression as well often secretly still engage in homosexual behavior. When you can bring me scientific evidence and a homexexual gene, then I'll believe that
ioukta said:A Gay Little Catboy said:There is no definitive prof, but there are links, such as when twins are born and one is gay there is 75% chance of the other twin being gay as well it's found that the more children a mother has the higher chance of one being gay, I find that interesting if genetics have nothing to do with it. Now to add to that, there has been found several animals in nature do partake in homosexual actives, these animals include, but not limited to, Dauphins, cats, lions, dogs, ducks, whales, monkeys, and deers.ioukta said:what's the problem with NOT giving them the right to perform a ceremony that has religious roots and was since the begining of times MEANT for a man and a woman ONLY? Just to let you know, I looked up the rules on marriage and found nothing that says it's strictly between a man and a woman. Rules? you mean you looked in the Bible? the FIRST book that mentioned marriage? You need to be reminded of the what the word ROOTS mean? Big misunderstanding, settled this in a PM.
I understand they want the "right" to get married so that they can do "everything" like heterosexuals, but getting married is not a right, it is and always was a religious ceremony that with time came with financial benefits. Marriage is not social, it's religious. Wrong! Marriage is contract with the state, religious is only a middle man It did not start out that way buddy, states didn't exist in ancient times, so no that's not what marriage started out as It still changed and no the church didn't have anything to do with marriage in the beginning. The roots of marriage started long before the Church.
Why not have a little respect for the union that brought them to this world? the heterosexual union? Again who made that a rule?
yeah i know respect is not a rule anywhere, you know that don't you? but you ARE AWARE people are born out of a NON HOMOEXUAL union right?why you had to comment on that I'll never get lol Why did I comment on that because I want to know who made the rules? But what about heterosexuals that don't want kids?
BTW no one is BORN gay, until you find a chemical or genetical proof you CANNOT CLAIM you were born that way, I know of many who are former homosexuals. Google it you'll see. Several in my church too. There is evidence that people are born gay and there is evidence of people "converting" to be heterosexuals, but there is also evidence stating that those same people have depression as well often secretly still engage in homosexual behavior. When you can bring me scientific evidence and a homexexual gene, then I'll believe that
ioukta said:I said it was the first book that instituted marriage, you're going on about religion, whatever man you're laughable lol Possibly I read your comment wrong, sorry if did
QUOTE(Leviticus 18:22) said:You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.
QUOTE(Genesis 19:22-25)[...]22
"Hurry, escape there! I cannot do anything until you arrive there." That is why the town is called Zoar.
23
The sun was just rising over the earth as Lot arrived in Zoar;
24
at the same time the LORD rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah (from the LORD out of heaven).
25
6 He overthrew those cities and the whole Plain, together with the inhabitants of the cities and the produce of the soil.
I totally agree.ioukta said:how i see it atheists "borrowed" marriage and made it their own introducing it as a state affair. But that's not how it started out. that's my only point, how it STARTED. adding things that don't contradict it is ok like adding financial benefits, and a social status, no problem with that, but contradiction like the people involved, that's where we draw the line. In the end que sera sera, but i better not hear no complaining in the streets when not everybody recognizes the union lol if it passes we have a right to our own opinion which is that they are not really married lol
We'll see how far it all goes...
A Gay Little Catboy said:ioukta said:Are you trying to tell me that marriage was invented by the State? I hope not. (yeah i'm trying to use simple words here like invented) Marriage can be traced back long before written languages. Which means it pre-dates must fully established religions.
Marriage began with the first humans. That's recorded. It predates any other religions fabricated by humans, though, yes.
It was "invented" by religious folx and then twisted by the state. It was not invented by the church if it predates the churches
True, it wasn't invented by the churches.
Let's see if you get that : If harry potter first appeared in J K Rowling books, and if anyone writes AFTER that a book using the Character Harry Potter and is not JK Rowling, and writes it with no permission and makes him do things that are contrary to what the original Harry potter would do then that 2nd Harry potter is a fake now wouldn't you say?
So if the Bible is the first to mention marriage, then anything that is contrary to what the original stated is fake. The Bible is not the first to mention marriage so that argument is invalid It mentions the first marriage; what other book was first?
U ask why if you're sinning didn't God smite you down, well did you see Him smite anyone down lately? does that mean that murder lying or stealing is not a sin BECAUSE He didn't smite anyone down? you have a weird logic lol To be correct I do see how God smites them. Interestingly enough I find that those who suffer with what they are done is what I would conciser smiting. If something bad happens to someone, that doesn't mean it's God that causes it.
You say God or Jesus target a few to hate? where did you see my God hates anyone? Several versus in the Bible really He doesn't hate the person, only their conduct.
I'm just going to say, that the bible wasn't the first work of literature to mention marriage. Gilgamesh is MUCH, MUCH older than the bible and it mentions marriage.ProtoKun7 said:A Gay Little Catboy said:ioukta said:Are you trying to tell me that marriage was invented by the State? I hope not. (yeah i'm trying to use simple words here like invented) Marriage can be traced back long before written languages. Which means it pre-dates must fully established religions.
Marriage began with the first humans. That's recorded. It predates any other religions fabricated by humans, though, yes.
It was "invented" by religious folx and then twisted by the state. It was not invented by the church if it predates the churches
True, it wasn't invented by the churches.
Let's see if you get that : If harry potter first appeared in J K Rowling books, and if anyone writes AFTER that a book using the Character Harry Potter and is not JK Rowling, and writes it with no permission and makes him do things that are contrary to what the original Harry potter would do then that 2nd Harry potter is a fake now wouldn't you say?
So if the Bible is the first to mention marriage, then anything that is contrary to what the original stated is fake. The Bible is not the first to mention marriage so that argument is invalid It mentions the first marriage; what other book was first?
U ask why if you're sinning didn't God smite you down, well did you see Him smite anyone down lately? does that mean that murder lying or stealing is not a sin BECAUSE He didn't smite anyone down? you have a weird logic lol To be correct I do see how God smites them. Interestingly enough I find that those who suffer with what they are done is what I would conciser smiting. If something bad happens to someone, that doesn't mean it's God that causes it.
You say God or Jesus target a few to hate? where did you see my God hates anyone? Several versus in the Bible really He doesn't hate the person, only their conduct.