alohabear wrote:Eagle wrote:I have my values and belief system. You have yours. I present my beliefs and values. I don’t try to push my belief system on you.
See, Eagle, that's the problem. You DO push your belief systems on others. Maybe not you specifically on this forum, but so many people who think the same way you do try to push their beliefs on the entire nation. A. They demand that creationism be taught in our public schools to our children. B. They push for "personhood" amendments that would not only outlaw abortion, but also most forms of birth control, as well as potentially criminalize miscarriage. C. They've denied civil rights to gay people because they interpret a 2,000 year old book that they claim is the literal word of god says homosexuality is a sin.
A. I don’t think it is unreasonable to at least allow for the option of teaching of Intelligent Design in schools. Further, punishing children who want to share their ideas or belief system seems a bit intolerant to me. One of my neighbor’s children was suspended for even suggested God existed and there might be an alternative to evolution. The suspension was for 3 days. Please tell me, do you think that is fair?
B. Birth control is one thing. Abortions performed on innocent babies is another. Teen pregnancies are in issue in America. The issue with those who support abortions (and even certain forms of birth control) is this line of thinking clearly promotes consequence-free sex. I mean how does one justify the killings of millions of innocents with the idea “so I do not feel I can support a child (or it’s not convenient) and therefore I’m going to end it’s life.”
C. Funny I was just discussing this in another forum with others. I honestly believe that the fight of same-sex marriage is two separate issues. The first is the actual institution of marriage from a religious standpoint. The second is the term “marriage” as a legal, binding contract registered by the government for the purpose of certain rights.
For many homosexuals, at least at the heart of the matter, the piece of paper with the marriage license is really not the issue. The issue is how our laws prohibit them from enjoying what their money, and taxes pay for. If a homosexual wants to put their partner on their health insurance I say let them do it. They pay for it. If they want them to get their social security when they die let them do it. If one partner dies, they should have the right to specify that their partner gets their inheritance, their pension, their retirement, etc. I believe if one partner is critically injured, the other should have the right to be by their side, not shunned because they aren't “legally family".
I’m not saying that a homosexual relationship should be called a marriage from a Biblical perspective, but the money they pay to these systems is the same. Their contributions to society are the same if they work and pay taxes. While the lifestyle they live is something I don't agree with, I can’t in good conscience say that they should not receive benefits. Possibly we should just give it a different name with the same rights. That way conservatives and liberals will be happy? Marriage and “give it a name”?
alohabear wrote:Yes, Eagle, you are entitled to your beliefs. But I'm getting damned sick of the pseudo-outrage and feigned persecution from conservative Christians claiming their religious rights are being infringed upon.
What feigned persecution are you referring to please? You mean the fact that everyone (including religious institutions) has to contribute to a health care system that promotes/finances abortions even if one doesn’t agree with said procedure?
If at all possible it would be nice to have a discussion without trying to insult me personally. I’d like to attempt to discuss this in a civilized manner.