Latest Church 'statement' on gay marriage ....

[_The Nehor]

Uhhhh.....GoodK. My point was that you can't be certain you're right. Go ahead and think I'm wrong.

Yet you can be certain. Interesting.

Previous societies have accepted homosexuality as acceptable (for a time) and then after that experiment it was villified again.

I don't know what "previous societies" you are talking about. Sodom and Gomorah?

Why do you think they discarded it so often after trying to allow it openly?

I don't think "they discarded it so often" so you'll have to be a little more specific.
Frankly, I think you are making this up like you made up that "sexual libertine socities" fail after a few generations.

I can be certain if I received divine confirmation. I admit this doesn't help your certainty at all. You can say I'm deluded or lying. I'm just curious how you can claim certainty.

Do a little reading on the history of homosexuality and then we can discuss it. All I'm saying is that it comes into societies and then goes away.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

No, he said whoredoms were an abomination. That and the way many of the men in Jerusalem treated their wives was also an abomination. That pesky text keeps getting in the way of random accusations.

Here's that "pesky text" in Jacob 2 (bold mine for emphasis):

22 And now I make an end of speaking unto you concerning this pride. And were it not that I must speak unto you concerning a grosser crime, my heart would rejoice exceedingly because of you.

23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.

24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.

26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.

27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;

28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.

29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.

30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.

31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.

32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.

33 For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.

34 And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.

35 Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend up to God against you. And because of the strictness of the word of God, which cometh down against you, many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds.

Call it "whoredom" or "abomination" or whatever, it's clear from this that God, at that time, had a real beef with polygamy. All that had changed by 1843, however, when God was sending an angel to smite off Joseph's head if he DIDN'T enter polygamy (on a serial basis and with already married women, to boot).

[_GoodK]

Yet you can be certain. Interesting.

I can be certain if I received divine confirmation. I admit this doesn't help your certainty at all.

It doesn't help your certainty either. See, you only believe you had divine confirmation. You only believe that an invisible being was speaking to you. In all honesty, I don't know how this could not be considered demonstrative of mental illness.

I'm just curious how you can claim certainty.

You are still curious? I already told you how easy it is to be certain homosexuality is not immoral.

Do a little reading on the history of homosexuality and then we can discuss it.

OMFG. Are you kidding me? Coming from this guy:

I have no objective way to present studies showing that sexual immorality (including homosexuality) are detrimental to society and you know this. I still think it is fairly easy to reach that conclusion just by living in society.

I need to just read up a little more. Indulge me Nehor, what should I read, exactly?

I think I am clearly more informed than you are when it comes to history - or anything that doesn't involve computer games, being a virgin, obscure sci-fi fantasy novels, or free porn sites.

All I'm saying is that it comes into societies and then goes away.

All I'm saying is that you are full of crap when you say this, and apparently even you know it:

I have no objective way to present studies showing that sexual immorality (including homosexuality) are detrimental to society and you know this. I still think it is fairly easy to reach that conclusion just by living in society.

[_The Nehor]

Do you disagree with the quotation? Is there an objective method of showing that something is detrimental to society?

If so, what is it?

[_GoodK]

Do you disagree with the quotation? Is there an objective method of showing that something is detrimental to society?

If so, what is it?

You are kidding, right?



And no, I don't disagree with the quotation, in principle.

I agree - I don't think you can show it is detrimental to society, but not because it is impossible to show that anything is detrimental to society.

It's because what you are saying is completely false and is likely based on nothing but dogma and homophobia.

[_The Nehor]

Do you disagree with the quotation? Is there an objective method of showing that something is detrimental to society?

If so, what is it?

You are kidding, right?



And no, I don't disagree with the quotation, in principle.

I agree - I don't think you can show it is detrimental to society, but not because it is impossible to show that anything is detrimental to society.

It's because what you are saying is completely false and is likely based on nothing but dogma and homophobia.

So showing that identifying as homosexual increases your chances of committing suicide and getting STDs is all you need? Say the word and I'll show this. This is easy!!!!

[_GoodK]

So showing that identifying as homosexual increases your chances of committing suicide and getting STDs is all you need? Say the word and I'll show this. This is easy!!!!

I wouldn't call getting an STD the demise of society, but just for the heck of it, go ahead and do it then. At least we'll have something to actually talk about.

[_Jason Bourne]

Legalizing same-sex marriage will affect a wide spectrum of government activities and policies. Once a state government declares that same-sex unions are a civil right, those governments almost certainly will enforce a wide variety of other policies intended to ensure that there is no discrimination against same-sex couples.

Yes, heaven forbid we take away a religious person's right to discriminate against homosexuals!

Morons...

Reading this kind of crap does nothing to make me sympathize with "religious freedom" and just makes me want to tell them where to shove their idiotic, unsupportable beliefs.

I don't see any attempt to discriminate here. The statement said the Church was not attempting to deny any basic right currently available under law. In areas of employment, health care and do on the Church makes no attempt to deny rights. In fact it seems to me that they do not oppose domestic partnership arrangements. They just don't want top cross the line to marriage. There are many fair reasons in the statement for their position and considering the doctrine of the Church about this there are no surprises. The problem with the quote you parse is they go on to explain for example that school curriculum would have to be modified in such a way to promote or remain neutral at least about what marriage is and should be. Also there is valid concern that same sex marriage recognition could be forced on Church's that oppose such marriages.

There are a lot of huge issues with this and it is not cut and dry.

[_The Nehor]

So showing that identifying as homosexual increases your chances of committing suicide and getting STDs is all you need? Say the word and I'll show this. This is easy!!!!

I wouldn't call getting an STD the demise of society, but just for the heck of it, go ahead and do it then. At least we'll have something to actually talk about.

Oxford University's International Journal of Epidemiology reports: "Life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality continues, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 will not reach their 65th birthday."

"The top six U.S. male serial killers were all gay:

• Donald Harvey claimed 37 victims in Kentucky;

• John Wayne Gacy raped and killed 33 boys in Chicago, burying them under his house and in his yard;

• Patrick Kearney accounted for 32, cutting his victims into small pieces after sex and leaving them in trash bags along the Los Angeles freeways;

• Bruce Davis molested and killed 27 young men and boys in Illinois;

• A gay sex-murder-torture ring (Corll-Henley-Brooks) sent 27 Texas men and boys to their grave; and

• Juan Corona was convicted of murdering 25 migrant workers (he "made love" with their corpses).

Lesbian Aileen Wuornos laid claim in 1992 to "worst female killer" with at least 7 middle-aged male victims. She single-handedly topped the lesbian nurse team of Catherine Wood and Gwen Graham, who had killed 6 convalescent patients in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

The association between serial murder and homosexuality isn’t recent. Two gays compete for the spot of "world’s worst murderer." During the Nazi reign of terror, Auschwitz executioner Ludwig Tiene strangled, crushed, and gnawed boys and young men to death while he raped them. Though his grand total is uncertain, he often murdered as many as 100 a day. Gilles de Rais (Bluebeard) brutally destroyed the lives of 800 boys. Each lad was lured to his home, bathed and fed. Just as the poor boy thought "this is my lucky day," he was raped, then killed by being ripped or cut apart and either burned or eaten.
A study of 518 sexually-tinged mass murders in the U.S. from 1966 to 1983 determined that 350 (68%) of the victims were killed by those who practiced homosexuality and that 19 (44%) of the 43 murderers were bisexuals or homosexuals."

STD rate in the homosexual community is very high. It appears that at least 75 percent of homosexual men are currently carrying at least one pathogen, although each one isn’t necessarily sick or infecting others. Seventy-five percent also have a history of at least one STD, and it appears that at least 40 percent get sick in a given year. This STD rate is remarkable when compared with even the most promiscuous segment of the general population. Among those in the general population who had more than 21 partners in their lifetime, 40 percent report any infection in their life. Overall, the general population has a 17 percent lifetime STD rate.


Is that enough to start? Homosexuals are more likely to kill, die by violence, contract deadly diseases, and die young.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I don't see any attempt to discriminate here. The statement said the Church was not attempting to deny any basic right currently available under law.

The right to marry was deemed a fundamental consitutional right long ago, and, of course, equal protection under the law has been around even longer.

The problem with the quote you parse is they go on to explain for example that school curriculum would have to be modified in such a way to promote or remain neutral at least about what marriage is and should be.

Red herring. I don't recall ever being taught in school "what marriage is and should be."

Also there is valid concern that same sex marriage recognition could be forced on Church's that oppose such marriages.

Another red herring. Rest assured the Church can continue to discriminate against gays to its heart's delight. The Church discriminated against blacks long after passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Church continues to discriminate against women to this day. Don't worry, the Church's various 'isms' are safe and sound.