Brethren gathering BYU force to help with Prop 8 ...

[_rcrocket]

I'm afraid I think the Church is just trying to follow what they see as "scriptural mandates" here. Unfortunately, the once persecuted minority, have now become the persecutors.

Those of us in California who visibly support Prop 8 are being subjected to minor crimes (theft of campaign material and vandalism). It is interesting to see how things are unfolding here.

I support Prop 8 because I believe Christians have the obligation to be stand and be heard on moral issues. Many faiths involved in the coalition, the evangelicals, the Catholics and the Mormons, believe that the Bible roundly condemns homosexual behavior. We believe that the Marriage Cases in California put government imprimatur upon a significantly aberrant behavior.

We also believe that merely speaking out about our views, and advancing legislation on moral issues, does persecute anybody. We believe firmly that licensing as marriage partners homosexual couples will imperil the very notion of a family. We don't really believe that marriage is a civil right unless and until the couple meets the basic objectives of marriage laws, a man and a woman. If and when a man and a woman present themselves to be married, it would be a denial of civil right to forbid it. (Even so, there are limitations on age and consanguinity.)

Now, I admit that so much of this is subjective. Who's to say whose views are better on moral grounds than somebody else's? Why not let license and abandon rule the day? The brethren, whom I support, don't think that is right in God's eyes.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I support Prop 8 because I believe Christians have the obligation to be stand and heard on moral issues. Many faiths involved in the coalition, the evangelicals, the Catholics and the Mormons, believe that the Bible roundly condemns homosexual behavior. We believe that the Marriage Cases in California put government imprimatur upon a significantly aberrant behavior.

And you call yourself a lawyer? We are talking about a change in civil and constitutional law, not a religion's bylaws. Do you favor a theocracy?

[_asbestosman]

How does it feel to have given your mind and your free will over to another person, on false pretenses? How does it feel to have fallen for one of the oldest tricks in the book?

I dunno, but I'll be sure to tell you if it ever happens.

to. Once a person because so convinced, then all reason, all rationality, all fairness, all emotions, etc. get thrown out the window and this person can be got to do whatever their Earthbound "spiritual leader" wants them to.

(bold mine)
Fair? Life has never been fair. I was born in the wealthy USA instead of as a starving child in Darfur. I was born to a family with two parents who stayed together and my home life was stable enough for me to concentrate on an education and get a good job. I don't suffer from any significant mental or physical ailments. Life is totally unfair but it's in my favor.

By the way, just because my reasoning and rationality depend on a premise you reject, it does not follow that all reason and reationality have been thrown out. You simply reject what I accept. If you define that as a loss of rationality or reason, then that's your definition, not mine.

[_Ray A]

We also believe that merely speaking out about our views, and advancing legislation on moral issues, does not constitute persecuting anybody. We believe firmly that licensing as marriage partners homosexual couples will imperil the very notion of a family.

That is what you believe, Bob, but it has had no effect in Australia. Zero. Who needs to try to destroy families when they are already self-destructing? Gays are causing all this havoc? I could use a few lines from Dan here - they (gays) are also responsible for the depression, the five year drought, Aboriginal homlessness, the high price of gas, land erosion, and the Japanese bombing of Darwin during World War 2.

[_rcrocket]

I support Prop 8 because I believe Christians have the obligation to be stand and heard on moral issues. Many faiths involved in the coalition, the evangelicals, the Catholics and the Mormons, believe that the Bible roundly condemns homosexual behavior. We believe that the Marriage Cases in California put government imprimatur upon a significantly aberrant behavior.

And you call yourself a lawyer? We are talking about a change in civil and constitutional law, not a religion's bylaws. Do you favor a theocracy?

See, one of the reasons I don't like being here is the personal slam. Why is it necessary? Really?

Yes, I call myself a lawyer but my being a lawyer has absolutely nothing to do with my posts.

Christian organizations have a duty and a responsibility to speak up and be heard on moral issues, even in the political arena. There is much scriptural support. The "wall" of separation referred to by Jefferson goes only one way, and does not bar religions from political expression. Merely because they engage in political expression does not mean they advocate a theocracy.

[_Jason Bourne]

I was simply registering my surprise that an apparently intelligent person like rcrocket would give so much money to such a wrong cause.

In your opinion. But I am starting to see that anyone who disagree with you is either stupid,bigoted or dishonest.

One can oppose marriage for gays without being a homophobe.

Not that I've seen. Of all the reasons to support a ban on gay marriage, each has stemmed from homophobia, in my opinion.

Ah the poisoning of the well homophobe. How about you take Bob's good arguments and show is why they are homophobic. Maybe you are an antigayaphobe.

They may be fine with gays as people, even have gay friends but see compelling reasons for leaving marriage between a man a woman that have nothing to do with hate, bigotry or prejudice.

BS.

Only in your narrow little mind.

The same reasoning could be used to support a ban on interracial marriage.

What reasons? I did not given any? How can you compare nothing to something. I simply stated that some of the arguments have validity.

Are you teenagerphobe because you might place limits on a 13 year olds ability to marry?

No,

Yes.

but I see good reasons for that, but when it comes to consenting adults I see no difference between a ban on interracial marriage and gay marriage.

How gives a rip what YOU see. Good people of honest hearts can have fine reasons for opposing this and not be bigoted.

Those who call people that have valid reasons that are not rooted in bigotry to oppose this homophobes are as much a a phobe towards those who disagree with them as thay accuse the other of.

I honestly have not seen one good reason to ban gay marriage.

In your opinion. ANd I am ok with that. But I am not ok with you calling people that do have honest and good reasons that differ from little old you homophobes. This seems to be your best argument. Name calling.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Yes, I call myself a lawyer but my being a lawyer has absolutely nothing to do with my posts.

You have mentioned your 'lawyerness' and legal experience innumerable times on this bb. Moreover, since we are discussing the Church's campaign to amend the CA state constitution in order to overturn current law, you'd better believe your law background has everything to do with this issue.

Christian organizations have a duty and a responsibility to speak up and be heard on moral issues, even in the political arena.

Few Christians think that Mormons are likewise "Christians."

I'm aghast that you, as a lawyer, would support amending CA's state constitution for the sole purpose to discriminate against an entire segment of society. Shame on you.

[_Daniel Peterson]

See, one of the reasons I don't like being here is the personal slam. Why is it necessary? Really?

It seems to be necessary, at least for some.

Personal slams are virtually all I get from certain people here -- Rollo Tomasi (a.k.a. Mini-Scartch) very much among them.

Not very interesting, and not very conducive to civil conversation. But I'm not sure that civil conversation is actually the primary goal for these folks, or even a goal at all.

[_Jason Bourne]

I bet that flew like a lead balloon, Ray. Unfortunately there's literally nothing that can be said to change or influence the mind of someone who is willing to believe that they are doing God's will. Abman already admitted that he wouldn't be supporting this except he's convinced himself that God wants him to. What could we possibly say that would Trump God in his mind? I'd dare say, nothing. Except maybe if we could convince him that God is just a figment of his imagination, and others are using the notion of God to push their own agenda.

by the way, Abman, that's one of the oldest patterns in the book, and one of the most effective - that is, human beings convincing other human beings that they represent some all-powerful God, and that one must do what they say, because God wants one to. Once a person because so convinced, then all reason, all rationality, all fairness, all emotions, etc. get thrown out the window and this person can be got to do whatever their Earthbound "spiritual leader" wants them to.

How does it feel to have given your mind and your free will over to another person, on false pretenses? How does it feel to have fallen for one of the oldest tricks in the book?

Seth

I see just as much unmovable posturing by those who are for gay marriage. Look at Rollo. There is NO good argument that those opposed to it can make. They are simply bigots in his mind.

[_rcrocket]

That is what you believe, Bob, but it has had no effect in Australia. Zero.

I can advance only my beliefs, not anybody else's.

Who needs to try to destroy families when they are already self-destructing?

I don't believe we should give up. We should fight pornography, prostitution, teenage alcoholism, teenage sex and fornication. We should fight for stable family relationships and government support for them. Just because families are falling apart doesn't mean we give in to license and abandon.

Gays are causing all this havoc? I could use a few lines from Dan here - they (gays) are also responsible for the depression, the five year drought, Aboriginal homlessness, the high price of gas, land erosion, and the Japanese bombing of Darwin during World War 2.

I have never said this, nor anybody I know had said this. However, Gibbon lists as one of the reasons for the fall of the Roman empire the destabilization by society of the family unit, and he does cite as a moral failure homosexual license.