Scottie wrote:This doesn't happen very often. I actually thought of a legitimate case against SSM.
Any employee that works for BYU must maintain a set of standards. BYU currently allows gay individuals to work there as long as they adhere to the honor code.
If SSM becomes legal, can a married gay couple now perform sexual acts without breaking the honor code? After all, they are married.
BYU is not the church. It is under more government regulations than the church. I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, that BYU will be forced by the government to accept gay marriages as they would any other marriage. Therefore, wouldn't they be discriminating if they fire a married gay individual for performing sex acts? Something the church is strongly against?
Thoughts?
This falls into the "slippery slope" category. I don't see that there is any definitive answer...at this point. I think that this is an example of one of those situations that the church would just as well not have to come up with a definitive answer for. Thus their involvement in supporting Prop 8. There are those that have said in this forum that Prop. 8 would really not change the status quo of the traditional establishment. This is just one example where that would not be the case.
skippy the dead wrote:As I said, right now there's a difference in how homosexuals and heterosexuals are treated - gays can't kiss or hold hands with members of the same sex; straights can.
Yeah, but what straight would want to kiss or hold hands with members of the same sex??
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
mentalgymnast wrote:This falls into the "slippery slope" category. I don't see that there is any definitive answer...at this point. I think that this is an example of one of those situations that the church would just as well not have to come up with a definitive answer for. Thus their involvement in supporting Prop 8. There are those that have said in this forum that Prop. 8 would really not change the status quo of the traditional establishment. This is just one example where that would not be the case.
Like I said Scotty, some of the Mormons for Prop 8 would like your example to be valid. But it's not. As everybody here except MG can see, there isn't a good case that BYU would be forced to change because of gay marriage.
rcrocket wrote:This is one of Rollo's favorite arguments. It is highly disingenuous...
VOTE YES on PROP 8.
Even rcrocket can see this is a terrible example. Set your vaguely worded slippery slope fears to rest.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
skippy the dead wrote:As I said, right now there's a difference in how homosexuals and heterosexuals are treated - gays can't kiss or hold hands with members of the same sex; straights can.
Yeah, but what straight would want to kiss or hold hands with members of the same sex??
Heh-heh. Depends on how much I've had to drink. Wait, you weren't talking specifically to me, were you. Never mind.
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
mentalgymnast wrote:This falls into the "slippery slope" category. I don't see that there is any definitive answer...at this point. I think that this is an example of one of those situations that the church would just as well not have to come up with a definitive answer for. Thus their involvement in supporting Prop 8. There are those that have said in this forum that Prop. 8 would really not change the status quo of the traditional establishment. This is just one example where that would not be the case.
Like I said Scotty, some of the Mormons for Prop 8 would like your example to be valid. But it's not. As everybody here except MG can see, there isn't a good case that BYU would be forced to change because of gay marriage.
Let me repeat. I said that there isn't any definitive answer to what BYU would do under these circumstances. Your conjectures and opinings are simply that...a rhetorical shooting in the dark. So I go back to my assertion that this is an example of a situation that resides/fits on the slippery slope.
Luckily not everyone in SCV is a hate filled bigot -- we've gathered quite a few of these "I hate gay people signs."
VOTE NO on Prop H8
I read this thread, and I don't see why any of what Scottie proposed is a valid argument against SSM. Even if what he says is true, how does that make the institutionalized discrimination of a whole group of people tolerable?
GoodK, stealing "yes on 8" signs doesn't do anyone any good. While it may feel satisfying in the heat of the moment, it is likely to hurt the cause more than help it. The more visible is right-wing homophobia, the more people will realize it's a problem. But when the news agencies run stories about Prop 8's opponents stealing signs and otherwise breaking the law, we look like the bad guys and the threat to orderly society.
