And how did that work out for them once the settlers came? I am trying to recall? Oh Yes. They got obliterated.
- Status
And how did that work out for them once the settlers came? I am trying to recall? Oh Yes. They got obliterated.
It was called "Duel sprit" I believe. I also understand it was not common among the "5 civilized tribes" that had the most contact with the white man.
They never like to hear that argument, but if "you love who you love" then honestly there is an argument as to why not two men and one woman and so forth. Since we have freedom of religion it can be argued it is tradition in some religions.
There are lots more issues that concern me for the country than gay marriage, but I think it is a dangerous slope we are slipping into.
No very wrong. Only if they have enough people to gripe and donate to democratic politicians. I do find it ironic that muslims and gays are allied with the democrats yet gays are burned at the stake in many muslim countries.
This almost has nothing to do with, and does not provide any reasoning behind this statement:
(the fact that you 1. still don't understand anything about Christianity and 2. still don't understand why the above statement is BS and 3. don't understand why none of your tired horse$#!+ answers have anything to do with it is priceless - I feel like I'm talking to MDP right now).
Freedom is a dangerous idea.
I'm sorry but the homophobic wing of the tea party is liable to kill the whole damn movement.
Rick, why do you keep bringing in Christian ideals as a basis for an argument? The bible has absolutely no bearing in the court of law. As stated before, we are not a theocracy.
Sodom and Gomorrah has no footing on an argument of state policy. It if did, we would be subject to shariah law and a whole host of other archaic decrees.
Sodom and Gomorrah has no footing on an argument of state policy. It if did, we would be subject to shariah law and a whole host of other archaic decrees.
Since you are one of the more intelligent debaters I will give you a straight answer. I keep bringing it up because one person posted that one book of the bible said nothing against lesbianism and that it was all a conspiracy to control women. Sounds like something lifted from a 70s women's liberation book instead of a thought out response and in fact is nothing but opinion. Others agreed with this thus bringing religion into the mix.
When I offered my opinion based on just as much research and some examples from the bible to back it up I was told I did not know what I was talking about. Frankly I enjoy playing with the liberal double standard mindset and watching closet liberals freak out trying to claim they are conservatives. It is really fun to me to see them use the classic lefty "You do not know what you are talking about" argument when somebody disagrees with them.
Personally I think that gays should be allowed to "marry" with all the same rights and responsibilities but that it needs to be called something else because of the divide between church and state. I do not think government should have any role in marriage for anybody.
Awesome. You've come full-circle - it's the RickN Menstrual Cycle of debate.
Fine, I'll hold your hand through this, but eventually, you're going to get pushed out of the nest.
This is what you said:
You're informing Christians what they believe and the reasoning behind something written in their holy book (from a completely non-biblical standpoint - which is why I say you don't understand what you're talking about). I'll put it frankly, you're wrong (not that I have to - you've tap-tanced all around your original post despite how awkward it has become that I continue quoting it for you to see that your constantly changing rationale is total BS and has nothing to do with what you originally posted).
Now I'm a closet liberal freaking out because you haven't made any sense at all in defending this idiotic post? Awesome job of dancing around things - like I said, it's exactly like I'm reading your political posts.
Here's the simple answer. The reason being gay is prohibited in the bible has nothing to do with "they wanted Christian men and women to have children thus making more Christians." I don't even know who "they" are supposed to be in your post, but that statement is idiotic.
I don't go around telling others what they believe (or the reasoning behind why they believe it) and yet, here you are doing that very thing (and blatantly misunderstanding the religion you're preaching to). You're arguing with me on the reasoning behind my religious book. I've only defended what my religion is (in this thread) - not that it's right or that you should believe or do as my particular faith dictates. You're trying to tell me what my religion says with the type of zealotry that you're complaining about seeing from those in organized religion (here in America).
Who sounds more like a closet-liberal now?
BS EZ and I think you know it. The bible and many of the Christian religions to tell Christians to go forth and multiply in clear specific terms which I posted. What part of that do you not understand?
- Status
Similar threads
