Today's Question: Do you support same-sex marriage?

Bama_Dawg

1st Team
May 17, 2005
727
0
0
58
I'm sure over time I could come up with a list ---

Heroes -- when NBC started moving it around -- had 11 million viewers -- one of their highest rated shows -- after they fooled around with it (and the unlikely timing of the writer's strike) still had 8-9 million.
Here's a chart of HEROES viewership by episode:



HEROES peaked around 16 million and was down to just 4 million when they canceled it. In other words, it was drawing only a quarter of the viewers it once did. If you owned Best Buy, and this chart reflected the sales performance of one of your stores, wouldn't you too consider closing it?

Also, as an aside, you should know that a number of your fellow christians were less than impressed with the message of the show:

In this series, we are given to believe that evolutionary processes have allowed a class of people to emerge with special gifts like mind reading, flying, instantaneous regrowth, memory stealing, time travel, etc. But at no point does the series try to explain how exactly a genetic mutation can allow a human to fly. It isn’t like they sprout wings. They just go, like Superman. We have here the curious mental exercise of imagining that evolution can produce literally any phenomena we might imagine- including what would otherwise have been described as supernatural- while not bothering to explain what the actual mechanism is in terms of the laws of physics.

It is almost as if we are being prepped to be direct witnesses to a miracle and yet still prefer a naturalistic explanation (2 Thessalonians 2:9-12).

In the meantime, the characters themselves are mystified about their powers and we occasionally see arguments about the source of the ‘gifts.’ Is it God? In the latest episode, Maya terms Sylar/Gabriel (I’m sure ‘Gabriel’ is unintentional) as a gift from God when of course we know that Sylar is a major punk. We are led to believe, I guess, that God is perfectly happy with a woman being able to kill people at a distance when yucky stuff comes out of her eyes. And in an episode previously, the argument is that there can’t be a God if all these bad things are happening. Ok, but is there no counter-argument?
http://sntjohnny.com/front/nbcs-heroes-and-a-christian-response-a-warm-up/114.html
 

CajunCrimson

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast
Staff member
Mar 13, 2001
29,098
26,386
337
Breaux Bridge, La
What's your point? I'm guessing I can find a number of people who like or dislike anything. I'm sure there are Christians that love Elton John and others that hate him....I'm sure there are Christians who like Vanilla and others that like Chocolate. There are plenty of people who breakdown things to such minute details that they fail to enjoy anything.....
Also, as an aside, you should know that a number of your fellow christians were less than impressed with the message of the show:
http://sntjohnny.com/front/nbcs-heroes-and-a-christian-response-a-warm-up/114.html
 

Bama_Dawg

1st Team
May 17, 2005
727
0
0
58
What's your point? I'm guessing I can find a number of people who like or dislike anything. I'm sure there are Christians that love Elton John and others that hate him....I'm sure there are Christians who like Vanilla and others that like Chocolate. There are plenty of people who breakdown things to such minute details that they fail to enjoy anything.....
It goes to the point of why it's in the state's interest to legislate civil rights, but not anyone's particular opinion of "wholesome" or "aberrant" behavior. Because there's always someone to the left or right of you.

Also, I noticed you didn't have much to say about HEROES.
 

BamaFlum

Hall of Fame
Dec 11, 2002
7,176
1,609
287
54
S.A., TX, USA
If the government passed legislation guaranteeing that civil unions have the same rights as married couples, would that satisfy equal treatment under the law?
 

SavannahDare

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
15,166
317
102
Gulf Breeze, Florida
If the government passed legislation guaranteeing that civil unions have the same rights as married couples, would that satisfy equal treatment under the law?
To me, yes. So long as the benefits and legal rights that are afforded to those who are "married" are afforded to those in a "civil union," I would be absolutely fine with it. I don't care what it's called, I just want equal treatment under the law for my homosexual friends, family members, colleagues, etc.
 

CajunCrimson

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast
Staff member
Mar 13, 2001
29,098
26,386
337
Breaux Bridge, La
To me, yes. So long as the benefits and legal rights that are afforded to those who are "married" are afforded to those in a "civil union," I would be absolutely fine with it. I don't care what it's called, I just want equal treatment under the law for my homosexual friends, family members, colleagues, etc.
So, what I'm hearing is Separate but Equal?
 

SavannahDare

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
15,166
317
102
Gulf Breeze, Florida
So, what I'm hearing is Separate but Equal?
Then you're hearing incorrectly.

"Marriage" has many religious connotations, and trying to get some religious people to become more accepting is a hopeless endeavor. Take the religious aspect out of it, call it a civil union on the books and let's all just move ahead. I'm not about forcing churches to perform marriage ceremonies for people they don't accept into their church to begin with. I'm ALL for it if they're willing (I know the Episcopal church is FAR more open-minded and accepting in this regard, for example), but I don't agree with the government forcing religious institutions to do or accept that which they feel violates the tenets of their belief system.

I AM for ALL consenting adults to be able to be married/united/partnered in the eyes of the law, no matter their sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, belief system, and/or gender. I don't care what it's "called." Grant them all the same recognition, rights and benefits under the law.
 

2003TIDE

Hall of Fame
Jul 10, 2007
8,867
5,282
187
ATL
isn't that what Separate But Equal means?
No. You are using a round peg in a square hole. You should go look it up. The whole Doctrine of Separate But Equal was used as an excuse to keep segregation around. Where did someone in here is suggest segregating people once we allow same sex marriages?
 

BamaFlum

Hall of Fame
Dec 11, 2002
7,176
1,609
287
54
S.A., TX, USA
Then you're hearing incorrectly.

"Marriage" has many religious connotations, and trying to get some religious people to become more accepting is a hopeless endeavor. Take the religious aspect out of it, call it a civil union on the books and let's all just move ahead. I'm not about forcing churches to perform marriage ceremonies for people they don't accept into their church to begin with. I'm ALL for it if they're willing (I know the Episcopal church is FAR more open-minded and accepting in this regard, for example), but I don't agree with the government forcing religious institutions to do or accept that which they feel violates the tenets of their belief system.

I AM for ALL consenting adults to be able to be married/united/partnered in the eyes of the law, no matter their sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, belief system, and/or gender. I don't care what it's "called." Grant them all the same recognition, rights and benefits under the law.
Thank you, Staci. I may not agree with the lifestyle based on my religious beliefs, but if the state/government grants equality with a civil union and keeps marriage defined as a one woman and one man, then so be it.
 

CajunCrimson

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast
Staff member
Mar 13, 2001
29,098
26,386
337
Breaux Bridge, La
Then you're hearing incorrectly.

"Marriage" has many religious connotations, and trying to get some religious people to become more accepting is a hopeless endeavor. Take the religious aspect out of it, call it a civil union on the books and let's all just move ahead. I'm not about forcing churches to perform marriage ceremonies for people they don't accept into their church to begin with. I'm ALL for it if they're willing (I know the Episcopal church is FAR more open-minded and accepting in this regard, for example), but I don't agree with the government forcing religious institutions to do or accept that which they feel violates the tenets of their belief system.

I AM for ALL consenting adults to be able to be married/united/partnered in the eyes of the law, no matter their sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, belief system, and/or gender. I don't care what it's "called." Grant them all the same recognition, rights and benefits under the law.
Staci - I'm not hearing incorrectly -- and yes, part of me is being argumentative. The problem is, is that we, as a country, cannot get 60% to agree on almost anything -- but placing a separate title to offer the same result will result in a revisiting of the same problem later.

That is ultimately my point -- if we go the path of Civil Unions as a Federal decision -- we will be back in 5-10 years arguing that there are still thousands of gay couples being discriminated against because they can't get married in the Church they want to......and they'll want the Government to intervene.

It's not going to be a long term solution and just a continued path....which is ultimately what happened when we came up with the concept of "Separate But Equal" to extend segregation..... they are more similar that many of you want to accept, but I didn't think I'd change your mind.....
 

buzzincuzzin

All-American
Jan 8, 2006
4,960
0
0
74
Tax structure is the only involvement of the government. I'd be good with that. It's the over-the-top coupledom and PDA flaunting I want to go away.
I think it's very wrong to vote sex preference when it may be among the least of our problems.
 

SavannahDare

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
15,166
317
102
Gulf Breeze, Florida
I disagree, Cajun. This fight isn't about trying to force religions to do what they don't want to do. You people keep trying to make it that, but it isn't.

It's very simple: Homosexual couples want to be able to be recognized by the law of this land as being a legal couple, and to be afforded all rights and benefits that are currently afforded to married couples.

Whether a couple is joined together in a church or not has zero bearing on whether they are recognized legally. I got married in a B&B by some dude who probably got the ability to marry people in some backwoods North Carolina speed course! The laws of this land recognize that union exactly the same way they recognize a couple joined in a Catholic church. That is what needs to be afforded to gay couples.
 

CajunCrimson

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast
Staff member
Mar 13, 2001
29,098
26,386
337
Breaux Bridge, La
I disagree, Cajun. This fight isn't about trying to force religions to do what they don't want to do. You people keep trying to make it that, but it isn't.

It's very simple: Homosexual couples want to be able to be recognized by the law of this land as being a legal couple, and to be afforded all rights and benefits that are currently afforded to married couples.

Whether a couple is joined together in a church or not has zero bearing on whether they are recognized legally. I got married in a B&B by some dude who probably got the ability to marry people in some backwoods North Carolina speed course! The laws of this land recognize that union exactly the same way they recognize a couple joined in a Catholic church. That is what needs to be afforded to gay couples.
I know two gay couples -- both of which want to be married -- in a church -- so I get that I have a small sample size to work with -- they want to tell people that they are married -- and want to be recognized as such -- but maybe you are right, maybe the majority of gay couples would be fine with civil unions....I just think that as long as there are "separate" rules that say the same thing -- some will be unhappy with the result.....
 

SavannahDare

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
15,166
317
102
Gulf Breeze, Florida
I know two gay couples -- both of which want to be married -- in a church -- so I get that I have a small sample size to work with -- they want to tell people that they are married -- and want to be recognized as such -- but maybe you are right, maybe the majority of gay couples would be fine with civil unions....I just think that as long as there are "separate" rules that say the same thing -- some will be unhappy with the result.....
There will always be dissatisfied people.

I've never understood the self-loathing that must be present for someone to want to belong to a church that actively, and with great passion, preaches that they are unworthy of God's grace so long as they continue to live as they were born. How much does one have to hate oneself to buy that line of thinking? :rolleyes:
 

CajunCrimson

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast
Staff member
Mar 13, 2001
29,098
26,386
337
Breaux Bridge, La
There will always be dissatisfied people.

I've never understood the self-loathing that must be present for someone to want to belong to a church that actively, and with great passion, preaches that they are unworthy of God's grace so long as they continue to live as they were born. How much does one have to hate oneself to buy that line of thinking? :rolleyes:
When you grow up gay in the bible belt (or in Catholic Country) there is a tremendous amount of guilt and a desire to belong to what everyone else you love is a part of -- that internal conflict is tremendous -- and I can totally understand wanting the acceptance......not sure it's hate at all -- it's the desire to be accepted by everyone that loves you.....and being able to share their love in Church is very very important.
 

New Posts

Latest threads