P
pieman3141
Guest
Drug users, straight people, et al. also contract AIDS.[b said:
Whoah I agree with the vatican!
- Thread starter CCGR
- Start date
rizz
New Member
[b said:
But seriously.. wheres the argument? surely everyone is against this?
Ultima Avatar
New Member
Against the fact that you can contract any type of STD with anyone in gay sex. I weep for the lesbians more than the gay males. Ech. But both can go bad any way.
Must we make a mass experiment on this? Take ten pairs of straight couples, and ten pairs of gay couples, leave em with no protection and see which contracts what?
Must we make a mass experiment on this? Take ten pairs of straight couples, and ten pairs of gay couples, leave em with no protection and see which contracts what?
P
pieman3141
Guest
UA: I think it shoudln't be funny, but it is. LOL
anyhoo... *shrug*
anybody can have any STD, provided
a. fluid transmission
b. bacteria/virii.
scary thought.
anyhoo... *shrug*
anybody can have any STD, provided
a. fluid transmission
b. bacteria/virii.
scary thought.
M
Mike Cole
Guest
I'll join you, man.[b said:
P
pieman3141
Guest
me three
Id go to Venus, they would never find me in those clouds of gas.
rizz
New Member
My money is on Io...but if we havent got travelling there down yet then plan B..
put head in bucket and close eyes...
put head in bucket and close eyes...
Gay marriages are wrong.
Anyway im posting more on Bush. I like the guy and im am very glad he is in office. I believe that he knows God and i know he talks to God everyday(first hand report from people in the white house). I would encourage any one who doesnt like to Bush to leave the country or stay out of it because he is the best president weve had in a while. Its unimaginable how much better he is than clinton was. Anyway those are my thoughts and im sticking to them
On a not totaly side note, isnt it distirbing about the gay bishop? how come none of them have read romans 2? =/
Anyway im posting more on Bush. I like the guy and im am very glad he is in office. I believe that he knows God and i know he talks to God everyday(first hand report from people in the white house). I would encourage any one who doesnt like to Bush to leave the country or stay out of it because he is the best president weve had in a while. Its unimaginable how much better he is than clinton was. Anyway those are my thoughts and im sticking to them
On a not totaly side note, isnt it distirbing about the gay bishop? how come none of them have read romans 2? =/
Grand Master
New Member
I don't really think it's anyone's place to judge if Bush is a "true" Christian, especially if you really don't know him. Let God be the judge of that.
Shagz
New Member
Hmmm...well, living and working in the GTA, I've sort've had to deal with this on a daily basis up here (GTA = Greater Toronto Area).
First, I'm not against gays, just the lifestyle, like a lot of you. But I guess there's something to be said about the seperation of Chruch and State, right? I dunno, this might be a powder keg I'm opening here, but how much of a role should faith/religion play in the decision made by an elected official, somebody who is being employed by their constiuency?
Crietien (sp?) and Paul Martin are both Catholics, and have stated that the Vatican's call to Catholic Politicians to stop this process will not play a role in their decision making, because they believe in seperation of Church and State, and that rights need to be upheld.
I dunno...there was a editorial that I read by a Professor at McMaster Univeristy in Hamilton, ON. I can't remember the name, but I think he was a Professor of Christian Thought or something. Anyways, he made an interesting point that Marriage is actually a sacred thing, a religious thing, and it should be up to the religions to decide on how this works, not the goverment. The only thing the government need concern itself about is how much taxes these people should pay, not just what their maritial status is. If we're going to seperate Church and State, then great, let the church do what it does best (spritiual guidance, growth, and traditionally, marriages) and let the government deal with more important issues, like the enviroment, homelessness and health care.
Anyways, I thought that was a good way of looking at the issue.
First, I'm not against gays, just the lifestyle, like a lot of you. But I guess there's something to be said about the seperation of Chruch and State, right? I dunno, this might be a powder keg I'm opening here, but how much of a role should faith/religion play in the decision made by an elected official, somebody who is being employed by their constiuency?
Crietien (sp?) and Paul Martin are both Catholics, and have stated that the Vatican's call to Catholic Politicians to stop this process will not play a role in their decision making, because they believe in seperation of Church and State, and that rights need to be upheld.
I dunno...there was a editorial that I read by a Professor at McMaster Univeristy in Hamilton, ON. I can't remember the name, but I think he was a Professor of Christian Thought or something. Anyways, he made an interesting point that Marriage is actually a sacred thing, a religious thing, and it should be up to the religions to decide on how this works, not the goverment. The only thing the government need concern itself about is how much taxes these people should pay, not just what their maritial status is. If we're going to seperate Church and State, then great, let the church do what it does best (spritiual guidance, growth, and traditionally, marriages) and let the government deal with more important issues, like the enviroment, homelessness and health care.
Anyways, I thought that was a good way of looking at the issue.
TastyWheat
New Member
I think that's a little harsh. I did vote for Bush because I agreed with his platforms (most of them at any rate). It's also our duty as voting citizens to criticize (sp?) our leader. That's how an approval rating is generated, and that's how Bush knows whether his people think he's doing a good job or not.[b said:
Maybe people who can't vote should stay out of it
well maybe not...that would eliminate over half of ToJ lol
Saxamaphone
New Member
There is no such thing as seperation of church or religion and state.[b said:
The gay society would have no problems with wiccan's or neopaganists pushing gay marriages. Because being gay is not an issue for them and their "religion".
Homosexuals only have problems when leaders have religious backgrounds that condemn their lifestyle choices. That is the only time we hear "seperation of church and state." We never hear about seperation when the leaders make decisions that coincide with both a lobby group and their (the leaders) religious values.
Its only seperate the True God from our daily living that is demanded, not seperation of church and state.
The Canadian leaders will have to stand up and be judged by our Lord. What will they have to say? I wanted to seperate you from my life as leader of Canada. What fools they are!!!! I really want to be a fly on that wall. Psalm 139, God is pretty much in every part of our lives, whether we like it or not. And they will never, ever be able to begin to justify this one.
MeanMrMustard
New Member
Please, not the "America, love it or leave it argument". People disagree in this country, I think Clinton was 100 times the president Bush is, you think the opposite. Thats politics, thats why we have different parties. Nobody was telling Republicans to leave the country just because they hated Clinton.[b said:
Actually in this country there is, I can't see why you'd think differently, it's just a fact. Countries without seperation of church and state members of the Church have great political power in the government. Iran, or the former Taliban for example. This country was founded on ideas like freedom of religion by the people, and freedom from religion for the government. Although it looks like you're Canadian, and I can't speak for sure about it since I don't know much about Canadian history and government, but I would assume it's similar to the way it is here.[b said:
Shagz
New Member
I found that article I was talking about - here. And the author was Douglas Farrow, associate professor of Christian Thought at McGill University, not McMaster.
It's not really so much about same-sex marriage but more about the government's role in that decision, and I read it wrong 'cuz now that I'm reading it again, he was actually arguing that the State can't stay out of this decision; actually, he argues that the more it tries, the more it will become drawn into it.
It's not really so much about same-sex marriage but more about the government's role in that decision, and I read it wrong 'cuz now that I'm reading it again, he was actually arguing that the State can't stay out of this decision; actually, he argues that the more it tries, the more it will become drawn into it.
Just a wee note. I'm not a "love it or leave it" American. At the same time, it's the Word of God that says we're to pray for our leaders because it's God that allows them to be placed in those positions of authority.
Bush claims, not only to believe in God, but to embrace Christ as his personal saviour. Are we gonna argue with that? So, the guy isn't perfect.......
Um...
*looks around.
Y'all think you could do a better job? Go to school, and when you're 35, run for prez. Otherwise, hush, and do what you can in your sphere to make this life a lil better for someone that needs it.
That's hard? Or is it easier to have opinions but do nothing?
I think I just answered my own question.
Bush claims, not only to believe in God, but to embrace Christ as his personal saviour. Are we gonna argue with that? So, the guy isn't perfect.......
Um...
*looks around.
Y'all think you could do a better job? Go to school, and when you're 35, run for prez. Otherwise, hush, and do what you can in your sphere to make this life a lil better for someone that needs it.
That's hard? Or is it easier to have opinions but do nothing?
I think I just answered my own question.
Kidan
Moderator
onto these CAtholic politicians who are criticizing the Vatican for that statement and claiming 'sep of church and state.'
What an truly irrelevant statement. These people work for the government, but at the same time, they should be voting on things and for WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN. Not what they think the constituents want, but rather, they should say, here are my beliefs, and when I'm in office, i'll vote accordingly. If they claim to be Catholics, then they should vote accordingly on any gay marriage bills.
We also need to get rid of all these inane activist judges who are creating laws from the bench. Did you know that according to the Supreme court, incest (as long as it's between two consenting adults in the privacy of their bedrooms) is now legal? I wonder what else people can get away with using the private bedroom defense now....
BAH! I'm rambling aren't I?
What an truly irrelevant statement. These people work for the government, but at the same time, they should be voting on things and for WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN. Not what they think the constituents want, but rather, they should say, here are my beliefs, and when I'm in office, i'll vote accordingly. If they claim to be Catholics, then they should vote accordingly on any gay marriage bills.
We also need to get rid of all these inane activist judges who are creating laws from the bench. Did you know that according to the Supreme court, incest (as long as it's between two consenting adults in the privacy of their bedrooms) is now legal? I wonder what else people can get away with using the private bedroom defense now....
BAH! I'm rambling aren't I?
Avesther
New Member
The USA was founded on Christian principles. That much I know.[b said:
Seperation of Church and State was started by, of all people, Christian leaders.
It was thought up solely to ensure that people who were not of the Christian faith could run for and act in office. Not to seperate God from government, which is what all non-Christian theists have twisted it too.
And speaking of countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, the differences between Christianity and Islam are very prevelant. Islam is a very controlling religion, the governments of Islamic nations are very controlling in accordance with their religion. Christianity is much less controlling, especially of those who are not of the faith, compared to Islam. So the governments are much more democratic and free.
The entire American society is based on Christianity.
It's true again. I haven't completely read all the post above, but saw "separation of church and state," and just wanted to remind us all what that was meant to mean.
It was meant to say that the government would no longer dictate how the citizens were to worship. it never occurred to them, I guess, that people just would choose to pitch Jesus out the proverbial door, and that the catch phrase "separation of church and state" would mean that we were no longer allowed to display the ten commandments in public places or openly ask for the blessing of Christ over a public forum, without also calling for the blessing of Allah and whatever god people wanna welcome in.
It was meant to say that the government would no longer dictate how the citizens were to worship. it never occurred to them, I guess, that people just would choose to pitch Jesus out the proverbial door, and that the catch phrase "separation of church and state" would mean that we were no longer allowed to display the ten commandments in public places or openly ask for the blessing of Christ over a public forum, without also calling for the blessing of Allah and whatever god people wanna welcome in.
MeanMrMustard
New Member
I disagree completely with this statement. Many of the founding fathers of this country were in fact not Christian at all, including people like Jefferson who wrote the declaration of independace, Ben Franklin and others.[b said:
Huge pieces of Christian doctrine, such as the 10 commandments are not really reflected in our laws. Murder and theft are illegal in EVERY nation, so you can't claim that. The other 8 don't have any bearing on our legal system at all. There is no evidence to suggest this country was founded on Christian principles, and if there is please present it.
Actually if you compare traditional Christianity to traditional Islam they are both very controlling. I would argue that modern Christianity has for the most part moved past the middle ages in terms of religious practices, and most modern muslims have not. It's not a difference in the religions themselves, but rather in how they've adapted to the changing western culture.[b said: