So...

[Count Duckula]

I don't know what mister Bush is upto with his complaints about that major of SF.

Two words:

ELECTION YEAR.

(*insert DeeBye or WarLocke bling-bling graphic here*)

[Occhidiangela]

Why is Gov S not more engaged, given that, from news reports, it is a California law that is at present, being broken and-or challenged.

[Griselda]

This was taken from the Live Journal of someone I know, so I can't vouch 100% for the accuracy of the quote, but since it's related to the topic I thought you'd be interested:

"Not only is the sacramental character of matrimony without foundation in Scripture; but the very traditions, which claim such sacredness for it, are a mere jest... Marriage may therefore be a figure of Christ and the Church; it is, however, no Divinely instituted sacrament, but the invention of men in the Church, arising from ignorance of the subject." ( Martin Luther, cf. "Von den Ehensachen," "De captivitate Babylonica")

[kandrathe]

And therein lies my problem. If "the code" as it exists in the 10 commandments, Christ's teachings, etc. is discernable through the use of reason or attendance to natural sympathies alone, then why is it that one must be "a follower of God" if one is to be priviledged with an afterlife? On principle alone, why does it concern God whether you act virtuously thanks to the "proof" of God's existence that was to be derived from Christ's physical resurrection or if you act virtuously purely because it seems the right thing to do and Christ's teachings simply make sense? Why should it matter to God whether or not you deem Christ immortal? Isn't the person who acts virtuously because it is right and good a 'better' person in some sense than is he/she who act as such because they know it is right on the basis of Christ's authoritative position via his resurrection?

In Christianity "sin" is a barrier between man and a pure God. That fact precludes man from the presence of God. The events of the coming of the messiah were foretold in the old testament book Isaiah. The intercession of Christ to atone in advance for the sins of all humankind was the new covenant offered by God, and replaced all the former agreements God made with men. One very devoted Christian I met in college told me that she was loath to sin, because each time she would visualize that sin as an additional burden on Christ on the cross. Understanding "The Passion of Christ (on the cross)" for instance, is the ultimate understanding of Christianity.

In Christs time there were many sects of Judaism dedicated to leading the "pure" life and being sinless, but Christ labeled them as hypocrits. He taught that actions, or refusing to take action and even ones own thoughts could be sinful. He taught that the number one commandment was to love God with all your being. If you do that one, the other virtues would follow on as one would desire to be obediant to God. The Pharisees (technically sinless Jews) were a powerful group at that time, and one notable Pharisee (Saul of Tarsus) was to become the apostle Paul. He was tasked by the Sanhedrin(ruling council) to hunt down Christs followers and arrest them, but he was confronted by the spirit of Christ on his way to Damascus and then became one of his most ardent followers. He wrote in his letter to the Philippians while in prison;

3:3 For we are the circumcision (meaning cut off from Judaism), the ones who worship by the Spirit of God, exult in Christ Jesus, and do not rely on human credentials 3:4 —though mine too are significant. If someone thinks he has good reasons to put confidence in human credentials, I have more: 3:5 I was circumcised on the eighth day, from the people of Israel and the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews. I lived according to the law as a Pharisee. 3:6 In my zeal for God I persecuted the church. According to the righteousness stipulated in the law I was blameless. 3:7 But these assets I have come to regard as liabilities because of Christ. 3:8 More than that, I now regard all things as liabilities compared to the far greater value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things—indeed, I regard them as dung!—that I may gain Christ, 3:9 and be found in him, not because I have my own righteousness derived from the law, but because I have the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness—a righteousness from God that is in fact based on Christ’s faithfulness. 3:10 My aim is to know him, to experience the power of his resurrection, to share in his sufferings, and to be like him in his death, 3:11 and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.

If Christ was resurrected in order to prove to us that his teachings were true, that they truly came from God, then it seems as though the people who understood the truth of Christ's teachings in advance of his resurrection were the ones who truly deserved the gift of heaven.

Christian's would point to much more than just the resurrection, his story is filled with miraculous occurances. There are incidents prior to his death where some people identify him as the messiah, which he affirms and which if I recall he does make a special note of their faith.

[Occhidiangela]

Sacremental =| spiritual, particularly in the sense that I was using the term spiritual.

I'd hazard a guess that his knowledge of the details matrimony, or being married, is suspect. I'll have to check and see if he ever got married himself.

His diatribe against scarements is an argument against ritual over scripture, no surprise, which defies the attributions to Jesus in the gospels in re marriage, and the later discussions of the letters that became canon. That hardly equates to dismissing marriage as a worthy institution. Or was he a lecher? Plenty of clergy in his day were, if you believe even a part of what you read.

All his harangue aside, Martin Luther still printed the Bible "as written." His target was Popes, and Papal Bulls (I share his lack of enthusiasm for the idea of Papal Bulls being equivalent to Scripture) and the inconsistency of the actions of the clergy, in his time, among other things.

Having not read the 99 theses in the original German, I cannot infer any sly or subtle messages he may have been making.

EDIT: I suspect the originals may have been written in Latin, the language of the clergy in medeival Europe. :P

[Den]

Thanks ShadowHM:
Not that you asked... but quickly; quit my day job a year ago to work from home full time. Also spend a lot of time with #1 Boy playing Mr Mom. Now get to double that with #2 girl! Haven't had D2 installed since my PC crashed shortly after v1.10 was released. Strangely, don't miss the game itself, but do miss the companionship of people over the age of 5.

Have fun watching Princess Bride again. It's one of my all time favs.

Best,
Den

[ShadowHM]

I think children are best raised by their parents.  If it must be done by others then the State as guardians of the child should make the determination within the available pool of applicants (regardless of maritial status).  From my study of child and adolescent psychcology and experience I would say that the first choice would be to find a substitute stable family with a man, a woman and 1 or 2 children.  Both male and female children use their parental relationships as models of how to relate to others.  Boys learn about maleness from their father, and about femaleness from their mothers.  Single mothers in our society will tell you how important it is for them to find an adult male father figure for their sons.  Loving homesexual same sex couples may be able to meet all the needs of adoptive children, but I think it would be much harder for social workers to insure that the placement is in the best interest of the child.

Hi

This one has been niggling at me a bit. I am unsure of the technicality of this in other jurisdictions, but there is something I want to briefly address. I don't think you meant to imply that the State should choose strangers when family is available.

In our wills, my husband and I have stipulated a guardian for our children, should we both die at the same time. In our case, we have stipulated that the children should go to live with my brother and his wife, who already have two sons. (What's four more, eh? ;) ) Technically, there is a provincial guardian who would review the terms of the will and the suitability of my brother before this would take place. But in practice, the wishes of the parents are very very seldom overturned.

This is consistant with the belief that family is important and that a parent would choose the best family member to do the job.

Now the case of two friends: They have two daughters, aged 10 and 12 at present. Their will stipulates Don's gay brother and his 'wife' to be guardians. The alternative is Jill's single brother who is a firefighter and has extremely odd hours. Uncle Steve and Aunt Jack have been together for longer than Don and Jill, and have been a positive and consistent part of the girl's lives. So it makes sense to Don and Jill to give them custody of the girls, should they die. As noted before, it would be most unusual for the Provincial Guardian to naysay this.

If you are starting from scratch, as in with adoption of an infant, all of what you said makes sense. But in the case of children who are orphaned, it is much better to have family involved, if they are willing. In the case of my friends, even the single brother with the odd work hours would be a better choice than a family of strangers. And, in my case, should something preclude my brother from taking custody of my sons, even my husband's extremely eccentric single brother would be the better choice, because he cares about my children.

[kandrathe]

This one has been niggling at me a bit. I am unsure of the technicality of this in other jurisdictions, but there is something I want to briefly address. I don't think you meant to imply that the State should choose strangers when family is available.

Sometimes. I was thinking of cases where children are removed from their parents, rather than of an untimely accident claiming them both. The best environment for the child is what is desired, and if a relative is willing to commit to being a surrogate parent that might work. Of course it would cause some stress in that family, and you risk that the relative might agree as a cover to place the child back with the unfit parents.

Prior Relationship of Adoptive Parent(s) to Child in US States (October 1, 2000 to September 30, 2001)

We have some close friends who have done a thing which I don't think I could put myself through. They wanted to adopt a child, so they went to the State and registered and trained in a program to be foster parents to children at risk. The children that have been placed with them all have been under 4 years of age and taken from thier parents because the parents have been deemed unfit. If the parents through the legal system lose their rights and no suitable relative can be found they have the opportunity to adopt the child. They have their 3rd child now, with the first two being each with them a year before being put back with a relative. It has been heart wrenching as you can imagine, and the children have some very profound emotional issues to deal with. This third child now they have had for eight months, and there is still a year of court hearings before his final status will be determined.

In the event of the death of my spouse and I, we have chosen some close friends who are excellent parents and they have agreed. When I looked at my family I saw no place for my children to go where it would work out well. They are all muggles. :D

[Ashkael]

It's really interesting to see all of you arguing about homosexual marriages, some of you in favor and some of you against it. However, I bet none of you know from firsthand experience what is like to be homosexual. I am homosexual, and I will try to explain as best as I can what is like to be homosexual and the way it affects your life. I hope some of you who think lowly of homosexuals will read what I have to say here and perhaps start thinking different about us.

One thing that always amuses me is how people talk about homosexuality as if it were some kind of disease or plague. The truth is I never choose to be homosexual, much in the same way you did not choose to be straight. Just think about it for a moment. When you were in your early puberty, did you wake up one day and suddenly proclaimed: “Hey, I’ve decided that I want to be straight! From this day onward I’ll get a hard-on whenever I look at a gorgeous chick!” No, you didn’t. It was something that came out naturally and before you knew it, you were staring at that cute little girl in your class all day long like an idiot. The same happened to me, but instead of a girl I was staring at a boy.

At my short age of 20, I think I’ve dealt with much more depressions than most of you. You see, one of the biggest problems a homosexual faces is coming out. Just picture this: you, as a regular and straight person, have friends, a family, etc. That is, your loved ones, the kind of people you cannot live without. Now, imagine that even though you are straight, you had to tell every single one of them that you are, in fact, straight, and risk losing their friendship, support, and love. How would that feel? Do you think it would be hard to do such a thing? And even if you tell them and they decide to accept you (albeit after a huge shock), you become paranoiac. If some of them refuse to go out with you to a party, to the movies, or whatever, you immediately think that they must hate you because you are straight, but are afraid to tell you that. So, even though they have assured you that they accept you the way you are, there’s always doubt left in you. Replace ‘straight’ with ‘homosexual’ and you will get a clear picture of what my life seems like every other day.

On top of that, another terrible shock comes when you find out that you are homosexual. Having been raised in a very macho environment (my father is very macho, if that’s how you call that in English), I almost committed suicide when I found out that I was homosexual. To this day my parents don’t have a clue about my sexual orientation, and I don’t plan on telling them anytime soon, at least until they finish paying for my education. And even then, I guess I’ll send an email to them, because my father could literally try to kill me if he finds out because he is really homophobic. I don’t know about you guys, but I really love my parents. They are an important part of my life, and the mere thought of losing their love makes me wish to be dead.

However, despite all of this, the biggest problem a homosexual faces is the realization that you will never, ever be able to have children and raise them in a “natural” environment. Even grimmer to me is the following question, which pops in my mind at least once or twice a day: How the hell am I going to explain my parents that I’ll never be able to give them grandsons? Couple this with the fact that I am the only male son in my family, and you know the kind of problem I am in. You can say that there are ways to get around this, like adoption or surrogate mothering. However, I don’t believe in adoption and the very idea of having an unknown woman lend me her belly to carry a child she doesn’t want just for money makes me sick.

Besides all of this, there are the usual gay-bashing comments that pop up in almost every single conversation with your straight friends that don’t know about your sexual orientation. One friend of mine whom I was considering coming out to once said that he would prefer to have a mentally retarded child than a homosexual child, because at least the mentally retarded one would die quicker. Needless to say, I never came out to him and promptly forgot about his existence.

And then, there’s the big mess with religion. I firmly believe in God, and I pray to him a lot. My life in this world has been very easy in the sense that I've always had what I wanted, my parents are well on their way to becoming rich, I am on my junior year of college and have an almost perfect GPA, and I have good friends that know I'm homosexual and support me. Every time I listen or read about someone saying that God hates homosexuals, I just think about my 'good' life and come to the conclusion that there's no way God can hate me. Remember what I said above? That I didn’t choose to be homosexual? I just keep wondering how God can hate someone for something he didn’t choose to be in the first place.

I don't believe in the Church, obviously because they are against homosexuality. It would be utterly stupid to align myself with an institution that openly expresses its hate against people that suffer from my same problem. And there’s also the Bible, the Holy Book, which contains passages that condemn homosexuality. The truth is the Bible is so hopelessly outdated that you can barely rely on it anymore. We cannot take every single word the Bible says literally. At least I don’t. And I make emphasis in the word “literally”, as the Bible does contain very interesting passages that deal with how a good son of God should act and behave.

The following link will illustrate this point more clearly. I highly doubt the veracity of this story, but the actual contents of the letter are interesting (and amusing).

http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~susan/joke/laura.htm

From religion we naturally step into marriage. Marriage is supposed to be a holy institution between a man and a woman and blah blah blah. If a few hundred years ago you would have told me that I couldn’t get legally married, I wouldn’t have complained. I would have been happy with my civil union or my mind-conceived marriage. However, nowadays marriage isn’t about a holy institution anymore, it’s more about the rights and benefits you get for being legally married. And you know what? I want my slice of the cake too.

But don’t get me wrong, I’m not that selfish. I firmly believe that the main purpose of a marriage or any kind of union is full commitment between the two persons that are involved in it, be it a man and a woman, two men or two women. For me, nothing in this life can beat the satisfaction of giving everything you can to the one you love. However, if being legally married entitles you to some form of benefit or whatever, then why can’t I receive those benefits too? In my eyes, the fact that straight couples can receive these benefits and homosexual couples can’t strikes me as discrimination. Discrimination against a big group of people that, once again and just like you, didn’t choose to be the way they are. And if you think about it, saying that people cannot marry because of their sexual orientation would be no different than saying that people can’t marry because they were born on Monday instead of Tuesday.

I sometimes find ironic that the very same people that like to boast about America being the land of the free are the same ones that oppose homosexual marriages with great passion. That’s why the outcome of all this is very important to me, because as someone already said, America is the big fish in the pond. Whatever they do, the rest of the fishes are watching. And usually some of the smaller fishes follow on the footsteps of the big fish and try to imitate what the big fish is doing. I really hope this situation gets settled. Just 50 years ago, if people knew that someone was homosexual, they would punch him in the street. At least now there’s some degree of tolerance. I expect (and hope) that in fifty more years this situation will go from tolerable to accepted.

And lastly, there is the big moral issue behind same-sex marriages. If I recall correctly, it think it was Nystul who, in his infinite intelligence, sweepingly proclaimed that same-sex marriages are morally wrong. I can honestly tell you that I sympathize with you. You can’t really understand homosexuality until you get to know a real homosexual. I have seen the reactions of several of my friends when I told them I was homosexual. One of them, after having known me for two years, told me that the week after I came out to him, he spent every single night in his bed going over my situation, trying to make it “click” in his mind. It’s really tough information to assimilate all in one go. That’s why I really hope someone dear to you turns out to be homosexual, so that you can at least try to understand all the implications of this condition.

Returning to the moral issue, tell me Nystul, is it morally wrong for people to bash other people just because they have a different sexual orientation? Is it morally wrong to just downright hate them before even getting to know one of them just because of that? Is it morally wrong for President Bush to try to screw the lives of millions of homosexuals who love each other and would like to marry to get some extra benefits under the law? Is it morally wrong to screw the life of people who are ALREADY screwed since birth and have to deal with a constant stream of crap throughout their lives? I think so. I hope that you think a bit about your statement. You are basically telling a lot of people that their existence as human beings is morally wrong.

I hope at least some of you find this post informative and start thinking differently about homosexuals.

Have a good day.

[DeeBye]

To this day my parents don’t have a clue about my sexual orientation, and I don’t plan on telling them anytime soon, at least until they finish paying for my education.

You're 20 years old, and you're afraid to tell your parents that you're gay because they are paying for your college education and you don't want to be cut off?

Don't be a wuss. Tell them the truth. They are your parents and they love you. You owe them at least that much.

edit:
Also, parents are pretty smart. I betcha that they already know, and are just waiting for you to confirm their suspicions.

[Vandiablo]

did you wake up one day and suddenly proclaimed: “Hey, I’ve decided that I want to be straight! From this day onward I’ll get a hard-on whenever I look at a gorgeous chick!” No, you didn’t.

Actually, I do this every morning. Then my wife reminds me that I'm not actually allowed to do anything with it.

and the very idea of having an unknown woman lend me her bowels to carry a child

uh, bowels? hmm. That side isn't for babies. Maybe there's a good reason that you're- hmm, let's go to the dictionary:

1 : INTESTINE, GUT; also : one of the divisions of the intestines -- usually used in plural except in medical use <the large bowel> <move your bowels>
2 archaic : the seat of pity, tenderness, or courage -- usually used in plural
3 plural : the interior parts; especially : the deep or remote parts <bowels of the earth>

(Mirriam-Webster)

AH, you're using definition number 3, and I'm using definition number 1, which is used to make number 2.

Kinda looks to me like definition 1 applies to people while definition 3 applies to things. I guess.

That’s why I really hope someone dear to you turns out to be homosexual, so that you can at least try to understand all the implications of this condition.

Are you addressing Nystul there? I think many of us already know at least one someone. But, even when this happens to them, you'll still see many people stick to their old prejudices. There are several right-wing politicos who have gay children or siblings, but still hold on to the party line.

But yes you're right, when someone close to you is affected, the debate is more meaningful. No more of the old "Us" and "Them".

-V

[Ashkael]

You're 20 years old, and you're afraid to tell your parents that you're gay because they are paying for your college education and you don't want to be cut off?

Don't be a wuss.  Tell them the truth.  They are your parents and they love you.  You owe them at least that much.

edit:
Also, parents are pretty smart.  I betcha that they already know, and are just waiting for you to confirm their suspicions.

Latinamerican culture is different from American culture. In America, a 16-year old teenager is already dying to move out from their parents house, and their parents are already putting pressure on them to start getting a job. In Latinamerica, teenagers usually live with their parents until they marry or decided to move out. And a great deal of them stays with their parents even after they have married. However, that doesn't mean I am incompetent. The reason I have a chance to study here in America is because my father is not your average poorly paid Latin. We have retail stores and until I moved to America a few months ago, I had been in charge of one of them for about 6 years. That's why I say I'm lucky.

Regarding my parents, I would say that they don't suspect anything. You know, being homosexual doesn't mean that you are effeminate. As I already said, I was raised in a very macho environment. In fact, none of my friends even had the slight suspicion that I was homosexual until I told them.

About coming out to them, I once read in a gay-minded website that 1 out of every 4 gay American teenagers were kicked out of their houses by their parents when they came out to them. Unfortunately, that was a few years ago and I don't seem to be able to find the page again. You know, it's very easy to think about it, but very hard to do it in practice. As I said before, my father is a really homophobic... I cannot envision what would happen if I told him that I am homosexual. That's why I want to play safe and wait at least 2 more years until I have my diploma.

[Ashkael]

When I said bowels I meant the part of the human body that holds the baby. I was googling for a translator and used the first cheap one I found <_< . Anyway, I corrected that already.

[Vandiablo]

Sorry... it's not nice to make fun of non-english speakers using english ... i didn't realize you fell in that category... and i was too weak to pass on the bowel thing

[DeeBye]

Latinamerican culture is different from American culture. In America, a 16-year old teenager is already dying to move out from their parents house, and their parents are already putting pressure on them to start getting a job.

That's an incorrect generalization. I wish I could have lived with my parents forever.

Here's a generalization that is correct:

Parents love their children, and will support them no matter what.

[Freepaperclips]

I'm sorry that you're angry, but try to be as open-minded as you ask everyone else to be. There has been a good deal of (undeserved) gay-bashing in this thread, but there has been just as much support for gay marriages or this thread would not have lasted this long.

Just so you know, the Church isn't "against homosexuals," and if you look around on the web, you can find several programs out there to help bring the homosexual community into the Church. So don't bash it without doing your homework, or you are being just as bigoted as those who are homophobic. Oh, and so you know the Mirriam Webster's (and the Bible's) definition of "abomination" is "something that is ritually unclean for a Jew to commit." Then again, the Hebrew peoples still haven't had the joys of pork chops either.

I'm not gay and to be perfectly frank, I don't care if you are. I'm willing to bet that most people would not care one way or another if they found out (with the possible exception of some dissapointed women and happier men;) ) with the possible exception of your family, so try to mellow out a bit. Good luck.

[whyBish]

Here's a generalization that is&nbsp; correct:

Parents love their children, and will support them no matter what.

Maybe in Disneyland.

[Nystul]

You can’t really understand homosexuality until you get to know a real homosexual.

Been there, done that, thought I covered it already in this thread. I've had friends who are homosexual. Whatever enlightenment I was supposed to gain from that, I must have missed. I will never know what it's like to "come out" to your friends, but I suspect that in a way it's similar to professing Christian beliefs on a Diablo forum.

You are basically telling a lot of people that their existence as human beings is morally wrong.

Just based on the little information in your post, there seems to be a lot more to your life than the endless pursuit of sex. So why then would you equate my condemnation of your sexual activity with being a condemnation of your existance? In my last reply to Shadow I went to great lengths to make that distinction.

You know, for me as an unmarried man, it is a sin to have sex with anyone. Whether I'm "straight" or "gay" is not really an issue. The basic desires of man are usually not very virtuous in nature. Trying to follow a moral path is a constant struggle under any circumstances. Obviously since part of the process is deciding what actually is and isn't moral, it makes things even tougher. But since your own moral beliefs are not strictly tied to organized religion, why worry about the institution of marriage at all?

However, nowadays marriage isn’t about a holy institution anymore, it’s more about the rights and benefits you get for being legally married.

If your attitude about marriage is really this casual, you don't deserve the right to get married even if you were "straight". This is about a sacred bond, a lifelong commitment to a loving relationship, a joining of families and the foundation of a new one. This institution does not deserve to be held hostage over healthcare rights and joint tax returns. If the political climate does change and you get the right to marry whomever you choose, I hope you will take that institution seriously and make a commitment to someone you will be willing to spend the rest of your life with.

And if the government chooses to remove all legal implications of marriage and handle each issue (guardianship, tax issues, health care, joint ownership of property) separately, then I would have no problem with you getting your "slice of the cake". Unfortunately though, that's not how this issue is going to play out, and I'm more concerned with the future of the sacred institution than I am with getting good deals on health care.

[ShadowHM]

Here's a generalization that is&nbsp; correct:

Parents love their children, and will support them no matter what.

Since I am personally acquainted with a young man (friend of my son) who is in a situation similar to Ashkael, I believe you are naive.

Some parents would immediately disown a child of theirs who proclaimed that he was homosexual. Sad but true. Ashkael *may* be mistaken about his father, but he is in a much better position to judge than you.

[DeeBye]

Here's a generalization that is&nbsp; correct:

Parents love their children, and will support them no matter what.

Maybe in Disneyland.

Like I said, it's a generalization.