[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Keep thinking that guy. This amendment not only snuffed the rights out for gay people, but also for the rights of man and women civil unions and domestic partnerships. SO, in order to "do right by god", they didn't mind destroying a crap ton of other rights for individuals (women, men, children) and benefits. Can you show me ONE verse in the bible that allows christian's to judge others, or even allows them to decide the fate of "sinners"? One verse? I'll be waiting.

Let me let you in on a secret – well, it's not so much a secret as I had posted it earlier in the thread, but obviously you were so enthralled with throwing out your hate that you completely ignored it, so I'll repost my thoughts. I stated earlier that both people who voted on either side of this amendment were not seeing the forest from the trees. The ones, like you, who are in such a blind rage over championing the gay rights flat out ignored those couples who are living together, raising a family together, but do not believe in marriage. And don't tell me you were including them because your several posts in this thread were all about the gays and nothing about those people. So, you were being just as discriminatory as those who wanted to deny these “rights” to gays. Instead, you wanted to use it as a chance to air your hatred of religious people by making this thread an “us verse them” thread. I went on to state that if the government truly wanted to provide special benefits to couples with children, then using marriage as a criteria was not the way to go. Personally, I feel all couples who are willing to take on the responsibility of raising children should be privy to these “rights” if the government is so insisting of using taxpayer money to fund this program, not just married people, and not just gay people. You, on the other hand, are going about this the wrong way, because you're headstrong. You think blasting the religious community is going to shame them, but all it's doing is making you look like a hater. If you were intelligent enough to take a step back and realize other ways of pushing for “equal rights” that were not so divisive and polarizing, then you'd probably have more support. But honestly, it's people like you that would cause me to cast my vote in the other way, and I didn't even vote in this.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I wasn't coming to that conclusion, nor was I stating a fact. Hence I said, "If you were to ask", but I should have put the word "probably" in there to denote a hunch.

Hence, your context was arranged so as to state a fact. IF you meant it as your opinion, you should have proof read your thoughts before hitting submit.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Wait....so let's go back to christian logic.

Random guy: Didn't the bible say this about your religion?
Christian response: We don't use the Old Testament anymore b/c Jesus died for our sins.

Random guy: Where does it say anything about homosexuality in the bible?
Christian response: It states clearly in the old testament.

Wait....so either you use the old testament...or you don't. You can't pick and ****ing choose guy. You are using verses to back up your silly logic and reasoning, but omitting others by saying they don't apply anymore.

Hhhmmm...OK, I'll dumb it down for you in your words:

Random guy: The bible said it's OK for us to kill gays.
Christian Response: No, the bible stated that God said all who sinned under the Mosaic Law during the Old Testament were sanctioned to death, by GOD. I never said sanctioned to death by MAN. This wasn't limited to homosexuality, but everything considered SIN. I also went on to state that God still showed mercy back in those times by sparing King David's life, yet you flat out ignored that like everything else. The whole thing about Jesus dying for our sins is kind of an important event that ended all of that. You know, the paid our way to salvation thing? You might want to read up on it sometime.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

So since the divorce rate is higher in NC, than most states, wouldn't it be ironic and downright hypocritical that most of these people voting in favor of it are doing so because their religion says so? Since gay people can't marry, this would only mean the divorce rate is among the god fearing men/women of the state eh?

It would be hypocritical for those who did not repent of their sin of divorcing their spouse for reasons other than adultery would vote in favor of the Marriage Amendment, yes. However, there are plenty of non-Christians who get married and divorced, so to state that all people who have gotten married and divorced are God fearing men and women would be an illogical statement since all who get married are not of the Christian faith. Am I to assume, then, by your logic, that since you are not Christian, then you are gay?

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I think you are taking my quote, and running with it even though it's not there. Let me share you my background. I grew up in a christian home. I went to a christian school. my family is still christian. I have seen how christians think and act all my life. I have never seen a bigger group of hypocrites in my life then the christian church.

Firstly, I sincerely apologize that you had a bad experience with being around a portion of the Christian population that is not living up to Jesus' teachings. I, too, have been around the same population, and I do see where you are coming from. Not all Christians are like that though, and you gotta stop putting everybody in one category. But, like you stating that Christians have no right to judge, neither do you. Usually, if someone comes to some sort of enlightenment in his/her life, along with that enlightenment comes peace; peace of mind, body, and spirit. I don't sense any of that with you. You tend to lash out and be very passionate in your rebuttals; not that passion is wrong at all, but mixing it with anger is like mixing fire and gasoline. Whenever one polarizes themselves far away from any and all people who opposes them, they usually wind up finding themselves very alone when it's said and done.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I suggest you look up what intolerant is. If I were intolerant, I would be asking for legislation to neuter these people so they could not breed their beliefs into this world. If I were intolerant, I would be requesting all religion banned and they muzzled. As it is, I am not. MY problem with these people is that their religion is affecting other people's lives.

I do know what intolerant is. I've witnessed it everywhere I've turned. In a lot of countries around the world, it is illegal to be Christian. Christians have been put to death for their beliefs. Even in this country, the ACLU is working hard to make it illegal to pray in public places, even if all involved wanted to pray. They are suing public institutions and schools for displaying the Ten Commandments, even though it is a historical document. How many televisions shows on TV are about God, Jesus Christ, or Christianity? I don't know of any. How many are about gay lifestyle, or how many are about sex, drugs, and violence? Quite a few! The point I'm making is, the secular population is still the most popular and is the ruling majority. The problem is that those against the Marriage Amendment did not do their job. If you actually think the whole state of North Carolina who were registered to vote came out to vote on this bill, then I have some beach front property in Kansas to sell you. You're beef should be with those who were too lazy to get out and vote against this thing. People in this country have the right to vote for or against as they choose, and you whining and complaining about it isn't going to change that fact.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Let's do the math here.
Gay marriages would impact the church or christian people in no way, shape, form or fashion.

You don't know what impact it would have. Maybe or maybe not. Never say never on anything that has to do with politics and the government. Who's to say that the state wouldn't eventually step in and force ministers to marry a gay couple, or that the ACLU would force them into some expensive lawsuit until they gave in. It could very well happen even though ministers and the church are supposed to be protected by the Freedom of Religion amendment, it still wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Christian bigotry and "beliefs" deny people the right to have benefits, civil unions, and marriages.

And atheistic bigotry deny Christians the right to have formal pray in schools, kill Christians in other countries, deny them the right to assemble in public, etc...at least gay people in the states can still get married, they just can't marry the one they love. Well, news flash, the amendment says nothing about marrying the one you love anyway. The government can care less if that man and woman love each other. Do you really think the government would have gotten involved in all of this IF there wasn't something in it for them? If not, you're extremely gullible.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Who's the "intolerant" ones around here? Looks like the vast majority (62%) of christians.

And where did you get that number and how do you know they are true, professing Christians to begin with? There are many people who use the banner of Christianity (such as the KKK for instance) to push their cultist hate agenda when we all know they're about as Christian as Bill Maher. And honestly, the stuff you're pushing out resembles the stuff I've seen from those hate groups.

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

On a side note, I know 4 people right off the top off my head that voted for it and have been divorced(one of them married 3 times). Yet, had the nerve to post on facebook about the "Sanctity of Marriage". /facepalm

OK, 4 people out of how many that voted? And you're willing to place everybody who voted for the Marriage Amendment in the category as bigots, and you know of 4 people? Talk about judgmental. Sure, I'd call those 4 people hypocritical IF they didn't repent of their sins of divorce, but if they DID, then they do have the right to talk about the Sanctity of Marriage. But, if they didn't, then yes, they are hypocrites. I'm not denying people voted for this amendment for the wrong reasons, but to throw the hate toward a certain religious group and lump them and everyone voting in favor of this amendment all in the category as bigots is down right stupid for a lack of better terms. Personally, I don't think the government should have EVER gotten into the marriage business to begin with, because it has no place with that. It also shouldn't have gotten into the business of handing out benefits to married people anyway. It should have stayed as a choice of those insurance companies and other companies who wanted to recognize married people. At least, it would have spurred more competition and maybe companies that were more gay friendly. The way I see it is, all of these social issues are taking away from where the government should be spending its time on, which is economic recovery in hard hit places, and keeping this country safe from terrorist attacks. Instead, people are fighting over social issues in which the government shouldn't have ever been involved with in the first place.