Well lately, all of you have had some questions about different religions. I've decided (well Becca helped come up with this too) that on Saturdays it's all up to you! You guys can ask me any questions about my religion! If you have any questions about other people's religions then comment and hopefully they'll comment back with your answer! Please understand that I'm answering all questions to the best of my ability!
So get asking some questions!
-Zoe
DO YOU REALLY LOVE JESUS CHRIST???
Today's Mass Readings
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(122)
- ► 08/31 - 09/07 (2)
- ► 06/08 - 06/15 (4)
- ► 06/01 - 06/08 (5)
- ► 05/25 - 06/01 (5)
- ► 05/18 - 05/25 (5)
- ► 05/11 - 05/18 (5)
- ► 05/04 - 05/11 (5)
- ► 04/27 - 05/04 (6)
- ► 04/13 - 04/20 (4)
- ► 04/06 - 04/13 (6)
- ► 03/30 - 04/06 (7)
- ► 03/23 - 03/30 (6)
- ► 03/16 - 03/23 (5)
- ► 03/09 - 03/16 (4)
- ► 03/02 - 03/09 (5)
- ► 02/24 - 03/02 (6)
- ► 02/17 - 02/24 (6)
- ► 02/10 - 02/17 (6)
- ► 02/03 - 02/10 (6)
- ► 01/27 - 02/03 (6)
- ▼ 01/20 - 01/27 (6)
- ► 01/13 - 01/20 (6)
- ► 01/06 - 01/13 (6)
-
►
2007
(30)
- ► 12/30 - 01/06 (5)
- ► 12/23 - 12/30 (1)
- ► 12/09 - 12/16 (3)
- ► 12/02 - 12/09 (6)
- ► 11/25 - 12/02 (7)
- ► 11/18 - 11/25 (6)
- ► 11/11 - 11/18 (2)
19 comments:
That sounds cool. I have my first question now. I'm not sure if I'm quoting this right but I'll try my best. In the bible it says something along the lines that a man will not sleep with a man as he does with a woman. But Christianity is all about love. Why should it matter what form love is in? I was wondering how you draw the line between the two?
Aren't you gonig to commebt? I thought that was what this poast is for?
IS ANYONE GOING TO COMMENT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Well, I'm not sure if it says that in the bible, but here's my opinion: If a man loves a man, good for him. I think it's terrible for someone to say it's not alright for you to love someone of the same gender. Because as I've said (in the same-sex marriage debate) you don't choose who you fall in love with. I do not agree with same-sex marriage, but that's another story that you can debate me on in that particular post.
I don't agree with a lot of things in the bible, and that's perfectly okay. That does not make me less of a Christian. If you just believe what your church belives, what parents believe and what the bible states, you don't really have your own opinion. You're just thinking that way because it's included in your religion, you go with it no matter if you agree with it or not. You shouldn't believe something, or stand up for something because it's what you're "supposed" to believe.
Roni, do you agree with this portion of the bible, or were you just wondering?
I don't agree with this portion of the bible. I think a man can love a man as much as he does with a woman. I also belive in gay marrige. I belive it is discrimination to not let gays get married. I know that for a long time gay marrige was not allowed, but times change. Some times you have to make adjustments.
I totaly agree with what you said about beliving in the bible. I don't belive in a lot of it. I have my own belifes and outlooks on life.
So why don't you belive in gay marrige?
Mostly because of what's called "The Slippery Slope". People will say "if you let gays marry because they love eachother, why won't you let me marry my cousin because I love her in that way too?!"
People will want to marry relatives, animals and maybe even objects. That's why I think marriage should have one clear defenition, and I don't think it should be "if you love eachother".
Okay theres a reason people can't marry relatives though. Its because if they have children their bloodtypes will be so similar that their children will be horribly disfigured! And an object cannot love a person, although theoritically, a person could potentially love an object. However, a man named Matt can love his boyfriend Cody, and Cody can also love Matt. They can both love eachother, not just ONE of them loving THE OTHER.
And as for people marrying animals, I think we can draw the line at species, can't we? Anyway, I think that you should have the consent of both parties to have a marriage. For a homosexual couple, both are able to say "Yes i would like to get married" or "No i would not like to get married."
While the person who loves the animal can make that decision, the animal cannot. Marriage should be agreed upon by both sides.
And for all the reasons given above, that is why same sex marriage is different from all the other examples you provide.
Also, if there was people who wanted to marry objects or animals or same relititives or whatever, they would be fighting for marrige rights, which they are not. And Strudel is right about what she said.
Ok so you can't tell if an object or animal really loves you. But what about your cousin, or relative? If they both love eachother, why don't we let people who are related get married?
Roni, I don't quite unserstand what you said...But just so you know, cousins in love are fighting to get married. (http://www.angelfire.com/on/cousins/stories.html)
I told you if they got married and had children their bloodtypes would be so similar that the children would be horribly disfigured. The only problem with homosexual marriage is that people will eventually have to come to terms with their narrow minded opinions about gays.
Anyway, if you go on the internet looking for ANYTHING, you'll find it. Just because there are a few people in the world who want to marry their cousins, it doesn't mean that marriage between relatives is a really hot topic, otherwise I think it would be one of our debate questions.
Anyway, we're talking about same sex marriage, not marriage between relatives.
Yes, but must I explain the slippery slope again. And shouldn't we still take minorities into consideration? Just because theres not alot doesn't mean that they don't still love eachother. And you said it yourself, marriage isn't just about having kids.
And I am NOT narrow minded about gays. I think that is just fine and dandy to be gay. I just think that marriagee is between two different genders because it's always been defined that way. If we change the definition, we might have to keep changing (thus the slippery slope). But this is not the gay marriage debate so I wish to go on withit no further. So if I don't comment after this one don't think it's because I have nothing to say. It's just we've debated and I think it's best to end here. OK?
What, are you affraid we are going to beat you? Are you even lisening to strudel? If this was a hot topic, it would be a debate question. Is it? No!
Even if marriage is about kids, I've realized that gays can potentially have children. Gay men can adopt and lesbians can be artificially inseminated. If a gay did decide to have a baby, there would be nothing wrong with the baby. But if relatives try to have children, there would be a great chance for a genetic mutation. And most couples who get married do want to have kids-- that's just the fact of life.
Don't explain the slippery slope to me again either. I already explaiend to you how marriage to objects and animals isn't the same, because both parties cannot consent to marriage in those cases. And as I explained above, marriage between relatives is different too.
Also, since when has the definition of marriage been between a man and a women? That may be a traditional marriage, but not the only type of marriage possible. It's just hogwash to say that marriage is a sacred union between a man and a women, because marriage doesn't have to be sacred or religious, and men can marry men and women can marry women. Or at least, they should be able to.
Marriage is only defined that way because it's an excuse for people to ban gay marriage. What if the definition of marriage were "a close intimate union between two people who love eachother" (which i believe is the real definition anyway) Would that change your opinion? Are you seriously basing your argument on the definition of a WORD? Cuz thats a pretty silly foundation.
Also:: I don't like that you get to decide when we end this debate. I haven't said all that I have to say and I really want to hear what you have to say. Otherwise, I'll just be forced to assume that you can't think of a good rebuttle. Anyway, you did ask me if it was okay to end this debate now. And I say no, it's not okay. Cuz im not done.
Also, the last thing we need in this world is to de promoting love. We need love in this world no matter what form it is in. Saying gays can't get married is disscrimination. One of the protected groups under civil right is sexual orintation. Saying gays shouldn't be allowed get married, in a way, is like saying black people shouldn't be allowed to get married. I agree with strudel. What gives you the right to end the debate? If you don't comment, I'm going to assume that you can't think of anything to say.
Okay just to let you know, now that I think about it, relatives getting married will become a debate topic. Oh and you can't have a debate with only one person, Becca. So stephie said that she wasn't going to comment anymore! that pretty much means that the debate won't continue. If steph decides that the debate won't continue then it won't cause there aren't too sides anymore!
So that's just what I'm saying so whatever...
-Zoe
Well i don't mean to sound harsh, but I don't think anyone here is really saying that relatives should be allowed to get married, so Im not sure how that would be a debate....but it's totally up to you zoe!
Roni- you are totally right about what you said about love. The last thing we need in this world is conflict or discrimination. Saying that gay marriage should be illegal is selfish. Because how could it affect you personally if gay marriage was legal? It wouldn't affect you! But while it is illegal, it is affecting millions of gay couples all across America. And how is this fair? Just because the "slippery slope" might occur? Well the slippery slope isn't a very good argument, as I have already said DOZENS of times, and I'm sure you guys are sick of me repeating myself.
You don't understand the discrimination that gays face when they aren't allowed to marry, because you know that when you grow up, you will be allowed to marry. I don't understand it either. Assuming that all of us are straight, nobody here understands the hardships gays face when they know that they'll never be able to get married. So how is it fair for STRAIGHT people to decide what GAY people should and shouldn't do? If gays are married, it won't personally affect us, so why are you so adament in saying it shouldn't be allowed? I can't wait until the day someone close to you comes out of the closet, and you have to tell them, to their face, that you think they shouldn't get married. Ever. In their life. That's a big blow and a perfect excuse to brew hate, which is the last thing we need.
Anyway, I guess since you guys (steph and zoe) are leaving the debate, me and roni won! :D
Go me and strudel!! Thanks for backing me up. You have good opinons.
Your welcome and thank you! :)
Post a Comment