I see no problem with that... but what's easier, rewriting thousands of pages of law and making widespread changing of labels, or just letting homosexuals call their union a "marriage"?
Freedom isn't about what's easy.
I see no problem with that... but what's easier, rewriting thousands of pages of law and making widespread changing of labels, or just letting homosexuals call their union a "marriage"?
Do you seriously think that in 50 years the LDS church will be tolerant of gay sex? I sure as heck don't.
I'm not gay, but I grew up in pretty much the exact same religious situation (shunned or deal with it). I have many friends in an identical situation. I'm sure you can see why I see this as a copout. I'm not angry or looking for excuses. I deal with it and live a pretty normal, run of the mill life. This is the way life is. People are emotional creatures, and have expectations that others see as irrational. Some can deal with that pressure and others cannot. I know people who've taken the shunned rout, and it worked out fine. I know others who deal with it "in the closet" and it worked out fine. Unfortunately, others weren't blessed to be born with the capacity to deal with it. That truly is very sad. I hate to see people chemical disadvantaged as I like to call it. That's not a spot I'd like anyone to be in. Life should be enjoyable.
I care if they publicly promote and make a significant issue about sexual orientation being a choice and that gay people can learn to be straight.
Wait, why did that other thread get closed? Seriously?
But, in 50 years, Packer's views and those of his ilk are going to look as absurd as any of the opposition of previous civil rights movements
It's true, and the last person I said this to went completely ape ****. It's like people can't handle that the world changes and acceptance expands as time goes on.
The shining example is seeing how many old people are still racist against black people, when anybody from our generation would say something racist and likely get their *** beaten. Standards change, and this is yet another standard that is inevitably going to change. But, people can't handle that for whatever reason.
Are you kidding? Page 4 was literally one of the dumbest pages in Jazzfanz history. A very good portion of the members on this forum can't form an intelligent point if their life depended on it, yet they choose to participate in discussions like this. Their method of making an intelligent argument is to mock the people that have perfectly valid points.
What the hell are you talking about? Because I care unequivocally about an individual's rights and their treatment I am biased? Are you sure you even know what that word means or rather, how it should be or is usually applied? And a little study of what could sooth my frustrations? If that was an attempt to proselytize, you are barking up the wrong tree.Here's a pun, your hate is making me Numb.
They publicly oppose gay marriage. They privately promote religious values in a religious venue. You have some anger issues and are more than biased. A little study could do a lot to sooth your frustrations.
If they're that easy to mock, maybe they're not as valid as you claim. Just a thought.
Wait, why did that other thread get closed? Seriously?