"Nathan Nagel" <njnagel@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3F21E05C.50570C38@earthlink.net...
> David Allen wrote:
> >
> > "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
> > news:bfrvb3$p0m$62@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > > In article <2223b4c9d66def5ddbae5bb73cec0a71@free.teranews.com>,
> > > Omphalos <#> wrote:
> > > >On Fri 25 Jul 2003 01:43:41p, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote
in
> > > >news:bfrq8d$p0m$3@puck.cc.emory.edu:
> > > >
> > > >> In article <IxVTa.4868$Hr.38351@twister.socal.rr.com>,
> > > >> David Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@san.rr.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> That comment isn't any different than the ones you offer all the
time,
> > > >>> except it's from the other side of the opinion sprectrum. Oh, and
the
> > > >>> bestiality, incest and bigamy arguments are real argurments
against
> > gay
> > > >>> marriage.
> > > >>
> > > >> Only in the minds of bigots and fools.
> > > >
> > > >Why is homosexuality ok, but at the same time incest, beastiality,
> > bigamy,
> > > >and child molestation are wrong?
> > > >
> > >
> > > If you have to ask that, you're too dumb to tie your own shoelaces.
> > >
> >
> > Humor us Lloyd. Do you have to dig deep to answer? Take more than 30
> > seconds?
> >
> > > >>> So, that comment doesn't come from idiocy. The point being that
> > > >>> gay marriage doesn't have an intellectual backstop that doesn't
have
> > > >>> within it's boundary those vices
> > > >>
> > > >> Two committed and consenting adults.
> > > >
> > > >Tolerance leads to perversity.
> > >
> > > Intolerance leads to murder. Drag any blacks to death lately? Beat
any
> > gays
> > > to death? How about lynchings?
> >
> > Tolerance of mistakes is good. Tolerance of evil and wrong is perverse.
> > Does that suprise you? It shouldn't, because it's common sense. All
people
> > of good will understand that and have for thousands of years.
> >
> > "Tolerance" by itself is just a word with no connection to good or bad.
> > Like "discrimination". Both words the left loves.
> >
> > As far as marriage goes, it's not defined as "consenting adults".
That's
> > the problem here, you "tolerant" types want to redefing marriage so that
> > anyone can join the party! Aren't we cool! We love everybody! We're
so
> > tolerant!
>
> And who are you to say what is "evil and wrong" and what isn't? I know
> some people that I consider good people who happen to be homosexual.
> Are you telling me that they aren't really good people after all? By
> what authority can you make that judgement?
>
> nate
I'm part of a vast majority of people who can categorically say murder,
dragging blacks to death and beating gays is evil and wrong. I am also part
of a smaller majority of people who believe re-defining marriage is wrong,
with all due respect to my homosexual friends and relatives. All of whom
are fine people of good character. That's never been the issue. I should
never presume to judge anyone's goodness only on the basis that they are
homosexual. That would be wrong (hey! another "judgement"!)
I've said it before, I'll say it again. As one who believes in God, I tend
to believe that of all those God will judge I think homosexuals will be
among those judged most mercifully (depending, of course on the kind of life
they tried to live). I don't know the statistics, but IMO, many if not most
are pre-disposed to homosexuality in some way.
The gays I've known in my life didn't want to be gay. They fought it and at
least some eventually gave up fighting. They went and carried on a gay
lifestyle. I find it really impossible for me to condemn them. I don't
agree with the choice, but then I'm not in their shoes. But I won't give up
my belief that re-defining marriage for the sake of gays who want to
legalize their relationship is wrong for us collectively. There's more to
that issue than just fairness to gays.