Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 77420

If two people wish to actively engage in a homosexual relationship, they're free to do so--with every consequence which comes with that. However, they are not free to redefine marriage to include said relationship. Why? 1. They didn't define marriage to start with, and 2. They don't have the intrinsic authority necessary to redefine marriage. It would not be Christ-like /not/ to tell them this, or to simply let them go on their merry way without warning.

Simple belief isn't necessarily correct. One can certainly /believe/ anything, but a wrong belief shouldn't be allowed to proceed unhindered, simply because the interest of pursuing knowledge is /objective truth/, not convenience. Saying that a particular belief isn't true and/or that following that belief results in grave consequences isn't forcing someone to believe that. It is presenting the objective truth in contrast to a false, subjective belief.

JarraxVolk, Christian Teen Forums 58 Comments [11/13/2010 4:06:07 AM]
Fundie Index: 56
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2 3
TB Tabby

And let me guess...your little holy book has the authority to define marriage?

Then have I got a surprise for you!

11/13/2010 4:11:20 AM

C_V


society defines what marriage is. societies change. you'll have to learn to live with that.

11/13/2010 4:40:17 AM

Cabraxas

Nobody needs to necessarily re-define your "Christian" marriage,,,,, only the legal, secular marriage.

11/13/2010 5:01:02 AM

Mudak

Um. Marriage hasn't always been your one man/one woman thing you claim to be upholding. Check your bible...

11/13/2010 5:05:37 AM



"Simple belief isn't necessarily correct. One can certainly /believe/ anything, but a wrong belief shouldn't be allowed to proceed unhindered, simply because the interest of pursuing knowledge is /objective truth/, not convenience. Saying that a particular belief isn't true and/or that following that belief results in grave consequences isn't forcing someone to believe that. It is presenting the objective truth in contrast to a false, subjective belief."

You guys are going to quit shrieking "persecution" when we point out you are wrong then?

11/13/2010 5:10:20 AM

Concerned Brit

"Simple belief isn't necessarily correct. One can certainly /believe/ anything, but a wrong belief shouldn't be allowed to proceed unhindered, simply because the interest of pursuing knowledge is /objective truth/, not convenience. Saying that a particular belief isn't true and/or that following that belief results in grave consequences isn't forcing someone to believe that. It is presenting the objective truth in contrast to a false, subjective belief."

Will you be applying this insight the next time we tell you that the diversity of life on this planet is explained by evolution by means of natural selection, rather than your wrong belief that goddidit?

11/13/2010 5:17:28 AM

Matante

The second paragraph is simply precious! <3

11/13/2010 5:25:12 AM

The Fixer

If people wish to actively engage in a religious worship, they're free to do so--with every consequence which comes with that. However, they are not free to redefine reality to include said religion. Why? 1. They didn't define reality to start with, and 2. They don't have the any authority necessary to redefine reality. It would be inhumane /not/ to tell them this, or to simply let them go on their merry way without warning.

Simple belief isn't necessarily correct. One can certainly /believe/ anything, but a wrong belief shouldn't be allowed to proceed unhindered, simply because the interest of pursuing knowledge is /objective truth/, not convenience. Saying that a particular belief is true and/or that following that belief results in some grand eternal reward isn't forcing someone to believe that. It is presenting the wishful thinking in contrast to reality.

FIXED

11/13/2010 5:46:58 AM

arcturus

Christ never referred to homosexuality in the bible, so his beliefs on the subject, had he existed, are unknown.

Saying it's un-christ-like is therefore a non-sequiter

11/13/2010 6:16:38 AM

dionysus

Simple belief isn't necessarily correct. One can certainly /believe/ anything, but a wrong belief shouldn't be allowed to proceed unhindered, simply because the interest of pursuing knowledge is /objective truth/, not convenience. Saying that a particular belief isn't true and/or that following that belief results in grave consequences isn't forcing someone to believe that. It is presenting the objective truth in contrast to a false, subjective belief.

Okay, then you should be fine with people debunking Christianity.

11/13/2010 6:21:55 AM

Doubting Thomas

Yes, marriage should be just between a man & as many women as he can handle as proscribed in the bible. Concubines are also OK, and it's OK for the man to divorce a woman, but not OK for a woman to divorce a man.

Is this the biblical definition of marriage you want us to have?

11/13/2010 6:23:10 AM

Pule Thamex

Very nice sentiments, I'm sure. However JarraxVolk, your wronger than a very wrong thing. As we all know, Christian Teen Forums is an extraordinary place on the web, a mysterious place where if a thing, thought, idea, sentiment or expression is in any way wrong, it will turn up there. Christianity is the wrong view to take and leads the unwary clot in to a lifetime full of glaring wrongs. Christianity is a thing of ultra-wrongness that talks about God, albeit a stupendously wrong God, but in reality, it is mainly about the wrong thoughts and the amazingly wrong desires of blatantly wrong and rabid men. Teens, if you don't want to be wrong, I'm looking particularly at you Mister incorrect JarraxVolk, then stay away from the drooling insanity that is religion and open your minds to rightness.

11/13/2010 6:45:23 AM

LAchlan

In your second paragraph, you pretty much pulled out the biggest pistol I've ever seen and shot yourself right in the foot with it. BOOOOM!

11/13/2010 6:47:37 AM

TGRwulf

Except you know, marriage PREDATES Christianity and many ancient cultures HAD gay marriage and didn't collapse because of it.

11/13/2010 7:28:55 AM

Berny

Marriage is defined by society, not religion. Marriage was a contractual relationship long before it was a formalized religious one.
In other words, gays are free to demand the right to marry, with everything that it entails, and assholes like you can't do sweet fuck all about it except spew you vile hatred at them and call it religion.
Sooner or later, the United States will join the enlightened world on this issue. It's either that, or you will degrade into the kind of Bronze Age theocracy that makes Iran such a shit hole.

11/13/2010 8:08:54 AM

JohnTheAtheist

In our society it is the state who decides you can and cannot get married, not the churches. Thank Jesus H. Christ for that.

The definition of marriage has already changed very dramatically in just the last 100 years in the United States. All of my fellow FSTDT'ers, please go read the decision that over turned Prop 8 in California, it is fascinating and will give you a ton of information that will be helpful when debating this topic with these retards.

11/13/2010 8:40:48 AM

I read about the afterlife

Jarrax, maybe you'd best stick to arguments that folllow an "If this, then that, therefore this" format.

11/13/2010 8:54:33 AM

Anon-e-moose

"If two people wish to actively engage in a homosexual relationship, they're free to do so--with every consequence which comes with that."

"Simple belief isn't necessarily correct. One can certainly /believe/ anything, but a wrong belief shouldn't be allowed to proceed unhindered, simply because the interest of pursuing knowledge is /objective truth/, not convenience. Saying that a particular belief isn't true and/or that following that belief results in grave consequences isn't forcing someone to believe that. It is presenting the objective truth in contrast to a false, subjective belief."

How right you are:



Jesus hates hypocrites, does he not? You do the maths, JarraxVolk.

I love the smell of destroyed arguments in the morning. Smells like... victory.

11/13/2010 8:55:10 AM



homosexual relationship...they're free to do so--with every consequence which comes with that.

I'm sure in your mind this includes bullying, discrimination, verbal and physical assault, murder, death, kill...

Saying that a particular belief isn't true and/or that following that belief results in grave consequences isn't forcing someone to believe that. It is presenting the objective truth in contrast to a false, subjective belief.

Islam is the True Faith(tm). Christianity is false.

You mean like that?

11/13/2010 9:21:05 AM

breakerslion

The Fixer said it exactly the way I would.

Second derivative:

If two people wish to actively engage in a heterosexual relationship, they're free to do so--with every consequence which comes with that. However, they are not free to redefine marriage to include only said relationship. Why? 1. They didn't define marriage to start with, and 2. They don't have the intrinsic authority necessary to define marriage. It would not be Christ-like /not/ to tell them this, or to simply let them go on their merry way without warning.

Paragraph two requires no rewrite, but a strong irony meter is recommended.

11/13/2010 9:29:04 AM

Zeus Almighty

You shoulda stopped after the first 16 weeks. Unfortunately you continued and went downhill fast from there.
Overall: FAIL!

11/13/2010 9:43:25 AM

Mister Spak

If two people wish to establish a fundie government in America they are free to wish it. However they are not free to redefine the meaning of the words used to write the constitution.

"Simple belief isn't necessarily correct."

As teabaggers have demonstrated continuously.

11/13/2010 10:04:42 AM

GodotIsWaiting4U

1) Neither did you.

2) Neither do you, by your logic.

11/13/2010 10:31:00 AM

StoneSpiral

Irony, we has it.

11/13/2010 10:51:19 AM

Beltaine

Here is my proposal.

Government gets out of marriage completely. All it will grant is a civil union, which has all the legal framework of rights and responsibilities that are currently granted to couples who are married. All current marriages are grandfathered in.

If you want to get married, find someone who you believe can preform the ceremony, and afterwards it has all the moral weight you assigned to it.

From that point on, the government will not get involved with any marriage unless some other law applies (age of consent, fire code, etc). If a same sex couple finds someone to marry them, and they say they are married, that's your problem.

11/13/2010 11:23:43 AM
1 2 3