Quote:That is still changing their view. Before they weren't tolerant of it and now they are. Again, peoples minds are changing. What do you think is next? More people will not also tolerate it, they will agree with it. It's inevitable.
That's where I disagree, tolerance does not equate approval. As a society we can strive to be tolerant of each others differences, doesn't mean we all approve of each others choices.
Just because I believe people have the right to do an act doesn't mean I've changed my belief in the act being right or wrong. The poll ytram cited even proves my point, the majority of peoples views (67%) on the issue haven't changed their belief about the issue, they've change what role they think government should play in the process.
Quote:That's where I disagree, tolerance does not equate approval. As a society we can strive to be tolerant of each others differences, doesn't mean we all approve of each others choices.
Just because I believe people have the right to do an act doesn't mean I've changed my belief in the act being right or wrong. The poll ytram cited even proves my point, the majority of peoples views (67%) on the issue haven't changed their belief about the issue, they've change what role they think government should play in the process.
Never said it did equate to approval. I stated people's views changed. And they have. If one day I don't approve of gays marrying legally and another I do regardless if I think it is wrong or right, then my views have changed. Also, there are those that were tolerant, but disagreed with it who now think it is okay. I am one of those people so I can tell you firsthand.
Quote:Never said it did equate to approval. I stated people's views changed. And they have. If one day I don't approve of gays marrying legally and another I do regardless if I think it is wrong or right, then my views have changed. Also, there are those that were tolerant, but disagreed with it who now think it is okay. I am one of those people so I can tell you firsthand.
Ok if that's the definition of views changing then I concede the point. I'm talking about their belief in moral and immoral acts. It was suggested that because more people support same sex marriage more people must have changed their minds about it being immoral. I was just simply trying to point out that plenty of people myself included still view it as immoral but simply view the role of government on the issue differently. Somewhere in the conversation that got lost.
Quote:Then you changed your mind. See, even TMD is being swayed. He was not in support of their right in a different thread.
Thats not true.
I'd like for you to show where I posted on here where I wasn't for equality/ their equal rights on this issue.
I just don't support/ agree with their lifestyle.
I've been very consistent on this.
Quote:That's where I disagree, tolerance does not equate approval. As a society we can strive to be tolerant of each others differences, doesn't mean we all approve of each others choices.
Just because I believe people have the right to do an act doesn't mean I've changed my belief in the act being right or wrong. The poll ytram cited even proves my point, the majority of peoples views (67%) on the issue haven't changed their belief about the issue, they've change what role they think government should play in the process.
The majority of people haven't changed their belief about the issue, true , but you seem to think that means they disapprove. The poll doesn't say that at all. If approval now carries a strong majority, and 67% say they have not changed their view on the issue, then obviously a large part of that 67% have always approved.
Plus, if you look at the polls on page 1, those show that people in general have changed their minds as to whether they approve of the act. The polls in 2007 showed a majority thought homosexuality was immoral, but the polls from 2014 show a strong majority now think homosexuality is NOT immoral. It is now a 20 point majority for homosexuality NOT being immoral.
You seem to think society has decided to tolerate but not approve homosexuality. The poll shows you are wrong about that. Society has decided to both tolerate AND approve homosexuality.
Quote:The majority of people haven't changed their belief about the issue, true , but you seem to think that means they disapprove. The poll doesn't say that at all. If approval now carries a strong majority, and 67% say they have not changed their view on the issue, then obviously a large part of that 67% have always approved.
Plus, if you look at the polls on page 1, those show that people in general have changed their minds as to whether they approve of the act. The polls in 2007 showed a majority thought homosexuality was immoral, but the polls from 2014 show a strong majority now think homosexuality is NOT immoral. It is now a 20 point majority for homosexuality NOT being immoral.
You seem to think society has decided to tolerate but not approve homosexuality. The poll shows you are wrong about that. Society has decided to both tolerate AND approve homosexuality.
Wheres the question that they ask about it being moral or immoral? I didn't see that one.
As for the 67% I'm not trying to say they all disapprove, just that they're views on it being moral or immoral are probably constant. Morals IMO are something that people don't change that often, certainly not in a short 7 year period. The change is in what role they think government should play in the decision. The religious people for example don't all the sudden view it as not-sinful, and there is still a pretty big sector of the population that are religious (just about all the religions view homosexuality as a sin).
That said MANY of the religious people that view homosexuality as a "sin" still support legislation making it lawful for homosexuals to have the same equal access to marriage as everyone else. That's not changing their mind about it's not sinful or immoral.
Quote:Wheres the question that they ask about it being moral or immoral? I didn't see that one.
As for the 67% I'm not trying to say they all disapprove, just that they're views on it being moral or immoral are probably constant. Morals IMO are something that people don't change that often, certainly not in a short 7 year period. The change is in what role they think government should play in the decision. The religious people for example don't all the sudden view it as not-sinful, and there is still a pretty big sector of the population that are religious (just about all the religions view homosexuality as a sin).
That said MANY of the religious people that view homosexuality as a "sin" still support legislation making it lawful for homosexuals to have the same equal access to marriage as everyone else. That's not changing their mind about it's not sinful or immoral.
Look on page 1 towards the bottom, where it says "Next I'm going to read you a list of issues..." The question asked in that poll is whether gay and lesbian relations are morally acceptable or morally wrong. That poll shows that the fundamental change is in people's attitude towards the morality of homosexuality. That is what has driven the change in their attitude towards gay marriage. The change in peoples attitudes towards the morality of it, and in their attitude towards gay marriage, are in sync with each other.
Quote:Look on page 1 towards the bottom, where it says "Next I'm going to read you a list of issues..." The question asked in that poll is whether gay and lesbian relations are morally acceptable or morally wrong. That poll shows that the fundamental change is in people's attitude towards the morality of homosexuality. That is what has driven the change in their attitude towards gay marriage. The change in peoples attitudes towards the morality of it, and in their attitude towards gay marriage, are in sync with each other.
Thank you was looking for it but missed it.
Quote:People that thought homosexuality was moral before still do, and people that thought it was immoral still do, the difference is most now agree it's not governments role to decide,
I mean, besides the 37% of people that have changed their opinion on the issue.
Like many of us said before, as the populous becomes more educated on issues, it's ignorant to expect opinions on those issues to not fluxuate. I realize this concept is impossible for you to wrap your head around, but please try. Now go and move that goalpost and say "I never meant 0%!" and show you ignorance at how far apart 0% and 37% is. Extrapolated across the entire population, that 37% would account for tens of millions of people.
But yeah, "people that thought homosexuality was immoral before, still do".
Quote:Ok if that's the definition of views changing then I concede the point. I'm talking about their belief in moral and immoral acts. It was suggested that because more people support same sex marriage more people must have changed their minds about it being immoral. I was just simply trying to point out that plenty of people myself included still view it as immoral but simply view the role of government on the issue differently. Somewhere in the conversation that got lost.
And plenty of people of changed their minds from disagreeing and being intolerant to agreeing. I'd say many of those people are the same ones who have questioned their religion. But again, if you go from intolerant to tolerant, you are still changing your views.
Quote:Thats not true.
I'd like for you to show where I posted on here where I wasn't for equality/ their equal rights on this issue.
I just don't support/ agree with their lifestyle.
I've been very consistent on this.
You didn't want them to be able to get married. You argued for civil union or them calling it something different. That isn't equal rights or equality. I could search back in the forum, but you did say it.
Quote:You didn't want them to be able to get married. You argued for civil union or them calling it something different. That isn't equal rights or equality. I could search back in the forum, but you did say it.
I initially was against it being labeled marriage because of the religious aspect - Yes, but then you missed the posts shortly after that back then when I relented after a good point was brought up about 2 athiests are allowed to marry and it still being labeled "marriage". Since that point my take has been exactly what I stated in the above post.
Quote:I initially was against it being labeled marriage because of the religious aspect - Yes, but then you missed the posts shortly after that back then when I relented after a good point was brought up about 2 athiests are allowed to marry and it still being labeled "marriage". Since that point my take has been exactly what I stated in the above post.
And I said even you changed your mind.
Quote:And I said even you changed your mind.
No you were attributing that to me changing my mind on the actual morality issue of it. My change of mind that I pointed out really was over what amounts to semantics with the "civil Union" or "Marriage" title. I still was for them being allowed to get the same benefits as hetero married people and be treated equally even back then.
I am all for same sex couples have equal rights to marry for financial/health benefits.
Marriage in my book is defined as a union between man and women.
No matter how many times man tries to re-write society, the power of the Lord will always prevail either through tongue, or spirit.
Quote:I am all for same sex couples have equal rights to marry for financial/health benefits.
Marriage in my book is defined as a union between man and women.
No matter how many times man tries to re-write society, the power of the Lord will always prevail either through tongue, or spirit.
I agree 100% with your post although sadly, you'll probably get a warning for your last sentence.
I said something similar in this post.... (but not quite as far as you did for fear of warning)
http://jungle.jaguars.com/index.php?/top.../?p=323160
Quote:I am all for same sex couples have equal rights to marry for financial/health benefits.
Marriage in my book is defined as a union between man and women.
No matter how many times man tries to re-write society, the power of the Lord will always prevail either through tongue, or spirit.
what do you think was happening when man wrote that book?
I'm going to share what may be more than I should:
I'm probably the only one here with a vested interest in this whole thing. IRL I'm an ordained minister. Although I do not currently work for any organized religious group (I've been on staff at several churches but my disillusionment is a long story), I serve our community doing weddings and funerals as I'm called upon by friends and family to do so. I also have several wedding vendors (photographers, caterers, DJs, etc.) who call on me when a client requires a minister's services. Although it's not my primary bread earning, it's a nice supplement and, because of the nature of the service, I often officiate for couples that I've only met once or twice before the ceremony.
Because of the religious aspect of my ordination I could not in good conscience officiate the vows for a same sex couple. I am greatly concerned that, at some point, I will be asked to do so and end up being sued because I refuse on the grounds of religious objection. Many of my friends in the ministry share this concern. For most people in this thread the concerns are abstract, but for me they are concrete; I could literally be dragged into court and through the mud because of my moral objection to same sex marriages. Although I personally do not object to the concept or that they have the right to do whatever they want, I can easily see the time when my professional stance could cause me a lot of trouble. The case the Houston pastors currently being investigated and subpoenaed because of what they've spoken from the pulpit and the case of the cake makers who were sued both lend credence to my concern. The LGBT movement is not satisfied with "Do as thout wilt", they require that all accept it and endorse it, something I will never do. I'm in the "Do what you will, but leave me out of it" camp, and I don't believe that will satisfy them in the long game.
Quote:I'm going to share what may be more than I should:
I'm probably the only one here with a vested interest in this whole thing. IRL I'm an ordained minister. Although I do not currently work for any organized religious group (I've been on staff at several churches but my disillusionment is a long story), I serve our community doing weddings and funerals as I'm called upon by friends and family to do so. I also have several wedding vendors (photographers, caterers, DJs, etc.) who call on me when a client requires a minister's services. Although it's not my primary bread earning, it's a nice supplement and, because of the nature of the service, I often officiate for couples that I've only met once or twice before the ceremony.
Because of the religious aspect of my ordination I could not in good conscience officiate the vows for a same sex couple. I am greatly concerned that, at some point, I will be asked to do so and end up being sued because I refuse on the grounds of religious objection. Many of my friends in the ministry share this concern. For most people in this thread the concerns are abstract, but for me they are concrete; I could literally be dragged into court and through the mud because of my moral objection to same sex marriages. Although I personally do not object to the concept or that they have the right to do whatever they want, I can easily see the time when my professional stance could cause me a lot of trouble. The case the Houston pastors currently being investigated and subpoenaed because of what they've spoken from the pulpit and the case of the cake makers who were sued both lend credence to my concern. The LGBT movement is not satisfied with "Do as thout wilt", they require that all accept it and endorse it, something I will never do. I'm in the "Do what you will, but leave me out of it" camp, and I don't believe that will satisfy them in the long game.
If you are asked to do one, just say you have something already scheduled that day, and schedule yourself a round of golf. :thumbsup:
Quote:
The LGBT movement is not satisfied with "Do as thout wilt", they require that all accept it and endorse it, something I will never do. I'm in the "Do what you will, but leave me out of it" camp, and I don't believe that will satisfy them in the long game.
Yep, I asserted something similar in one of my posts earlier in this thread....