Originally Posted By barboy2 imadisneygal, "knowing" and "fully believing" are the same thing, no? It looks like you dislike Josh's stance so much that you are now inventing reasons to justify how he is wrong. Josh & Co. are wrong not because of the semanitcs of 'believing' vs 'knowing' but because they want to stick their large noses in the lives of Jack and Jim when Jack and Jim aren't hurting anybody with their relationship.
Originally Posted By barboy2 ///RoadTrip you missed the point/// I doubt that---- I'd bet that he understands well what is going on with this topic.
Originally Posted By imadisneygal I totally agree with your last sentence, Barboy. In this case, the Prop 8 argument, the real problem is the interjection of personal morality into the lives of other people. I am just saying that one of the reasons I get so frustrated with conversations about religion. There are people, and Josh is one of them, who doesn't even entertain the possibility that what they believe to be the truth is not necessarily the truth for everyone.
Originally Posted By barboy2 ///I still believe this is rooted in fear of the fundamentalist Mormons who still practice polygamy and wish to legalize it. The LDS Church leadership foolishly believes that if gay marriage becomes legal, then polygamy will be next./// interesting angle, very interesting indeed..... you might well be correct.
Originally Posted By -em >>In this case, the Prop 8 argument, the real problem is the interjection of personal morality into the lives of other people. I am just saying that one of the reasons I get so frustrated with conversations about religion. There are people, and Josh is one of them, who doesn't even entertain the possibility that what they believe to be the truth is not necessarily the truth for everyone.<< I think a lot of the problem particularly with "Utah Mormons" is lack of diversity within their communities. I know its better in some areas (like SLC) but for the most part its rare to find non-mormons let alone anyone else who doesn't fit the white, hetero cookie cutter mold. The view they have is what they see on TV/Internet/Newspapers. It's a blind "dislike" because they don't have names or identities. They don't know any different because their social circles are built of people who are exactly like them. Once I was listening to my family talk about a similar topic and I was ashamed about listening to them talk knowing full well none of them KNEW a homosexual and I realized how shallow and insensitive they were because they didn't know better. For them ignorance is bliss. -em
Originally Posted By Dabob2 "knowing full well none of them KNEW a homosexual " Or more accurately, none of them knew they knew a homosexual. There are plenty of closet cases in disapproving communities, no question.
Originally Posted By -em >>Or more accurately, none of them knew they knew a homosexual. << Very true. Sad part is that it's their loss and why a lot of my life will always stay in Florida and not utah
Originally Posted By utahjosh I know and am friends with, not just acquaintances, 3 or 4 gay people. Including family. Just to dispel that myth in my case.
Originally Posted By DVC dad clone I cannot believe I suckered myself into reading 149 posts on this topic when the OP really sums it up. Silly me. By the by, heeeey TIM!
Originally Posted By Donny I have notice that the same people who want to say Mormons are a hate group seem to forget how they would like to rip out any reference to God on our money,in our government buildings,School organizations,they don't even want churches to be able to get government money to help in Aid for the poor.Seems pretty hateful to me
Originally Posted By Mr X ***they would like to rip out any reference to God on our money,in our government buildings,School organizations*** How is any of that "hateful"? Why should YOUR religion be imposed on the rest of us? ***they don't even want churches to be able to get government money to help in Aid for the poor*** Link? I have NO problem with churches getting government subsidies AS charitable organizations if they're eligible. I haven't heard anything otherwise. I think you're just making it up.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Seems pretty hateful to me<< Then you have a really weird definition of hateful. What you call hateful the rest of us call respecting our nation's diversity by not imposing your god on those who don't believe in him, be they Atheist, Muslim, etc.
Originally Posted By Donny Should a Church really not be allowed to have a voice in Government ????Unions,businesses,non profit organizations all have a voice.Sounds pretty hateful to not allow a group of people a voice because they believe in God.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> I have NO problem with churches getting government subsidies AS charitable organizations if they're eligible. I haven't heard anything otherwise. << I do have a problem with churches receiving taxpayer dollars - for charity or anything else. We've already seen glaring examples of collusion in which specific churches were hand-picked by administration officials as 'payback' for support and votes. This increases the power and influence of these churches above and beyond other churches in the community that do not receive these taxpayer provided subsidies. And there's essentially no oversight of how these monies are disbursed. Donny may have faith and trust in every church out there, but I don't. Let's use the LDS church as an example. They may be feeding the naked and clothing the poor and performing good works, but they also have a long history of oppression of disfavored groups - and for that matter oppressing their own members. So it should be understandable that I - and plenty of others - wouldn't want a dime of my money, or any taxpayer provided funds given to them. Money is the mother's milk of politics, and giving money to churches increases their political power. Churches shouldn't have political power, and they shouldn't expect it. That's why they're given a tax exempt status.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> Should a Church really not be allowed to have a voice in Government ???? << When they start paying taxes, they can have a 'voice' in government. But they don't pay taxes, so no - they don't get a voice. In this case, you're asking for "representation without taxation". You've got some weird ideas about what it means to be an american. But perhaps you're like Josh who's commitment to your church overrides your commitment to your nation.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad I say we do away with Taxes altogether. Let us have an voluntary offering system of funding government.
