mswobod@linfield.edu, studentforum@linfield.edu
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:04:19 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<69430826.1078310944@Megan>
<2147483647.1078329859@[10.119.96.187]>
<69430826.1078310944@Megan>
It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon or
any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It makes me
sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know that when it
is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to hell.
Sean Horning
--On Wednesday, March 2004, 10:49 AM -0800 mswobod@linfield.edu wrote:
> As of 11pm last night Multnomah County decided to start issuing marriage
> licenses to same-sex couples. Here are a couple articles...
>
> Congratulations, Oregon!
> Megan Swoboda
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> http://www.oregonlive.com/metro/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/all_wire_storie
> s/ 1077886922312110.xml
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Gay Marriage Licenses Coming to Oregon
>
> March 3, 2004
> By THE NEW YORK TIMES
>
>
> Oregon's most populous county will begin issuing marriage
> licenses to same-sex couples today, a county commissioner
> said last night.
>
> The board of commissioners for Multnomah County, which
> includes Portland, released a statement yesterday in favor
> of the policy change after the county attorney, Agnes
> Sowle, issued an opinion that the licenses would not
> violate state law.
>
> Commissioner Lisa Naito said that the commissioners would
> hold a news conference this morning to explain their
> decision and that the licenses would be issued afterward.
>
> Roey Thorpe, executive director for the gay rights group
> Basic Rights Oregon, said the group was thrilled.
>
> "Many gay and lesbian couples have been waiting for decades
> to be seen as equal under the law," Ms. Thorpe said.
>
> Oregon is one of 13 states without laws defining marriage
> as between a man and a woman.
>
> A spokesman for the state attorney general, Hardy Myers,
> said it was too early to say what action the state would
> take, if any.
>
> Commissioner Lonnie Roberts said the decision by others on
> the four-member board was made "clandestinely," without his
> knowledge.
>
> "I wasn't informed, and I feel that this is the wrong way
> to approach this issue," Mr. Roberts said.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/03/national/03GAYS.html?ex=1079301892&ei=1
> &e n=8cf2e52f62a2355b
>
>
> -
>
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>
mswobod@linfield.edu, studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:42:41 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
<2147483647.1078329859@[10.119.96.187]>
<20040304004241.GR728@linfield.edu>
<69430826.1078310944@Megan> <2147483647.1078329859@[10.119.96.187]>
begin sean horning quotation:
> It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon or
> any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It makes me
> sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know that when it
> is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to hell.
FREE MUMIA
--
BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS George Moffitt
1: SEE OUT http://www.georgebox.org
2: RELAXED SIGHT
3: HOLD ONESELF
Gloria Contreras <gcontre@linfield.edu>,
Sarah <sheilma@linfield.edu>, sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>,
studentforum@linfield.edu
dblumen@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:50:53 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<869112277.1078330659@[10.119.98.220]>
<26517349.1078332653@[10.119.94.109]>
<69430826.1078310944@Megan>
<2147483647.1078329859@[10.119.96.187]>
<1184769.1078330604@[10.223.251.101]> <869112277.1078330659@[10.119.98.220]>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:17 PM -0800 Gloria Contreras
<gcontre@linfield.edu> wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:16 PM -0800 Sarah <sheilma@linfield.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> --On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 4:04 PM -0800 sean horning
>> <shornin@linfield.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon
>>> or any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It makes
>>> me sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know that
>>> when it is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to hell.
>
> Ya know, that whole Biblical condemnation of gays? It's right up there
> with the kosher food and killing disobedient children.
>
>
> Gloria
>
> Nunquam Dormio
Kosher food and killing disobedient children are both applicable only to
the Jews- seeing as both were mentioned in the Old Testament books of the
Law (Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, all that). Personally, I'm a gentile,
so I'll eat what foods I want to. Also, the law was written for the purpose
of holding the Jews to a higher standard (as the "chosen people") of
holiness. Things like certain ceremonial washings and abstaining from meat
from strangled animals and meat with blood in it was symbolic of the
necessity of the people to stay clean. And as for killing disobedient
children, think of it from God's point of view for a second. Is it more
merciful to let a child grow up in rebellion amidst a people called to be
holy as God is holy, and then be stoned later on, or to- hm, there's not
really a very good way to put this without it being misconstrued, is
there?- let him be carried into Heaven before he is held responsible for
his actions? I have a feeling I'm going to get a lot of flak for this...
Paul wrote about how the law was added to show men how truly unable they
were to live up to the standard of holiness and perfection. Once people see
how sinful they are, they usually see the need for help, and they go to the
closest source- God. Thus, the law and its endless un-followable rules
served as an arrow to point to God.
That's a lot to say in a reaction to a comment about kosher food and
killing disobedient children, but if you're going to quote the Bible, do it
in context and take into account exactly who these things apply to and the
intent behind their application, please.
Oh, and the biblical condemnation of gays never actually occurs anywhere.
The condemnation of the actions of gays- and liars, and cheaters, and
coveters, and thieves, and prideful people, and those who kill- comes in a
couple places, but off the top of my head, its in Romans 1:24-27, give or
take. However, it also balances that with the command to "love one another,
as God loved you". I don't hate anybody, but I won't accept that homosexual
behavior is any more acceptable than beating a homosexual to death.
~Dustin
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>
mswobod@linfield.edu, studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 17:01:58 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<20040304004241.GR728@linfield.edu>
<22483830.1078333318@[10.119.91.141]>
<20040304004241.GR728@linfield.edu>
As someone who lives in Olympia Washington, home of everyone's favorite The
Evergreen State College, I don't know for sure where the Free Mumia
response fits in to any of this arguement, but celebrating or even
acknowledging the freedom of a non-sympathetic cop-killer isn't comical at
all.
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:42 PM -0800 George Moffittt
<gmoffit@linfield.edu> wrote:
> begin sean horning quotation:
>> It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon
>> or any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It
>> makes me sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know
>> that when it is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to
>> hell.
>
> FREE MUMIA
>
> --
> BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS George Moffitt
> 1: SEE OUT http://www.georgebox.org
> 2: RELAXED SIGHT
> 3: HOLD ONESELF
cassandra <cbrulot@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, mswobod@linfield.edu,
studentforum@linfield.edu
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 17:19:48 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<2147483647.1078332668@[10.119.92.200]>
<23554309.1078334388@[10.119.91.141]>
<2147483647.1078332668@[10.119.92.200]>
Cassie,
I love the irony in yours, and every other tolerance preching hypocrite out
there. Tolerance is pretty rhetorical if you think about it. Even if you
found Hornings comments as "intolerant" (according to YOUR definition at
least) why don't YOU just try to understand and be TOLERANT of HIS views?
Tolerate his intolerance, if you will. Oh yea, of course! Because to you,
tolerance is a one-way street. It's easy to just accuse people of being
intolerant, close-minded assholes. It happens all the time. You stand up
against a woman, a homosexual, a black person, a mexican, a religious
minority, your automatically labeled intolerant and close-minded.
The fact of the matter is, the folks up in Multnomah County knew that
they'd face major opposition, and I;m sure they still will, so they went
behind closed doors for a month and then at 1030 PM on the eve of the day
they open the gay marraige gates, they announce that at 10AM the following
day they'll be issuing marraige licenses to gays. They intentionally kept
it all under wraps so that they could have this outpouring of support
without any obvious oppsing voice.
I don't want to change the subject too much, but another interesting point
is that all the Dems come out in protest of Bush saying that the war is his
personal deal and that he illegally went to war, (with the approval of
Congress that is) yet when a small-time too big for your britches county
chair goes out and slaps the demcratic process in the face and starts
handing out marraige licenses she's labeled courageous. I'm done.
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:51 PM -0800 cassandra
<cbrulot@linfield.edu> wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 4:04 PM -0800 sean horning
> <shornin@linfield.edu> wrote:
>
> It's days like this when I am so thankful that I came to college where I
> would meet so many tolerant and open-minded people.
>
> Thanks Sean for telling us all about your great home state. I think my
> step-father's family lives in Arizona too. You'd love them, they're
> racist, sexist, homophobic, overly religious people. If you'd like, I'll
> give you their number so you can get together with some like-minded folk
> when you go back to that backwater you were spawned in. Then you all can
> discuss the sins of those of us who will have all the good company in
> hell.
>
> I would likie to extend my apologies to anyone else from Arizona that has
> been unfairly associated with such bigotry.
>
> -Cassie Brulotte
>
>
>
> It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon
>> or any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It makes
>> me sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know that when
>> it is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to hell.
>>
>> Sean Horning
>>
>> --On Wednesday, March 2004, 10:49 AM -0800 mswobod@linfield.edu wrote:
>>
>>> As of 11pm last night Multnomah County decided to start issuing marriage
>>> licenses to same-sex couples. Here are a couple articles...
>>>
>>> Congratulations, Oregon!
>>> Megan Swoboda
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> http://www.oregonlive.com/metro/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/all_wire_stor
>>> ie s/ 1077886922312110.xml
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Gay Marriage Licenses Coming to Oregon
>>>
>>> March 3, 2004
>>> By THE NEW YORK TIMES
>>>
>>>
>>> Oregon's most populous county will begin issuing marriage
>>> licenses to same-sex couples today, a county commissioner
>>> said last night.
>>>
>>> The board of commissioners for Multnomah County, which
>>> includes Portland, released a statement yesterday in favor
>>> of the policy change after the county attorney, Agnes
>>> Sowle, issued an opinion that the licenses would not
>>> violate state law.
>>>
>>> Commissioner Lisa Naito said that the commissioners would
>>> hold a news conference this morning to explain their
>>> decision and that the licenses would be issued afterward.
>>>
>>> Roey Thorpe, executive director for the gay rights group
>>> Basic Rights Oregon, said the group was thrilled.
>>>
>>> "Many gay and lesbian couples have been waiting for decades
>>> to be seen as equal under the law," Ms. Thorpe said.
>>>
>>> Oregon is one of 13 states without laws defining marriage
>>> as between a man and a woman.
>>>
>>> A spokesman for the state attorney general, Hardy Myers,
>>> said it was too early to say what action the state would
>>> take, if any.
>>>
>>> Commissioner Lonnie Roberts said the decision by others on
>>> the four-member board was made "clandestinely," without his
>>> knowledge.
>>>
>>> "I wasn't informed, and I feel that this is the wrong way
>>> to approach this issue," Mr. Roberts said.
>>>
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/03/national/03GAYS.html?ex=1079301892&ei
>>> =1 &e n=8cf2e52f62a2355b
>>>
>>>
>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
cassandra <cbrulot@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, mswobod@linfield.edu,
studentforum@linfield.edu
gwales@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 17:42:31 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<2147483647.1078332668@[10.119.92.200]>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<2147483647.1078332668@[10.119.92.200]>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:51 PM -0800 cassandra
<cbrulot@linfield.edu> wrote
Cassie, having an opinion does not make someone closed minded. The table
could easily be turned and I could ask you why you aren't more open minded
to the idea of same sex marriage being wrong.
In fact, your little rant about the racist and sexist comments proves you
to be just as closed minded and judgemental as the "people" you so
respectfully mentioned in your first sentance. I'm just so sick and tired
of this kind of talk because it is what we are "supposed" to be feeling.
Between the rhetoric of half the faculty and the students, you would think
their should be an orgy on the front lawn of dillon every other day. A
little word to the wise, some people still place their trust and values in
the bible and that is their God-given right. Just because the idea of
homosexuality and their extra rights is the new issue of choice for the
"tolerant" people, in no way does that mean that if it is not accepted then
the person chosing not to recognize it is close minded or not tolerant.
Thinking that homosexualism is wrong is not a fear, it is an opinion. Last
I checked everyone was entilted to those.
GW
> --On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 4:04 PM -0800 sean horning
> <shornin@linfield.edu> wrote
It's days like this when I am so thankful that I came to college where I
> would meet so many tolerant and open-minded people.
>
> Thanks Sean for telling us all about your great home state. I think my
> step-father's family lives in Arizona too. You'd love them, they're
> racist, sexist, homophobic, overly religious people. If you'd like, I'll
> give you their number so you can get together with some like-minded folk
> when you go back to that backwater you were spawned in. Then you all can
> discuss the sins of those of us who will have all the good company in
> hell.
>
> I would likie to extend my apologies to anyone else from Arizona that has
> been unfairly associated with such bigotry.
>
> -Cassie Brulotte
>
>
>
> It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon
>> or any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It makes
>> me sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know that when
>> it is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to hell.
>>
>> Sean Horning
>>
>> --On Wednesday, March 2004, 10:49 AM -0800 mswobod@linfield.edu wrote:
>>
>>> As of 11pm last night Multnomah County decided to start issuing marriage
>>> licenses to same-sex couples. Here are a couple articles...
>>>
>>> Congratulations, Oregon!
>>> Megan Swoboda
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> http://www.oregonlive.com/metro/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/all_wire_stor
>>> ie s/ 1077886922312110.xml
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Gay Marriage Licenses Coming to Oregon
>>>
>>> March 3, 2004
>>> By THE NEW YORK TIMES
>>>
>>>
>>> Oregon's most populous county will begin issuing marriage
>>> licenses to same-sex couples today, a county commissioner
>>> said last night.
>>>
>>> The board of commissioners for Multnomah County, which
>>> includes Portland, released a statement yesterday in favor
>>> of the policy change after the county attorney, Agnes
>>> Sowle, issued an opinion that the licenses would not
>>> violate state law.
>>>
>>> Commissioner Lisa Naito said that the commissioners would
>>> hold a news conference this morning to explain their
>>> decision and that the licenses would be issued afterward.
>>>
>>> Roey Thorpe, executive director for the gay rights group
>>> Basic Rights Oregon, said the group was thrilled.
>>>
>>> "Many gay and lesbian couples have been waiting for decades
>>> to be seen as equal under the law," Ms. Thorpe said.
>>>
>>> Oregon is one of 13 states without laws defining marriage
>>> as between a man and a woman.
>>>
>>> A spokesman for the state attorney general, Hardy Myers,
>>> said it was too early to say what action the state would
>>> take, if any.
>>>
>>> Commissioner Lonnie Roberts said the decision by others on
>>> the four-member board was made "clandestinely," without his
>>> knowledge.
>>>
>>> "I wasn't informed, and I feel that this is the wrong way
>>> to approach this issue," Mr. Roberts said.
>>>
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/03/national/03GAYS.html?ex=1079301892&ei
>>> =1 &e n=8cf2e52f62a2355b
>>>
>>>
>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, studentforum@linfield.edu
cassandra <cbrulot@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 17:47:04 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<23554309.1078334388@[10.119.91.141]>
<2147483647.1078336024@[10.119.92.200]>
<2147483647.1078332668@[10.119.92.200]>
<23554309.1078334388@[10.119.91.141]>
--On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 5:19 PM -0800 Colby Shaffer
<cshaffe@linfield.edu> wrote:
So, in your world the application of true equality is equal to a gamble
with millions of lives? Wow. I'm definately not following your logic
here, but I'll allow it. I happen to believe that all people are entitled
to their own beliefs, no matter how irrational, idiotic or unfounded they
may appear to me. However, by posting a comment on student forum, you are
asking for a response. I am also entitled to my opinion, and I gave it in
exactly the same tone and with the same consideration that Sean used.
Isn't tolerating intolerance the same as saying its ok? Maybe such views
are what have kept humanity from evolving past the pettiness that threatens
to destroy us. Just a thought mind you, not an expression of intolerance
against history or our great ancestors or the numerous wars fought for the
same reasons for thousands of years. I should of course tolerate such
intolerances. Especially the next time I hear about a terrorist bombing in
Israel. I mean, those people are entitled to their own intolerances,
right? And preaching against hate is just another face of intolerance,
which makes me no better than them, right? Am I getting the hang of your
reasoning yet?
Cassie,
>
> I love the irony in yours, and every other tolerance preching hypocrite
> out there. Tolerance is pretty rhetorical if you think about it. Even
> if you found Hornings comments as "intolerant" (according to YOUR
> definition at least) why don't YOU just try to understand and be TOLERANT
> of HIS views? Tolerate his intolerance, if you will. Oh yea, of course!
> Because to you, tolerance is a one-way street. It's easy to just accuse
> people of being intolerant, close-minded assholes. It happens all the
> time. You stand up against a woman, a homosexual, a black person, a
> mexican, a religious minority, your automatically labeled intolerant and
> close-minded.
>
> The fact of the matter is, the folks up in Multnomah County knew that
> they'd face major opposition, and I;m sure they still will, so they went
> behind closed doors for a month and then at 1030 PM on the eve of the day
> they open the gay marraige gates, they announce that at 10AM the
> following day they'll be issuing marraige licenses to gays. They
> intentionally kept it all under wraps so that they could have this
> outpouring of support without any obvious oppsing voice.
>
> I don't want to change the subject too much, but another interesting
> point is that all the Dems come out in protest of Bush saying that the
> war is his personal deal and that he illegally went to war, (with the
> approval of Congress that is) yet when a small-time too big for your
> britches county chair goes out and slaps the demcratic process in the
> face and starts handing out marraige licenses she's labeled courageous.
> I'm done.
>
> --On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:51 PM -0800 cassandra
> <cbrulot@linfield.edu> wrote:
>
>> --On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 4:04 PM -0800 sean horning
>> <shornin@linfield.edu> wrote:
>>
>> It's days like this when I am so thankful that I came to college where I
>> would meet so many tolerant and open-minded people.
>>
>> Thanks Sean for telling us all about your great home state. I think my
>> step-father's family lives in Arizona too. You'd love them, they're
>> racist, sexist, homophobic, overly religious people. If you'd like, I'll
>> give you their number so you can get together with some like-minded folk
>> when you go back to that backwater you were spawned in. Then you all can
>> discuss the sins of those of us who will have all the good company in
>> hell.
>>
>> I would likie to extend my apologies to anyone else from Arizona that has
>> been unfairly associated with such bigotry.
>>
>> -Cassie Brulotte
>>
>>
>>
>> It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon
>>> or any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It makes
>>> me sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know that
>>> when it is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to hell.
>>>
>>> Sean Horning
>>>
>>> --On Wednesday, March 2004, 10:49 AM -0800 mswobod@linfield.edu wrote:
>>>
>>>> As of 11pm last night Multnomah County decided to start issuing
>>>> marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Here are a couple articles...
>>>>
>>>> Congratulations, Oregon!
>>>> Megan Swoboda
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> http://www.oregonlive.com/metro/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/all_wire_stor
>>>> ie s/ 1077886922312110.xml
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Gay Marriage Licenses Coming to Oregon
>>>>
>>>> March 3, 2004
>>>> By THE NEW YORK TIMES
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oregon's most populous county will begin issuing marriage
>>>> licenses to same-sex couples today, a county commissioner
>>>> said last night.
>>>>
>>>> The board of commissioners for Multnomah County, which
>>>> includes Portland, released a statement yesterday in favor
>>>> of the policy change after the county attorney, Agnes
>>>> Sowle, issued an opinion that the licenses would not
>>>> violate state law.
>>>>
>>>> Commissioner Lisa Naito said that the commissioners would
>>>> hold a news conference this morning to explain their
>>>> decision and that the licenses would be issued afterward.
>>>>
>>>> Roey Thorpe, executive director for the gay rights group
>>>> Basic Rights Oregon, said the group was thrilled.
>>>>
>>>> "Many gay and lesbian couples have been waiting for decades
>>>> to be seen as equal under the law," Ms. Thorpe said.
>>>>
>>>> Oregon is one of 13 states without laws defining marriage
>>>> as between a man and a woman.
>>>>
>>>> A spokesman for the state attorney general, Hardy Myers,
>>>> said it was too early to say what action the state would
>>>> take, if any.
>>>>
>>>> Commissioner Lonnie Roberts said the decision by others on
>>>> the four-member board was made "clandestinely," without his
>>>> knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> "I wasn't informed, and I feel that this is the wrong way
>>>> to approach this issue," Mr. Roberts said.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/03/national/03GAYS.html?ex=1079301892&ei
>>>> =1 &e n=8cf2e52f62a2355b
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
studentforum@linfield.edu
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>
Wed, 3 Mar 2004 17:25:51 -0800
Homosexuals.
Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
<20040304012551.GU728@linfield.edu>
http://www.achewood.com/index.php?date=02272004
--
BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS George Moffitt
1: O -- BONUS http://www.georgebox.org
2: A -- CORE
3: O O - BONUS
gwales@linfield.edu, cassandra <cbrulot@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, studentforum@linfield.edu
cassandra <cbrulot@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 17:55:50 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<2147483647.1078336550@[10.119.92.200]>
<2147483647.1078332668@[10.119.92.200]>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
--On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 5:42 PM -0800 gwales@linfield.edu wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:51 PM -0800 cassandra
> <cbrulot@linfield.edu> wrote
>
The bible is not the only basis for religion in the world. Perhaps such
Christain beliefs are completely outside my experiences based on my
upbringing. Everyone is entitled to their own Goddess given opinions,
including me. Its the violent expression of those opinions that concern
me. When is the last time a man was brutally murdered or beat up for
disliking homosexuals? Now when was the last time someone was attacked for
being homosexual? If you compare notes, I'm sure you'll discover which way
the dangerous side of intolerance is swinging.
Can we get back to the issue here people? We were discussing the rights of
homosexuals, not the intolerance surrounding the issue.
Cassie, having an opinion does not make someone closed minded. The table
> could easily be turned and I could ask you why you aren't more open
> minded to the idea of same sex marriage being wrong. In fact, your little
> rant about the racist and sexist comments proves you to be just as closed
> minded and judgemental as the "people" you so respectfully mentioned in
> your first sentance. I'm just so sick and tired of this kind of talk
> because it is what we are "supposed" to be feeling. Between the rhetoric
> of half the faculty and the students, you would think their should be an
> orgy on the front lawn of dillon every other day. A little word to the
> wise, some people still place their trust and values in the bible and
> that is their God-given right. Just because the idea of homosexuality
> and their extra rights is the new issue of choice for the "tolerant"
> people, in no way does that mean that if it is not accepted then the
> person chosing not to recognize it is close minded or not tolerant.
> Thinking that homosexualism is wrong is not a fear, it is an opinion.
> Last I checked everyone was entilted to those.
>
> GW
>
>
>
>
>
>> --On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 4:04 PM -0800 sean horning
>> <shornin@linfield.edu> wrote
> It's days like this when I am so thankful that I came to college where I
>> would meet so many tolerant and open-minded people.
>>
>> Thanks Sean for telling us all about your great home state. I think my
>> step-father's family lives in Arizona too. You'd love them, they're
>> racist, sexist, homophobic, overly religious people. If you'd like, I'll
>> give you their number so you can get together with some like-minded folk
>> when you go back to that backwater you were spawned in. Then you all can
>> discuss the sins of those of us who will have all the good company in
>> hell.
>>
>> I would likie to extend my apologies to anyone else from Arizona that has
>> been unfairly associated with such bigotry.
>>
>> -Cassie Brulotte
>>
>>
>>
>> It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon
>>> or any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It makes
>>> me sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know that
>>> when it is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to hell.
>>>
>>> Sean Horning
>>>
>>> --On Wednesday, March 2004, 10:49 AM -0800 mswobod@linfield.edu wrote:
>>>
>>>> As of 11pm last night Multnomah County decided to start issuing
>>>> marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Here are a couple articles...
>>>>
>>>> Congratulations, Oregon!
>>>> Megan Swoboda
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> http://www.oregonlive.com/metro/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/all_wire_stor
>>>> ie s/ 1077886922312110.xml
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Gay Marriage Licenses Coming to Oregon
>>>>
>>>> March 3, 2004
>>>> By THE NEW YORK TIMES
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oregon's most populous county will begin issuing marriage
>>>> licenses to same-sex couples today, a county commissioner
>>>> said last night.
>>>>
>>>> The board of commissioners for Multnomah County, which
>>>> includes Portland, released a statement yesterday in favor
>>>> of the policy change after the county attorney, Agnes
>>>> Sowle, issued an opinion that the licenses would not
>>>> violate state law.
>>>>
>>>> Commissioner Lisa Naito said that the commissioners would
>>>> hold a news conference this morning to explain their
>>>> decision and that the licenses would be issued afterward.
>>>>
>>>> Roey Thorpe, executive director for the gay rights group
>>>> Basic Rights Oregon, said the group was thrilled.
>>>>
>>>> "Many gay and lesbian couples have been waiting for decades
>>>> to be seen as equal under the law," Ms. Thorpe said.
>>>>
>>>> Oregon is one of 13 states without laws defining marriage
>>>> as between a man and a woman.
>>>>
>>>> A spokesman for the state attorney general, Hardy Myers,
>>>> said it was too early to say what action the state would
>>>> take, if any.
>>>>
>>>> Commissioner Lonnie Roberts said the decision by others on
>>>> the four-member board was made "clandestinely," without his
>>>> knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> "I wasn't informed, and I feel that this is the wrong way
>>>> to approach this issue," Mr. Roberts said.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/03/national/03GAYS.html?ex=1079301892&ei
>>>> =1 &e n=8cf2e52f62a2355b
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
studentforum@linfield.edu
Patrick Nance <pnance@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 18:10:32 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<869112277.1078330659@[10.119.98.220]>
<114566093.1078337432@[10.119.94.131]>
<69430826.1078310944@Megan>
<2147483647.1078329859@[10.119.96.187]>
<1184769.1078330604@[10.223.251.101]> <869112277.1078330659@[10.119.98.220]>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:17 PM -0800 Gloria Contreras
<gcontre@linfield.edu> wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:16 PM -0800 Sarah <sheilma@linfield.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> --On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 4:04 PM -0800 sean horning
>> <shornin@linfield.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon
>>> or any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It makes
>>> me sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know that
>>> when it is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to hell.
>
> Ya know, that whole Biblical condemnation of gays? It's right up there
> with the kosher food and killing disobedient children.
>
>
> Gloria
>
> Nunquam Dormio
I just wanted to express some of my views as a Christian. Of course because
I believe in God, I believe in his word (bible) which means that I am
against the ACT of homosexuality. Now but then I also have to consider some
things. If there was a Jewish person trying to impose there values on me I
would be ticked. I would say that I wasn't being able to express my views
and beliefs freely which is what life is all about. FREEDOM to do what ever
we want which includes- Not believing in God and the like. I don't want to
believe in God because I am forced to! I want to do what I want to do! God
doesn't want a bunch of robot humans praying and following him because God
simply wants them to. He wants people to WANT and to FREELY follow him. The
issue here is not whether it is against the bible or not. Even
non-Christians will tell you homosexuality is against the bible. What
matters here is whether they can "sin" if they want to. We all have that
right as humans to sin if we want to- it's called freedom. About the gay
marriage thing, It is my PERSONAL opinion, not biblical that since we live
in the United States which stands for freedom, if they want to go and do
their thing, then I believe that they should be able to do that. I do think
however, the the word "marriage" is between a man and a women. I am not
opposed to giving them "civil unions." But- the only way those would work
is if they would have the EQUAL rights that the word "marriage" would give
them. Again, I am not endorsing homosex. I think it is wrong. But, I can't
shove my beliefs in their face. I think that if they want to sin, then more
power to them.
Patrick Nance
studentforum@linfield.edu
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>
Wed, 3 Mar 2004 17:55:13 -0800
:<
Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
<20040304015513.GV728@linfield.edu>
Can we please stop arguing over whether or not it's okay to be
gay? That's not the issue! The issue is whether it should be LEGAL.
I don't think it's a good idea to smoke, but I'll fight to keep it
legal. What would Voltaire do?
If a person is gay it causes you no harm. That is a fact. If
two people are gay there is no further harm, since twice nought is
nought. If those two people want to live together, have dinner
together, have sex with each other, or get married, it causes no harm
to anyone.
You could form an argument, a weak one, for why gay couples
should not raise children. But that is not at issue. The point is
that other people being gay does not hurt you, so quit complaining
about it. You're still free to get married in whatever church you
belong to, and nobody's trying to redefine what that means (except
maybe for your church, which is your problem).
You are all so dongs.
--
BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS George Moffitt
1: SURELY RETURN http://www.georgebox.org
2: SHAKE ARMS
3: SMILE TO ANSWER
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, mswobod@linfield.edu,
studentforum@linfield.edu
Julia Sweet <jusweet@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 18:47:11 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<2147483647.1078329859@[10.119.96.187]>
<2147483647.1078339631@[10.225.80.201]>
<69430826.1078310944@Megan>
<2147483647.1078329859@[10.119.96.187]>
--On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 4:04 PM -0800 sean horning
<shornin@linfield.edu> wrote:
> It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon
> or any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It makes
> me sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know that when
> it is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to hell.
>
> Sean Horning
>
>
Please tell me your opinion isn't based in religious beliefs, because if
so, that sort of statement makes said religion look pretty bad. I think
it's pathetic that there are still intolerant people in this so-called
"great nation" that think certain types of romantic relationships (between
consenting informed adults) are in some way inferior and less deserving of
recognition and validation. Love is love is love. If someone is lucky
enough to find it, who are you to imply that it marks a denegration of
society? If anything, it marks an improvement. The government is no longer
treating some of its citizens as second-rate by denying them a right. I say
rock on, Oregon.
Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>,
Julia Sweet <jusweet@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, mswobod@linfield.edu,
studentforum@linfield.edu
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 19:51:52 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<382810732.1078343454@[10.119.94.126]>
<32678298.1078343512@[10.119.91.141]>
<382810732.1078343454@[10.119.94.126]>
No one is afraid of anything or anyone. Let's just get that straight.
That is a stupid and weak argument and it's older than dirt.
The fact of the matter is that these mayors and county chairs across the
country are arbitrarily deciding that they are above the law when they're
making these rulings. There is a process for everything that happens in
government and these few individuals are thumbing their nose at the law and
deciding that the law doesn't apply to them.
And I'm not worried about the issue of gay marriage itself, I could really
care less, but what I do care about is the precedent it sets when
government officials are allowed to call their own shots and turn a blind
eye to the law whenever they feel like it.
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 7:50 PM -0800 Brandon Sharp
<bsharp@linfield.edu> wrote:
> It amazes me, how people can still be so unacceptable. People fear gays
> like they fear the plague. It is too bad people some people can be so
> ignorant.
>
> Thank you, and God bless Oregon and California and any other state that
> chooses to do this
>
> Brandon Sharp
>
>
>
Aaron Ramsey <aramsey@linfield.edu>,
cassandra <cbrulot@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, mswobod@linfield.edu,
studentforum@linfield.edu
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 19:58:47 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<264413859.1078343745@[10.119.98.108]>
<33092814.1078343927@[10.119.91.141]>
<264413859.1078343745@[10.119.98.108]>
You're damn right I'm comparing the war and gay marriage. And if you read
what I wrote how I wrote it it'd make perfect sense to you. We have to go
through a specific process before we can go to war with another country
just like we have to go through specific processes if we want laws changed.
Dems are quick to grill Bush for an "illegal" war when it was anything but
illegal, but when a few people at the county level decide laws don't apply
to them none of the Dems say a word. They don;t blink. I personally think
everyone, political parties and stance on gay rights aside, should be upset
that elected officials are acting so arrogant in respect, or disrespect for
the law.
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 7:55 PM -0800 Aaron Ramsey
<aramsey@linfield.edu> wrote:
> ->> ORIGINAL MESSAGE (cshaffe@linfield.edu / 3/3/2004 5:19 PM -0800 / Re:
> Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses) <<-
>
>| another interesting
>| point is that all the Dems come out in protest of Bush saying that the
>| war is his personal deal and that he illegally went to war, (with the
>| approval of Congress that is) yet when a small-time too big for your
>| britches county chair goes out and slaps the demcratic process in the
>| face and starts handing out marraige licenses she's labeled courageous.
>| I'm done.
> ->> END ORIGINAL MESSAGE <<-
>
> Wow, taking a war that's taken over 500 American lives and countless more
> in civilian casualties and comparing that to allowing gay people to get
> married. Just...wow. Congratulations, I'm officially speechless.
>
> % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
> Aaron Ramsey, Production Director, KSLC 90.3 FM
> "The Station Behind the Movement"
> Office: 503.883.2550 | Fax: 503.883.2665
> Home: 503.883.5051 | aramsey@linfield.edu
> % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>
Sean Enright <senrigh@linfield.edu>
studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:50:09 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
senrigh@linfield.edu
<23554309.1078334388@[10.119.91.141]>; from cshaffe@linfield.edu on Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 17:19:48 -0800
<20040304055008.GA3711@mu.linfield.edu>
<2147483647.1078332668@[10.119.92.200]> <23554309.1078334388@[10.119.91.141]>
On 2004.03.03 17:19, Colby Shaffer wrote:
> I don't want to change the subject too much, but another interesting point
> is that all the Dems come out in protest of Bush saying that the war is his
> personal deal and that he illegally went to war, (with the approval of
> Congress that is) yet when a small-time too big for your britches county
> chair goes out and slaps the demcratic process in the face and starts
> handing out marraige licenses she's labeled courageous. I'm done.
C'mon, it's not as though Oregon has been known for following its laws very well.
I mean, they allowed black people to own property in the state for years even though
the state constitution explicitly forbade such a thing until just two years ago.
It's just a state FULL of lawbreakers, I tell you.
-Sean
--
Est-ce difficile trouver une cravate plus odieuse que vous?
Robin Cangie <rcangie@linfield.edu>, studentforum@linfield.edu
dblumen@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 21:49:36 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]>
<44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 6:07 PM -0800 Robin Cangie
<rcangie@linfield.edu> wrote:
> So far, I've only heard arguments against homosexuality that are based on
> the Bible. While you're all entitled to hold them, America's leaders
> can't use the Bible as a sole basis for forming our country's laws any
> more than they can use the Koran or the Talmud. Banning homosexual
> marriage on those grounds seems to me an awful lot like holding us all to
> the same religious standard, doesn't it? And that goes against individual
> religious freedom, doesn't it? Unless someone can come up with a valid
> secular reason for depriving homosexuals of the right to civil marriage,
> your arguments are all beside the point. And please, children, play nice
> when debating.
>
> ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
> "You ought to be ashamed of yourself,
> having anything to do with such nonsense!"
> ~Samwise Gamgee
>
I think part of the issue that a lot of people (Christian or otherwise)
that a lot of people have with legalizing gay marriage is that marriage is
originally an institution, with a specific definition: union between one
man and one woman. Besides the fact that yes, families have been shown to
work best when there is both a woman and a man to model behavior and to
provide for children's needs (George's "weak argument"), the definition of
the word "marriage" is what it is; "gay marriage" would then be an
oxymoron. This sounds like splitting hairs, but as we all know, a "legal
union" can be a far cry from an actual marriage.
The other thing is, a man has a penis, and girl has a vagina- they're
made to fit each other- marriage is more than just cohabitating, sharing
meals, raising kids, sleeping together. It' s the union of two people into
one person- symbolized best by the union that occurs during sex. There is
no such union between two homosexual men or women. Emotional attachments
aside, love (however you define that) aside, a large part of the sanctity
of marriage is retaining that definition of the two becoming one. And I
think that, by and large, is one of the main reasons that a lot of people
are opposed to gay marriage- not necessarily gay union, but gay marriage.
Not that it hurts anybody, but that they call it marriage.
Oh, and just a little FYI, if you do some open-minded research on the
founding fathers, they were specifically dependent on the Bible (not just
broad morality) during the framing of the constitution. Everyone likes to
quote Madison and Jefferson and their supposed "separation of church and
state", but I think that if you consider their other writings, plus the
writings of the founding fathers, you might be surprised just how much
prayer, the Bible, and church were all involved in the founding of our
country. That's essentially irrelevant to the subject, but I just thought I
would throw in a little food for thought.
~Dustin
dblumen@linfield.edu
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>
Robin Cangie <rcangie@linfield.edu>, studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 3 Mar 2004 22:07:40 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
<44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]>
<20040304060740.GY728@linfield.edu>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]> <44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]>
begin dblumen@linfield.edu quotation:
> I think part of the issue that a lot of people (Christian or otherwise)
> that a lot of people have with legalizing gay marriage is that marriage is
> originally an institution, with a specific definition: union between one
> man and one woman. Besides the fact that yes, families have been shown to
> work best when there is both a woman and a man to model behavior and to
> provide for children's needs (George's "weak argument"), the definition of
> the word "marriage" is what it is; "gay marriage" would then be an
> oxymoron. This sounds like splitting hairs, but as we all know, a "legal
> union" can be a far cry from an actual marriage.
So gay parents are no less fit than divorced or widowed
parents, who can still provide a fabulous childhood to any kid
already.
And yes, you are splitting hairs. A legal marriage is nothing
but a legal acknowledgement of two people as a single entity. It has
no bearing on what whatever wacko carnie church you happen to belong to
calls a marriage. If the new law changes the meaning of the word
"marriage" in some way, then I guess that's why there's a law for it.
But if you're afraid that a linguistic change will alter your, or
anyone's, morality, then you are an idiot.
> The other thing is, a man has a penis, and girl has a vagina- they're
> made to fit each other- marriage is more than just cohabitating, sharing
> meals, raising kids, sleeping together. It' s the union of two people into
> one person- symbolized best by the union that occurs during sex. There is
> no such union between two homosexual men or women. Emotional attachments
> aside, love (however you define that) aside, a large part of the sanctity
> of marriage is retaining that definition of the two becoming one. And I
> think that, by and large, is one of the main reasons that a lot of people
> are opposed to gay marriage- not necessarily gay union, but gay marriage.
> Not that it hurts anybody, but that they call it marriage.
I say they're free to call it a strawberry, a Dustin, a devan,
or whatever the hell they want to call it. IT DOES NOT AFFECT YOU.
OR ANYONE.
You are like the snot-nosed trolls on web boards arguing about
whether The Legend of Zelda is an adventure game or an RPG. It's the
same game either way.
> Oh, and just a little FYI, if you do some open-minded research on the
> founding fathers, they were specifically dependent on the Bible (not just
> broad morality) during the framing of the constitution. Everyone likes to
> quote Madison and Jefferson and their supposed "separation of church and
> state", but I think that if you consider their other writings, plus the
> writings of the founding fathers, you might be surprised just how much
> prayer, the Bible, and church were all involved in the founding of our
> country. That's essentially irrelevant to the subject, but I just thought I
> would throw in a little food for thought.
So you are arguing that the founding fathers wanted the United
States to be a Christian entity, and that we should keep it that way?
Personally, I'd rather the fact that US political thinkers in the 1700s
were theocratic nutjobs not have any bearing on my pursuit of
happiness.
It's positivists like you who spoil liberty for everyone.
--
BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS George Moffitt
1: FESTIVE HEART http://www.georgebox.org
2: DECIDE WEAPONS
3: 6464-Q
Aaron Ramsey <aramsey@linfield.edu>,
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>,
cassandra <cbrulot@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, mswobod@linfield.edu,
studentforum@linfield.edu
gwales@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:20:02 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<264413859.1078343745@[10.119.98.108]>
<44406031.1078352402@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<264413859.1078343745@[10.119.98.108]>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 7:55 PM -0800 Aaron Ramsey
<aramsey@linfield.edu> wrote:
The biggest bullshit part of this reply Aaron is that is was blantantly
taken out of context and spun for your own personal comeback. That's weak.
GW
> ->> ORIGINAL MESSAGE (cshaffe@linfield.edu / 3/3/2004 5:19 PM -0800 / Re:
> Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses) <<-
>
>| another interesting
>| point is that all the Dems come out in protest of Bush saying that the
>| war is his personal deal and that he illegally went to war, (with the
>| approval of Congress that is) yet when a small-time too big for your
>| britches county chair goes out and slaps the demcratic process in the
>| face and starts handing out marraige licenses she's labeled courageous.
>| I'm done.
> ->> END ORIGINAL MESSAGE <<-
>
> Wow, taking a war that's taken over 500 American lives and countless more
> in civilian casualties and comparing that to allowing gay people to get
> married. Just...wow. Congratulations, I'm officially speechless.
>
> % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
> Aaron Ramsey, Production Director, KSLC 90.3 FM
> "The Station Behind the Movement"
> Office: 503.883.2550 | Fax: 503.883.2665
> Home: 503.883.5051 | aramsey@linfield.edu
> % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>,
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>,
Julia Sweet <jusweet@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, mswobod@linfield.edu,
studentforum@linfield.edu
gwales@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:25:03 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<2147483647.1078351701@[10.215.201.226]>
<44706484.1078352702@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<2147483647.1078351701@[10.215.201.226]>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 10:08 PM -0800 Brandon Sharp
<bsharp@linfield.edu> wrote:
First of all, "They" are going above the law. A mayor has no business in
interpreting the constitution. That is putting themselves above the law.
GW.
> What are you talking about? They aren't going above the law in any way.
> In the Oregon constitution they it says nothing that same sex marriages
> can't happen so they are simple looking at the current law and executing
> it. Which isn't above the law but simple doing their jobs. And if people
> weren't scared of gay people then why are we concerned whether states
> allow it or not?
>
> Brandon Sharp
>
>
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>, dblumen@linfield.edu
dblumen@linfield.edu
Robin Cangie <rcangie@linfield.edu>, studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:31:42 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<20040304060740.GY728@linfield.edu>
<46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]> <44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]>
<20040304060740.GY728@linfield.edu>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 10:07 PM -0800 George Moffittt
<gmoffit@linfield.edu> wrote:
> begin dblumen@linfield.edu quotation:
>> I think part of the issue that a lot of people (Christian or otherwise)
>> that a lot of people have with legalizing gay marriage is that marriage
>> is originally an institution, with a specific definition: union between
>> one man and one woman. Besides the fact that yes, families have been
>> shown to work best when there is both a woman and a man to model
>> behavior and to provide for children's needs (George's "weak
>> argument"), the definition of the word "marriage" is what it is; "gay
>> marriage" would then be an oxymoron. This sounds like splitting hairs,
>> but as we all know, a "legal union" can be a far cry from an actual
>> marriage.
>
> So gay parents are no less fit than divorced or widowed
> parents, who can still provide a fabulous childhood to any kid
> already.
> And yes, you are splitting hairs. A legal marriage is nothing
> but a legal acknowledgement of two people as a single entity. It has
> no bearing on what whatever wacko carnie church you happen to belong to
> calls a marriage. If the new law changes the meaning of the word
> "marriage" in some way, then I guess that's why there's a law for it.
> But if you're afraid that a linguistic change will alter your, or
> anyone's, morality, then you are an idiot.
>
>> The other thing is, a man has a penis, and girl has a vagina- they're
>> made to fit each other- marriage is more than just cohabitating, sharing
>> meals, raising kids, sleeping together. It' s the union of two people
>> into one person- symbolized best by the union that occurs during sex.
>> There is no such union between two homosexual men or women. Emotional
>> attachments aside, love (however you define that) aside, a large part
>> of the sanctity of marriage is retaining that definition of the two
>> becoming one. And I think that, by and large, is one of the main
>> reasons that a lot of people are opposed to gay marriage- not
>> necessarily gay union, but gay marriage. Not that it hurts anybody, but
>> that they call it marriage.
>
> I say they're free to call it a strawberry, a Dustin, a devan,
> or whatever the hell they want to call it. IT DOES NOT AFFECT YOU.
> OR ANYONE.
> You are like the snot-nosed trolls on web boards arguing about
> whether The Legend of Zelda is an adventure game or an RPG. It's the
> same game either way.
>
>> Oh, and just a little FYI, if you do some open-minded research on the
>> founding fathers, they were specifically dependent on the Bible (not
>> just broad morality) during the framing of the constitution. Everyone
>> likes to quote Madison and Jefferson and their supposed "separation of
>> church and state", but I think that if you consider their other
>> writings, plus the writings of the founding fathers, you might be
>> surprised just how much prayer, the Bible, and church were all involved
>> in the founding of our country. That's essentially irrelevant to the
>> subject, but I just thought I would throw in a little food for thought.
>
> So you are arguing that the founding fathers wanted the United
> States to be a Christian entity, and that we should keep it that way?
> Personally, I'd rather the fact that US political thinkers in the 1700s
> were theocratic nutjobs not have any bearing on my pursuit of
> happiness.
> It's positivists like you who spoil liberty for everyone.
I split hairs because I believe in morality. When you start re-naming
things, it's a step towards re-defining what right and wrong are. We don't
call it "killing old and sick people", we call it assisted suicide- that
sort of thing. Now what kind of a person would I be if I didn't defend my
own sense of morality- which I believe coincides with the ideas of the men
who drafted the Constitution that serves as a basis for our laws and our
pursuit of happiness? If society holds that one thing is right and one
things is wrong, if you come out saying, "well, it's okay to murder
people", then it's not going to fly. Changes in the societal perception of
morality occur very slightly, with little things like re-defining things.
Next will we be allowing for marriages between people and animals? Sounds
ridiculous and immoral, but so did homosexuality not too long ago. If I
believe something is wrong, why should I tolerate the legalization of it? I
live here too, and I like this country, for the most part. What seems like
a linguistic change is only the precursor to a shift in morality that I
oppose. When things that were previously illegal become "sort of" legal,
where do we draw the line? If we allow gays to be joined in holy matrimony,
next will we declare man and horse? Sounds ridiculous, but it's a slippery
slope, and sometimes it means splitting hairs and sounding like a
"snot-nosed troll" to keep morality from changing on us.
Dust
gwales@linfield.edu
Sean Enright <senrigh@linfield.edu>
studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 3 Mar 2004 22:34:41 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
senrigh@linfield.edu
<44706484.1078352702@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>; from gwales@linfield.edu on Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 22:25:03 -0800
<20040304063441.GC3875@mu.linfield.edu>
<2147483647.1078351701@[10.215.201.226]> <44706484.1078352702@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
On 2004.03.03 22:25, gwales@linfield.edu wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 10:08 PM -0800 Brandon Sharp
> <bsharp@linfield.edu> wrote:
>
> First of all, "They" are going above the law. A mayor has no business in
> interpreting the constitution. That is putting themselves above the law.
Hey, then we can be just like France, where city governments have exactly no
power because the only body that can really make laws that mean anything at
all is the federal government. This would solve once and for all that problem
we have with local governments using their own laws in places where higher-level
laws aren't really defined, eh?
-Sean
--
Est-ce difficile trouver une cravate plus odieuse que vous?
gwales@linfield.edu, Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>,
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>,
Julia Sweet <jusweet@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, mswobod@linfield.edu,
studentforum@linfield.edu
Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:36:03 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<44706484.1078352702@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<392719951.1078353363@[10.119.94.126]>
<2147483647.1078351701@[10.215.201.226]>
<44706484.1078352702@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
A mayor does have a responsibility of upholding the constitution.
Brandon Sharp
studentforum@linfield.edu
Jessiquah <jbopp@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:44:38 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<44706484.1078352702@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<645958296.1078353878@[10.119.93.133]>
<2147483647.1078351701@[10.215.201.226]>
<44706484.1078352702@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 10:25 PM -0800 gwales@linfield.edu wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 10:08 PM -0800 Brandon Sharp
> <bsharp@linfield.edu> wrote:
>
> First of all, "They" are going above the law. A mayor has no business in
> interpreting the constitution. That is putting themselves above the law.
>
> GW.
>
>
Speaking of the constitution, or more so interpreting it, where does it say
gay people can't get married?
If mayors don't have to right to interpret it, neither do college students.
I believe that is putting themselves above the law.
dblumen@linfield.edu, Robin Cangie <rcangie@linfield.edu>,
studentforum@linfield.edu
cassandra <cbrulot@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:48:04 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]>
<2147483647.1078354084@[10.119.92.200]>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]> <44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]>
--On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 9:49 PM -0800 dblumen@linfield.edu wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 6:07 PM -0800 Robin Cangie
> <rcangie@linfield.edu> wrote:
Most of the founding fathers kept slaves and did not believe in the rights
of women! Should we take everything they believed as "gospel" merely
because they are responsible for the founding of this country? Or should
we, as intelligent and informed citizens, take their opinions in the
context of their time and consider our issues in the context of our own.
>
>
> Oh, and just
> a little FYI, if you do some open-minded research on the founding
> fathers, they were specifically dependent on the Bible (not just broad
> morality) during the framing of the constitution. Everyone likes to quote
> Madison and Jefferson and their supposed "separation of church and
> state", but I think that if you consider their other writings, plus the
> writings of the founding fathers, you might be surprised just how much
> prayer, the Bible, and church were all involved in the founding of our
> country. That's essentially irrelevant to the subject, but I just thought
> I would throw in a little food for thought. ~Dustin
>
>
dblumen@linfield.edu
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>
studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 3 Mar 2004 22:51:57 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
<46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
<20040304065156.GZ728@linfield.edu>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com> <32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]> <44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]> <20040304060740.GY728@linfield.edu> <46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
begin dblumen@linfield.edu quotation:
> I split hairs because I believe in morality. When you start re-naming
> things, it's a step towards re-defining what right and wrong are. We don't
> call it "killing old and sick people", we call it assisted suicide- that
> sort of thing. Now what kind of a person would I be if I didn't defend my
> own sense of morality- which I believe coincides with the ideas of the men
> who drafted the Constitution that serves as a basis for our laws and our
> pursuit of happiness? If society holds that one thing is right and one
> things is wrong, if you come out saying, "well, it's okay to murder
> people", then it's not going to fly. Changes in the societal perception of
> morality occur very slightly, with little things like re-defining things.
> Next will we be allowing for marriages between people and animals? Sounds
> ridiculous and immoral, but so did homosexuality not too long ago. If I
> believe something is wrong, why should I tolerate the legalization of it? I
> live here too, and I like this country, for the most part. What seems like
> a linguistic change is only the precursor to a shift in morality that I
> oppose. When things that were previously illegal become "sort of" legal,
> where do we draw the line? If we allow gays to be joined in holy matrimony,
> next will we declare man and horse? Sounds ridiculous, but it's a slippery
> slope, and sometimes it means splitting hairs and sounding like a
> "snot-nosed troll" to keep morality from changing on us.
Holy fucking matrimony! You said it! You said HOLY
MATRIMONY.
We are talking about a LEGAL UNION here. LEGAL. Leave God
out of this, you heathen.
Also, please research the notion of "harm". Write a
five-paragraph essay comparing the harm caused by legal union with
that of murder. Also include concepts of "natural law" and "freedom".
Bake for 20 minutes in a 350 degree oven and let sit for one hour.
Your dogmatic moral impositions are not charming. They are
not cute. They are not even pitiable. I'm not arguing for
relativism, or anarchy, or anything of that sort. I'm just asking you
to not be a cock.
Oh, my God! Are you asking me to accept black people as
equal? By redefining the notion of "citizen" and "human" in this way,
you are opening the door to all kinds of allowances! Next thing you
know I will be sending my kid to school with dogs and horses, and he
will be sharing drinking fountains with the dead!
I WANT TO HATE THE BLACK PEOPLE! WHY ARE WE NOT HATING THE
BLACK PEOPLE?! DO NOT LET THEM MARRY OUR WOMEN! PLEASE, WHATEVER YOU
DO, DO NOT DESTROY OUR DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE IN THAT WAY!
Learn how language works or GTFOML.
--
BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS George Moffitt
1: IN FIGHTING http://www.georgebox.org
2: MAKE AN EFFORT
3: 15 DOT TEXTURE.. OIOI..
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>, studentforum@linfield.edu
Brian Gehr <bgehr@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:52:50 -0800
Re: :<
<20040304015513.GV728@linfield.edu>
<317578769.1078354370@bgehr.linfield.edu>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004, 5:55 PM -0800 George Moffittt
<gmoffit@linfield.edu> wrote:
> Can we please stop arguing over whether or not it's okay to be
> gay? That's not the issue! The issue is whether it should be LEGAL.
> I don't think it's a good idea to smoke, but I'll fight to keep it
> legal. What would Voltaire do?
ahh! moffitt! god bless your heart. the issue is just that! the
government has no right to tell me that i can't be gay! i don't advocate
homosexuality in any way, and i think acting on it is wrong, but i know for
a fact that the government is more wrong in making it illegal. there's
your tolerance, moffitt, right back to good old politics. one point for
voltaire.
see? civil libertarians always win!
and i don't want to hear any of that swedish muppit crap. get some sleep.
studentforum@linfield.edu
rgaffne@linfield.edu
Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:01:51 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
<382884656.1078358511@[10.119.99.199]>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]>
<44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]><20040304060740.GY728@linfield.edu>
<46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 10:31 PM -0800 dblumen@linfield.edu wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 10:07 PM -0800 George Moffittt
> <gmoffit@linfield.edu> wrote:
>
>> begin dblumen@linfield.edu quotation:
>>> I think part of the issue that a lot of people (Christian or otherwise)
>>> that a lot of people have with legalizing gay marriage is that marriage
>>> is originally an institution, with a specific definition: union between
>>> one man and one woman. Besides the fact that yes, families have been
>>> shown to work best when there is both a woman and a man to model
>>> behavior and to provide for children's needs (George's "weak
>>> argument"), the definition of the word "marriage" is what it is; "gay
>>> marriage" would then be an oxymoron. This sounds like splitting hairs,
>>> but as we all know, a "legal union" can be a far cry from an actual
>>> marriage.
>>
>> So gay parents are no less fit than divorced or widowed
>> parents, who can still provide a fabulous childhood to any kid
>> already.
>> And yes, you are splitting hairs. A legal marriage is nothing
>> but a legal acknowledgement of two people as a single entity. It has
>> no bearing on what whatever wacko carnie church you happen to belong to
>> calls a marriage. If the new law changes the meaning of the word
>> "marriage" in some way, then I guess that's why there's a law for it.
>> But if you're afraid that a linguistic change will alter your, or
>> anyone's, morality, then you are an idiot.
>>
>>> The other thing is, a man has a penis, and girl has a vagina- they're
>>> made to fit each other- marriage is more than just cohabitating, sharing
>>> meals, raising kids, sleeping together. It' s the union of two people
>>> into one person- symbolized best by the union that occurs during sex.
>>> There is no such union between two homosexual men or women. Emotional
>>> attachments aside, love (however you define that) aside, a large part
>>> of the sanctity of marriage is retaining that definition of the two
>>> becoming one. And I think that, by and large, is one of the main
>>> reasons that a lot of people are opposed to gay marriage- not
>>> necessarily gay union, but gay marriage. Not that it hurts anybody, but
>>> that they call it marriage.
>>
>> I say they're free to call it a strawberry, a Dustin, a devan,
>> or whatever the hell they want to call it. IT DOES NOT AFFECT YOU.
>> OR ANYONE.
>> You are like the snot-nosed trolls on web boards arguing about
>> whether The Legend of Zelda is an adventure game or an RPG. It's the
>> same game either way.
>>
>>> Oh, and just a little FYI, if you do some open-minded research on the
>>> founding fathers, they were specifically dependent on the Bible (not
>>> just broad morality) during the framing of the constitution. Everyone
>>> likes to quote Madison and Jefferson and their supposed "separation of
>>> church and state", but I think that if you consider their other
>>> writings, plus the writings of the founding fathers, you might be
>>> surprised just how much prayer, the Bible, and church were all involved
>>> in the founding of our country. That's essentially irrelevant to the
>>> subject, but I just thought I would throw in a little food for thought.
>>
>> So you are arguing that the founding fathers wanted the United
>> States to be a Christian entity, and that we should keep it that way?
>> Personally, I'd rather the fact that US political thinkers in the 1700s
>> were theocratic nutjobs not have any bearing on my pursuit of
>> happiness.
>> It's positivists like you who spoil liberty for everyone.
>
> I split hairs because I believe in morality. When you start re-naming
> things, it's a step towards re-defining what right and wrong are. We
> don't call it "killing old and sick people", we call it assisted suicide-
> that sort of thing. Now what kind of a person would I be if I didn't
> defend my own sense of morality- which I believe coincides with the ideas
> of the men who drafted the Constitution that serves as a basis for our
> laws and our pursuit of happiness? If society holds that one thing is
> right and one things is wrong, if you come out saying, "well, it's okay
> to murder people", then it's not going to fly. Changes in the societal
> perception of morality occur very slightly, with little things like
> re-defining things. Next will we be allowing for marriages between people
> and animals? Sounds ridiculous and immoral, but so did homosexuality not
> too long ago. If I believe something is wrong, why should I tolerate the
> legalization of it? I live here too, and I like this country, for the
> most part. What seems like a linguistic change is only the precursor to a
> shift in morality that I oppose. When things that were previously illegal
> become "sort of" legal, where do we draw the line? If we allow gays to be
> joined in holy matrimony, next will we declare man and horse? Sounds
> ridiculous, but it's a slippery slope, and sometimes it means splitting
> hairs and sounding like a "snot-nosed troll" to keep morality from
> changing on us.
>
> Dust
>
>
>
A teacher at my church-affiliated junior high/ high school tried the "what
next? bestiality!" argument on me in the seventh grade. It did not work
then, it still does not work now. An animal is not capable of consenting
to the sexual advances of a human being. In that way, bestiality is like
rape, which I think we all agree is wrong. In much the same way, we as a
society believe that children are not capable of fully knowing and
understanding sexual advances, which is why there are laws regarding sex
with minors.
We are not arguing that any of these acts should be accepted. Beings,
whether animal or child, that are not capable of understanding and/or
consenting to sexual advances would still enjoy the legal protections that
they enjoy today regardless of homosexual marriage rights. Likewise, those
capable of giving consent, but forced into sex against theie will would
still be victems of rape and the rapist would still be a criminal of the
highest order.
Those of us who believe in marriage rights for homosexuals are not arguing
to legalize beastiality, rape or child molestation. What we are arguing is
that two consenting human beings, recognized as adults by the laws of the
United States and the State in which they reside, have the same rights as
another set of two consenting human beings recognized as adults by the same
laws.
Argue other angles regarding the acceptance of homosexuality and homosexual
marriage and you might have a chance. The so-called "slippery slope"
argument is a fallacy. If you are going to argue against gay marriage,
that is wonderful (I love the educated opinion of those who disagree with
me), I would suggest angles used in previous posts or new angles that do
not require you to prognosticate what exactly the supporters of gay
marriage are going to try to "pull off next."
I don't normally post here, but I am a regular reader (and an admitted fan
of George) and simply felt the need to say something regarding some of the
recent statements made in regrad to bestiality as the supposed "natural"
result of homosexual acceptance.
I think I'm going to go read something now.
Rob Gaffney
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>
Brian Gehr <bgehr@linfield.edu>
studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 23:36:19 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<20040304065156.GZ728@linfield.edu>
<320188622.1078356979@bgehr.linfield.edu>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004, 10:51 PM -0800 George Moffittt
<gmoffit@linfield.edu> wrote:
> Holy fucking matrimony! You said it! You said HOLY
> MATRIMONY.
> We are talking about a LEGAL UNION here. LEGAL. Leave God
> out of this, you heathen.
> Also, please research the notion of "harm". Write a
> five-paragraph essay comparing the harm caused by legal union with
> that of murder. Also include concepts of "natural law" and "freedom".
> Bake for 20 minutes in a 350 degree oven and let sit for one hour.
> Your dogmatic moral impositions are not charming. They are
> not cute. They are not even pitiable. I'm not arguing for
> relativism, or anarchy, or anything of that sort. I'm just asking you
> to not be a cock.
> Oh, my God! Are you asking me to accept black people as
> equal? By redefining the notion of "citizen" and "human" in this way,
> you are opening the door to all kinds of allowances! Next thing you
> know I will be sending my kid to school with dogs and horses, and he
> will be sharing drinking fountains with the dead!
> I WANT TO HATE THE BLACK PEOPLE! WHY ARE WE NOT HATING THE
> BLACK PEOPLE?! DO NOT LET THEM MARRY OUR WOMEN! PLEASE, WHATEVER YOU
> DO, DO NOT DESTROY OUR DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE IN THAT WAY!
>
> Learn how language works or GTFOML.
maybe i should have read the entire thread. at no point in your rambling,
incoherent response george moffitt were you even close to anything that
could be considered a rational thought. everyone on this forum is now
dumber for having read it. you are awarded no points, and may god have
mercy on your soul!
damnit moffitt! tone it down some homeboy because this crap is way out of
line!! you're sarcasm is hardly constructive and isn't worth anything.
and i think if we are splitting legal hairs, definitions are everything.
learn how couth works or GTFOML
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>,
Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>,
Julia Sweet <jusweet@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, mswobod@linfield.edu,
studentforum@linfield.edu
Brian Gehr <bgehr@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 23:07:23 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<32678298.1078343512@[10.119.91.141]>
<318451784.1078355243@bgehr.linfield.edu>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004, 7:51 PM -0800 Colby Shaffer
<cshaffe@linfield.edu> wrote:
> The fact of the matter is that these mayors and county chairs across the
> country are arbitrarily deciding that they are above the law when they're
> making these rulings. There is a process for everything that happens in
> government and these few individuals are thumbing their nose at the law
> and deciding that the law doesn't apply to them.
>
> And I'm not worried about the issue of gay marriage itself, I could
> really care less, but what I do care about is the precedent it sets when
> government officials are allowed to call their own shots and turn a blind
> eye to the law whenever they feel like it.
ahh, but that's the wonder of american civil freedom. "is justice to be
sought in the law and the constitutuion, or in a call to principle outside
of the law?" what would martin luther king have said? how about susan b
anthony? remember, there is a politcal and a moral, which one is right?
(quote borrowed from West and Mooney)
cassandra <cbrulot@linfield.edu>, gwales@linfield.edu,
Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>,
Colby Shaffer <cshaffe@linfield.edu>,
Julia Sweet <jusweet@linfield.edu>,
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, mswobod@linfield.edu,
studentforum@linfield.edu
gwales@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 23:09:58 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<2147483647.1078354401@[10.119.92.200]>
<47401859.1078355398@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<2147483647.1078354401@[10.119.92.200]>
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 10:53 PM -0800 cassandra
<cbrulot@linfield.edu> wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 10:25 PM -0800 gwales@linfie
>> --On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 10:08 PM -0800 Brandon Sharp
>> <bsharp@linfield.edu> wrote:
>>
>> First of all, "They" are going above the law. A mayor has no business in
>> interpreting the constitution. That is putting themselves above the law.
>>
>> GW.
>>
>>
>>> What are you talking about? They aren't going above the law in any way.
>>> In the Oregon constitution they it says nothing that same sex marriages
>>> can't happen so they are simple looking at the current law and executing
>>> it. Which isn't above the law but simple doing their jobs. And if people
>>> weren't scared of gay people then why are we concerned whether states
>>> allow it or not?
>>>
>>> Brandon Sharp
>>>
>>>
>>
>> So what your telling me is that a mayor can now "clarify" the law, a
process which has in the past been performe by the United States Supreme
Court. Huh, I guess I didn't realize it was such a simple process that any
elected official has now replaced the highest court in the land.
GW
>>
>
> How exaclty is the legal application of equality above the law? They've
> changed no laws, merely clarified something for the benefit of the
> populace.
gwales@linfield.edu
Sean Enright <senrigh@linfield.edu>
studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 3 Mar 2004 23:28:51 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
senrigh@linfield.edu
<47401859.1078355398@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>; from gwales@linfield.edu on Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 23:09:58 -0800
<20040304072851.GA4218@mu.linfield.edu>
<2147483647.1078354401@[10.119.92.200]> <47401859.1078355398@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
On 2004.03.03 23:09, gwales@linfield.edu wrote:
> So what your telling me is that a mayor can now "clarify" the law, a
> process which has in the past been performe by the United States Supreme
> Court. Huh, I guess I didn't realize it was such a simple process that any
> elected official has now replaced the highest court in the land.
Except that all that Multnomah County is doing is allowing something to happen
that the county does not believe to be prohibited by the constitution. This
sort of thing happens all the time, but if you can explain how it is possible
for local governments to create only laws that have nothing to do with the
state's constitution, I'd like to hear it.
And anyway, the state's definition of marriage is so vague that the only types
of marriage explicitly prohibited are those involving someone under 17 and/or
someone who is neither male nor female. Obviously somebody lacked foresight.
-Sean
--
Est-ce difficile trouver une cravate plus odieuse que vous?
dblumen@linfield.edu, George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>
cassandra <cbrulot@linfield.edu>
Robin Cangie <rcangie@linfield.edu>, studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 23:32:27 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
<2147483647.1078356747@[10.119.92.200]>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]> <44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]>
<20040304060740.GY728@linfield.edu> <46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
--On Wednesday, March 3, 2004 10:31 PM -0800 dblumen@linfield.edu wrote:
> --On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 10:07 PM -0800 George Moffittt
> <gmoffit@linfield.edu> wrote:
>
>> begin dblumen@linfield.edu quotation:
>>> I think part of the issue that a lot of people (Christian or otherwise)
>>> that a lot of people have with legalizing gay marriage is that marriage
>>> is originally an institution, with a specific definition: union between
>>> one man and one woman. Besides the fact that yes, families have been
>>> shown to work best when there is both a woman and a man to model
>>> behavior and to provide for children's needs (George's "weak
>>> argument"), the definition of the word "marriage" is what it is; "gay
>>> marriage" would then be an oxymoron. This sounds like splitting hairs,
>>> but as we all know, a "legal union" can be a far cry from an actual
>>> marriage.
>>
>> So gay parents are no less fit than divorced or widowed
>> parents, who can still provide a fabulous childhood to any kid
>> already.
>> And yes, you are splitting hairs. A legal marriage is nothing
>> but a legal acknowledgement of two people as a single entity. It has
>> no bearing on what whatever wacko carnie church you happen to belong to
>> calls a marriage. If the new law changes the meaning of the word
>> "marriage" in some way, then I guess that's why there's a law for it.
>> But if you're afraid that a linguistic change will alter your, or
>> anyone's, morality, then you are an idiot.
>>
>>> The other thing is, a man has a penis, and girl has a vagina- they're
>>> made to fit each other- marriage is more than just cohabitating, sharing
>>> meals, raising kids, sleeping together. It' s the union of two people
>>> into one person- symbolized best by the union that occurs during sex.
>>> There is no such union between two homosexual men or women. Emotional
>>> attachments aside, love (however you define that) aside, a large part
>>> of the sanctity of marriage is retaining that definition of the two
>>> becoming one. And I think that, by and large, is one of the main
>>> reasons that a lot of people are opposed to gay marriage- not
>>> necessarily gay union, but gay marriage. Not that it hurts anybody, but
>>> that they call it marriage.
>>
>> I say they're free to call it a strawberry, a Dustin, a devan,
>> or whatever the hell they want to call it. IT DOES NOT AFFECT YOU.
>> OR ANYONE.
>> You are like the snot-nosed trolls on web boards arguing about
>> whether The Legend of Zelda is an adventure game or an RPG. It's the
>> same game either way.
>>
>>> Oh, and just a little FYI, if you do some open-minded research on the
>>> founding fathers, they were specifically dependent on the Bible (not
>>> just broad morality) during the framing of the constitution. Everyone
>>> likes to quote Madison and Jefferson and their supposed "separation of
>>> church and state", but I think that if you consider their other
>>> writings, plus the writings of the founding fathers, you might be
>>> surprised just how much prayer, the Bible, and church were all involved
>>> in the founding of our country. That's essentially irrelevant to the
>>> subject, but I just thought I would throw in a little food for thought.
>>
>> So you are arguing that the founding fathers wanted the United
>> States to be a Christian entity, and that we should keep it that way?
>> Personally, I'd rather the fact that US political thinkers in the 1700s
>> were theocratic nutjobs not have any bearing on my pursuit of
>> happiness.
>> It's positivists like you who spoil liberty for everyone.
>
> I split hairs because I believe in morality. When you start re-naming
> things, it's a step towards re-defining what right and wrong are. We
> don't call it "killing old and sick people", we call it assisted suicide-
> that sort of thing. Now what kind of a person would I be if I didn't
> defend my own sense of morality- which I believe coincides with the ideas
> of the men who drafted the Constitution that serves as a basis for our
> laws and our pursuit of happiness? If society holds that one thing is
> right and one things is wrong, if you come out saying, "well, it's okay
> to murder people", then it's not going to fly. Changes in the societal
> perception of morality occur very slightly, with little things like
> re-defining things. Next will we be allowing for marriages between people
> and animals? Sounds ridiculous and immoral, but so did homosexuality not
> too long ago. If I believe something is wrong, why should I tolerate the
> legalization of it? I live here too, and I like this country, for the
> most part. What seems like a linguistic change is only the precursor to a
> shift in morality that I oppose. When things that were previously illegal
> become "sort of" legal, where do we draw the line? If we allow gays to be
> joined in holy matrimony, next will we declare man and horse? Sounds
> ridiculous, but it's a slippery slope, and sometimes it means splitting
> hairs and sounding like a "snot-nosed troll" to keep morality from
> changing on us.
>
> Dust
>
> So homosexual unions = bestiality? Wow, another amazing connection
between two coompletely unrelated topics. But we have seen many tonight,
eventually these things just may stop surprising me.
And words are arbitrary. AKA they merely symbolize the thing, they are not
the thing. The word "marriage" only represents the act of marriage.
Redefining words happens all the time. Its part of the evolution of
society. "Gay" used to mean happy, then it meant homosexual and now most
kids equate it with stupid. Look at all those shifts in meaning and yet
happiness, stupidity and homosexuality remain constant. Stop worrying
about the word. Words change, its okay. Breathe in, breathe out.
>
dblumen@linfield.edu, George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>
Robin Cangie <rcangie@linfield.edu>
studentforum@linfield.edu
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 23:55:56 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
<53115586.1078358156@[10.119.98.151]>
<46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
I can see the point you're making about morality, but let me ask you this -
as a Christian, do you also believe pre-marital sex is morally wrong? Do
you believe telling lies is morally wrong? Do you believe calling someone a
bad name is morally wrong? Do you believe taking the Lord's name in vain is
morally wrong? If the answer is yes, then do you think all those things
should be outlawed by the government, as well? Just think what would happen
if someone were arrested everytime they said "God damn it." Yet, that's an
outright violation of the Ten Commandments, a mortal sin according to some
churches and just as bad, in this frame of mind, as "man lying down with
mankind." All these examples have to do with privacy and free speech, civil
liberties which are constitutionally protected. Civil marriage between
homosexuals also has to do with civil liberties, namely that the government
doesn't have the right to tell people who they want to unite with in civil
marriage (religious marriage is another matter - that's the church's deal).
That's a private matter that should be left up to individual couples. If
you want to uphold your own moral ideals in your personal life, it's one
thing. Trying to make the government act as enforcer of religious-based
morality is a tricky issue, however. Our government's job is to protect
civil liberties - which includes the freedom to have your own set of
values, whatever they may be. The government's job is definitely not to
discriminate against someone because of their sexual preference. And
denying same-sex couple the same rights as hetersexual couples is
discrimination. It would be like saying a tall person can marry a short
person, but two short people can't get married. What is the basis for
saying marriage must be between a man and a woman, anyway? History isn't
very reliable, nor is the Bible, because if we went by either of their
traditional definitions, women would have to legally submit to their
husbands, and slavery would still be allowed.
Robin
** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
"You ought to be ashamed of yourself,
having anything to do with such nonsense!"
~Samwise Gamgee
studentforum@linfield.edu
Jessica Noll <jnoll@linfield.edu>
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 23:52:46 -0800
gay marriages
<54066283.1078357966@[10.119.99.109]>
lets just clear up some things. The California Supreme Court refused to
contest the marriages in San Francisco. And no, it might not be the job of
the mayor to challenge the constitution, but as for the supreme court...
that's what it's there for. And the federal constitution doesn't say
anything about men and women.
Furthermore, there's also this little thing called a slippery-slope
FALLACY, meaning Dustin's email should be entirely disregarded.
AND. Civil unions have fewer rights than marriages do. This is starting
to sound a lot like "separate but equal". There are religious homosexuals
who might really like to get married. I know it sounds weird, but they
aren't all going to hell.
And it used to be that women couldn't own property, african-americans
couldn't read, and you basically weren't human unless you were a white,
heterosexual male. Guess what this is? No. Not heresy. PROGRESS.
studentforum@linfield.edu
Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>
Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:05:42 -0800
Gay Marriage Licenses Posts
<382884656.1078358511@[10.119.99.199]>
<398098885.1078358742@[10.119.94.126]>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]>
<44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]><20040304060740.GY728@linfield.edu>
<46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]> <382884656.1078358511@[10.119.99.199]>
I appreciate all the debate, I am signing off now, and none of the posts
have changed my mind. But it did keep me busy for a night. The beauty of
all of us is that we have such different opinions. Take care everyone.
Brandon Sharp
Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>
studentforum@linfield.edu
Thu, 4 Mar 2004 00:15:00 -0800
Re: Gay Marriage Licenses Posts
Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
<398098885.1078358742@[10.119.94.126]>
<20040304081500.GA728@linfield.edu>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com> <32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]> <46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]> <382884656.1078358511@[10.119.99.199]> <398098885.1078358742@[10.119.94.126]>
begin Brandon Sharp quotation:
> I appreciate all the debate, I am signing off now, and none of the posts
> have changed my mind. But it did keep me busy for a night. The beauty of
> all of us is that we have such different opinions. Take care everyone.
That is such a cop-out.
--
BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS George Moffitt
1: HIGH SPEED SIGHT http://www.georgebox.org
2: BRAVE HEART
3: BROTHER LOVE
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>,
Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>
Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>
studentforum@linfield.edu
Thu, 04 Mar 2004 08:42:43 -0800
Re: Gay Marriage Licenses Posts
<20040304081500.GA728@linfield.edu>
<429120542.1078389763@[10.119.94.126]>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]> <46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
<382884656.1078358511@[10.119.99.199]>
<398098885.1078358742@[10.119.94.126]> <20040304081500.GA728@linfield.edu>
Alright, to defend my dignity I will respond to George. I fortunately have
a life aside from Student Forum, unlike you George.
Brandon
Brandon Sharp <bsharp@linfield.edu>
George Moffittt <gmoffit@linfield.edu>
studentforum@linfield.edu
Thu, 4 Mar 2004 08:44:01 -0800
Re: Gay Marriage Licenses Posts
Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
<429120542.1078389763@[10.119.94.126]>
<20040304164401.GC5791@linfield.edu>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com> <32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]> <46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]> <382884656.1078358511@[10.119.99.199]> <398098885.1078358742@[10.119.94.126]> <20040304081500.GA728@linfield.edu> <429120542.1078389763@[10.119.94.126]>
begin Brandon Sharp quotation:
> Alright, to defend my dignity I will respond to George. I fortunately have
> a life aside from Student Forum, unlike you George.
I mean the "I was not affected by the discussion in the
slightest, because by 'opinion', I mean 'dogma', and isn't it great
how those never change?" line.
--
BE ATTITUDE FOR GAINS George Moffitt
1: NEVER DESPAIR http://www.georgebox.org
2: PLAY ALONG WITH
3: ESCAPE WITH MARON
ebarret@linfield.edu
dblumen@linfield.edu
studentforum@linfield.edu
Thu, 04 Mar 2004 16:25:57 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<1199409.1078416267@[10.119.96.121]>
<13949938.1078417557@[10.119.94.109]>
<27754828.1078335751@G-DUBSCASTLE.attbi.com>
<32209124.1078337250@[10.119.98.151]>
<44439981.1078350576@[10.119.94.109]><20040304060740.GY728@linfield.edu>
<46966424.1078353102@[10.119.94.109]>
<2147483647.1078411379@[10.225.80.201]> <1199409.1078416267@[10.119.96.121]>
--On Thursday, March 04, 2004 4:04 PM -0800 ebarret@linfield.edu wrote:
> As Heard On Friday, January, 31, 2003: Letter to Dr. Laura
> from a Bob and Sheri listener!
>
> Dear Dr. Laura:
>
> Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's
> Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to
> share that knowledge with as many people as I can. For
> example, when someone tries to defend the homosexual
> lifestyle, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly
> states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
>
> However, I do need some advice from you regarding some of the
> other specific laws and how to follow them.
>
> 1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it
> creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev.1:9). The problem
> is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them.
> Should I smite them?
>
> 2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as
> sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you
> think would be a fair price for her?
>
> 3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she
> is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19-24.
> The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most
> women take offense.
>
> 4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both
> male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring
> nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans,
> but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
>
> 5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath.
> Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I
> morally obligated to kill him myself?
>
>
>
> 6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish
> is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than
> homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
>
> 7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God
> if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear
> reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there
> some wiggle room here?
>
> 8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including
> the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly
> forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?
>
> 9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead
> pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear
> gloves?
>
> 10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting
> two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by
> wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread
> (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme
> a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble
> of getting the whole town together to stone them
> (Lev.24:10-16)? Couldn't we just burn them to death at a
> private family affair like we do with people who sleep with
> their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these
> things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you
> again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and
> unchanging.
>
> Your devoted fan,
> Jim
>>
>
>
Dear Jim,
You are a gentile.
Laura.
sean horning <shornin@linfield.edu>, studentforum@linfield.edu
"Catherine M. Dondlinger" <cdondli@linfield.edu>
Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:01:01 -0800
Re: Multnomah County Issues Gay Marriage Licenses
<2147483647.1078329859@[10.119.96.187]>
<58279591.1078444861@[10.119.95.185]>
<2147483647.1078329859@[10.119.96.187]>
don't be too sure. how arrogant are you, that you think you can judge?
in christ, catherine *~
--On Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:04 PM -0800 sean horning
<shornin@linfield.edu> wrote:
> It is days like this when I am proud that I am not a resident of Oregon
> or any other state that is giving licenses to same-sex couples. It makes
> me sick that this is happening in our great nation. I just know that when
> it is all said and done, that I will not be the one going to hell.
>
> Sean Horning
>
> --On Wednesday, March 2004, 10:49 AM -0800 mswobod@linfield.edu wrote:
>
>> As of 11pm last night Multnomah County decided to start issuing marriage
>> licenses to same-sex couples. Here are a couple articles...
>>
>> Congratulations, Oregon!
>> Megan Swoboda
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> http://www.oregonlive.com/metro/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/all_wire_storie
>> s/ 1077886922312110.xml
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Gay Marriage Licenses Coming to Oregon
>>
>> March 3, 2004
>> By THE NEW YORK TIMES
>>
>>
>> Oregon's most populous county will begin issuing marriage
>> licenses to same-sex couples today, a county commissioner
>> said last night.
>>
>> The board of commissioners for Multnomah County, which
>> includes Portland, released a statement yesterday in favor
>> of the policy change after the county attorney, Agnes
>> Sowle, issued an opinion that the licenses would not
>> violate state law.
>>
>> Commissioner Lisa Naito said that the commissioners would
>> hold a news conference this morning to explain their
>> decision and that the licenses would be issued afterward.
>>
>> Roey Thorpe, executive director for the gay rights group
>> Basic Rights Oregon, said the group was thrilled.
>>
>> "Many gay and lesbian couples have been waiting for decades
>> to be seen as equal under the law," Ms. Thorpe said.
>>
>> Oregon is one of 13 states without laws defining marriage
>> as between a man and a woman.
>>
>> A spokesman for the state attorney general, Hardy Myers,
>> said it was too early to say what action the state would
>> take, if any.
>>
>> Commissioner Lonnie Roberts said the decision by others on
>> the four-member board was made "clandestinely," without his
>> knowledge.
>>
>> "I wasn't informed, and I feel that this is the wrong way
>> to approach this issue," Mr. Roberts said.
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/03/national/03GAYS.html?ex=1079301892&ei=1
>> &e n=8cf2e52f62a2355b
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Not all those who wander are lost."
~J. R. R. Tolkien
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has limits."
~Albert Einstein
studentforum@linfield.edu
Mike <mpace@linfield.edu>
Fri, 05 Mar 2004 01:06:21 -0800
In Response...
<58279591.1078444861@[10.119.95.185]>
<62689578.1078448781@[10.215.200.217]>
<2147483647.1078329859@[10.119.96.187]>
<58279591.1078444861@[10.119.95.185]>
Speaking as a member of the leadership team from one of the Christian clubs
on campus, I apologize for how this debate got started. I'd also like to
give my opinion.
Homosexuality does go against God's law. And anything that goes against
God's law is what Christians call a sin. It doesn't make you a bad person
or evil, in fact I have some amazing friends, whom I care deeply for, who
are homosexual. Of course it's not any more wrong than killing, stealing
or telling a lie. There are no levels of sin. Sin is sin no matter what
you do. You have to make a choice to do it. Who am I, as a sinner, to
judge someone else for doing something that's against my morals? It would
be straight up hypocrisy. If I were to say that someone who identifies as
homosexual is going to hell, it is in turn condemning me to hell because I
am guilty of just as much, if not more than that person. The only one who
is worthy to judge is the sinless, God.
As to the matter of homosexual marriages, I think it's a lot safer than
being promiscuous. I say pledge your love to somebody and stay faithful
for life. However, this doesn't change the fact that it goes against God's
laws. I happen to believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God and
is 100% accurate and 100% true. If I'm right, the only way to be saved
from hell is to believe that Jesus is God, that he came to Earth to live as
a man, that he lived a sinless life, died as a sacrifice for you and came
back to life and now lives in heaven as part of the Trinity known as God.
It doesn't matter whether your sin is lying, cheating or homosexuality,
according to the Bible, this is the only way to avoid hell.
If you have any questions or comments feel free to e-mail me and I'll do my
best to explain.
Mike Pace
"In all you do, work with all your heart as working for the Lord!"
"I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me!"