Is our moral compass f***ed up?

Triathlon Forum
1

Sorry to go off topic, but this just chaps my hide.

Following the Mass. Supreme Court decision to make gay marriage legal, our President went on record to say that he found the incident “very troubling” and hinted that he would explore a constitutional ban to “preserve the sanctity of marriage.”

I find this stance on the sanctity of marriage rather sanctimonious. I mean how can you cite the sanctity of marriage when it is perfectly legal for a convicted pedophile to marry and have children? It’s also perfectly legal for a pair of Ku Klux Klan members to marry and raise a gaggle of racist children. If the sanctity of marriage is the issue, shouldn’t there therefore be more restriction on who can and cannot get married?

To me, this reeks of George Wallace blocking the entrance of the University of Alabama. A politician taking a perceived moral stand to pander to his constituents when in actuality, he is defending discrimination. Plain and simple. How can an objective-minded person defend this view?

Admittedly, the Dems aren’t much better; Kerry is in favor of “gay unions,” a separate but unequal distinction. But like slavery, civil rights and women’s suffrage, isn’t this an issue where we need to differentiate between what is popular and what is the right thing to do?

2

The Supreme Court would never allow a blatantly discriminatory amendment to the Constitution. Amazingly enough the President of United States cannot make laws or decide the constitutionality of laws. Thank God the founding fathers believed in checks and balances.

3

The Supreme Court would never allow a blatantly discriminatory amendment to the Constitution.

Why not? They’ve upheld blatantly discriminatory Constitutional articles before.

The Supreme Court cannot rule on the “Constitutionality” of the Constitution (or its amendments) itself. Were an amendment to the Constitution banning same-sex unions to be passed, the Supreme Court would have no choice but to uphold it (or try to find a “loophole” with an “activist” interpretation). AFAIK, there is no legal ground that the Court could use to justify nullifying an amendment. In effect, the amendment process to the Constitution is a check and balance on Supreme Court power. That’s one of the reasons why Constitutional amendments are much harder to pass than most laws.

Whether the amendment is “morally correct” or not is another question, but that’s irrelevant from a Supreme Court perspective, especially if the law is specifically clarified in the Constitution.

4

We have currently have a big government debate going on about the legality of gay marriages up here in Canada. Originally it would be recognized, but there is so much contraversy that it seems to have been placed on the back burner for awhile.

This doesn’t have much to do with triathlon but I’d suspect that there are quite a large number of gay triathletes even if they are in the closet on this forum, so this is probably not an inappropriate lifestyle topic.

I’m not homophobic and personally I don’t care one way or other if two gays wish to declare themselves married. However, I admit having a bit of a hard time viewing this as a true family unit with getting spousal pension rights, etc.

As someone who has been thru a divorce I really don’t understand why two gays would want the legal status in the first place, because there will be more chance of alimony battles, etc. and all the other pay the damn lawyer things us heterosexuals have to go thru when a marriage fails.

5

I don’t know why we’re worried about the gays will do to the sanctity of marriage. Heterosexuals have done quite a number on marriage when over half of us are divorced. What sanctity are we protecting?

6

Who really gives a rats ass about this? Who gives a flying f*ck about Janet’s tit? Another sick MoFo on parole has kidnapped and killed an innocent child. Our laws are weak and our children are not safe. I’m not smart enough to come up with the solution but burning these deviants at the stake would be a start…

7

Child abduction, while horrifying, is a sensationalist story that affects less than 100 children a year. In the grand scheme of things, there are issuesgoing on in our society that affect more people than these heinious crimes. But abduction sells newspapers and makes for riveting tv, so we can focus on the micro, rather than the macro.

We’ll let everone have a kid regardless of their qualifications as a parent. Crappy parents make crappy people. Jail is graduate school for criminals. To get back on, the “off topic” post; there are millions of unfit straight, married couples poorly raising their kids. Studies show time and time again that poor parenting leads to offspring who turn to crime. I guess this is another facet of the “sanctity of marriage.”

8

I’ll probably take my licks for this, but that’s been the trend over the last few days, so what else is new…

Yes, there is no question, our moral compass is f***ed up. As a matter of fact, I doubt we even know where to find it.

First off, marriage as an institution is rarely taken seriously anymore. People rarely take it as seriously as they should, and as a result the divorce rate is high. There are a million reasons to justify a person’s divorce- most of them, in my opinion, boil down to selfishness and an unwillingness to compromise one’s ego to benefit the greater good of the marriage/family. In short- “It’s all about me and my needs.” When a marriage no longer suits a person’s purposes the currently acceptable sociatal remedy is to leave it. Oprah says its OK, Dr. Phil says its OK, It’s all about you sistah, and if the man ain’t cuttin’ the mustard kick him to the curb, get a breast lift and move on down the road.

Second, at what point did government become responsible for legislating social conduct? Society, culture, family and tradition are supposed to mandate the morays of our interpersonal relationships. Not the federal governement.

The governement runs the military, collects taxes, performs some limited and closely monitored “watchdog” functions such as the FDA, represents the voters, upholds the constitution and some other stuff too. They shouldn’t be in the business of controlliing every aspect of our lives.

At some point we have to be responsible for managing our relationships, dealing with the results when we mismanage them, raising our children responsibly and trying to fix the moral mess our society and culture sometimes is- one person at a time, beginning with me.

9

I agree about this stuff being insignificant compared to child protection laws, which are way too lenient. The punishment should fit the crime. The punishment does not fit the crime. It doesn’t take much instigation for me to want to gather up all the Gladiator weapons I could find and go “Molester Hunting”.

My take on gay marriages …

If you pay taxes (i.e. citizenship), you are entitled to every allowance allowed to every other citizen … including marriage. That’s how I feel about it as an american.

As a Christian, it’s quite clear what the Bible says about it. The word “Abomination” isn’t a word that cannot be interpreted 90 different ways.

Essentially, isn’t “marriage” a religious thing? Didn’t it start out as a joining of man and woman before God. Isn’t the oath taken meant to be before God and Family? Marriage, like praying, doesn’t seem to be something that “non-religious” people would do anyway.

Seriously, I’ve never really seen where marriage was anything other than a religious junction. In practice it has become a legal-binding commitment. So, in general Christians are protective of an event that they view as an oath taken with God as your witness. I see that as being they don’t want something that is not accepted by God (according to the Bible) to atain status as being something religious (whihc is what marriage, IMO, is intended to be).

Much like everything else religious, through the practice of non-religious people, events have taken on a non-religious sense and have lost their religious intent (like Christmas).

That’s how I have always understood it to be.

This is a subject that I don’t know what to think about. The Libertarian in me says people have the right to do anything they want as long as my rights aren’t affected,but the Christian in me wonders if I shouldn’t be oppossed to something “not right” taking place in a religious event.

Perhaps, if marriage is a religious event, they could have “Legal Partnerships” or whatever, for those that are not “religious” (includes more than just gays).

10

Good observation TripleThreat,

One thing I learned over the last year is that marriage means different things to different people. For some it is a deeply sacred thing. For others it is a matter of convenience or a pajama party. For others still, it is a business deal. If it means the same thing to both parties the likelyhood of a misunderstanding happening are reduced. When one party is on one sheet of music and the other on another then you’ll have problems.

11

While abductions may be sensationalized they are the tip of the iceberg when it comes to crimes against children. Child Protection Laws take a backseat in American Politics. Instead of worrying about gay marriage lets worry about gay Priests. Sixty-seven percent of all victims of sexual assault reported to law enforcement agencies are juveniles (under the age of 18); 34% of all victims are under age 12. One of every seven victims of sexual assault reported to law enforcement agencies are under age 6.

13

The campy/shimano thing has been shelved for the time being. I posted that yesterday.

15

A word on the word “abomination”

Forget that the Bible was rewritten thousands of time from the original scripture to increase membership and bend the word of God to fit the political needs of the powerful. There are a lot of abominations we have to watch out for. In addition to eating pork …

Don’t Eat Birds of Prey

And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray,

Sushi Lovers: Don’t Eat Eels

And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

“Fear Factor” Contestants: Watcheth Out

And every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth shall be an abomination; it shall not be eaten.

Whatsoever goeth upon the belly, and whatsoever goeth upon all four, or whatsoever hath more feet among all creeping things that creep upon the earth, them ye shall not eat; for they are an abomination.

Don’t Sacrifice Ugly Sheep

Thou shalt not sacrifice unto the LORD thy God any bullock, or sheep, wherein is blemish, or any evilfavouredness: for that is an abomination unto the LORD thy God.

I Guess Henry Potter is Going to Hell …

There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch. 11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. 12 For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD

Get out of those blue jeans, ladies!

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

Don’t re-marry your ex-wife

Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

The Death Penalty

The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the LORD: but the prayer of the upright is his delight.

Don’t feel too good about yourself …

Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD

Don’t run a stop sign on your bike

He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination.

Despite today’s great interest rates, Mortgage Brokers are in trouble

Hath given forth upon usury, and hath taken increase: shall he then live? he shall not live: he hath done all these abominations; he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon him.

Befriending those with foreskin is Evil!

In that ye have brought into my sanctuary strangers, uncircumcised in heart, and uncircumcised in flesh, to be in my sanctuary, to pollute it, even my house, when ye offer my bread, the fat and the blood, and they have broken my covenant because of all your abominations.

16

Damn, 3Sport, you beat me to it. I was just about to post the same thing. I consider myself a Christian, but it bothers me how some ‘Christians’ (mainly the ones wanting to get their faces on TV) love those passages in the Bible that support their prejudices, but conveniently ignore all the other inconvenient ones. I’m no biblical scholar, but I don’t think bigotry and hatred was what Jesus had in mind. Just my $.02 worth, not looking for a fight. :slight_smile:

Chris

17

There will be a lot of political discussions this year. Beyond the economy, and foreign policy, everything else pales.

I find people like to discuss moral-based political issues when they have no idea of the facts. What is the national budget? How much is homeland security? What is the difference between medicare and medicaid? How much is the debt service? How much is welfare?

To have a discussion on politics, you need to know this.

If you don’t know these things, but want to talk talk politics, talk about:

gay marriage

steroids

letter from Suzy Creamcheese

Clark’s sweater

…

Eyes on the prize.

18

LOL. Point taken. Regardless, we get the idea that homosexuality is “not accepted” by God, or at the very least that’s what I’ve been taught in church. I have never set out on a personal mission to determine whether homosexuality is accepted or not

Ya think some of the phrases you are using are somewhat out of context and more figurative than literal. I’m guerssing some of it was on purpose for some humor, and I’m not bent out of shape or anything.

I should have just simplified it like this.

  1. The Bible seems to indicate that homosexuality is not accepted.

  2. Marriage is a religious ceremony.

Hence, the protection of a religious ceremony by Christians.

I am not a marriage historian either. If marriage is not a religious ceremony (I don’t even know if it was “invented” by Christians), could someone point out where it was originated.

I am not oppossed to “gay legalized partnerships” … but marriages seem to be a very religious event where a man is promising himself to a woman with God as a witness (and vice versa).

I’m also not oppossed to having Santa Claus day … but it could be on a day other than Dec. 25th … stop pissing on my holiday. Why is society so concerned with not offending anyone except Christians? If you wanna have “Bunny Egg” day … go right ahead … do it on a day other than Easter. Okay, so my pet peeve is out of the bag.

Personally on gays … as I can see that Christians opposing gay marriage are going to get labelled “homophobes” (A person really cannot make a comment withou 4,321 disclaimers). My wife and I have friends that are gay. A coworker friend of mine is gay, and they have adopted a son, that my son plays with . I have no problem with that. As someone that is trying to live their life by giving Glory to God, I know I am not to discriminate against others or impose my judgements on them. By the same token, I don’t know what I’m suppossed to feel. I’m taught it’s wrong, but I’m not suppossed to act like it is? It’s confusing to say the least. I have friends that have committed far greater sins that “being gay”.

19

3Sport, normally I don’t get involved in threads like this (on a tri-forum) because one, I seriously doubt I’ll be able to convince someone effectively over the internet, and two I try to respect the purpose of this board. (Sorry to everyone about the libritarian post.)
But, since you have blasted so many verse of the Bible totally out of context, and used them to try and prove your own point, I feel compelled to respond.

First of all, yes many Bibles have over the course of history been bent or twisted to meet someones personal goals. But, I you go out today and go to a Christain Book Store and ask for an NIV, or an NAS, or any number of newer recently translated Bibles you’ll find they are much more accurate. (Because someone or someones went back to the original texts and is actually looking for answers.)

As far as the verses you quoted, they all came out of the Old Testament. Before Jesus came back and did the whole sin forgivng stuff. If you really want moral lessons, pull me some verses out of the New Testament. I’m not saying that the Old Testament isn’t good for anything, but it isn’t all the law for today.

20

Point taken, Ze Gopha, but twisting the verse out of context was kind of my point. Twisting the context of ‘holy’ scripture has been done for eons by Christians, Jews and Muslims to divinly justify discrimination, violence and hate. I was doing it to show it can also be done for a chuckle. :slight_smile:

21

<<As someone that is trying to live their life by giving Glory to God, I know I am not to discriminate against others or impose my judgements on them. By the same token, I don’t know what I’m suppossed to feel. I’m taught it’s wrong, but I’m not suppossed to act like it is? It’s confusing to say the least. I have friends that have committed far greater sins that “being gay”. >>

Perhaps this will make it easier: It’s not for you to judge, judgement is reserved for God. So, be a good human, set a good example for others to follow and let Him worry about the rest.

As far as unagi (freshwater eel) goes, I’m doomed…

Brett

22

That’s precisely what I am trying to do.

It’s not for you to judge, judgement is reserved for God.

I’m not sure how to interpret this, and I don’t want to react to something that I am unsure of the actual meessage (learning from past mistakes).

IMO, one can say that adultry is bad, without judging adulterers. MOF, the Bible tells Christians not to committ adultry. Same deal with murder, etc. While it is not for me to “condemn them to hell”, I can still say murder is wrong, and admit they should pay for the crime. In regards to homosexuality … can’t I read the Bible, infer that homosexuality is wrong based on what I read, and come to that conclusion without judging homosexuals? Or can I?

I’m certain that Christians aren’t suppossed to go through life without an opinion, hiding their opinion, or biting their tongue so no one gets offended if you dare say what someone has done or are doing is wrong. I don’t know if that qualifies as “judging or not”. Reading the accounts of Jesus, he certainly wasn’t a discriminator, but he certainly wasn’t shy in disclosing what was right and what wasn’t, nor did he seem to be a big fan of listening to whining and excuse-making. He was a straight-shooter to say the least. My only point on the last bit is that while Christians certianly aren’t equated as being equal to Jesus, just the same I don’t think we’re intended to go through life as spineless, silent shadows.

Well, I said I didn’t want to comment without knowing what you meant, and I tried to tip-toe as soft as I could without saying something that could be interpreted as “over-reacting” or “assuming” to know what you meant. Walking on eggshells is not how I go through life. I try not to stomp, but not being direct is not my game.