Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mustang6172]

I for one am dissapointed with this arc.  Maurice should have gone on some long tirade about how he doesn't believe in marriage!

If the comic isn't going to use toilet humor, it should at least use soap opra-like drama.

[Mojo]

Well, I haven't read all through it, but I have no doubt that the usual gay marriage debate has been raging, so here's my take.


First, I don't understand the problem people are having with it.  If two people get married, it has absolutely nothing to do with me, so why should it matter what their genders are?  Further, even if I felt it was immoral for whatever reason, what gives me the right to impose my beliefs on someone else?

Thus, on these grounds I do not oppose gay marriage.  Further, I actually support it.  Two people that love each other should have the same right to marry as anyone else.

Now, legally speaking, I don't see how it can be denied to people.  That is, at least in Canada, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) states quite clearly that the law cannot discriminate against anyone on the basis of several characteristics, in this case GENDER.

That is, marriage provides a number of legal rights and priveleges to couples, so the institution is one provided by law.  This being the case, you cannot prevent a person marrying another person on the basis of the GENDER of one of those people.
Thus, the law MUST recognize gay marriage as LEGAL.

Now, that is not to say that churches should have to perform the ceremonies.  They are entirely within their rights to say that people cannot be married in their church, but they cannot say they cannot be married AT ALL.  Couples would still have the recourse of going to the government (City Hall).

Now, I don't know American Law, but I imagine the same argument could be made.  I'd have to look into it.

[maddness]

Have to say as accepting of gays I am, I have mixed feelings about gay marriage. I agree that homosexuals deserve all the rights of married heterosexuals but in the end the church are the ones offering the service of marriage and if they don't want to offer that service to a particular group of people then that sucks but it's their right, especially given that there are alternatives (civil partnerships) that offer all rights of marriage.

When you marry you have to have a license from the state to make it legal. So long as you have that license and are married by someone who legally has the power to perform a marriage, you are considered to be married under the law. Whether you have a religious ceremony or no matters not at all to the state. I was married in a courthouse by a Justice of the Peace. I was semi-Catholic at the time, but did not belong to a local church in my husband's home town, and he was raised in a split household, Pentecostal and Southern Baptist. We decided to eschew religion altogether when it came to our marriage.

I believe that every religion has it's own right to decide whether they can perform a marriage between same-sex couples. I may think it sucks if they don't, but as a religion, the state has no say in whether they do or not.

[kemon]

mojo, if only people had the capability to grasp it in the clear and concise manner you've presented it.  unfortunately, there are far too many who cannot and choose to blatantly ignore the fact that it is clearly discrimination to deny marriage between any couple.

[Near Lurker]

they'll only commit to something if it's fun. that and they're directed by people with FAR more patience and capability for strategic thought.

Wait...political intrigue = fun, romantic relationships = BO-ring!

...right.  Also, the Illuminati have every well-known homosexual on speed dial, Conservapedia is a reliable source, and LHOOQ doesn't exist.

I can't help but notice that for all your moralizing, you've ignored the other, more obvious homosexuality thread right next door.  But that concerns lesbians, and lesbians actually bite back.

[hanalways]

When my brother got married. Haha. Typo. That's what happens when you multitask. >_> Not incestuous.

[the_shankmaster]

Well, it was a different way to interpret a "little family wedding." 

[ChokingOutTheRadio]

I don't have any protest against gay marriage, but this comic has jumped the shark. Ooooh lets get a reaction but pushing a hot button item. Boring. The auxilliary Hannelore is the only interesting character, and I like the addition of self concious Marigold. The rest of the characters have gotten stale, especially Marten and Dora (not that Dora ever was very interesting). And does every male in the strip have to look like carbon copies of each other? OOh Martens dad has white hair, that denotes he's older! He looks like a twenty-something with bleached hair to me. Sven, Angus and whoever that other forgettable male character thats dating the blonde forgettable character could all pop up in the strip and i wouldn't know which is which other than the fact Sven would make a sex joke. Faye is the only dynamic character yet she only pops up in the strip to crack a wise ass joke, despite having tons of history from which to pull material. Anyway, I typically read this comic once or twice a week and catch up on the strips I missed, but I'm pretty sure its just habit. Put this thing down already.

[JD]

He's not pushing a hot button item, the fact that Marten's dad was gay was known for quite a while. He was even used in a joke if I remember correctly.

[BigSol81]

The vast majority of devout religious people are sheep. Plain and simple. Blind devotion and blind faith to a being they have absolutely no evidence exists.

And no, the world being here is not "proof".

You're free to believe whatever you want, but I base my beliefs on evidence. I believe that the existence of a divine power is possible because I have no evidence that one does not exist, and no evidence exists to rule out such a being.

- There is no proof of a lack of God, thus no intelligent, rational human being can legitimately state that there is not one with any degree of certainty.

- There is no proof that God exists, thus no intelligent, rational human being can legitimately state that there is one with any degree of certainty.

I have just as much a problem with atheists as I do with theists, since just like theists, atheists claim knowledge without any empirical evidence. I am an agnostic, because I don't know what powers lie beyond. I don't know what happens after death, and if you think you do, if you think you're totally sure that you know, I can guarantee you're wrong.

If my opinions offend those of you that steadfastly deny the existence of any supreme beings, or those of you that cling pathetically to the idea of some magical, mystical savior, then that's too bad. Getting offended by someone else's opinion is ridiculous.

[JD]

Have to say as accepting of gays I am, I have mixed feelings about gay marriage. I agree that homosexuals deserve all the rights of married heterosexuals but in the end the church are the ones offering the service of marriage and if they don't want to offer that service to a particular group of people then that sucks but it's their right, especially given that there are alternatives (civil partnerships) that offer all rights of marriage.

Married people have more rights than civil unions.

[Mr_Rose]

I believe that every religion has it's own right to decide whether they can perform a marriage between same-sex couples. I may think it sucks if they don't, but as a religion, the state has no say in whether they do or not.

Right. But who has been telling any particular religious organisation who or what they can marry? It has been pretty much exactly the other way around ever since the topic first came up.
No state institution I have ever heard of has ever tried to tell a church or other religious outpost that they must perform a ceremony for such-and-such classification of couple - mostly it's the churches that have been trying to tell the states that they aren't allowed to issue licences to gay couples because it "violates the sanctity of marriage" or some such.

[Near Lurker]

I don't have any protest against gay marriage, but this comic has jumped the shark. Ooooh lets get a reaction but pushing a hot button item. Boring.

The thing is, I don't think anyone was actually expecting a reaction to the issue.  This is kinda weird.

[JD]

Mostly killbot's fault

Edit: I wasted my 3000th post

[Ravenswing]

It has made me feel suicidal that I will always be seen and perceived as a woman no matter what I do, that every "masculine" thing I like and do (almost everything) will have to be proven, that any time I want to play with femininity I have to accept being treated as a "girl" ... So yes, if gender roles went away, if people accepted sexuality, interests and behaviour as a spectrum then I would be happy in my skin. But that will never happen. And the fact that despite not coping at all with being female sometimes I don't actually feel I AM male (if it was easy I probably would change my sex) means I really respect that some people do.

Which suggests that substantively, you agree with me.

It's a hard thing to wrap our heads around, because we're so wedded to gender identity that even now, even in circles you'd think would be progressive enough to believe otherwise, we have this rigid concept of what behavior ought to be exhibited by whom.  As you say, you're likely to be pigeonholed no matter how you act, no matter your interests, but that's because damn near every activity and personality trait that exists has a traditional pigeonhole.  It even comes down to tiny little things you'd think wouldn't matter ... that, for instance, a difference I really appreciate between my first wife and my second is that Amanda is comfy with giving me flowers, something I quite like, but that (cough) Gurrrrls aren't supposed to get for Boys.

Will this ever change?  Probably not in what's left of my lifetime, no.  But c'mon.  I'm from Massachusetts, and if you had told me as recently as six years ago that I'd not only see single-sex marriage in my lifetime, it'd be celebrated in my own community within a year, I'd have advised you to lay off the hallucinogens.  This in a state - one so strongly identified with liberalism that it's used as a slur nationwide - where I grew up in an area so lily white and Pleasantville-ish that I went until my fifth birthday before I ever saw a black person in the flesh, gay bars lacked signs for safety reasons well into my 20s, and to be a "faggot" was the worst thing in the world when I was a kid, even if we didn't have any clear idea what that actually meant.  If that was ostensibly liberal Massachusetts in the 1960s, heaven alone knows what backcountry Mississippi was like.

The world's changing in front of our eyes at a staggering rate, and that's a comforting thing.  I certainly won't live to see the day when none of this will matter.  You may.

[Ravenswing]

And, as far as Killbot goes ... c'mon, folks.  This isn't even clever trolling, at this point.  This is pretty lame.

[DonInKansas]

Gay marriage isn't federally possible because of the separation between church and state.......

I'll begin believing in the supposed "separation of church and state" when they take "In God we Trust" off of all the money.

[Mr_Rose]

Gay marriage isn't federally possible because of the separation between church and state.......

I'll begin believing in the supposed "separation of church and state" when they take "In God we Trust" off of all the money.

Well, it was only added in the 1860s; it has nothing to do with the original intent of the Founding Fathers. Just get it declared unconstitutional and changed back to "E Pluribus Unum" which actually makes sense... Can't be that difficult, right?
Then you can get Congress to re-issue Eagle coins.

[ChristKnows]

Have to say as accepting of gays I am, I have mixed feelings about gay marriage. I agree that homosexuals deserve all the rights of married heterosexuals but in the end the church are the ones offering the service of marriage and if they don't want to offer that service to a particular group of people then that sucks but it's their right, especially given that there are alternatives (civil partnerships) that offer all rights of marriage.

Married people have more rights than civil unions.

To my knowledge in the UK at least that isn't true.

[Dliessmgg]

I just pondered, how big is the chance Hanners will bring Marigod?

PONDER PONDER PONDER I love that word.

[Lyrical]

I think they're celebrating in town with the whole gang, but it seems a little strange that they'd invite a bunch of people that they don't know to their wedding, much less have them *in* the wedding party.  Since they're visiting from out of town, I guess they might decide to welcome anyone who shows up and is respectful.

killbot, disagreeing with you, or refusing to convert, doesn't count as persecution.  In China, where Christians and people from other religions  can be *jailed* for their faith, they're experiencing persecution.

I personally find it disturbing that far too many of the "conservative" Christian side are only well-read when it comes to Bible commentary.  These rather vocal folk then proceed to bash science (threatens their faith), any minority they wish (same), education in general (who needs physics & evolution?), & the arts (anything that isn't religious is an attack on religion & pro-{gay,atheist,satanist}).

So...Henry & Maurice do tie the knot.   Pintsize gets left at home because everyone knows he'll cause trouble.  A Fred Phelps-like leader & his flock do the "God hates fags" thing outside.  Pintsize trolls them with his usual style, possibly involving horsecock or other male genitalia. 

Wait, Pintsize is trolling the Phelps-people or Marten, Maurice, and Henry? 

Actually, quite a few of the "conservative" Christians you mention don't bother to read the Bible either, they just regurgitate the passages their Pastor feeds them.  In 3 different places, the Disciples ask Jesus how to go about evangelising, and He tells them that if someone isn't interested, to go away, leave them alone, and find someone who *wants* to talk with them about it!  He also specifically says that missionaries aren't supposed to take money for lodging and food with them.  If the people in one place don't want them there so much that they are willing to put them up in their own homes and make sure they get enough to eat, they're obviously not welcome and need to move on.  As to the whole prayer in the schools thing, as long as there are midterms and finals, there *will* be prayer in the schools!  Jesus says that anyone who makes a loud production of it needs to go "back in the closet" and mend their relationship with God.  (I'm serious - direct quote there!)

My Dad is Baptist, and a convert from Orthodox Judaism.  He wishes that the governmentally-performed marriages would get a different name, such as Civil Unions, regardless of the gender of the people involved, but that they should have the same rights including health care and taxes.  He agrees that current Civil Partnerships don't go far enough.  My Mom isn't as supportive of legalising same-sex marriage (by any name) but she "doesn't want anyone to be discriminated against, and nobody should be mean to them for any reason."  I've had the same attitude for a long time, but with reading some more about "separate but equal", I'm concerned that even if it starts out the same (very optimistic), keeping a different label might make it easier for the government to change policies/remove rights. 

I have several gay friends, and a lot of them are still close to their families, including ones who are Catholic or Protestant.  I've met some of their parents (not as a potential girlfriend or anything like that, just hanging out), and they're very warm, caring, accepting people.

Back when I was doing Renaissance Faire, one of the (rather drunk at the time) ladies in the guild said at a party, "I'm so great in bed, I got a gay man to go straight."  Another looked at her and said, "That's nice dear.  *I* drove a straight man gay!" (her fiance dumped her a few days before the wedding and came out).  In all seriousness, most such "flips" result from pressure within the gay community for high-Kinsey-score bisexual men to choose the "gay" label instead, almost as a political statement.  I've heard them yell at guys for "sitting on the fence," "being greedy/slutty/promiscuous," and "he'll just dump me for a girl" (and very similar things from lesbians toward bisexual women).  There are also some people who are in denial, or who try to fit in with social pressure to get married and have kids, especially if they are older.

[maddness]

I believe that every religion has it's own right to decide whether they can perform a marriage between same-sex couples. I may think it sucks if they don't, but as a religion, the state has no say in whether they do or not.

Right. But who has been telling any particular religious organisation who or what they can marry? It has been pretty much exactly the other way around ever since the topic first came up.
No state institution I have ever heard of has ever tried to tell a church or other religious outpost that they must perform a ceremony for such-and-such classification of couple - mostly it's the churches that have been trying to tell the states that they aren't allowed to issue licences to gay couples because it "violates the sanctity of marriage" or some such.

Was I arguing that point?

I was just saying you can be fully, legally married without any church involvement whatsoever.

[AvalonXQ]

I'm pretty happy with Jeph's treatment of this topic in the comic so far.  Personally I'm opposed to gay marriage, but I don't think it's reasonable that these characters would be; they're acting realistically based on the beliefs that Jeph has reasonably portrayed them as having.
What I'm concerned about is Jeph using this as an opportunity to set up a strawman -- an obvious stereotype to oppose Henry and Maurice.
Setting up unrealistic characters with beliefs that you strongly disagree with, just for the purpose of knocking them down, really tends to turn me off whether I agree with your position or not.

[Mr_Rose]

I believe that every religion has it's own right to decide whether they can perform a marriage between same-sex couples. I may think it sucks if they don't, but as a religion, the state has no say in whether they do or not.

Right. But who has been telling any particular religious organisation who or what they can marry? It has been pretty much exactly the other way around ever since the topic first came up.
No state institution I have ever heard of has ever tried to tell a church or other religious outpost that they must perform a ceremony for such-and-such classification of couple - mostly it's the churches that have been trying to tell the states that they aren't allowed to issue licences to gay couples because it "violates the sanctity of marriage" or some such.

Was I arguing that point?

I was just saying you can be fully, legally married without any church involvement whatsoever.

Dunno, sounded like you might have been? Every time I've hear the argument that "religions should be free to choose who to marry" it has always been followed by "therefore homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry, because that's our thing" or similar. I guess I just responded by reflex.

[Rikushix]

Actually, quite a few of the "conservative" Christians you mention don't bother to read the Bible either, they just regurgitate the passages their Pastor feeds them.  In 3 different places, the Disciples ask Jesus how to go about evangelising, and He tells them that if someone isn't interested, to go away, leave them alone, and find someone who *wants* to talk with them about it!  He also specifically says that missionaries aren't supposed to take money for lodging and food with them.  If the people in one place don't want them there so much that they are willing to put them up in their own homes and make sure they get enough to eat, they're obviously not welcome and need to move on.  As to the whole prayer in the schools thing, as long as there are midterms and finals, there *will* be prayer in the schools!  Jesus says that anyone who makes a loud production of it needs to go "back in the closet" and mend their relationship with God.  (I'm serious - direct quote there!)

Unfortunately the sad fact is that the Bible consists of two books - the Old and the New Testaments. Citing the New Testament is nice and all, but it's the Old Testament that is a veritable tome of hatred, bigotry and rampant tyranny.

It's pretty interesting actually, the job I worked on this summer had a girl working there, 16 years old (and her 14 year old sister). Half-Taiwanese, (in my opinion) extremely bright and a very good "thinker". But the discussions we had turned from interesting to "laughably ridiculous" when they broached the topic of her religion.

Her family is Reformed Calvinist. Her dad is a minister; she and her sister were born while their parents were doing a missionary in Fiji for three years.

So obviously, being a Reformed Calvinist, they aren't puritan in terms of customs, but as far as religious beliefs go, they believe EVERYTHING in the Bible. One day we were talking about religion (cordially), and this is the conversation we had:

Her: "One of my biggest pet peeves is when people pick and choose what they want from the Bible."
Me: "In what way? You mean historical anecdotes, like 'did God really rain fire and brimstone upon Sodom and Gommorah?', or moral teachings, like 'you should stone your kids if they speak back to you'. Or both?"
Her: "Anything. Everything."
Me: "So you agree that an unmarried woman who is raped should marry her rapist, as long as the rapist pays her father fifty shekels?"
Her: "Uh..."
Me: "How about you and I take a trip to Utah and take the sword to everyone living in Salt Lake City because they're all heathen Mormons?"
Her: <_<
Me: "Megan."
Her: "Yeah?"
Me: "Do you sacrifice two doves at your father's church every month you have your period?"
Her: "...no. I don't do that."
Me: "So why don't you do that? The Bible says that you should, and the Bible is God's word. I thought you were supposed to do what God told you to."
Her: (much thinking for a good few minutes before she says something along the lines of "Social values naturally change over time", which is officially the lamest response ever)

However, the saddest thing happened when I asked her about me.

We had had several (very intelligent and altogether fair) discussions about god and our personal beliefs, so she knew I wasn't an outright athiest. But this same day, I asked her, "Megan, if I believed God didn't exist, would I go to Hell?" I'll never forget the facial expression she made as she tried to deal with the mental dilemma. It was just disheartening in a disturbing sort of way, as she tried to weigh her own moral compassion against the rigid values that had been indoctrinated into her from birth, courtesy of her caregivers. Finally she told me that while, "technically", the Bible says, yes, I would go to hell, she really doesn't like the "concept of Hell" - basically saying that she doesn't think a loving God would send people like me to eternal damnation.

After that we were silent.

It was very sad.

Just wanted to share that.

[Moxie]

Have to say as accepting of gays I am, I have mixed feelings about gay marriage. I agree that homosexuals deserve all the rights of married heterosexuals but in the end the church are the ones offering the service of marriage and if they don't want to offer that service to a particular group of people then that sucks but it's their right, especially given that there are alternatives (civil partnerships) that offer all rights of marriage.

Married people have more rights than civil unions.

This is only my opinion.
If the problem is religion and marriage by saying you can't have gay marriage because that ruins marriage or whatever the argument is, then why not fully support the idea of separation of church and state and get rid of marriage in terms of rights given by the government? If the government is going to give rights to two people who love each other/want to make the bond to be together, then there should be a complete overhaul to the system. To be fair and separate religion, in the eyes of the government every union between two people should be a civil union. Nothing more, nothing less.
If the two people want a marriage, then they can go to their religious place of choice and have that too, but it wouldn't (and shouldn't) affect their rights according to the government.


(edited for clarification)

[Near Lurker]

So obviously, being a Reformed Calvinist, they aren't puritan in terms of customs, but as far as religious beliefs go, they believe EVERYTHING in the Bible. One day we were talking about religion (cordially), and this is the conversation we had:

Her: "One of my biggest pet peeves is when people pick and choose what they want from the Bible."
Me: "In what way? You mean historical anecdotes, like 'did God really rain fire and brimstone upon Sodom and Gommorah?', or moral teachings, like 'you should stone your kids if they speak back to you'. Or both?"
Her: "Anything. Everything."
Me: "So you agree that an unmarried woman who is raped should marry her rapist, as long as the rapist pays her father fifty shekels?"
Her: "Uh..."
Me: "How about you and I take a trip to Utah and take the sword to everyone living in Salt Lake City because they're all heathen Mormons?"
Her: <_<
Me: "Megan."
Her: "Yeah?"
Me: "Do you sacrifice two doves at your father's church every month you have your period?"
Her: "...no. I don't do that."
Me: "So why don't you do that? The Bible says that you should, and the Bible is God's word. I thought you were supposed to do what God told you to."
Her: (much thinking for a good few minutes before she says something along the lines of "Social values naturally change over time", which is officially the lamest response ever)

Um...isn't the Reformed Calvinist position that the laws that Christians should follow were set by Paul, these laws only applying to ethnic Jews before Christ?

[Rikushix]

So obviously, being a Reformed Calvinist, they aren't puritan in terms of customs, but as far as religious beliefs go, they believe EVERYTHING in the Bible. One day we were talking about religion (cordially), and this is the conversation we had:

Her: "One of my biggest pet peeves is when people pick and choose what they want from the Bible."
Me: "In what way? You mean historical anecdotes, like 'did God really rain fire and brimstone upon Sodom and Gommorah?', or moral teachings, like 'you should stone your kids if they speak back to you'. Or both?"
Her: "Anything. Everything."
Me: "So you agree that an unmarried woman who is raped should marry her rapist, as long as the rapist pays her father fifty shekels?"
Her: "Uh..."
Me: "How about you and I take a trip to Utah and take the sword to everyone living in Salt Lake City because they're all heathen Mormons?"
Her: <_<
Me: "Megan."
Her: "Yeah?"
Me: "Do you sacrifice two doves at your father's church every month you have your period?"
Her: "...no. I don't do that."
Me: "So why don't you do that? The Bible says that you should, and the Bible is God's word. I thought you were supposed to do what God told you to."
Her: (much thinking for a good few minutes before she says something along the lines of "Social values naturally change over time", which is officially the lamest response ever)

Um...isn't the Reformed Calvinist position that the laws that Christians should follow were set by Paul, these laws only applying to ethnic Jews before Christ?

Maybe. I don't know. All I knew was that her family was explicitly Reformed Calvinist and she believed, as an ordained minister's daughter, the Bible should be followed in its entirety.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Calvinism

[LTK]

People. Please. The discuss thread is what religious debate is for. Whether or not Maurice is going to barf on anyone this time is what belongs in WCT.

I wonder how the couple will react to Faye's inevitable sass-raffs?

[Martinab]

Skipping the gay marriage discussion...

I love the timing in http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1519 , and the analogous facial expressions of Marten and dad. Also love 3 jokes in 1 comic 

Also find it very interesting how Dora ran back to her black and short hair as soon as she was required to appear somewhere looking nice. I think it says so much about her personality and self confidence issues in a very subtle way.

[Schmorgluck]

This is only my opinion.
If the problem is religion saying you can't have gay marriage, then why not fully support the idea of separation of church and state and get rid of marriage in terms of rights given by the government? To be fair, every union between two people should be a civil union, in the eyes of the government. Nothing more, nothing less.
If the two people want a marriage, then they can have that too, but it wouldn't (and shouldn't) affect their rights according to the government.

Interesting way to state it. This question recently hit the headlines in France, where a kind of civil union (disreguarding sexes) has been created ten years ago. Interestingly, a demand that emerged was the possibility to hold a ceremony presided by the mayor (or one of his adjuncts) for the contracting of this civil union. Which would make it quite alike to a French civil wedding, if only symbolically. There are also issues about inheritance rights that has been brought up.
I'm personally in favor of gay couples having access to the same rights as straight ones, but this is complicated. Civil unions are not as binding as marriages in several respects, particularly in terms of mutual duties. But if civil unions are turned into civil marriages, what's left for people who'd prefer a civil union as it is now? The other possibility is to open marriage to same-sex couples, but it brings up the fatal question: what exactly is the meaning of marriage to a secular society? The religious aspects can be left aside: religion is a matter of personal choice, if people who marry want their wedding to be sanctified by whatever religion they want, it's strictly their choice. Actually, you can even choose to be married in the eye of your religion without being officially (i.e. civilly) married.
But what is the meaning of civil marriage to a secular society? Is it to promote natural demographic increase? Hard facts tend to demonstrate it's not a requirement.

Tough question.

EDIT: well, shit, I shouldn't have posted that here. It drifts far away from the topic. Mods feel free to delete my post if you can't move it to a more relevant thread, I saved a copy of it.

[Near Lurker]

Maybe. I don't know. All I knew was that her family was explicitly Reformed Calvinist and she believed, as an ordained minister's daughter, the Bible should be followed in its entirety.

Well, by that logic, they should take their sons to be sacrificed, since God told Abraham to do that.

[Is it cold in here?]

I wonder how the couple will react to Faye's inevitable sass-raffs?

Faye plays nice with gay people, more so than with straight people. I wonder if it's discrimination. Notice also, perhaps due to some lingering influence of her upbringing, she is more respectful to her elders?

[akronnick]

Maybe. I don't know. All I knew was that her family was explicitly Reformed Calvinist and she believed, as an ordained minister's daughter, the Bible should be followed in its entirety.

Well, by that logic, they should take their sons to be sacrificed, since God told Abraham to do that.

God told Abraham specifically to sacrifice Isaac, it wasn't a routine thing. And then God stopped him at the last minute anyway, so yeah.

[mustang6172]

This is only my opinion.
If the problem is religion and marriage by saying you can't have gay marriage because that ruins marriage or whatever the argument is, then why not fully support the idea of separation of church and state and get rid of marriage in terms of rights given by the government? If the government is going to give rights to two people who love each other/want to make the bond to be together, then there should be a complete overhaul to the system. To be fair and separate religion, in the eyes of the government every union between two people should be a civil union. Nothing more, nothing less.
If the two people want a marriage, then they can go to their religious place of choice and have that too, but it wouldn't (and shouldn't) affect their rights according to the government.


(edited for clarification)

Moxie, I've been saying that for years.  It's just a shame so few people listen to us.

Now can we get back to talking about the comic?

[Delirium]

Her: "One of my biggest pet peeves is when people pick and choose what they want from the Bible."
Me: "In what way? You mean historical anecdotes, like 'did God really rain fire and brimstone upon Sodom and Gommorah?', or moral teachings, like 'you should stone your kids if they speak back to you'. Or both?"
Her: "Anything. Everything."
Me: "So you agree that an unmarried woman who is raped should marry her rapist, as long as the rapist pays her father fifty shekels?"
Her: "Uh..."
Me: "How about you and I take a trip to Utah and take the sword to everyone living in Salt Lake City because they're all heathen Mormons?"
Her: <_<
Me: "Megan."
Her: "Yeah?"
Me: "Do you sacrifice two doves at your father's church every month you have your period?"
Her: "...no. I don't do that."
Me: "So why don't you do that? The Bible says that you should, and the Bible is God's word. I thought you were supposed to do what God told you to."
Her: (much thinking for a good few minutes before she says something along the lines of "Social values naturally change over time", which is officially the lamest response ever)

This is hilarious in the light of the fact that conservative christians are emphatically opposed to "moral relativism" and believe that society should be run on a set of unchanging biblical principles.

[ysth]

How many times does it have to be said? homosexuals don't WANT to get married, they don't want that much commitment and responsibility (after all, variety is the spice of life. can't count how many times gay "friends" told me THAT line). They just want to redefine marriage as part of the greater plan to degrade, defile, and eventually destroy our Christian nation (or what's left of it). Mark my words, it will come to pass that a rainbow flag will fly over the White House, as surely as a crescent and star will fly over China.

No, they want to get married.

Not sure what you mean be a rainbow flag.  Some kind of symbol that we'll never enter wars of aggression again?  Or that we foreswear our first-strike policy?
Personally, I'd rather the crescent and star over the White House than a confusing rainbow.

[kraemandrummer]

Believe it.

with the use of this phrase you have officially lost all credibility and speaking privileges.  Sorry naruto fans but saying this doesnt make you cool. better luck next time.  

Being a fundamentalist homophobic jerk didn't do this, but quoting Naruto did.

Can I frame this and make it a motivational poster with the tagline "Priorities"?

Homophobic? I'm not the one claiming to speak for the gays!

Maurice's last name is Lester. Believe it.

Killbot, you were doing pretty well at first, but you lost me with the rant.  Sorry, (wo)man.  Keep pushing Poe's law!

HAhahaha Poe's Law.
From Conservapedia (I know what you're thinking, and I'm only quoting from them because Wikipedia is only listing the "real" Poe's law currently, quite unusual for them to avoid such an easy potshot against people of faith): "Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won't mistake for the real thing."

From that same page: "Poe's law is often used to mock conservatives and fundamentalists, based on its implicit assertion that fundamentalists and conservatives are so absurd as to be indistinguishable from parody. However, there is a fundamental flaw in this assertion. One might as well argue that genuine works of art are indistinguishable from cheap knockoffs, because some people are unable to distinguish between the two. Clearly, the cause of the mistake is not that the genuine article is no better than a mockery; rather, the cause of the mistake is that some people lack the critical thinking skills and/or experience to differentiate the two -- particularly in cases when an artist (or a parodist) goes to special efforts to emulate the genuine article."

I really think that says it all, wouldn't you agree?

I'm not going to quote what's-his-name, as I really don't want to, but one thing really stuck out:

Gay folk (according to kill-whatever) aren't committed enough to stay with one person for any length of time, but they're committed enough to collectively attempt to destroy marriage?
How does that even work?

It doesn't.
"She's" not using logic.

"If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people."

Killbot: "Everything you know is wrong, black is white, up is down, and short is long, and everything you thought was so important doesn't matter; everything you know is wrong, just forget the words and sing along, all you need to understand is, everything you know is wrong!"
 

Quoting Weird Al REALLY helps your case.

I'm not going to quote what's-his-name, as I really don't want to, but one thing really stuck out:

Gay folk (according to kill-whatever) aren't committed enough to stay with one person for any length of time, but they're committed enough to collectively attempt to destroy marriage?
How does that even work?

they'll only commit to something if it's fun. that and they're directed by people with FAR more patience and capability for strategic thought.

Win! <3 I simply loved the recent developments, minus the various biblethumpers who all of a sudden decided to come out of the woodwork (funny how that never happened when Tai was banging two other girls or when people were busy shipping Hannelore with every possible female character.... ). I can't wait for the celebration/wedding shenanigans!

haven't been reading that long. For the record, I find lesbians to be as reprehensible as gays (perhaps even more so, from personal experience *shudder*)

Killbot, the only thing you know less about than the "will of God" is what homosexuals really want, so get your head out of   Pat Robertson's ass and shut up already.

Do you no what will happen to this country when DOMA gets busted and all fifty states have to recognize gay marriage? NOT A DAMNED THING!!!

Do you know what effect two men or two women getting married has on everyone else? NOT A DAMNED THING!!!

Okay, now it's just guaranteed that you're trolling. You turned up the paranoid crazy to 11.

It's not even original Paranoia, he's just parroting the Pat Robertson's hate-spew.

See, this is what I;m talking about. You are so thoroughly brainwashed that you accuse anyone who expresses an opinion you don't like of trolling or copying some random wacko. I assure you I am serious.

[paranoid ravings]

... you really are quite a heinous individual.

Where is this love your holy men preach so much about?

Sadly, we are, in the end, human beings, with all human beings silly foibles and limitations. Many Christians seem to forget certain aspects of Christ's teaching, just as many open minded Liberals (such as can be found on this forum, please don't take that as an insult, but it's true) have no respect for the beliefs of those on the opposing political side, despite there self image being more tolerant and open mind and caring.

I myself fell that Christ would actually be rather upset at the things that have been done in his name in the years since his death. I myself feel that God and Christ want us to come to them by choice, not by force, which is why evil and the devil still exist. God is, in many ways liek a very strict fifties father. H eloves us, but like any parent, he occassionally has to let his stupid children to stupid things for them to learn. That's my opinion at least. Sadly, some of his children don't get the obvious message, or even want to..

[paranoid ravings]

... you really are quite a heinous individual.

Where is this love your holy men preach so much about?

If you were christians you wouldn't be cutting parts out of the bible that offended you. Christians accept ALL the scripture as God-breathed.

Killbot, up high man!
o/

We gotta keep the christian nation strong. Gotta get rid of all those undesirables in our great country. First we should get rid of barack HUSSEIN obama before he indoctrinates our children into being socialists. After that it would be a logical step to remove all of the blacks, hispanics, asians and terrorists from the country. We can send them to Canada. Step three should clearly be appointing Sarah Palin as defense secretary, but not president, we don't really want to let the women have too much. In fact, we might need to make their votes count for whatever their husband's vote is. At that point, we should have a fairly strong, white nation, but we need to keep it christian, basically, we'll have only the jews in banking stay. The Catholics can stay too, but they can't attend our colleges, and they'll all have to go to separate schools. To top it off, anyone of the Muslim faith will be executed on sight by our Faith Patrols. We can reclaim the Christian Nation, but we'll need God's help.

Galatians 3:28. Your attempt to satirize me fails. Please try again.

How many times does it have to be said? homosexuals don't WANT to get married, they don't want that much commitment and responsibility (after all, variety is the spice of life. can't count how many times gay "friends" told me THAT line). They just want to redefine marriage as part of the greater plan to degrade, defile, and eventually destroy our Christian nation (or what's left of it). Mark my words, it will come to pass that a rainbow flag will fly over the White House, as surely as a crescent and star will fly over China.

To those who are criticizing my and God's opinions, just remember that God can use the unrighteous as well as the righteous to His ends (as He did with Nebuchadnezzar in Jeremiah 27). You are giving Christ's church meaning by persecuting it.

You would not be opposing God's will were it not for God's will. Think about that. Perhaps you, like Paul, will come around and see the Light.

People who hate non-hetero people should not be reading this comic, which has had an openly bisexual and an openly gay character for years, so it's not like it's a big surprise to have another two gay characters.

Go away and read something else.  Really, it's okay.  No one's forcing you to come here.

Or keep trolling and be banned by Jeph.  Either way.

I don't hate people of abnormal sexuality, they're flawed, sinful people like everyone else. In fact, the presence of homosexuals gives the comic more realism, and demonstrates that the characters are imperfect and in need of God's transforming power. I have no problems with gays in fiction, but with Jeph's attitude toward them, portraying them as okay and not needing to change. This is a rejection of family values and the traditional order of marriage.

Bottom line: I'll suspend my disbelief, but not my beliefs.

If this comic were even the slightest bit realistic, Marten's dad would not be making contact with him. Whatever shrill liberal media shrews may have told you, gays are not family people. Men who turn gay never return to their families.

Typical.

The overall ostracized gay community isn't always the way a particular individual would be tunneled or led through. Just because there have been many instances that made it to where a gay couple ends up estranged from family (By their choice or the families) doesn't mean that every single homosexual shunts out their family and reteats into a shack with their lover.

This is a great moment for Martin, and I think the hug is not at all over the top, nor a moment that would be rare in the given circumstances.

You call my opinion "typical", then accuse me of overgeneralizing?

typical liberal behavior.

I can't tell if you're honestly just terribly bitter about some personal experience or if you're just another homophobe troll. I think it's the truly heartfelt way you made that sweeping generalisation that does it. Well played sir.

Firstly, sir, I'm not a sir. I am female, was born female, and will not be trying to change this.

I can see that the Orwellian homosexualization of america has taken your mind so completely that you are unsure even that others can think differently from you. Well, I assure you I am not a troll, just one whom the truth has set free.

If this comic were even the slightest bit realistic, Marten's dad would not be making contact with him. Whatever shrill liberal media shrews may have told you, gays are not family people. Men who turn gay never return to their families.

THIS IS WHY WE CAN'T HAVE NICE THINGS!!!!!

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/9/9e/Arguecat.PNG

[SJCrew]

Blah blah blah gay marriage, blah blah blah religion... Same shit everywhere, read this thread knowing exactly what to expect, and wasn't off by so much as an inch. Fucking amazing.

Can't we all just get along?

[LTK]

THIS IS WHY WE CAN'T HAVE NICE THINGS!!!!!
http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/9/9e/Arguecat.PNG

Why did you do that? Why?

[BeoPuppy]

Syrupykeyboard and Fenriswolf deserve a hug. Or anything else that would make them feel better.

[jonarus_drakus]

I've come to the conclusion that we should all just take a page from Jeph's book and focus on the following:

"Hey look, a cartoon!"

[The Duke]

^ I concur.

[Thorbard]

A quick thought:

Is this the first time we've seen Marten in a non-black hoodie?

[LTK]

A quick thought:

Is this the first time we've seen Marten in a non-black hoodie?

Hm, must be a genetic mutation in the reproductive cycle of Hoodiea Nigerus in his closet.

[The Duke]

When I get out of school, I am studying to become a hoodiologist.

[pwhodges]

Is this the first time we've seen Marten in a non-black hoodie?

By no means.

[Near Lurker]

Just, for the record, folks?  I'm a registered Republican.

[syrupykeyboard]

Syrupykeyboard and Fenriswolf deserve a hug. Or anything else that would make them feel better.

Can I get some Lortab? 

[Fenriswolf]

It has made me feel suicidal that I will always be seen and perceived as a woman no matter what I do, that every "masculine" thing I like and do (almost everything) will have to be proven, that any time I want to play with femininity I have to accept being treated as a "girl" ... So yes, if gender roles went away, if people accepted sexuality, interests and behaviour as a spectrum then I would be happy in my skin. But that will never happen. And the fact that despite not coping at all with being female sometimes I don't actually feel I AM male (if it was easy I probably would change my sex) means I really respect that some people do.

Which suggests that substantively, you agree with me.

Did you read the point? I am extremely affected by my hatred of gender roles being applied to me... and I am not transgender. I am not a man. Transgender people are exactly what they claim to be. Trans women can be butch. Trans men can be camp. Trans people are what they say they are and you do not have the right to reclassify their experiences.

Will this ever change?  Probably not in what's left of my lifetime, no.  But c'mon.  I'm from Massachusetts, and if you had told me as recently as six years ago that I'd not only see single-sex marriage in my lifetime, it'd be celebrated in my own community within a year, I'd have advised you to lay off the hallucinogens.  This in a state - one so strongly identified with liberalism that it's used as a slur nationwide - where I grew up in an area so lily white and Pleasantville-ish that I went until my fifth birthday before I ever saw a black person in the flesh, gay bars lacked signs for safety reasons well into my 20s, and to be a "faggot" was the worst thing in the world when I was a kid, even if we didn't have any clear idea what that actually meant.  If that was ostensibly liberal Massachusetts in the 1960s, heaven alone knows what backcountry Mississippi was like.

The world's changing in front of our eyes at a staggering rate, and that's a comforting thing.  I certainly won't live to see the day when none of this will matter.  You may.

Well, I think you're laughably optimistic. For humans to evolve our lifestyles to the point of fluid gender roles, open sexuality, no racism, religious bigotry, ableism or classism, we would have to change human nature. Maybe in a couple of thousand years we will stop needing a way to feel superior to others, and something to reassure us that we matter and our lives have purpose.

EDITED TO ADD:

Syrupykeyboard and Fenriswolf deserve a hug. Or anything else that would make them feel better.

Can I get some Lortab? 

lol! Are you sure that's what you want??

SIDE EFFECTS:
*shallow breathing, slow heartbeat;
*feeling light-headed, fainting;
*confusion, fear, unusual thoughts or behavior
*seizure (convulsions);
*problems with urination; or
*nausea, stomach pain, loss of appetite, itching, dark urine, clay-colored stools, jaundice (yellowing of the skin or eyes).

Less serious Lortab side effects may include:
*feeling anxious, dizzy, or drowsy;
*mild nausea, vomiting, upset stomach, constipation;
*headache, mood changes;
*blurred vision;
*ringing in your ears; or
*dry mouth.

I'd be happy with a cocktail party. Yup.