This problem would be fixed forever if we didn't allow gays to vote. I think we need an amendment. Who's with me? dmen, I know you're in. Anyone else?
The issue is whether or not Americans can be "forced" to recognize something they believe to be "deviant" as something they believe to be God ordained and the most important institution on the planet that trumps even creation itself. No laws have been passed to prevent *****s from doing whatever it is that they do with each other. No Christian has any validity in behaving in a hateful way toward any other person and indeed, doing so is, in itself, a contradiction to who we claim to be. However, we do as parents, have the right and legal responsibility to protect our children from things which are clearly what we believe to be physically, emotionally and spiritually outside God's clear standards. I think it boils down to a fear of opening Pandora's Box. We have a ***** couple living next door to us and we treat them with the highest respect. We look after their house when they are out of town. I have cut down trees for them and have helped with some home repairs and taken meals to them when one of them is sick. But also while we will treat them with respect, I am not going to communicate to them that I believe their private behavior is acceptable in God' eyes. He will be their judge, not me but at the same time, I am not going to send my 14 year old son over there to borrow a cup of sugar knowing that one of them is on the Sex Offender's listing for an offense against a 14 year old boy. That would be assinine and irresponsible on my part. As far as the divorce rate goes, be sure those numbers get skewed/slanted/abused terribly all over the chart for many illegitimate reasons.
They are free to marry, just like i am. I am in favor of marriage being between a man and a woman. I see no problem with gay couples getting the same financial incentives as hetero couples, but marriage is different. Family is different. Every child deserves to have both a mother and a father, there is no replacement for that.
What about a civil union? Civil unions are not to be "God ordained", but rather government ordained. Why do you have a problem with that?
What that has to do with being gay is beyond me. Are gays more likely to be sex offenders? I don't think so. FTR, I'm not sending my 34 year old wife down the street to borrow sugar from the "straight" sex offender. That would be asinine.
They already do. To my knowledge, a gay man can't give birth, and a gay woman can't fertilize an egg. What do we do with all the children being raised by a single parent? Those who's mother or father is completely out of their life? Eliminating death as a possibility, they either had the child/children out of wedlock or they divorced. Both are no-nos. Can we just shun them with the gays to save time?
I don't think I said I did. Whatever the government does isn't going to change God's ultimate standards one bit.
Hooker hit the nail on the head. I only take offense to the use of marriage. Term it a civil union so they can still save on their taxes and I couldn't care less what sins others choose to partake in. I have enough of em to manage myself, although I can at least claim that isn't one of my sins.
Ok, I know this might be hard for some, but let's remove the God equation from this argument for just one second. Now why are you against 2 consenting adults being recognized as legal, joint partners by the State? Because this is what we are discussing.
I didn't say *****s are more likely to be sex offenders. I am saying this one is a convicted sex offender and though I teach my son to treat him with respect, I am not going to be stupid either as I don't think you would be, regardless of the gender or orientation of the sex offender. I don't think we are in disagreement.
Starts with a Q. The site added censored the *s for me. Of all the words to filter after letting so many other's fly, I was surprised. No offense was intended, I would hope to never intentionally do that.
That is just it, I STRONGLY believe God shouldn't be removed from marriage... I just said I'm not against 2 consenting adults being recognized as legal, joint partners by the State....Just don't call it a marriage as that was intended to be a religious joining as it was originally. The fight to remove God from this country (where he has been a part of the ideals/laws since day 1) is far stronger than the fight for Christians to force their ideals on others, IMO of course.
For future reference... [h=3]*****/kwi(ə)r/ [/h][TABLE="class: ts"] [TR] [TD]Adjective:[/TD] [TD][TABLE="class: ts"] [TR] [TD]Strange; odd: "she had a ***** feeling that they were being watched".[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR="bgcolor: #ddd"] [TD="colspan: 2"][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Noun:[/TD] [TD][TABLE="class: ts"] [TR] [TD]offensive. A homosexual man.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR="bgcolor: #ddd"] [TD="colspan: 2"][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Verb:[/TD] [TD][TABLE="class: ts"] [TR] [TD]Spoil or ruin (an agreement, event, or situation): "Reg didn't want someone meddling and *****ing the deal at the last minute".[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]
Remember when Shatner and Spader got maried in Boston Legal? That was a funny episode. I mean they weren't gay, just really good friends who wanted to get the benefits of being married mainly so one could leave money to the other. Something like that, I don't remember exactly but I do wonder in states where same sex marriages are legal if same sex straight people marry each other to take advantage of the benefits. Or say a person who is a legal immigrant with citizenship marries a same sex individual without citizinship just to get them citizenship.
I am assuming you're asking me? Please forgive me if not. I am against the government sticking their big fat nose into 99% of what they stick their big fat nose into. However, if the state offered a referendum vote, to the people, those people have the right and responsibility to vote their conscience. I don't think I said whether I agreed or disagreed but most "professing" Christians, regardless of how messed up they really are, still recognize God's standard for the family and will use that as the measuring stick. Most people who vote against it are unwilling to grant "married" status, regardless of the term used, to "unmarried" people. If they believe marriage is between one man and one woman, same sex couples do not fit that standard. By the way, I personally believe God's standards for marriage are way higher than most people realize, so I admit the enormous societal hypocrisy in all of this .
