Gay marriage debate:
May 2, 2015 23:47:54 #
JFlorio wrote:
And He answered and said to them, "Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate."
But man is not trying to separate conventional marriages. If you live a conventional lifestyle married to a person of the opposite sex in LA how is your marriage threatened by 2 men getting married in San Francisco? Gays have shown no inclination to force heterosexual couples to give up their "lifestyle" and adopt a same sex way of living.
May 3, 2015 00:04:20 #
JFlorio wrote:
And He answered and said to them, "Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate."
Yet hardly any church honors these words of Jesus, being very lax on enforcing this injunction that would probably reduce the "contributing" congregation by at least a third. This is a very common practice and details the hypocrisy of the church.
"...made them male and female": in appearance or actuality? The science of genetics has clearly and unarguably shown there are those born with "the cover" of a male or female but not the book. No matter. Love is the whole purpose of t***h. "Love, and forget about the rest."
May 3, 2015 06:30:48 #
I feel some of your questions makes me wonder, are you heading for the looney bin, or did you just crawl out of one.
May 3, 2015 07:44:11 #
fiatlux wrote:
If we want to make the Bible as the legal argument for what is a marriage, then we must include concubines, women as property, and adultery as the norm to secure money, property, and prestige.
Yes these happen as was the culture and customs as told in the old Testaments However when Christ came that all changed in the New Testament !
May 3, 2015 12:34:39 #
Cherokee38
Loc: Atlanta
fiatlux wrote:
As an argument against gay marriage--no, of course not. As a general argument against the "slippery slope" idea, of course. Where or why do we stop? It is a legitimate question. And my cats are waiting with baited breath for your answer.
This to me is a question of morality. When we have mothers who put their daughters on birth control because they can't or won't teach morality shows the decline in our personal standards. I believe the homosexuals were offered a civil union status with equal rights but that is not what they wanted. They want to tear down any and all religious beliefs the public may have. Let's look at the b****s for a moment. If I disagree with their stance on a topic I am a r****t, yet they have "the united negro college fund" "the Miss Black America contest" Black p***e month and the list goes on. My question, who is promoting a difference in the races?? Isn't that in it self R****M????
May 3, 2015 13:45:46 #
Cherokee38 wrote:
This to me is a question of morality. When we hav... (show quote)
Actually it is not. R****m which is a practice should not be confused with prejudice which is an attitude. Bigotry is institutionalized prejudice. All races have prejudice. R****m is prejudice put into practice. In other words if I am a white employer and I decline to employ a person of another race solely on the basis of my prejudgement of all members of that race then I am practicing R****m because I have the power as an employer to do that.
It comes down to a question of empowerment. Since b***k A******ns are a minority they lack the power, political and otherwise to put their prejudices into practice. In order to counter this unempowerment there is defiant p***e in the form of " Black P***e Month" etc. You see this circle the wagons mentality in the "Gay P***e" Parade and the "Aryan Nation" rallies, all minorities that feel the sting of what they perceive as intolerance by the majority.
May 3, 2015 15:32:35 #
The country is heading down the cliff and we are debating about GAY issue. Can people just leave them alone? I have gay friends of different ages and they seem to be content with their lives and frustrated to see the conflicts of the gay issues keep continue endlessly.
May 4, 2015 00:22:17 #
May 5, 2015 16:17:40 #
fiatlux wrote:
Though I may believe in and abided by the male and... (show quote)
I don't know what your point is with all this, that Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever. Jesus has nothing to do with all this including concubines, women as prperty, adultery, this should be included in our definition of marriage.
Jesus CONDEMED all that when he was here on earth, that had nothing to do with marriage. Marriage consist of one man one woman, that is the Word of God, not man. God made man, Adam, then God made him an helpmeet she was called woman Eve. one man one woman hence marriage.
Jesus said you are to leave your father and mother and cling to your wife, and the wife would cling to her husband. He also said whatsoever God has joined together, let not mankind put asunder(Rip it apart) So i I just don't know how you can put Jesus in the midst of all the things you listed, that have nothing to do with marriage. And let me add, that is what is going on with this same sex marriage, that is ripping what God established, apart one man one woman, Adam and Eve. Not Adam and Steve.
Justice Alito Shuts Down Gay Marriage Lawyer With One Perfect Question
During oral arguments at the Supreme Court on Tuesday, Justice Samuel Alito raised a revealing question to attorney Mary Bonauto, who was arguing in favor of same-sex marriage before the justices...
Continue Reading
May 5, 2015 16:52:29 #
JFlorio
Loc: Seminole Florida
fiatlux is just saying crap he/she thinks Jesus meant I guess. Personally I don't think government should be involved in the definition at all . Same sex union with wh**ever those benefits would be designed by man. Let government that condones such a thing perform the appropriate documentation. Marriage was meant as definition to be between a man and a woman. Next will we force Religious institutions too perform so-called same sex marriage?
PRM2014 wrote:
I don't know what your point is with all this, tha... (show quote)
May 5, 2015 17:26:07 #
eden wrote:
But man is not trying to separate conventional marriages. If you live a conventional lifestyle married to a person of the opposite sex in LA how is your marriage threatened by 2 men getting married in San Francisco? Gays have shown no inclination to force heterosexual couples to give up their "lifestyle" and adopt a same sex way of living.
If man isn't trying to separate conventional marriage, why are they saying they are being, discrinated against.
If that is the way they want to live I say let them have at it.
Just don't run to the supreme court and try to change a couple thousand years of conventional marriage.
If they are being discrimted against, what about the oter side ,
is that not the same thing (discrimination)?
May 5, 2015 20:06:24 #
PRM2014 wrote:
If man isn't trying to separate conventional marriage, why are they saying they are being, discrinated against.
If that is the way they want to live I say let them have at it.
Just don't run to the supreme court and try to change a couple thousand years of conventional marriage.
If they are being discrimted against, what about the oter side ,
is that not the same thing (discrimination)?
If that is the way they want to live I say let them have at it.
Just don't run to the supreme court and try to change a couple thousand years of conventional marriage.
If they are being discrimted against, what about the oter side ,
is that not the same thing (discrimination)?
The original concept of marriage is intact, not disturbed. Men and women can marry without hindrance as before, no rights are being abrogated. Same sex marriage is an ADDITION to this institution not a subtraction from it.
May 5, 2015 20:16:39 #
no propaganda please
Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun
elk6x6 wrote:
All of the arguments for Gay Marriage can be equally applied to multiple person marriage.
Why can't 3 or more people love each other and get married? Seriously.
Why can't 3 or more people love each other and get married? Seriously.
the difference is that one man and many women has been considered a marriage for thousands of years, and is still allowed in Muslim countries, and two or more of the same sex is a new invention, with no precedent or logic behind it what so ever. A civil union would be acceptable for legal matters, but that is not what is demanded.
May 5, 2015 20:41:57 #
dennisimoto wrote:
Cal Thomas is a level headed guy and I enjoy his w... (show quote)
Not even 20 years ago gay marriage was total trash and not even suitable for discussion. How far down this slippery slope will we go?
May 5, 2015 20:45:39 #
elk6x6 wrote:
All of the arguments for Gay Marriage can be equally applied to multiple person marriage.
Why can't 3 or more people love each other and get married? Seriously.
Why can't 3 or more people love each other and get married? Seriously.
It's already been done. I read about two recently. They call themselves "throuples." Here's one example...with a kid to boot.
http://nypost.com/2014/04/23/married-lesbian-threesome-expecting-first-child/
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.