One More Thought On Conservatism (Page 5): Whos interfering? Its legal now, even use of the word marriage, a union between a man and a woman. This is not enough? Also, My reading...

73STNGLKABEE

Vic Freits wrote:

So let them not interfere in gay marriage because its a govt.. affair?

Whos interfering? Its legal now, even use of the word marriage, a union between a man and a woman. This is not enough? Also, My reading comprehension is outstanding. Got all A's in school. 73

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

Vic Freits wrote:

So let them not interfere in gay marriage because its a govt.. affair?

Uh...not that I care whether gays get married or not...none of my business, you understand, but far more churches perform weddings than justices O' the peace or ship captains and as long as churches are free to keep their ceremonies in line with the tenets of their scripture who has the right to interfere with a person's private life? Marriage by definition has been between a man and a woman until it was recently rewritten. Fine. If that's the direction people wish to take we'll just see how it turns out for following generations. One more thing; as far as hospital visitation and the right to inheritance and all the other legal ramifications of marriage go, neither the government or the church have any business telling people who can occupy those places in anyone's life. God allows people to make choices. There are consequences to all our decisions, however. Everything is a trade-off. Every action we take is at the expense of all other possible actions. Nothing is exempted from this simple universal law

faithistheword

BigMike wrote:

Uh...not that I care whether gays get married or n... (show quote)

Ouch! I found something I disagree with Big Mike.
I maintain that marriage is between a man and a woman. Period. I think rights that have pertained to married couples forever should stand, like inheritance. They can always make a will, naming whomever. Llowing them the marriage sacrament is wrong. We'll see--if they have the right of marriage--does a priest have the right of refusal?
Whose rights cancel whose?

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

faithistheword wrote:

Ouch! I found something I disagree with Big Mike.
I maintain that marriage is between a man and a woman. Period. I think rights that have pertained to married couples forever should stand, like inheritance. They can always make a will, naming whomever. Llowing them the marriage sacrament is wrong. We'll see--if they have the right of marriage--does a priest have the right of refusal?
Whose rights cancel whose?

As to the first part of your statement, I respect that and it is my opinion also, and as I said, the rights of churches to follow their doctrine on this issue should never be infringed upon. Neither should the rights of business folk who chose to conduct their affairs in a manner that aligns itself to the commandments of God in their scriptures. If this nation is free then that shouldn't be a problem. Civil marriage is another thing. Whether or not civil marriages between homosexuals are legal is up to the v**ers. As a person of faith myself I believe we were given our form of government by God and there are good and bad aspects of it that I must learn to live with to the best of my ability. The best one can do as a person of faith is let your voice be heard and v**e while living your life in obedience to that faith and allowing it to be a persuasion to the folks you come into contact with on a daily basis and leave the results to God. As citizens of a nation who's political system was given to us by God, we have the reponsibility to participate but we must realize in the end that politics is not the answer to our problems. Our problem is our rebellious human nature, and that doesn't get fixed until the book's last chapter.