Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most religious people would not agree on same sex shoudl marry basically. You foubnd a odd preacher if true. Marriage is only between a mna and woman i the bible. But of course who have all kinds calling themsleves christian even preadtorsa as has been seen. They are not just as the bible talked about.A man marrying a a child may not change my life but i do not think it is moral or right i anyway. You getting murdered wil not change my life and I would proably not even hear about it.but if I did I would object to it beig ignored.
Marriage in the Bible is between a man and his women. Which was culturally acceptable when the various texts of the Bible were written. We've actually modified the Bible, in numerous ways, as cultures have changed. And there were certainly many Christian people who objected to interracial marriage, but those objections yielded to rational debate that there is nothing wrong with interracial marriage. And there is nothing wrong with same-sex marriage. Perhaps in Texas, "most religious people would not agree", but that is not necessarily true for the United States.
Marriage between consenting adults who are legally able to provide consent should be strictly a matter between those adults, and not a matter for government. The government has an obligation to protect those persons who cannot give consent to contracts, whether that inability is due to age or to other conditions. That obligation stems from the fact that we are a nation founded on laws. The laws designed to protect minors and people who are compromised in some way must stand, but laws designed to force people to behave in ways dictated by religious mores must be overcome, because we are a nation founded on laws, not a nation founded on religion.
Most religious people would not agree on same sex shoudl marry basically. You foubnd a odd preacher if true. Marriage is only between a mna and woman i the bible...
Explain to me how a legal "marriage" performed by a judge in a county courthouse has ANYTHING to do with religion or the bible.
The fact is that being "married" has become a legal state for two people. As such, any two (or even more, for all I care) consenting adults who are able to enter into any other legal contract should be allowed to enter into *that* specific contract. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION.
Explain to me how a legal "marriage" performed by a judge in a county courthouse has ANYTHING to do with religion or the bible.
The fact is that being "married" has become a legal state for two people. As such, any two (or even more, for all I care) consenting adults who are able to enter into any other legal contract should be allowed to enter into *that* specific contract. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION.
The reason it has become an issue is because the state grants permission (license) regarding who can marry. We have been convinced that we are a democracy and that means majority dictate.
Agreed, hilgi, but that would require all of the local/state/federal protections and benefits associated with being "married" be done away with, too.
Personally, I like the idea that my property goes to my spouse upon my death without any additional documentation. I also like the idea that my wife can't be forced to testify against me in court. There are others...
Agreed, hilgi, but that would require all of the local/state/federal protections and benefits associated with being "married" be done away with, too.
Personally, I like the idea that my property goes to my spouse upon my death without any additional documentation. I also like the idea that my wife can't be forced to testify against me in court. There are others...
Any benefit (tax deductions etc.) can easily be done on an individual basis.
The other points are valid but I imagine those can be taken care of in the certification process, or there could be contracts easily available that would grant the same protections.
A birth certificate provides benefit and protections between a parent and child; same could be done via a marriage certificate.
Any benefit (tax deductions etc.) can easily be done on an individual basis.
The other points are valid but I imagine those can be taken care of in the certification process, or there could be contracts easily available that would grant the same protections.
A birth certificate provides benefit and protections between a parent and child; same could be done via a marriage certificate.
I think that's hooligan's point. The benefits and protections between a parent and child are provided via the government. Benefits and protections via a marriage certificate are still via the government.
And when the robot gets on your nerves, you do what. Just what i want to be married to a robot, don't think so, for some people not even a robot, could give them what they want............. After a while wouldn't the robot get on ones nerves, if it does everything your heart desires, boring.
Again, please give us an example of a gay or lesbian suing a church or religious event because they don't support gay issues. And after you do that, please tell us why you assume that all gays and lesbians want to sue churches or religious events.
You're making big generalizations, and they don't even seem to be based in reality.
Gay man sues Catholic church for withdrawing job offer - Crime, UK - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/gay-man-sues-catholic-church-for-withdrawing-job-offer-559403.html - broken link)
Why would you have gays/lesbians suing a religious organization, event, publication, etc.? You might find it good for them to sue because you are pro-gays/lesbians but think about it. How would you react if, say, Muslims sued gays/lesbians for having a magazine out in the stands? Not nice, huh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilgi
Your version of marriage has only been around for a little over 100 years. All I want to do is get the government out of my marriage.
Nope, the word marriage has been used since antiquity. Sure, I agree with you, government shouldn’t decide how you carry your relationship or an adult’s relationship with a teenager, a robot, or what not. Let everybody carry on their loving relationship as they wish so we can all celebrate diversity, embrace differences, be a happy family, be open minded, accept others, and every other gay/lesbian slogan.
Quote:
You guys? Who are "you guys"? I never once cheered for anyone or asked you to cheer for anyone, the only person calling for cheering is you, yet your cheers involve the force of government
Ok then, I’ll use another expression “for the people that support gays/lesbians”…you’ll say that those who oppose are afraid, hateful, close-minded, bigots, etc. Which is a good way to make people want to root for gays/lesbians and not be labeled like that. Label me whoever you want but I don’t support gays/lesbians the same way I don’t support the lifestyle of a, say, gambler, drunk, etc. Do I hate a drunk? Nope, I just don’t support what he does. Am I afraid of a gay person as gay supporters would say just because I don’t root for them? Nope, I can go to the movies with one if I want to, share a meal, go shopping, etc. In fact, I have 2 gay friends. One of them is funny as heck and have a great time with him. I just don’t root for his lifestyle.
Quote:
Not knowing all gays and lesbians worldwide, I have no idea what they are afraid of (other than bigots who want to use force).
In that case I have no idea what gays/lesbians are afraid of religions and those who oppose to them.
Quote:
I do know lots of Christians who happen to be gay or lesbian
Saying that someone is gay and Muslim, gay and Christian, etc. is like saying that one is a vegetarian steak-eater. Or, a neo-vegetarian, modern-vegetarian, open minded vegetarian, whatever you want to call it. You are either vegetarian or not.
Quote:
I would be willing to bet that there are several sitting right by you in your church, most likely married to the opposte sex, yet living a LIE. Which last I checked is still a sin
Ooooh and gays/lesbians are perfect couples, right? Yes, I agree with you, living a lie is a sin, just like homosexuality according to most religions out there: Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Mormon’s, etc.
Quote:
But many of us will always fight to keep liberty and stop the authoritarians from always trying to change our nation. Sorry.
Then be as supportive of liberty for those older women/men who want to be free to enjoy a loving relationship with their teenage boy/girl, a robot, or whatever. Remember the gay/lesbian slogans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale
That's fine. But change happens. It always has, and it always will.
Like the change of accepting adult/teenage marriages, pets, robots, etc. Sounds shocking but change always happens. And according to gay/lesbian slogans they proudly proclaim and chant, then I guess everybody will accept all kinds of loving relationships in countries like USA.
I, along with millions of others in the US and elsewhere, want marriage to remain unchanged. That's all.
Then get the government out of "marriage" and issue a legal binding contract between two consenting adults which insures that one of them is not a child or unable to consent for some other reason and all rights which we now assign to "marriage" are given the couple. Protections for children who are part of the uniion remain in place. Then they can go and find someone who wants to "marry" them, or have a do-it-yourself vowes and be married. If your church does not want to they don't have to. But the rights of human beings are being protected to make their own choice.
The only other condition I'd make is brother-sister, sister-sister, or brother-brother should not be acceptable since it crosses other boundries which often have at some time before led to abuse, including brother to brother or sister to sister. But this is not the primary issue here.
It should be a simple contract and if one party wishes to revoke it it should be a simple procedure to do so within guidelines which protects children and both parties interests.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
