Saturday, January 23, 2010

So you believe that gay marriage should be prohibited by the law in order to enforce the christian faith?

Should fornication and adultery be prohibited and punished by the same laws?So you believe that gay marriage should be prohibited by the law in order to enforce the christian faith?
No. And yes, anti-gay ';votes'; and the ';will of the people'; is just a back door (no pun intended) attempt to legislate Christianity. Although Christian, I refuse to enact my beliefs through law. If you are not enough of a Christian to live the life voluntarily, well, you are not really Christian, are you?





This is not a state matter; it a freedom matter. Gay marriage is going to be the law of the land, and the sooner the better.So you believe that gay marriage should be prohibited by the law in order to enforce the christian faith?
Well, it was the will of the people that saw and experienced slavery, and, found it repugnant. The will of the people banished slavery.





Fornication and adultery laws are still on the books in most states, but now rarely enforced because social liberalism and relativity have taken a strong hold on our culture.





Not that much is said in the bible about homosexuality. What little is, frowns upon ';gay acts'; of love.





Too much attention is given to gay rights and such in the media. I do not see gays as persecuted by the government, and, marriage is a union by a man and a woman, not, by a man to a man, nor, a woman to a woman.





If gay couples wish to live and love one another, so be it, but, I do not see the need to institutionalize such unions.
No.





';If it was up to the will of the people we would still have slavery'; That is not true. Before the Civil War, several slave owners had begun granting freedom to their slaves. They found that when those men and women had freedom, and worked for something they wanted, they were more productive. So your slavery analogy just doesn't work.





The issue of gay marriage is not about religious issues. It is about the fact that marriage is a privilege, not a right.





Ask yourself - Why is it illegal for first cousins, and siblings to marry? Because the off spring would more than likely have birth defects.





Now realizing that the ultimate goal of a marriage is to have a family)children), then there is absolutely no reason to legalize gay marriage; they can have no children.





There really is a reason for two genders. Those two genders have different reproductive organs, for a reason.
this question is sarcasm right?





today Iowa, tomorrow the United States.





I guarantee there will be a SCOTUS case concerning the recognition of gay marriage in all the states. according to the full faith and credit clause of our Constitution, the states should recognize other states' court decisions. therefore, not every state has to perform gay marriages, but if i got married in Massachusetts and came back to Ohio, my state gov't should recognize my marriage.
That's basically what the Christian Right and many (even most) Americans want.





The people (minus the Christian Right) are going through a sea change though. The trend is very clear. Prop 8 wouldn't pass in a few years, and will be laughed at not long after that. Gay marriage is here to stay.





What does our Constitution say? Equal protection. There is no justification to stop it. The states will fall like dominoes.





The 'save marriage' people have no ground to stand on. Like you say....if you really want to start saving marriage, then start prosecuting people for adultery and give 6 months of jail for everyone who wants to divorce.
Excellent point--one I've been making since before Proposition 8.





Anybody serious about ';protecting the sanctity of marriage'; ought to favor six weeks in jail for every incidence of adultery, and probably three years or so in prison for each divorce...





Anybody talking about the ';sanctity of marriage'; because they grossed out by the thought of two dudes kissing needs to mind his own business and get a freakin life.
No


I truly believe if you are going to change the legal definition of marriage than you must pass a change in the law.


Much like VT did.


I don't think changing the law by court is the way to go.





While we are at it Christian faith also is against murder so do you want that change too?





We have process to change the laws in the country.





Use it.
no,it should not take place because marriage is defined between a man and a woman. words have meanings


carl gay men can marry any woman they want,gay women can marry any man they want,straight men can't marry another man,so there is equal protection.
I think it should be banned because it is an unnatural act of perversion and you can only ask what is next lowering the legal age of consent so pedophiles have equal rights or allowing sex with animals so perverts have equal rights? You have to ask where does it end?
More like just protect the law of nature ! I'm sorry it is just nasty and some of us really don't want to have it shoved down our throats (no pun ) Comparing it to slavery is just stupid ! Take a trip to the farm or the zoo, you don't see any gay animals !
Adultery is prohibited. I don't know what state you live in.





Gay marriage is a moral issue. There are atheists against gay marriage.
I couldn't care less about enforcing the Christian faith. What you want to do in your church is your business, but don't force your superstitions onto my government.
This issue has been brought before the voters dozens of times and Americans consistantly vote against gay marriage. Why can't you accept the will of the people?
Well not all gays are Christians ... so you would obviously approve of a gay Buddhist wedding ceremony ... or a Jewish one ... or just a secular ceremony?


If not ... why not?
Yeah definitely, allowing fags to marry is nonsense and the government should not encourage these nonsense.
I just want them to stay in the closet and to quit trying to push their sickness onto society.
Who cares what they do, they're not hurting anyone.
Issues like this should be left up to the states.
  • skin care cosmetics
  • No comments:

    Post a Comment