Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 100

Thread: For Those Against Gay Marriage...

  1. #16
    Member Linda_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    God's Own Country ... the Southern Tier
    Posts
    8,222
    Quote Originally Posted by run4it View Post
    So we should go back to polygamy...and why not slavery while we're at it? It worked well for thousands of years, right...at least in Biblical lore?
    Well, at least for the masters.

  2. #17
    Member 300miles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Buffalo
    Posts
    9,612
    Quote Originally Posted by BorderBob View Post
    I agree. As others have stated "marriage" is a religious sacrament (sacrement?) which is concurrently sanctioned by the state as a "contract."
    Atheists can marry.
    Non-religious people can marry.
    Piss-drunk people that met 1 hour earlier get married by "Elvis"

    Religion and churches are not required for marriage.
    Why is it suddenly a reason now for this one singular issue?

  3. #18
    Member Yankeefan2009's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Linda_D View Post
    Well, at least for the masters.
    Why do liberals support illegal immigration if it is essentially a continuation of slavery?
    "We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." --Barack Obama

  4. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,449
    Quote Originally Posted by Yankeefan2009 View Post
    Exactly. Gay marriage serves no purpose. The bottom line is that people need to procreate to carry on the species, and two men or two women simply fail to do this naturally.
    Granted, gays can't procreate, but the species is going to be fine. There have been gay people since the beginning of time. The breeders seem to be doing a fine job at procreating.

    As for your statement that "Gay marriage serves no purpose," can you please show me where it says that the reason for marriage is to procreate?

  5. #20
    Member BorderBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Quote Originally Posted by 300miles View Post
    Atheists can marry.
    Non-religious people can marry.
    Piss-drunk people that met 1 hour earlier get married by "Elvis"

    Religion and churches are not required for marriage.
    Why is it suddenly a reason now for this one singular issue?
    Piss-drunk people are not getting married by Elvis in a church (sheesh) Again, the difference and out of respect to the faith is the notion that allowing gay "marriage" will only start the process of forcing them into a church where the faith and many congregations find the conduct sinful.

    But I'm no religion expert. I will leave that argument to others. Civil unions, fine. Church weddings, not without the blessings of the church.


    b.b.

  6. #21
    Member Yankeefan2009's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,234
    Civil Unions seem to be the only legitimate argument in my opinion. In France, they have had civil unions for years for gays and it seems to be working. The sticking point with most people is the reinvention of marriage.

    Elton John thinks civil unions are the way to go.
    "We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." --Barack Obama

  7. #22
    Member 300miles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Buffalo
    Posts
    9,612
    Quote Originally Posted by BorderBob View Post
    Piss-drunk people are not getting married by Elvis in a church (sheesh)
    I didn't say they got married in a church. I'm saying they get married without any religious involvement whatsoever. Churches don't seem to have a problem with legal marriages of drunken strangers by a dude in an elvis suit. That seems like an affront to the sanctity of marriage to me, yet churches don't seem to care about that.

    Quote Originally Posted by BorderBob View Post
    allowing gay "marriage" will only start the process of forcing them into a church where the faith and many congregations find the conduct sinful.
    I don't understand... How does it force it on the churches? If a church is against homosexual marriage, they can simply deny them from their church... excommunicate them... whatever. If the church sets up a rule that gay marriage is not allowed, then gay couples can't join. (and why would they want to when other churches support them). The marriage is a state contract, not a religious one.

  8. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,449
    Quote Originally Posted by Yankeefan2009 View Post
    Civil Unions seem to be the only legitimate argument in my opinion. In France, they have had civil unions for years for gays and it seems to be working. The sticking point with most people is the reinvention of marriage.
    .
    The difference between "civil union" and marriage being.... what??

  9. #24
    Member Linda_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    God's Own Country ... the Southern Tier
    Posts
    8,222
    Quote Originally Posted by BorderBob View Post
    Piss-drunk people are not getting married by Elvis in a church (sheesh) Again, the difference and out of respect to the faith is the notion that allowing gay "marriage" will only start the process of forcing them into a church where the faith and many congregations find the conduct sinful.

    But I'm no religion expert. I will leave that argument to others. Civil unions, fine. Church weddings, not without the blessings of the church.


    b.b.
    Nobody is saying that churches have to marry gays. There's civil marriage and theirs religious marriage. Some religions do not recognize marriages not performed in their own churches/ceremonies while others do.

    Heterosexual couples get married in City or Town halls or in backyards by mayors, justices of the peace, judges, etc all the time. There's no church involved, and it's been that way since the founding of this country. All they need is a blood test (to test for STDs), a marriage license, and somebody with the authority to marry them.

    People who do get married in a religious ceremony in this country still have to get a a blood test (to test for STDs) and a marriage license, and their clergyman has to be recognized as such by the government in order to legally marry people. Polygamous Mormons can be married in their own churches but only their first marriages are recognized by the government.

    The anti-gay marriage crowd likes to pretend that marriage is only a religious institution, and it's not -- and pretty much has never been. There has always been a secular side to marriage that is being denied here.

  10. #25
    Member Yankeefan2009's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,234
    Quote Originally Posted by therising View Post
    The difference between "civil union" and marriage being.... what??
    I think that a reasonable argument could be made for healthcare and insurance benefits. A civil union would accomplish this, but it should be clear that marriage is reserved for those who can actually start a family. And it doesn't completely destroy the institution of marriage that has existed as a basic building block of society since ancient times.
    "We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." --Barack Obama

  11. #26
    Member Yankeefan2009's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Linda_D View Post
    Nobody is saying that churches have to marry gays. There's civil marriage and theirs religious marriage. Some religions do not recognize marriages not performed in their own churches/ceremonies while others do.
    This is why it's such a slippery slope. It won't be long before gays start suing churches to marry them on grounds of "discrimination" and forcing them to wed them or lose tax exempt status.

    This is a big issue with why people are against gay marriage.
    "We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." --Barack Obama

  12. #27
    Member leftWNYbecauseofBS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    10,873
    Quote Originally Posted by therising View Post
    The difference between "civil union" and marriage being.... what??
    Civil Unions do not give the 'Crazy Christians' a leg to stand on in the public debate.

    If the religious right is simply trying to defend the sanctity of marriage, then they would not have an argument if Civil Unions were pushed for.

    All of the rights that the LGBT community wants would be provided under proper civil union legislation. No?

    All of the concerns on sanctity of marriage that the Christian right wants to protect would not be in jeopardy under proper civil union legislation. No?

  13. #28
    Member Linda_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    God's Own Country ... the Southern Tier
    Posts
    8,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Yankeefan2009 View Post
    This is why it's such a slippery slope. It won't be long before gays start suing churches to marry them on grounds of "discrimination" and forcing them to wed them or lose tax exempt status.

    This is a big issue with why people are against gay marriage.
    Bull manure! The "big issue with why people are against gay marriage" is homophobia.

  14. #29
    Member Yankeefan2009's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Linda_D View Post
    Bull manure! The "big issue with why people are against gay marriage" is homophobia.
    No it's not for most people. That's a common liberal knee-jerk reaction: when you're losing an argument, just call people bigots and racists.

    Pretty lame
    "We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." --Barack Obama

  15. #30
    Member Linda_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    God's Own Country ... the Southern Tier
    Posts
    8,222
    Quote Originally Posted by leftWNYbecauseofBS View Post
    Civil Unions do not give the 'Crazy Christians' a leg to stand on in the public debate.

    If the religious right is simply trying to defend the sanctity of marriage, then they would not have an argument if Civil Unions were pushed for.

    All of the rights that the LGBT community wants would be provided under proper civil union legislation. No?

    All of the concerns on sanctity of marriage that the Christian right wants to protect would not be in jeopardy under proper civil union legislation. No?

    Plain and simple, Lefty, f#$% the Christian Right and their homophobia.

    This country is NOT a theocracy. We don't dance to their bigoted tune.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Approve gay marriage
    By kernwatch in forum Albany NY State budget Capital and Governor Kathy Hochul
    Replies: 170
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2010, 07:55 AM
  2. Paterson says gay marriage bill will pass in NY
    By kernwatch in forum Albany NY State budget Capital and Governor Kathy Hochul
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: October 23rd, 2009, 07:41 PM
  3. Paterson To Introduce Same-Sex Marriage Bill
    By steven in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: April 14th, 2009, 10:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •