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.
So it should also be Constitutionally wrong, too? Thank God we don't let religion run our government, because God only knows what kind of in-fighting we'd have and God awful things we'd do overseas in the name of God.
I mentioned PDA's b/c I personally know people who would say they don't want to see to gays or lesbians making out. Yeah, well I don't want to see any couple making out. Sorry I didn't expand on that.
As far as all of your talk of God, this country was founded as "One nation UNDER GOD no matter how many people try to change it. If you pay attention you will notice that when we took God out of school and just about every other public place but church that's when so much started falling apart in our formerly great country.
I don't care who gets married. If two people are committed to each other and want to get married, more power to them. If two same gender people are going to live together and be faithful to each, why should they not have the same rights as a man/woman couple?
I don't think anything is wrong with gay unions/ marriage, whatever. None of my business what other people do or don't do, as long as it isn't hurting anyone. That is why I want nothing to do with "religious" people... mind your own business and worry about your own life. Leave others to live theirs, they DO NOT have to subscribe to your religious views.
As far as all of your talk of God, this country was founded as "One nation UNDER GOD no matter how many people try to change it.
No it wasn't. That was added in the 50s during the McCarthy era (as I recall...might have to check my facts here) as a knee-jerk reaction to the satanic Commie Pinkos.
**Edit: And most of you who spout that rhetoric forget about the "liberty and justice FOR ALL" part.
Last edited by RoaminRed; 02-14-2008 at 02:24 PM..
Reason: Added stuff...
Marriage, whats in a name? That particular institution has a nasty connotation ala the Brittany Spears type of marriages and the trophy marriages of politicos and the half of the marriages that end in divorce each year. No I don't want to emulate them or bring my relationship down to the level of most marriages.
What the Bible says is absolutely irrelevent to me. I have no intention of stoning McCain or my next door neighbor or any other adulterer--as far as I am concerned the Bible is just plain flat out wrong. Stoning adulterers may have worked 5000 yrs ago for some nomadic tribes.....as for me it just doesn't seem right. I do put a lot of stock in the teachings of Jesus and I notice he never ever suggests that there is any special type of love that God likes or abhors. "What the world needs now is love sweet love, thats the only thing....that theres just too little of."
I hope that you and yours are having a good Valentines Day, my guy and I are!
No it wasn't. That was added in the 50s during the McCarthy era (as I recall...might have to check my facts here) as a knee-jerk reaction to the satanic Commie Pinkos.
**Edit: And most of you who spout that rhetoric forget about the "liberty and justice FOR ALL" part.
The pledge is fascist propaganda anyway, lol. But seriously, what about "liberty and justice for all" assures that traditional laws about marriage ought to be overturned for every Tom, Dick, and Harry who all want to marry each other?
I don't think anything is wrong with gay unions/ marriage, whatever. None of my business what other people do or don't do, as long as it isn't hurting anyone. That is why I want nothing to do with "religious" people... mind your own business and worry about your own life. Leave others to live theirs, they DO NOT have to subscribe to your religious views.
There are many "religious" people that would favor gay marriage. Not everyone that does not favor it is "religious." Looking at it that way just makes it easier to dismiss their point of view.
No it wasn't. That was added in the 50s during the McCarthy era (as I recall...might have to check my facts here) as a knee-jerk reaction to the satanic Commie Pinkos.
**Edit: And most of you who spout that rhetoric forget about the "liberty and justice FOR ALL" part.
You are corrrect that it was added while I was in High School; I graduated in 1958. And the pledge of alligence has absolutely nothing to do with the founding fathers; it is much more recent and has been re-written several times.
There are many "religious" people that would favor gay marriage. Not everyone that does not favor it is "religious." Looking at it that way just makes it easier to dismiss their point of view.
There's some truth there, yeah. I'm an atheist. A crabby atheist curmudgeon, yes, but a bona fide atheist nonetheless.
So are gay married couples in Massachusettes good to go with the sex since som many Christians claim gay sex is wrong because it's "outside marriage"?
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.
