Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Do you think gay marriages should be legal or illegal?
Yes 82 63.08%
No 48 36.92%
Voters: 130. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-21-2008, 08:49 PM
 
Location: Lawrenceville GA
13 posts, read 42,039 times
Reputation: 11

Advertisements

Aids has been there since the B.C. times but nobody knew wat it was
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-21-2008, 08:53 PM
 
Location: Lawrenceville GA
13 posts, read 42,039 times
Reputation: 11
i'm sayin if you want a pastor to do the wedding if they are fully into the word of God no pastor or Priest would marry them. The government would have to force the religious leaders to do the wedding. This occurs if someone wants a big wedding not doing city hall.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2008, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Penobscot Bay, the best place in Maine!
1,895 posts, read 5,899,461 times
Reputation: 2703
Quote:
Originally Posted by oexume View Post
i'm sayin if you want a pastor to do the wedding if they are fully into the word of God no pastor or Priest would marry them. The government would have to force the religious leaders to do the wedding. This occurs if someone wants a big wedding not doing city hall.
I have a very hard time reading your posts.

However, you need to keep in mind that Christianity is certainly not the only religion, and that even within Christianity, views differ about what being a Christian means. There are plenty of religions, including many branches of Christianity, that do not feel that homosexuality and/or same-sex marriage is a sin, and would have no problem performing/celebrating a same-sex marriage ceremony. I still think that every marrying couple should (only) have to do the legal ceremony at city hall, and then if they so choose, have a wedding ceremony at their place of worship, or not..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2008, 11:20 PM
 
2,215 posts, read 3,614,478 times
Reputation: 508
It not legal and not moral.

One man and one woman period.

Judges are making the laws and this is wrong. Case in point, the PEOPLE of California voted to BAN this and yet a looney bin liberal judge overturned the majority vote to ban it and changed it.

He broke the law and should be arrest and jailed. All Calif. sme sex marriages are illegal and should be tossed into the trashcan.

Judges are not allowed to make laws, and if one does like the idiot in Calf just did, arrest them and put them in jail at Gitmo.

The majority of Americans do not want same sex marriage and that is what counts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2008, 11:23 PM
 
Location: CNJ/NYC
1,240 posts, read 3,969,414 times
Reputation: 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by oexume View Post
Marriage was about love ever since God created it with Adam and Eve.
Really? Marriage was about property and politics for a damn long time... like... until recently.

Quote:
Marriage is an institution that brings two people together purely to have sex together, live together and enjoy life together living life together helping each other then comes protection and property and all that extra stuff but God created this institution for His children to fill the land that is what it says in His word.
Wow, strong run-on sentence. Marriage is an institution to establish property rights. Until recent Western history, the wife(s) and kids were the man's property, as well as the dowry and whatever else came from the marriage.

Quote:
Many people may not like what i am sayin but why was same-sex relationships always held behind close doors just because it is not pure
I don't dislike what you're saying. I do think you can improve your communication skills.

Regarding same-sex relationships and purity- what the heck does "purity" have to do with anything? Think about how oppressive religion can be and then tell me why you think same-sex relationships were held behind closed doors.

Quote:
but since the end of the world is coming and God already ordained this: that when the beginning of the end arrives you will hear nation against nation, rumors and rumors of war, morals diminishing and everyone trying to stay away from God.
So nothing has changed for millennia- the "the sky is falling!" crowd has been chanting this since the beginning.

Quote:
I love you all I may not like what you do but the humaness in you I love because God created you so I rather be the only one against what God is against then forfeit my faith and agree with you Same-sex marriage is an abomination to God period. Whether you like it or not but you still have time to change since your still alive.
Please break this down so it makes sense. Thanks.

Quote:
And please can some answer my question y would someone rather have what they already have then get something they don't. And for a man what can another do to you sexually that a woman can't do besides up the butt. For a woman what can another woman do to you sexually that a man can't do. Please let me know cus i find homosexuality sickening.
How old are you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2008, 11:28 PM
 
Location: CNJ/NYC
1,240 posts, read 3,969,414 times
Reputation: 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunshine Chick View Post
It not legal and not moral.

One man and one woman period.
It's perfectly legal and your morality is... well... worthless to those who don't subscribe to your brand of religion.

Quote:
Judges are making the laws and this is wrong.
Not in the least. The CA SC made no law. It interpreted the State Constitution as written and found the challenged law unconstitutional. This is their job and there is nothing wrong with it.

Quote:
Case in point, the PEOPLE of California voted to BAN this and yet a looney bin liberal judge overturned the majority vote to ban it and changed it.
The majority doesn't get to vote in whatever it wants: if what the majority votes in unconstitutional crap then it will be stricken down once challenged. Why do you think we have courts, anyway?

Quote:
He broke the law and should be arrest and jailed. All Calif. sme sex marriages are illegal and should be tossed into the trashcan.

Judges are not allowed to make laws, and if one does like the idiot in Calf just did, arrest them and put them in jail at Gitmo.
Kindly take your medication. Thanks.

Quote:
The majority of Americans do not want same sex marriage and that is what counts.
That is not what counts. The Constitution counts, Equal Protection counts, and the Anti-Establishment clause counts. Your religious beliefs don't count because we are talking about civil matters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2008, 11:31 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,232 posts, read 46,639,854 times
Reputation: 11084
Quote:
Originally Posted by oexume View Post
Have you ever heard of bi-sexuals hello!!! that's y it entered the heterosexuals THink about it
And blood transfusions...Randy White, a teenager and virgin got it that way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2008, 12:36 AM
 
242 posts, read 193,135 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunshine Chick View Post
It not legal and not moral.

One man and one woman period.

Judges are making the laws and this is wrong. Case in point, the PEOPLE of California voted to BAN this and yet a looney bin liberal judge overturned the majority vote to ban it and changed it.

He broke the law and should be arrest and jailed. All Calif. sme sex marriages are illegal and should be tossed into the trashcan.

Judges are not allowed to make laws, and if one does like the idiot in Calf just did, arrest them and put them in jail at Gitmo.

The majority of Americans do not want same sex marriage and that is what counts.
It's clear you don't know what you're talking about. No laws were broken and judges overturning edicts and discounting the will of the majority is fundamental to societal progress. Minorities are citizens, and they cannot wait around for the rest of the country to get off of its moral high-ground and recognize the equal rights that they are guaranteed.

You should consider reviewing American history and government. The Supreme Court of California, just like the US Supreme Court, is there to protect individual rights and privileges. It exists, partially, as a functioning unit of social evolution. The argument that the majority of Americans do not want same-sex marriage is completely irrelevant, and most certainly is NOT what counts. If the majority of Americans got their way historically, blacks and women would still be devoid of rights. If issues of civil rights went to ballot for the majority to decide, progress would be extremely incremental, if occurring at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2008, 12:47 AM
 
8,726 posts, read 7,407,433 times
Reputation: 12612
Marriage is a religious term so i do not see how the gov should be involved with what religious institutions do.

The purpose of marriage in the anthropolgical sense is for the rights to sexual access. marriage in the religious sense is standing before God and giving your committment to one another.

I do not see how the gov interferes with either one nor should they.

Now why don't we call it what it is, which is civil union because they and everyone else wants to be recongnized by the gov as belonging to each other and having certain rights over affairs of each other that a friend or stranger wouldn't.

So in that case, it should not matter what sex the people are as if they want to mutaully engage in repsonsibility beyond what a friendship would have and enter into the legal fray of what rights spouses have, then so be it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2008, 03:18 AM
 
Location: Earth
24,620 posts, read 28,271,474 times
Reputation: 11416
Marriage is not a religious term. It is a secular term usurped by religion.
So, you're saying that because I don't believe in your god, I can't be married?
I was married by a justice of the peace, a recognized agent of the government, not by a clergyman. Are you saying that my marriage was invalid?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:55 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top