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.
dogs sexuality has nothing to do with human sexuality we don't go around sniffing each other butts.
Than why is someone projecting human concepts like hetero- hom- and bi-sexuality on dogs? Why am I hearing the gay agenda folks quoting animals research on animals which suppsedly can be homosexual?
i'm not a oppressor of gays and gays have very narrow minds also otherwises gays would have persued equal rights under the institution of domestic partnership or civil unions. GOD also has a very narrow mind like me so i'm in very good company indeed.
Actually we have, in the past, tried to get equal rights under civil unions. Many states do not allow us to have that protection. Some have civil unions or domestic partnerships that are supposed to have equal protection of marriage, but don't. No civil union or domestic partnership is recognized federally.
No man knows the mind of God. Why do you claim that you do?
i'm not a oppressor of gays and gays have very narrow minds also otherwises gays would have persued equal rights under the institution of domestic partnership or civil unions. GOD also has a very narrow mind like me so i'm in very good company indeed.
God did not advocate anything you are spouting on this board. Sadly, you seem to think you're incapable of being wrong and have full understanding of a 4000 year old text, when you aren't even reading it in the original language and context. You also don't own an English word and have no right to claim exclusivity on it. It's changed meanings a dozen times in the US alone, and will continue to change. Protestants adamantly opposed marriage having anything to do with Christianity.
"You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out he hates all the same people you do" - Anne Lamott
Well of course not. None of this shows how "civic marriage in the U.S. is in part to encourage" anything, much less "heterosexual couples to bear and raise children". But it's interesting how even you freely admit you can't support your argument with facts that are relevant.
No one should be pretending to be for traditional "values", or hiding behind the word "traditional" at all, if they don't want to imitate the absolute earliest era when it comes to marriage as a concept, and in every way (not just the anti-gay facet of it). Call it what it is. You are standing against gay marriage, not for traditional values. The only thing even arguably traditional about modern-day marriage is exactly that only heterosexuals can marry (in most states). Everything else is an undeniable deviation from what marriage used to be, and telling enough, none of you seem upset about this.[snip]
You're dense, or intentionally misunderstanding the quotes for the sake of arguing.
The quotes mean that society is better off if children are born and raised in a committed relationship, referred to in this society as 'marriage.' They do Not mean that marriage is Only for people who want children. I substantiated the claim with court decisions. What what you prefer, quotes from the Lesbian Avengers ?
Your claim that one must go back absolute earliest era of 'marriage' to use the word 'traditional' is ridiculous. I won't bother substantiating that claim.
Accepting that a part of marriage's purpose is to encourage people who want children to enter that legally structured relationship or that woman-man is the traditional form does not = opposition to ssm.
Actually we have, in the past, tried to get equal rights under civil unions. Many states do not allow us to have that protection. Some have civil unions or domestic partnerships that are supposed to have equal protection of marriage, but don't. No civil union or domestic partnership is recognized federally.
homosexual marriage doesn't have federal recognition either so go and figure.....
No man knows the mind of God. Why do you claim that you do?
i do know the mind of GOD on homosexual marriage he's against it.....
God did not advocate anything you are spouting on this board. Sadly, you seem to think you're incapable of being wrong and have full understanding of a 4000 year old text, when you aren't even reading it in the original language and context. You also don't own an English word and have no right to claim exclusivity on it. It's changed meanings a dozen times in the US alone, and will continue to change. Protestants adamantly opposed marriage having anything to do with Christianity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero
that just your opinion isn't it ? i have a hebrew greek concordance what about you ?
"You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out he hates all the same people you do" - Anne Lamott
Than why is someone projecting human concepts like hetero- hom- and bi-sexuality on dogs? Why am I hearing the gay agenda folks quoting animals research on animals which suppsedly can be homosexual?
they laid that trick on me and i took it whole hook and line....LOL
doesn't the bible say study to show yourself approval as a workman rightly dividing the word of GOD that need not be ashamed LOL
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.
What The Bible Says
