Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Unions

Nov 30, 2010 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: CBS2

The Illinois House has approved a measure to legalize civil unions for same-sex couples.

Comments
35,601 - 35,620 of 49,246 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago
cubeshaker

Romeoville, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41559
Aug 5, 2013
 
beers wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage began only in the bible. What I believe to be the living word of God. Many (not all) of the founding fathers believed this as well. To say this is not a Christian Nation is, well silly. The bible has and still does have a great implication on this country. And for it to carry forward, in prosperity it should listen carefully. You may perceive it as "fairy tales" but if you listen to your heart and look about yourself and the world you live in you will find more truth than the man made laws that exist today.
Marriage began only in the bible....
Got anything to back that up.... other than your holy book?.... of course not...

We are not a "christian" nation... if we were we would do a biblical check on all our laws. We are a natin of many religions and beliefs... to believe otherwise is silly
CDC

Saint Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41560
Aug 5, 2013
 
AGENASQUARE - A very shaky cubic agendist.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41561
Aug 5, 2013
 
beers wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage began only in the bible.
That's where I stopped reading your post. Your opening line is incorrect.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41562
Aug 5, 2013
 
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't use the Bible to expose the duplicity of a fake relationship being imposed on marriage.
The Bible gives ONE expression of God intended marriage. It is found at the very beginning, and confirmed by Jesus in Matthew 19.
Ignorance is bliss. Ignore the other 7 if you must, but they remain in print, in your bible. Your personal prejudice is all you have.

Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
19:10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
19:11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

But again, your interpretation of the bible is not the source of our laws. We use a constitution which require equal treatment under the law for all persons.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41563
Aug 5, 2013
 
beers wrote:
<quoted text>
Are any of the "8 marriages" man & man or woman & woman? No. I do not wish to "impose" my religion on anyone. I simple ask that as I respect theirs, they respect mine. I'm all for gay unions. I think everyone should be allowed to love whomever they wish. I think one should be able to decided who gets their property, health benefits, etc, etc. I firmly believe that the term "marriage" is a Christian only institution. Other forms of "Christianity" may choose to believe as they wish. But the bible does clearly state, one man one woman.
So Jews, Hindu, and all other faiths as well as atheists should not be allowed to get married?
And only the Christians who agree with your interpretations of the bible can get married?

You can set any additional rules for marriage you choose in your own church. But your additional religious requirements have no place in the law.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41564
Aug 5, 2013
 
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Ignorance is bliss. Ignore the other 7 if you must, but they remain in print, in your bible. Your personal prejudice is all you have.
Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
19:10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
19:11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
But again, your interpretation of the bible is not the source of our laws. We use a constitution which require equal treatment under the law for all persons.
To claim the rights, you have to establish equality. You can't.

I don't used the Bible to prove SS marriage is an oxymoron, I use science.

Matt 19 gives the option of celibacy as opposed to life long marriage between a male and female.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41565
Aug 5, 2013
 
beers wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the bible is the source of pretty much all our laws. You may choose to ignore that, but it doesn't change the original laws of this country.
While many of our laws are based on principals that can be found in many religious texts including the bible, those are universal. Many things required in the bible are prohibited by our laws. The bible was not the source of our laws, as Mahz points out.

The founders were well aware of the atrocities perpetuated through the ages based on nothing more than a few passages found in the bible. The wanted to keep the bible out of the law, not to enshrine it there.

Thomas Paine:
"Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse
than Moses. Here is an order, attributed to 'God' to butcher the boys, to
massacre the mothers, and to debauch and rape the daughters. I would not
dare so dishonor my Creator's name by (attaching) it to this filthy book
(the Bible)." "It is the duty of every true Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God
against the evils of the Bible."

James Madison
"What influence in fact have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on
civil society? In many instances they have been upholding the thrones of
political tyranny. In no instance have they been seen as the guardians of
the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty
have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government,
instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the clergy."

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41566
Aug 5, 2013
 
beers wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage began only in the bible. What I believe to be the living word of God. Many (not all) of the founding fathers believed this as well. To say this is not a Christian Nation is, well silly. The bible has and still does have a great implication on this country. And for it to carry forward, in prosperity it should listen carefully. You may perceive it as "fairy tales" but if you listen to your heart and look about yourself and the world you live in you will find more truth than the man made laws that exist today.
Marriage existed long before the bible was written, and even before written language, in various civilizations around the world.

You can claim we are a nation of Christians, since that is the majority claim to believe in one of the many various Christian churches. But we are not a Christian nation in the sense that our laws require any adherence to Christian laws, rules, and beliefs.

"Justice Brewer published a book in 1905 titled The United States: A Christian Nation. In it he wrote:
But in what sense can [the United States] be called a Christian nation? Not in the sense that Christianity is the established religion or the people are compelled in any manner to support it. On the contrary, the Constitution specifically provides that 'congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.' Neither is it Christian in the sense that all its citizens are either in fact or in name Christians. On the contrary, all religions have free scope within its borders. Numbers of our people profess other religions, and many reject all.[...]

Nor is it Christian in the sense that a profession of Christianity is a condition of holding office or otherwise engaging in public service, or essential to recognition either politically or socially. In fact, the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions.
Justice Brewer's decision was not, therefore, any attempt to argue that the laws in the United States should enforce Christianity or reflect solely Christian concerns and beliefs. He was simply making an observation which is consistent with the fact that people in this country tend to be Christian."
beers

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41567
Aug 5, 2013
 
cubeshaker wrote:
<quoted text>Marriage began only in the bible....
Got anything to back that up.... other than your holy book?.... of course not...

We are not a "christian" nation... if we were we would do a biblical check on all our laws. We are a natin of many religions and beliefs... to believe otherwise is silly
Ok then tell me where it first appeared.
CDC

Saint Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41568
Aug 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Correction:
The Bible was not the ONLY source of our laws.
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
While many of our laws are based on principals that can be found in many religious texts including the bible, those are universal. Many things required in the bible are prohibited by our laws. The bible was not the source of our laws, as Mahz points out.
The founders were well aware of the atrocities perpetuated through the ages based on nothing more than a few passages found in the bible. The wanted to keep the bible out of the law, not to enshrine it there.
Thomas Paine:
"Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse
than Moses. Here is an order, attributed to 'God' to butcher the boys, to
massacre the mothers, and to debauch and rape the daughters. I would not
dare so dishonor my Creator's name by (attaching) it to this filthy book
(the Bible)." "It is the duty of every true Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God
against the evils of the Bible."
James Madison
"What influence in fact have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on
civil society? In many instances they have been upholding the thrones of
political tyranny. In no instance have they been seen as the guardians of
the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty
have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government,
instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the clergy."

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41569
Aug 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
To claim the rights, you have to establish equality. You can't.
I don't used the Bible to prove SS marriage is an oxymoron, I use science.
Matt 19 gives the option of celibacy as opposed to life long marriage between a male and female.
Again, to qualify for fundamental civil rights, you must be human. That is the only requirement.(SCOTUS: Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978):[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.

You do not have to earn fundamental rights. Restrictions on that right may be made, but only if they provide a compelling and legitimate governmental interest. The restriction on gender is an artificial one, as neither sexual activity nor procreation are required for marriage to remain a fundamental right. Your personal prejudice fails to provide any legitimate governmental interest.

Your interpretation of scripture is your interpretation, and as you note, has no place in the law.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41570
Aug 5, 2013
 
beers wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok then tell me where it first appeared.
Archeological evidence shows marriage existed before written language in various places around the globe.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41571
Aug 5, 2013
 
CDC wrote:
Correction:
The Bible was not the ONLY source of our laws.
<quoted text>
If the bible was the source of our laws, we would have a very different set of laws, including the constitution, as has been pointed out. We would not have freedom to believe anything we choose, but would be required to follow the bible. The fact universal principals can be found among all of the other biblical laws we ignore, does not mean it was the source of those laws.
cubeshaker

Romeoville, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41572
Aug 5, 2013
 
beers wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok then tell me where it first appeared.
Who knows... but it is certain that it happened before some one found some transcript written by people no where near the time aof adam and eve.....

Face it if you really believe that the A AND E story is true... then you must admit that God is ok with incest.
CDC

Saint Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41573
Aug 5, 2013
 
One more time.
It was not the ONLY source.
To say it did not have influence is just crazy.
Many books influence our laws.
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
If the bible was the source of our laws, we would have a very different set of laws, including the constitution, as has been pointed out. We would not have freedom to believe anything we choose, but would be required to follow the bible. The fact universal principals can be found among all of the other biblical laws we ignore, does not mean it was the source of those laws.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41574
Aug 5, 2013
 
CDC wrote:
One more time.
It was not the ONLY source.
To say it did not have influence is just crazy.
Many books influence our laws.
<quoted text>
So how do you explain the fact most biblical laws did not make it in, no belief in God is required, or you can worship any God or gods, golden calf, etc. you choose?

Again, universal principals such as treating others as you would yourself can be found in all religious and non religious ethical belief systems as well as in the bible.
CDC

Saint Louis, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41575
Aug 5, 2013
 
Can't argue with that. You are FINALLY catching on.
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
So how do you explain the fact most biblical laws did not make it in, no belief in God is required, or you can worship any God or gods, golden calf, etc. you choose?
Again, universal principals such as treating others as you would yourself can be found in all religious and non religious ethical belief systems as well as in the bible.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41576
Aug 5, 2013
 
CDC wrote:
Can't argue with that. You are FINALLY catching on.
<quoted text>
Same thing I said before. The fact universal principals can be found among all of the other biblical laws we ignore, does not mean it was the source of those laws.

You didn't address why most of the 10 commandments are not law, and the ones that are, are also universal, and why the thousands of other biblical laws are not civil laws.

Ironically, the golden rule, which can be found in all ethical belief systems and is promoted as the most important rule of all in the bible, is ignored and contradicted when we refuse to treat the marriages of same sex couples equally under the laws in effect for opposite sex couples.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41577
Aug 5, 2013
 
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
To claim the rights, you have to establish equality. You can't.
I don't used the Bible to prove SS marriage is an oxymoron, I use science.
Matt 19 gives the option of celibacy as opposed to life long marriage between a male and female.
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, to qualify for fundamental civil rights, you must be human. That is the only requirement.(SCOTUS: Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978):[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.
You do not have to earn fundamental rights. Restrictions on that right may be made, but only if they provide a compelling and legitimate governmental interest. The restriction on gender is an artificial one, as neither sexual activity nor procreation are required for marriage to remain a fundamental right. Your personal prejudice fails to provide any legitimate governmental interest.
Your interpretation of scripture is your interpretation, and as you note, has no place in the law.
We are not talking about basic human rights, we are talking about special rights for a unique relationship.

That is why gender, children and number are part of the discrimination.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41578
Aug 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Archeological evidence shows marriage existed before written language in various places around the globe.
At it's most basic essence, marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Ss couples are a defective failure of mating behavior.

'ss marriage' is literally an oxymoron.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Canton Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
IL Who do you support for Governor in Illinois in ... (Oct '10) 2 hr what it is 3,903
Would you slow your car and allow a person in a... 13 hr Balth 1
IL Who do you support for Lieutenant Governor in I... (Oct '10) 13 hr Weneedchange 147
Ryan Voice (Apr '13) Tue True friend 6
IL Illinois Governor Recall Amendment (Oct '10) Aug 18 newpoly 1,898
Child molesters in Bryant. (Dec '10) Aug 16 hey u busy body 6
IL Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Illinois ... (Oct '10) Aug 2 nono 6,593

Search the Canton Forum:
•••
•••
•••

Canton Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Canton People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Canton News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Canton
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••