Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against ...

Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?

There are 16101 comments on the news.yahoo.com story from Apr 27, 2009, titled Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?. In it, news.yahoo.com reports that:

The trouble they see is not just an America where general support for gay marriage will have driven a wedge between churches and the world, but between churches themselves.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at news.yahoo.com.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#17184 Jun 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
So sex isn't a part of marriage unless its required by law?
Damn, I'm busted big time!!!
Sex is a part of LIFE, but it is not required of anybody, is it? Is sex a required component of marriage? You keep bringing up sex and marriage. Well, I just want you to be super clear and explicit with your argument. What sexual practices, if any, are a required part of marriage? Is it legal for a couple to have a celibate marriage? Is there an assumption in the law that sex will be a part of marriage? Which sexual practices, in particular, does the law mention to disqualify people from getting married? I want to understand your argument, but you leave out huge and important swaths of information that leave your argument woefully incomplete and invalid. Please, make it whole and valid so it can make sense from a legal perspective. Because, we ARE talking about legal justifications for prohibiting same-sex marriage, right?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#17185 Jun 20, 2013
Kami Sureiya wrote:
<quoted text>
So chilrden being raped, genocide, and thousands of children dieing of starvation everyday are part of your God's plan?
It was part of God's plan in the Bible. Why wouldn't it continue to be?

I would never devise a plan that involved children being raped and killed, needlessly suffering, and starving. But, then again, I'm not the ultimate moral authority. ;)

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#17186 Jun 20, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, your unGodly opinion. Your opinions are TOTALLY irrelevant to God's people.
Psalm 1:1 (NKJV)
1 Blessed is the man Who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly,
When the godly involves endorsement of slavery, genocide, murder, child sacrifice, rape, incest, willful ignorance, and dishonesty, why should anybody NOT walk in the counsel of the ungodly?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#17187 Jun 20, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
And God called it. You have a REPROBATE MIND and will burn in Hell FOREVER.
And, it's God's decision for someone to be reprobate ACCORDING TO YOU. So, you blame people for God's decisions? That hardly seems proper.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#17188 Jun 20, 2013
snyper wrote:
Well golly gee, Hekkubah!
Minnesota is STILL the 12th State ...
Didn't they also vote twice for a narcistic despot too?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#17189 Jun 20, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Sex is a part of LIFE, but it is not required of anybody, is it? Is sex a required component of marriage? You keep bringing up sex and marriage. Well, I just want you to be super clear and explicit with your argument. What sexual practices, if any, are a required part of marriage? Is it legal for a couple to have a celibate marriage? Is there an assumption in the law that sex will be a part of marriage? Which sexual practices, in particular, does the law mention to disqualify people from getting married? I want to understand your argument, but you leave out huge and important swaths of information that leave your argument woefully incomplete and invalid. Please, make it whole and valid so it can make sense from a legal perspective. Because, we ARE talking about legal justifications for prohibiting same-sex marriage, right?
You are the eliminating things unless they are required by law. That honey excludes huge swaths of important elements, dumbing down marriage to a contract between two or more people. Do you understand how that makes the kids cry???

I simply point out that SS couples don't equate to marriage on any plane.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#17190 Jun 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the eliminating things unless they are required by law. That honey excludes huge swaths of important elements, dumbing down marriage to a contract between two or more people. Do you understand how that makes the kids cry???
I simply point out that SS couples don't equate to marriage on any plane.
Again, kids like these?



http://www.youtube.com/watch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

so...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Thinking

Kingston Upon Thames, UK

#17191 Jun 20, 2013
People getting married in the air sounds odd to me, but live and let live. It's the intention that counts.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the eliminating things unless they are required by law. That honey excludes huge swaths of important elements, dumbing down marriage to a contract between two or more people. Do you understand how that makes the kids cry???
I simply point out that SS couples don't equate to marriage on any plane.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#17192 Jun 20, 2013
Thinking wrote:
People getting married in the air sounds odd to me, but live and let live. It's the intention that counts.
<quoted text>
That's because SS couples can't be married on any plane.
Mikey

Fullerton, CA

#17193 Jun 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
That's because SS couples can't be married on any plane.
Why not? Depends on the country your flying over.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#17194 Jun 20, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, kids like these?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =FZsyyL21LpkXX
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
so...
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Ah, using token kids for propaganda. That helps your cause. You insinuate kids in SS homes don't miss a parent. What a gay assertion.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#17195 Jun 20, 2013
Mikey wrote:
<quoted text>
Why not? Depends on the country your flying over.
A SS couple will never ever be more than a mutually barren, pointlessly duplicate gendered half of marriage.

Clearly not the same.

Since: Dec 09

Chicago, IL

#17196 Jun 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
That's because SS couples can't be married on any plane.
KiMare: "That's because SS couples can't be married on any plane."

FALSE. What an absurd claim.
Despite your delusional homophobic wishful-thinking, legally sanctioned SS marriage is a reality.

Marriage: a legally, religiously, or socially sanctioned union of persons who commit to one another, forming a familial and economic bond.

Marriage is the simple and usual term describing the legally sanctioned union of a two person committed relationship, without implications as to circumstances and without emotional connotations.
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#17198 Jun 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, using token kids for propaganda. That helps your cause. You insinuate kids in SS homes don't miss a parent. What a gay assertion.
studies that have been conducted would run contra to your belief.

of course, i can also ask my 3 kids what they think or feel. they'd wonder why i was asking such a silly question, or they might try to turn it around & say that they missed that shelby mustang they didn't get to drive around in.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#17199 Jun 20, 2013
Claiming that someone else's marriage is against your religion is like being angry at someone for eating a cupcake because you're on a diet.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#17200 Jun 20, 2013
janeebee wrote:
<quoted text>
KiMare: "That's because SS couples can't be married on any plane."
FALSE. What an absurd claim.
Despite your delusional homophobic wishful-thinking, legally sanctioned SS marriage is a reality.
Marriage: a legally, religiously, or socially sanctioned union of persons who commit to one another, forming a familial and economic bond.
Marriage is the simple and usual term describing the legally sanctioned union of a two person committed relationship, without implications as to circumstances and without emotional connotations.
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.

This is why marriage has been present in every single culture in human history from start to finish, and apart from any one religion.

Ss couples have NEVER been considered married in ANY culture from start to finish.

A ss couple will only ever be a mutually sterile, pointlessly duplicated half of marriage.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#17201 Jun 20, 2013
heartandmind wrote:
<quoted text>
studies that have been conducted would run contra to your belief.
of course, i can also ask my 3 kids what they think or feel. they'd wonder why i was asking such a silly question, or they might try to turn it around & say that they missed that shelby mustang they didn't get to drive around in.
Oh please, list the study with the methods used for it.

Then explain why any heterosexual default family falls drastically behind birth parent results, but default lesbian couples excel.

How's fathers day around your house?

Since: Dec 09

Chicago, IL

#17202 Jun 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
This is why marriage has been present in every single culture in human history from start to finish, and apart from any one religion.
Ss couples have NEVER been considered married in ANY culture from start to finish.
A ss couple will only ever be a mutually sterile, pointlessly duplicated half of marriage.
What you describe as the basic essence of marriage is but one of many purposes marriage serves.

Marriage has never had just one meaning. Adjectives commonly used with the word reveal the institution’s diversity, among them traditional, religious, civil, arranged, gay, plural, group, open, heterosexual, common-law, interracial, same-sex, polygamous, and monogamous. And this diversity has been in evidence, if not since the beginning of time, at least since the beginning of marriage itself, roughly some 4000 years ago.
Multiple wives, for example, proliferate in the Bible. King Solomon famously had 700, although most were apparently instruments of political alliance rather than participants in royal romance.(For that, he had 300 concubines.)
Marriage can be sanctioned legally or religiously, and typically confers upon married people a special legal status with particular rights, benefits, and obligations. Access to this special status has changed over time. Interracial marriages, for example, were legalized in the United States by the Supreme Court as recently as 1967, and as of this writing, same-sex marriage, while banned in some states and ignored in some, is recognized in others.
Marriage as the union of one man and one woman is the most common definition of the term in the Western world today—this in spite of the prevalence on the one hand of divorce (enabling people to marry several different partners in sequence), and on the other, of an increasing acceptance of same-sex marriage. And as society becomes more inclusive, it is likely that “equal protection under the law” will be further extended to same-sex couples.
In crafting definitions for a word that represents an institution that is rapidly evolving, the dictionary may well have to keep adding, changing, and reordering senses, splitting or combining them as the institution changes. Inevitably, those who want to preserve what they cherish as traditional values will resist new definitions, while those who anticipate, welcome, and fight for societal change will be impatient when new definitions do not appear as quickly as they would wish. But we should all remember that while it is not the job of a dictionary to drive social change, it is inevitable that it will reflect such change.
__dictionary Boss

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#17203 Jun 20, 2013
Sorry honey, my statement is a concise scientific explanation, not one of many 'definitions'.

Here is a brief but thorough explanation;

http://voices.yahoo.com/
analyzing-human-mating-behavio r-1020545.html

This paragraph on long term mating (marriage) explains the strategy;

"The nature of human reproduction is such that paternal parental investment is not essential to offspring survival. Consequently, short term mating strategies are more favorable to males; Buss and Schmitt (1993) assert that by inseminating as many females as possible while providing as little parental investment as possible, males increase the odds of forwarding their genes. In contrast, the large amount of parental investment required by females makes long term mating strategies much more favorable for them. By attaining the commitment of their male counterparts, females can capitalize on the consequent non-genetic resources provided by the male (food, protection)."

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#17204 Jun 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, using token kids for propaganda. That helps your cause. You insinuate kids in SS homes don't miss a parent. What a gay assertion.
Conversely, you present testimony from NO kids at all to support your assertion.

Gee. Which would stand up in Court?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Wedding Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Irish gay marriage referendum campaigner warns ... 4 hr Fa-Foxy 8
News Pastors Rarely Asked to Wed Same-Sex Couples 5 hr Christians In Nam... 48
News How Donald Trump is slowly teaching Republicans... 10 hr Go Blue Forever 39
News Michael Kirby warns against 'dangerous' politic... Mon Larry Craig s WC ... 26
News Why Does the Church Wink at Divorce but Get So ... Sun Theocraencyclical 9
News Gay South Carolina police chief makes historic ... Sun Theocraencyclical 5
[Guide] Funny maid of honor speech (Sep '14) Sun umbrellas 175
More from around the web