Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on ...

Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches

There are 9653 comments on the The Skanner story from Mar 1, 2012, titled Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches. In it, The Skanner reports that:

With Maryland poised to legalize gay marriage, some conservative opponents and religious leaders are counting on members of their congregations, especially in black churches, to upend the legislation at the polls this fall.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Skanner.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#8283 Nov 20, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>That's untrue, the issue is social policy and has nothing to do with respect. I've always written, there is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality but that's no reason to redefine marriage.
It's as if the only way you can show respect for your fellow human being is to redefine basic cultural institutions (like marriage) to accommodate sexual predilection. The only way you can respect members of a culture that practice polygamy is to change your laws so your government permits polygamy. I think not.
I am married to a partner of the same sex. Do you approve?

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#8284 Nov 20, 2012
Polygamy redefines the "what" of marriage. Allowing same sex partners to participate under the rules currently in effect does not alter the "what" of marriage. It only changes the "who" may participate, in a way that does not deny any rights to opposite sex partners.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#8285 Nov 20, 2012
Not Yet Equal wrote:
Polygamy redefines the "what" of marriage. Allowing same sex partners to participate under the rules currently in effect does not alter the "what" of marriage. It only changes the "who" may participate, in a way that does not deny any rights to opposite sex partners.
Indeed. Polygamy is a red herring.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#8286 Nov 20, 2012
Not Yet Equal wrote:
Polygamy redefines the "what" of marriage. Allowing same sex partners to participate under the rules currently in effect does not alter the "what" of marriage. It only changes the "who" may participate, in a way that does not deny any rights to opposite sex partners.
That is false in every way. Same sex marriage certainly changes the "what" of marriage.

Are you nuts?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#8287 Nov 21, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
That is false in every way. Same sex marriage certainly changes the "what" of marriage.
Are you nuts?
No. It's fairly simple.

When same sex couples marry, nothing changes. It's still about two unrelated consenting adults forming a loving and committed union. No definition change required. Marriage in our country has ALWAYS been about two people marrying and forming a couple.

With polygamy, it's not about the genders of the participants, it's about changing the definition from two, to many.

Whether the definition of marriage should be expanded to include polygamy is an entirely different argument, with completely different legal and societal ramifications, is it's own complex issue.

For same sex couples to marry, no such issues exist.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#8288 Nov 21, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
That is false in every way. Same sex marriage certainly changes the "what" of marriage.
Are you nuts?
What legal rights and protections do you think have changed now that gay people are getting married?

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#8289 Nov 21, 2012
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
No. It's fairly simple.
When same sex couples marry, nothing changes. It's still about two unrelated consenting adults forming a loving and committed union. No definition change required. Marriage in our country has ALWAYS been about two people marrying and forming a couple.
No, its ALWAYS been about a man and a woman getting married. I can't believe you even wrote that. Allowing a person to marry their own sex does indeed change the definition of marriage. It changes the definition of what marriage has been since the beginning of recorded history.

Arguing against this simple fact just makes you look disingenuous.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#8290 Nov 21, 2012
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
What legal rights and protections do you think have changed now that gay people are getting married?
The legal rights of parents to be notified and having their children pulled from a classroom before they are subjected to gay propaganda in public schools...for starters.

They teach this which is all about gays and gay families:

http://www.healthiersf.org/LGBTQ/InTheClassro...

But the law says this:

"The California Education Code (51938) mandates that parents/ caregivers be notified 15 days before classroom instruction about sexuality, human growth and development, including sexually transmitted disease/HIV infection. Further, parents/caregivers must be given the opportunity to review instructional materials and exclude their child from curriculum sections related to FAMILY LIFE AND SEXUALITY."

And here is their response:

"A discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning people does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life education and does NOT require parent notification according to the California Education Code."

It doesn't? On what planet!!!

Allow me to paraphrase. "We get to teach your kids whatever we want with or without your permission. If we have to say 'up is down' and 'black is white' to circumvent the law so be it. Its for their own good. We know what is best."

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#8291 Nov 21, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
The legal rights of parents to be notified and having their children pulled from a classroom before they are subjected to gay propaganda in public schools...for starters.
They teach this which is all about gays and gay families:
http://www.healthiersf.org/LGBTQ/InTheClassro...
But the law says this:
"The California Education Code (51938) mandates that parents/ caregivers be notified 15 days before classroom instruction about sexuality, human growth and development, including sexually transmitted disease/HIV infection. Further, parents/caregivers must be given the opportunity to review instructional materials and exclude their child from curriculum sections related to FAMILY LIFE AND SEXUALITY."
And here is their response:
"A discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning people does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life education and does NOT require parent notification according to the California Education Code."
It doesn't? On what planet!!!
Allow me to paraphrase. "We get to teach your kids whatever we want with or without your permission. If we have to say 'up is down' and 'black is white' to circumvent the law so be it. Its for their own good. We know what is best."
Remember that California does not currently have marriage equality. That law is independent of marriage equality, and has nothing to do with the legal rights and protections that accompany marriage.

Teaching tolerance of others is independent of marriage laws, and does not require teaching sex ed. That is a separate topic.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#8292 Nov 21, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
No, its ALWAYS been about a man and a woman getting married. I can't believe you even wrote that. Allowing a person to marry their own sex does indeed change the definition of marriage. It changes the definition of what marriage has been since the beginning of recorded history.
Arguing against this simple fact just makes you look disingenuous.
Despite what some preachers and politicians parrot, anthropological information indicates same sex couples were getting married even before recorded history.
In written history, same sex marriages can be traced back 4,000 years to ancient Egypt. While never the predominant form of marriage, it has existed across time and cultures.

"At times throughout history, same-sex relationships have enjoyed relative freedom within their respective places.

Evidence exists that same-sex marriages were tolerated in parts of Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt. Artifacts from Egypt, for example, show that same-sex relationships not only existed, but the discovery of a pharaonic tomb for such a couple shows their union was recognized by the kingdom. Meanwhile, accounts of the Israelites' departure for Canaan include their condemnation of Egyptian acceptance of same-sex practice. In actuality, same-sex marital practices and rituals are less known in Egypt compared to Mesopotamia, where documents exist for a variety of marital practices, including male lovers of kings and polyandry. None of the recorded laws of Mesopotamia, including the Code of Hammurabi, contain restrictions against same-sex unions despite the fact that marriages are otherwise well regulated. "
http://www.randomhistory.com/history-of-gay-m...

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#8293 Nov 21, 2012
A book by the Dominican missionary and Prior, Jacques Goar (1601-1653), includes same sex ceremonies in a printed collection of Greek Orthodox prayer books,“Euchologion Sive Rituale Graecorum Complectens Ritus Et Ordines Divinae Liturgiae”(Paris, 1667).

Another book by Gerald of Wales (‘Geraldus Cambrensis’) recorded same gender Christian sanctified unions also took place in Ireland in the late 12th and early 13th centuries.

"Historical evidence, including legal documents and gravesites, can be interpreted as supporting the prevalence of homosexual relationships hundreds of years ago, said Allan Tulchin of Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania.

Gay Marriage Is As Old As History www.gaychristian101.com/Gay-Marriage.html

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#8294 Nov 21, 2012
It's OK to pity gays but not cool to redefine marriage.
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

#8295 Nov 21, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
The legal rights of parents to be notified and having their children pulled from a classroom before they are subjected to gay propaganda in public schools...for starters.
They teach this which is all about gays and gay families:
http://www.healthiersf.org/LGBTQ/InTheClassro...
But the law says this:
"The California Education Code (51938) mandates that parents/ caregivers be notified 15 days before classroom instruction about sexuality, human growth and development, including sexually transmitted disease/HIV infection. Further, parents/caregivers must be given the opportunity to review instructional materials and exclude their child from curriculum sections related to FAMILY LIFE AND SEXUALITY."
And here is their response:
"A discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning people does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life education and does NOT require parent notification according to the California Education Code."
It doesn't? On what planet!!!
Allow me to paraphrase. "We get to teach your kids whatever we want with or without your permission. If we have to say 'up is down' and 'black is white' to circumvent the law so be it. Its for their own good. We know what is best."
Good luck in Court. Maybe they can explain to you what NO means.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#8296 Nov 21, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
It's OK to pity gays but not cool to redefine marriage.
There is no reason to pity gays. Nor is there any reason to oppose marriage equality.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#8297 Nov 21, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>
Good luck in Court. Maybe they can explain to you what NO means.
They've explained it to you dozens of times. But you haven't been listening. So the courts will keep setting you straight.

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#8298 Nov 21, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
The legal rights of parents to be notified and having their children pulled from a classroom before they are subjected to gay propaganda in public schools...for starters.
They teach this which is all about gays and gay families:
http://www.healthiersf.org/LGBTQ/InTheClassro...
But the law says this:
"The California Education Code (51938) mandates that parents/ caregivers be notified 15 days before classroom instruction about sexuality, human growth and development, including sexually transmitted disease/HIV infection. Further, parents/caregivers must be given the opportunity to review instructional materials and exclude their child from curriculum sections related to FAMILY LIFE AND SEXUALITY."
And here is their response:
"A discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning people does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life education and does NOT require parent notification according to the California Education Code."
It doesn't? On what planet!!!
Allow me to paraphrase. "We get to teach your kids whatever we want with or without your permission. If we have to say 'up is down' and 'black is white' to circumvent the law so be it. Its for their own good. We know what is best."
Then by your standards no mention of even the concept of parenting can be mentioned. That would be a discussion of sexuality.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#8299 Nov 21, 2012
Not Yet Equal wrote:
A book by the Dominican missionary and Prior, Jacques Goar (1601-1653), includes same sex ceremonies in a printed collection of Greek Orthodox prayer books,“Euchologion Sive Rituale Graecorum Complectens Ritus Et Ordines Divinae Liturgiae”(Paris, 1667).
Another book by Gerald of Wales (‘Geraldus Cambrensis’) recorded same gender Christian sanctified unions also took place in Ireland in the late 12th and early 13th centuries.
"Historical evidence, including legal documents and gravesites, can be interpreted as supporting the prevalence of homosexual relationships hundreds of years ago, said Allan Tulchin of Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania.
Gay Marriage Is As Old As History www.gaychristian101.com/Gay-Marriage.html
Oh...well if its posted on " gaychristian101.com " then it must be true. I stand corrected.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#8300 Nov 21, 2012
DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>
Then by your standards no mention of even the concept of parenting can be mentioned. That would be a discussion of sexuality.
Its not my standard Dave...that is the actual wording from law in CA.

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#8301 Nov 21, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
Its not my standard Dave...that is the actual wording from law in CA.
I have no problem with the law in California. But what YOU want is to apply the sex education -- the class -- standard to anytime the mere mention of something gay or lesbian is touched upon in the classroom. Using YOUR standard, if it is to be applied equally, then there could be no mention of the concept of parenting because that would be a discussion of sexuality. If YOU want the ability to pull your child from a classroom anytime the mere mention of homosexuality comes into discussion, then that standard must then also apply to heterosexual topics as well.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#8302 Nov 22, 2012
DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with the law in California. But what YOU want is to apply the sex education -- the class -- standard to anytime the mere mention of something gay or lesbian is touched upon in the classroom. Using YOUR standard, if it is to be applied equally, then there could be no mention of the concept of parenting because that would be a discussion of sexuality. If YOU want the ability to pull your child from a classroom anytime the mere mention of homosexuality comes into discussion, then that standard must then also apply to heterosexual topics as well.
Everything you just assumed about me is false.

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? 4 min woodtick57 41
News 10 Questions for Christians Who Support Gay Mar... 5 min Belle Sexton 40
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 8 min Elven 33,998
News Mormon church backs Utah LGBT anti-discriminati... 8 min Termiraider 5,290
News Huckabee: 'Redefinition of love' threatens marr... 11 min Shinichiro Takizawa 26
News An East Tennessee store owner put up a 'No Gays... 12 min WasteWater 134
News Bakery ordered to pay $135,000 for denying wedd... 14 min WasteWater 7
News Same-sex marriage fight turns to clerk who refu... 16 min WasteWater 348
News Supreme Court extends gay marriage nationwide 18 min WasteWater 553
News Governors vow to fight SCOTUS ruling on gay mar... 35 min Rose_NoHo 733
News Gay marriage opponents propose 2 Colorado ballo... 1 hr Belle Sexton 31
News Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? (Sep '14) 1 hr Reverend Alan 7,054
More from around the web