Reba

I believe it's my duty to vote my conscience. It would be hypocritical of me to vote to pass a law that would support a behavior that I believe to be a sin.

Don't you also vote your conscience?

This is marriage:

Genesis 2:24
"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."

Matthew 19:4-5
"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?"

Mark 10:6-8
"But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh."

Ephesians 5:31
"For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh."


First of all, I don't attempt to dictate anyone's beliefs.

Secondly, I don't attempt to dictate legal rights; I vote just like all American citizens 18 years and older are allowed to do.

Don't you follow your personal beliefs when you vote?

No, Jesus never accepted the sin of homosexuality. Jesus never told his followers that they shouldn't participate in their country's government processes. He encouraged them to be good citizens.

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

TXgolfer

And the great thing about America is people are entitled to either opinion.

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

Jiro

I'm glad that our laws are created based on logic, not opinions otherwise we'd be stuck in time where slavery exists, no women's rights, etc.

__________________
- Don't forget to buy Jiro's Special Edition Sunglasses for $19.95

Sunshine

Problem with use Bible justify argument is many will argue Bible written by people long past. No proof Bible word of "God" and not John Doe, so how can use as fact?

Sunshine

And Reba, I really would like know even one way Leaf & James' marriage impact you.

TXgolfer

Actually those things were done away with by amendments which were voted on by congress who was elected by the people. So....

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

Reba

I have no idea who Leaf and James are.

This thread is not about naming people. It's about why people are against same-sex marriage.

Making same-sex marriages legitimate impacts me by making yet more sin sanctioned by government and society. That impacts my country and society, and not in a good way. It makes people comfortable with sin. It brings the world closer to the end times.

Sunshine

Leaf my brother. James his fiancé.

That last paragraph...you say this serious...? Or tongue-in-cheek?

With so much hatred, pain, ugliness in world...WHY we want say any love bad? Would not Christian thing be embrace love, any form? Admit not Christian, but I always think this point of having God...for love. No?

MDCodeRedFreak

Reba, regarding your comment about the world being "closer to its ending times," really?

I'm still not buying any of that BS about the world ending.

Take into account Jehovah's Witnesses, for example.

JWs, according to their history, sent out brochures about the world ending in 1890, then 1945, then 1975, then 1990, then twice this year (May 21st and Oct 21st - o.O) and will be in Dec 2012. You want a source?

former jehovah's witness - YouTube

former jehovah's witness - YouTube

Guess what? NOTHING HAPPENED! It's exactly why the Bible and religions are being ridculed - for inaccurate predictions.

And btw, I'm all up for gay marriage being legal - take the European Union, for instance. They are literally LIGHT YEARS ahead of the US when it comes to marriage equality that it's not even funny.

__________________
~The Code Red Freak

naisho

You shouldn't just lump all the Christians in one group. Jehovahs witnesses are actually not considered a denomination of the Christian movement/church, they are actually considered operating on some of their own accord and methods. Same goes for the Latter Day Saints.

It's kinda like saying ASL and SEE are the same group of people who share same same signs and cultures but it's actually not the same. Then you have something like cued speech where someone is deciding how this is better, but not everyone agrees with them.

Reba

Yes, really.

It's not BS but no one is forcing you to believe it.

I'm not a JW. Their beliefs and mine are not the same.

Camping isn't a JW.

The Bible says we can't know the date of when the Rapture will happen, which will precede the end of the world. It does say that the sinful conditions of the world will lead up to the end times. Obviously, as sin increases, the end draws closer.

Guess what? Most Christians follow the Bible and don't believe these false predictions. The Bible wasn't wrong. The Bible says man can't predict the date. It was individuals who were wrong. Don't blame the Bible for what some misled people do.

I agree. It's not funny in the least.

Steinhauer

I can name one way gay marriage effects others.

Why are we even discussing it? Why are children being pulled into the discussion?

Do parents have the "right" to train their children in spirituality and morals, or should we leave that up to the government?

I can tell you this right now - any actions that "dictate" what children should be taught about homosexuality will most certainly be considered an act of war.

KarissaMann05

I finally found one of few articles:

Liberty Counsel: Take Kids Away From Gay Parents : Dispatches from the Creation Wars

It is kinda of hard to find those articles like that. But that does happen...

posts from hell

looooooooooooool

dogmom

Jillio


The Bible could very well be wrong

religions are myths basically
stories
viewpoints
ways of perceiving something through a certain lens

your <general> lens is not mine and you have no right to make it such

Reba

That's not an example of kids being taken away from same-sex couples.

I asked for an example of kids being taken away from the custody of same-sex couples simply because the parents are gay.

So far, no examples of that happening.

If it happens, how come there are no articles about it?

rolling7

Dogmom,

Thank you for this post. I am in no way criticizing you, as you have the right to your viewpoints as always. You post validates my two points: you did intend to bring religion into this and you are pro gay marriage. If jillio can't accept that, using your own words, that is her problem.

jillio

That is your definition. Fortunately, there are others. Here is an example:

Marriage (or wedlock) is a social union or legal contract between people that creates kinship. It is an institution in which interpersonal relationships, usually intimate and sexual, are acknowledged in a variety of ways, depending on the culture or subculture in which it is found. Such a union, often formalized via a wedding ceremony, may also be called matrimony.

[B]People marry for many reasons, including one or more of the following: legal, social, libidinal, emotional, economic, spiritual, and religious. These might include arranged marriages, family obligations, the legal establishment of a nuclear family unit, the legal protection of children and public declaration of commitment.[1][2] The act of marriage usually creates normative or legal obligations between the individuals involved. In some societies these obligations also extend to certain family members of the married persons. Some cultures allow the dissolution of marriage through divorce or annulment.[/B]
[B]Marriage is usually recognized by the state, a religious authority, or both. It is often viewed as a contract. Civil marriage is the legal concept of marriage as a governmental institution irrespective of religious affiliation, in accordance with marriage laws of the jurisdiction.[/B
]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrimony

My conscious tells me that I am not so self centered in my focus as to believe that my way is the one and only true right way; especially when applied to people who have a very different existence than my own. My conscious tells me that it is a very dangerous thing to attempt to impose my particular belief system on others through force...which is exactly what attempting to enact law based on personal religious persuasion is. My conscious tells me actions such as that have had very, very harmful consequences throughout history and my conscious above all, tells me never to seek to do harm to others. Maybe your conscious tells you something different.

When you are attempting to determine the legality of something based on your own religious belief then you are indeed, attempting to dictate the behaviors of others based on your particular religious doctrine. I think Warren Jeffs is currently doing prison time for attempting same in a different situation.

Jesus accepted a great deal more than some people who identify as Christian give him credit for. He cautioned against judging others. And when you attempt to make illegal a behavior that you simply don't like because it goes against your orientation, then you are, in fact, pronouncing judgment.

jillio

You are quite welcome.

jillio

You are too funny. You seem to have completely missed the context of her post. She was thanking me for properly rephrasing and interpreting what she was saying.:lol

But, then, I am still waiting for you to cite objections founded on legal principles, and to list the negative impact on heterosexuals that has occured in the states that allow for same sex marriage. Guess you can't do that. Not surprising.

VacationGuy234

As for who votes for what and why, it is not the job of the public to refrain from how they vote which is the very basis of the democracy. It is the job of the constitution and the judiciary to keep in check tyranny of the minority or majority.

In the words of U.S. District Judge John E. Jones, who presided over the
intelligent design trial:
The framers of the Constitution, in their almost infinite wisdom, designed the legislative and executive branches under Articles I and II to be directly responsive to the public will. They designed the judiciary, under Article III, to be responsive not to the public will--in effect to be a bulwark against public will at any given time--but to be responsible to the Constitution and the laws of the United States.

While I agree with Jillio's position, the issue cannot, should not and will not be resolved through the vote mechanism. In fact, the state vote means nothing and many such votes have been overturned.

jillio

Yep. everyone is entitled to their opinion. They are just not entitled to use it to determine whether certain groups are openly discriminated against. Especially when that group has no impact whatsoever on the opinion holders life.

jillio

It would appear that some would not see a return to such times as objectionable.

jillio

I am in agreement with you regarding the issue of vote. This is not an issue that should be left to vote, any more than any other civil rights issue should be left to vote. That is the very process by which bigotry and prejudice becomes institutional.

jillio

Why can't people be named? Those homosexuals that are directly impacted by these attitudes are people; they are human beings who suffer the consequences. Perhaps if you put a face on that objection, it would be less easy for you to be so quick to judge.

jillio

Take James Camping as an example. He is certain the world is going to end sometime in the next few months. He just keeps getting his calculations wrong.

jillio

So name that way that it effects others.

Why are children being pulled into it? Go back and read my link. 1.2 million children of gay couples are suffering the consequences of the bigotry and intolerance that keeps same sex marriage illegal. You sir, are part of the group that denies these children the same benefits that you would demand for your own children. How selfish and self centered is that?

If you want to teach your future children that homosexuality is wrong, same sex marriage being legal will certainly not prevent you from doing so. For heaven's sake, there are still people that teach their kids that interracial marriage is wrong. Nothing about interracial marriage being legal has interferred with their right to do that.

You are still citing personal belief systems. Come up with a legal premise. Come up with a way that samwe sex marriage has a direct legal consequence for you. Come up with a single way that your rights will be taken away through the granting of the same rights to a marginalized population.

rolling7

You are right, I can not do that. Because you are asking an illogical question (not a suprise) that would require a crystal ball (something that does not exsist) to look into the future. Remember when booze and cigs. were make legal? Who could look into the future all the way to today and see all the harm that comes from appleasing a small section of the population. Many times in the pass people have spoken out against making a law, and were ridiculed for doing so, only to see time prove them right.

jillio

It doesn't require a crystal ball. It simply requires reading with comprehension.

Leave the strawmen out of your argument. We are discussing the ways in which legal marriage of same sex couples will remove any of your rights. Legalization of alcohol did not remove any of your rights. Cigarrettes being legal did not impinge on any of your rights. Legal marriage between two adults of the same sex will not remove any of your rights. If you cannot cite a single way in which legal marriage between same sex couples will have a negative impact on you personally, then the only conclusion that can be drawn is that your objection is based on a self centered need to demand rights for yourself that you judge others as being unworthy of. It is a matter of your moral imperialism, and that, my dear rolling, is completely unnacceptable as a justification for bigotry.

Thank you for confirming my point.

rolling7

"Properly"? Well I guess you should thank her for allowing you to put words in her mouth. I certainly wont allow you, nor anyone else, to do that to me.