It must be an election year because ...

If you find one, they'll tell you all about it. I covered an event last year and sat with a person in the business that I consider a friend, and this topic came up. He's also a fundamentalist Christian and a fierce "values voter." He was dead serious in explaining to me that acceptance of homosexuality will lead to the downfall of the family structure. He firmly believes that it is the root of family issues in America - deadbeat dads, high divorce rates, etc., etc.

He also said that it is "proven" that "80 percent" of homosexuals were sexually abused as a child, and that by endorsing the "lifestyle," we are putting a stamp of approval on child abuse.

 

If by overly involved you mean overstepping its bounds in an attempt to establish just what it feels is marriage and isn't, just what is moral and isn't, then yes, it has.

Since you're one of those conservatives Trounced, please answer the question. Beyond the biblical standpoint, what is your objection to gay marriage and why would you support an amendment banning it (or, more specifically, establishing marriage as a union between a man and a woman)? How would a gay marriage or union threaten a straight marriage or union?

 

I've said throughout this thread that I don't support an amendment banning it. I just think it's morally wrong.

 

Las Vegas changed the dynamic, too. I don't exactly hear you calling for a federal ban in quickie marriages.

 

Then don't marry a man. Don't go to a church that would perform the ceremony.

Having said that, if anyone on this earth believes that marriage was invented by religion then they are some of the stupidest people ever. Marriage has been around as long as people.

Governments get involved because there are tax incentives. There is the issue of children and how to tax parents that carry the burden of children. There is the issue of immigration and how some people fall in love with someone from another country.

Government needs to be involved in this issue purely because marriage has NOTHING to do with religion. Some religions have adopted it and used it as some sort of sanctity of god. But in the end, they didn't invent it. They just adopted it.

If you pass this amendment you are advocating discrimination. You are basically saying, "I don't care about the person born differently." It is a crime.

 

Thank you Pastor. Thank you.
The casual attitude we take toward marriage as a society is laughable, but even more laughable, and criminal, are people who try to pick and choose what they're going to moralize, ignoring all other aspects of the same book they're thumping. If you're going to ban gay marriages, then let's pull up all those other laws from the Bible and write laws for them too. Otherwise, stay the hell out of people's businesses. They're the ones who have to deal with God, not you.

 

One thing I always wondered: Fundamentalists believe in a strict interpretation of the Bible, which is where calls for same-sex marraige bans come from.

The Bible says man should not lie with man, but says nothing about women and women.

Lesbianism: OK?

 

Lesbianism ok, eating pork and shellfish, not ok.
Jimmy Dean sausage = moral equivalent of taking it up the ass.
All those hot dogs you see bubbas slurping at ballgames?  May as well be cocks.
Clam-bake, gonna have a clambake?  Elvis, you degenerate, fat fuck.

If you read the Old Testament literally, that is.

 

Mmmmmm. Jimmy Dean sausage.
Bite me, Leviticus, I'm having me some for breakfast!
(Suggested new slogan from the folks down in Market Research.)

 

I have yet to hear an answer to the question of how, exactly, does allowing gay marriage threaten hetrosexual marriage. Show me a married couple that feels threatened by this and I'll show you a marriage that is in trouble under any circumstances.

 

In other news...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/05/terror/main1683852.shtml

You have to admire their timing.Those "US officials," that is.