|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Dec 9, 2008 9:16:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Dec 9, 2008 23:04:43 GMT -5
Nice mischaracterization of what St. Paul said, plus ignoring his condemnation of homosexuality. Ignores the St. Peter was married.
Pretty typical of the anti-religion segment of the progressives.
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Dec 10, 2008 16:11:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Dec 10, 2008 17:55:17 GMT -5
I think the big issue is over the use of the term "marriage."
The legislature could readily craft a law that would create a civil union between people of any sex, and would grant that union all of the rights of a marriage: health, survivorship, tax benefits, etc. That way, civil unions could remain the purview of the state, and marriage could remain a religious term.
The gays would never accept this, of course. Part of the campaign to grant gays the right to marriage is an attack on the religious foundations of marriage. If the gays would be satisfied with civil unions, all of this would go away.
If our legislature would do its job, we wouldn't be voting on this issue every 2 to 4 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Dec 10, 2008 18:21:34 GMT -5
Of course, if blacks would have just been satisfied sitting at the back of the bus and drinking out of a different water fountain we could have avoided all that trouble too.
You see, gay people are fighting for equal rights. Why should they have to call their loving, dedicated relationship something different? Their love is the same as the love felt between a heterosexual couple.
|
|
|
|
Post by barneyfife on Dec 10, 2008 19:46:29 GMT -5
Except for the fact that blacks are born black.
The science of homosexuality as a genetic trait is still infantile. And there are an equal amount of respected scientists on both sides of the spectrum.
Until it can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that being gay is in fact genetic, it's not a civil rights issue as much as you would like it to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by anonymousperson on Dec 10, 2008 20:06:41 GMT -5
Saunterelle, you're gay as well as just being your average idiotic libtard?
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Dec 10, 2008 20:12:07 GMT -5
*sigh* No anonymous, I'm not gay.
barney, the majority of gay people are born gay. Are you seriously claiming that being gay is a lifestyle choice? If it were, why would anyone choose that as their lifestyle?
|
|
|
|
Post by anonymousperson on Dec 10, 2008 20:15:24 GMT -5
Because being gay is the lifestyle choice of the gayleft, of which you're a card carrying member.
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Dec 10, 2008 20:24:39 GMT -5
First of all I am NOT gay either, but I agree that most "gay" people are born that way and it is unfair to exclude them from the rest of society as if they are deviant and sick.
|
|
|
|
Post by anonymousperson on Dec 10, 2008 20:27:32 GMT -5
Oooh. Unfair!!!!!!!!! Oh dear. Life is just too unfair, isn't it? Really unfair. Awww. You need a baby bottle?
Marriage is between a MAN & A WOMAN, not a tranny and his lez lover. Not 2 guys or more. That's the way it is, and we will CONTINUE to vote FOR marriage, and against the GAY AGENDA. Period! That's the way California is!
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Dec 10, 2008 20:34:20 GMT -5
anonymousperson, you are entitled to do as you wish. I choose to value and respect people despite their differences.
And boo hoo for you I am a 5th generation Californian and will vote according to my beliefs and respect for others...
|
|
