Gay marriages expected to begin in Iowa April 24

Kleej - if your going to use your religious views to impose policy for the nation maybe you should be forced to come up with some evidence that your god is not imaginary.
.
Also no thanks I won't stop finger pointing for two reasons:
.
1. You guys keep telling me what's right and wrong and leading us into wars, killing, and extensive debates over simple things like gay marriage.
.
2. It is a great deal of fun.

I think gay marriage shuld b legal cuz its not up 2 ne 1 2 tell ppl if they shuld get married or not. Love is love regaurdless if its between men nd men or woman nd woman or a man nd woman.

700+ comments. i guess it shouldn't surprise me. i'm not sure why anyone would argue the value of marriage, or why religion should be dragged into it (indeed 60-70% end in divorce which is often not recognized by religion-only recognized by the person if it fits their preferrence) but if you want to be married then, by all means, let it happen. perhaps homosexuals can do it better than the heterosexuals. i believe the quality of the relationship is more important than the gender of the people in it. the jesus i came to learn about would, no doubt, would feel the same. peace!

Saint Mother Theresa the atheist. It has a nice ring to it.

Kleej make good point. He know good and bad. He good you bad. He right you wrong. You smart, Kleej no like smart. Smart bad. Kleej no like doctor. Doctor smart. Smart mean you think for yourself. God no like you thinking. God like dumb sheep. God no like dumb sheep.

Hopefully, the religious people will understand because they understand little else.

Go Ms. California!

DrTalk I assure you I am not persecuting you. You seem angry that I merely gave my input. You chose to become a Christian to believe in something bigger, I respect that. I am merely noting that Christians certainly do like to stray from "loving their neighbor as themselves" an awful lot. Gay, straight or otherwise what you are saying is that these people don't deserve to be happy. If marriage will make them happy you will deny them that? Intolerance of gays is wrong. Everyone deserves to be loved, and not judged, so we should treat gay people like everyone else. I understand asking for everyone to get along is a lot though.

Sorry prounion! Progress stopped when you so called intellects started coming up with your own versions of right vs wrong. You can dump your victim mentality any time now. I think it's so ironic how far this country has sunk over the years as God is slowly erased from the public's conscience. It's not a coincidence. You keep spewing your self serving garbage as you wish, no problem, but you can quit finger pointing at the Christian nation for the problems your world view has created for this country! I could care less that you're athiest or whatever, it still doesn't validate your lack of wisdom and your distaste for people who choose religion. It's called being self serving. You've mastered that no doubt.

Kleej if you could come up with a logical arguement that would stand up to any scrutiny beyond - the bible says so - for the existance of god, maybe then you would be wise. In the meantime - live and let live, stop interfering with progress.

No really Kleej we never would have guess. As far as wisdom is concerned, I do have faith that fortune cookies are wiser than you.

Zoom, true that. You no doubt would know all about pot's and kettle's and the color black!

prounion..the devout Christians don't lives based around being smart. It's something called wisdom. Something that seems to have eluded many of you in here.

Christians confused why the smart people don't buy their story - shocker.

"Can't you just live and let live? Is that so hard?"

pot....kettle

darwin..did your parents beat you silly as a kid and tell you it was God's will or something? I'm so amused at how someone can come in these blogs with such a plethera of information and yet is so lost when it comes to reality. Can't you just live and let live? Is that so hard?

You can't be bigoted against a lie which is what religion is anymore than the police can be bigoted against criminals.

For a better explanation of the interactions between majorities and minorities you might try reading John Stuart Mill's essay on Liberty.

darwin1,
Are you assuming only the majority is bigoted?
.
Just in case you're having definition problems again:
bigot: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices ; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
.
You're part of the atheist minority and your bigotry shows everytime you express your hatred of Christianity. You don't have to be a member of the majority to be a bigot.

I have one question for all of you that are pushing your views by stating that gay marriage is wrong. Religion is about believing in God and believing that he is the only one that can judge anyone, but why are so many of you sitting there stating that gay marriage is wrong?? I am Catholic I am happily married to a man but I have numerous gay friends that are completely in love with their partners. So how is that wrong??? Are they hurting you?? Are they taking anything away from you??? From your children??? So why does it matter to you??? I thought GOD is the only one that can judge anyone!?!?!? But maybe my religious beliefs are wrong and every one else in here that is all about pushing their beliefs on everyone else are right.

Latinmami~ Keep living your life by your beliefs and raising your children with your beliefs!!

kinsohn said: "As with anything, broadening the definition of marriage makes it mean less. "

What utter rubbish. Marriage is a social construct and nothing more. It means what it means only to the two people getting married, nothing more. I don't see any right wing crusades deterring no-fault divorce.

People get married for many reasons, money, love, sex (bad idea), children, sense of duty or responsibility, and many others. Narrow definitions of marriage only serve those that are fearful and close minded to restrict the rights of other human beings to be treated with dignity and respect. Two things I don't see very much around here.

Dr Talk, you are right. The courts have no place interpreting laws. Who do they think they are? One of the branches of government meant to make sure none of the other branches becomes to powerful and tries to take peoples rights away.

I agree with you, anything bigoted the majority of Americans want they should get.

kwebba said "When do we get to vote on heterosexual marrige, huh?Congratulations Iowa. Perhaps more states will follow in Iowa, Massachusetts and Connecticut's footsteps and will help to create a more equal America."
.
I think you mean when will the judges in this State take it upon themselves to overrule the will of the people and start allowing gay marriage.
.
This is from the article:"The Iowa Supreme Court on Friday unanimously upheld a lower-court ruling that rejected a state law restricting marriage to a union between a man and woman."
.
The judges clearly overstepped their bounds and legislated from the bench.

As a young adult in this community, it sickens me to see discussions such as this. Way to go, Janesville adults, for showing teens how the hate and drama of high school never go away. I feel that my peers are more mature and open-minded than any of you. Keep arguing over something that doesn't involve you, folks. You're sending a great message =].

Actually, your comment makes very little sense. Tell me, is it an indicator of your character or your IQ?

Christians have the cranial fortitude of a mayonnaise and cheese sandwich.

Can no one stick to the subject of the legality of gay marriage?
I'm out. Tired of the same old arguements that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.
I'm off to marry my dog with my brother as my bridesmaid, my daughter the ringbearer and my son the flowergirl-and it will not be in a church.
Good luck to all those who are now allowed to get married!!

kinsohn, your facts don't justify denying homosexuals their rights under the equal protection clause they justify denying rights to heterosexuals since your FACTS are based on heterosexual behavior. Right facts, wrong application.

To the religious right ALL slopes are slippery except the one that leads to a theocracy and inquisition of those not like them.

It would be broad and judgemental (not to mention incorrect) to say or imply that marriage meant more and more. Saying marriage means less and less to society is a factual statement by any measure: it is no longer seen as necessary before you have sex (rates of virgins before marriage are below 5% nowadays), it is decreasingly seen as necessary to have children (the illegitimacy rate has now hit 40% in the US, every year a record and rising fast), and the divorce rate is always climbing. By what measure can anyone say that marriage does not mean less?

And thank you for bringing up the subject of love: I love my sister and brother, mother and father, aunts and uncles, my cousins. Why shouldn't I be allowed to marry them? I mean, we're consenting adults, right?

As with anything, broadening the definition of marriage makes it mean less. I have presented several facts which are easily verified and have not seen any fact here or anywhere else backing up the misplaced hope that it weren't so. I wish throwing out vapid statements like "that's broad and judgemental" would help change reality. Unfortunately, it doesn't, and future generations are going to have to live with the consequences, much as children in inner cities (with illegitimacy rates of about 80%) already do.

When do we get to vote on heterosexual marrige, huh?

Congratulations Iowa. Perhaps more states will follow in Iowa, Massachusetts and Connecticut's footsteps and will help to create a more equal America.

Marriage means less and less to every generation? Such a broad and judgemental statement.

By allowing gay marriage-isn't making marriage mean nothing. Marriage is-or should be-about love. That's the point. If the many wives-or husbands-love their spouses and all the spouses are ok with the situation-then by all means do your thing.
If people are upset because these situations aren't within the traditional definition of marriage, they have to know that times are changing. If everything was like it was back whenever when-my married sisters should be barefoot and pregnant and I would be scorned by all for being a single mother (I may be scorned by some who pre-judge but most definately not by all).
Marriage is between the spouses-doesn't make less of your marriage. If you think it does-you may want to rethink YOUR vows.

Thank you for making my point: by allowing marriage to mean anything (one man one woman, two women, two men, one man several women, one woman several men, several men, several women), it means nothing. To the extent that any definitions are put around marriage, those definitions by their nature discriminate against relationships outside of the definition and are thus "bigoted."

It is no coincidence that those countries that permit gay marriage have lower marriage rates and higher illegitimacy rates (which, by the way, is the single largest cause of poverty in the U.S.) In Sweden, for example, most couples never marry!

Why? Marriage means less and less to every generation. Legalizing gay marriage, polygamy, polyandry, whatever else just speeds up the process.

Does a polygamous relationship really threaten anyone else's marriage?
*******************
it does not threaten anyone's marriage, the only thing that bothers me is when young teenage girls are being married off to a much older man

Press me about polygamy. I won't rail against it. I am for homosexual marriages as well. I can believe in one thing and not the other. Or I can believe in both. Or neither.
So now, to me, that arguement means nothing.
You are talking about those in favor of homosexual marriage instead of the topic OF homosexual marriage.

Why are we so afraid of polygamy and polyandry? By banning such marriages which are common elsewhere, aren't we unfairly discriminating against those who have different backgrounds than we do? Does a polygamous relationship really threaten anyone else's marriage? Unlike homosexual marriage, the Bible does not speak against polygamy. Those that promote homosexual marriage but rail against polygamy (when pressed) are just as "bigoted" as are those against homosexual marriage.

Why are we so afraid of same sex marriages? Is love not love no matter who is involved, same sex or not? Are we not taught as children that everyone is created equal and everyone has feelings no matter what? That is what we teach our children correct? We are taught that everyone is allowed to love whomever they want no matter what, love knows knows borders. There is no handbook for love, no right or wrong way for love and there is definitely no way for anyone to force there beliefs onto anyone else. Been a mother of two children I am very greatful for them openmindness that they do have. Yes we do believe that love is blind when is comes to male and female and colors and race and nationality and econoic standing and everything else that may stand in the way of getting to know the real the person. If one of my children were to be involved in a same sex relationship I would be proud and I would stand beside them and encourage them to be themselves. Why should they hide just because some people want to be ignorant and closemindedness?

dub 190
You asked, "What happens if everyone is gay? Do humans just become extinct?"

Same thing that happens if everyone becomes a nun or priest. Are you afraid of that too?

Just more nonsensical resistance to change that we always see from the imaginary friend folks. The Earth is the center of the universe, women should not be allowed to speak in church, women should not be allowed to vote, schools should be segregated, and also the sanctity of marriage should be protected. Tough crap folks, equality is coming, regardless of your collective imaginations.

There are two issues here: the views of the various religions and the rights granted by the states/feds. Today, when a couple wishes to announce to the community that they wish to spend their lives together, they get married. Along with that recognition of the relationship, legal rights are gained.

Perhaps it is time to split the definition of marriage by religious and legal views. If a church is against marrying same gender couples, they don't have to bless that union. The government should not be in the business of upholding religious viewpoints...they are in the business of defining legalities.

If one is against gay marriage, then don't marry someone of the same gender. If you wish to marry your mate, gender should not stand in the way. There are some religions out there who truly do practice tolerance & who recognize that marriage is about a loving, committed relationship.

Granting others the legal rights of marriage does not detract from your own marriage. Your marriage is not threatened by allowing gays to marry.

Perhaps the real issue is fear that gay marriage may end up more solid than our current state of marriage. If you don't feel that fear, then why would you deny others the joy you find in your marriage?

darwin1:"DrTalk tell it to the Jews who lived."
.
Tell the Jews that persecution is persecution no matter what the size of the group that is being persecuted? I'm sure they already know that. Here let me post the definition of persecute and you tell me where either the size of the group doing the persecuting or the size of the group being persecuted is mentioned:
"1: to harass or punish in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict ; specifically : to cause to suffer because of belief2: to annoy with persistent or urgent approaches (as attacks, pleas, or importunities) :"
.
"Your persecution is like your god: a delusion."
.
Maybe here in America persecution might be too strong of a word, but in the rest of the world Christians get killed for they're beliefs.

DrTalk tell it to the Jews who lived.

Too bad during the Dover trial it was the scientists whose lives were threatened and not the other way around.

Your persecution is like your god: a delusion.

DrTalk, you appropriately include yourself in the same ilk as TURTLE guy -you are both opposed to the use of the intellect.

darwin1,
You're having a problem with the definition of words again. The size of a group doing the persecuting doesn't matter. It's what the group does that qualifies as persecuting.

"THANK YOU FOR THAT LONG DRAWN-OUT INTELLECTUAL GARBAGE GAZETTEFAN." -iLIKEturtles.
.
I agree with iLIKEturtles that it's intellectual garbage but I won't thank you for it gazettefan.

One of the preachers makes a spurious statement that blames low church attendance on modern culture.

This heterotaxy of cause and effect is a classic example of the sophistry that passes for wisdom by religionists.

Culture is a manifestation of what humans are and what humans want. Humans formerly wanted the contrivance of religion because certain decisions were too difficult to make. Now humans make the decisions that they formerly relegated to religion. Religion has nothing left to offer. That's why people don't go to church. Religion has failed humans. This is the exact opposite of what the preacher claims.

The principals of this story, by omission, unwittingly acknowledge the above truth: note that none of the preachers stated the consequences of not going to church more than twice a year, or not going to church at all, for that matter. No hint of punishment; especially the big punishment of eternal damnation spent in a fiery hell. Humans don't need this threat anymore to be good. Religion has nothing to offer as a motivation to be good. The preachers, on some level, know this. So they verbally dance around the attendance problem with a bunch of falderall about christians needing to attend church to learn of the christianity of each other.

This means the preachers are attempting to discover what humans want. The preachers are attempting to compromise (this is proof positive that religion and god are man-made). They are turning their backs on the threat of god and scripture that states that the failure to show proper respect for god will result in severe punishment for the non-compliant.

The preachers are sensing the real reasons people attend church nowadays. It's merely a social event that has nothing to do with religion, god, and the supernatural. One of the preachers even alludes to the idea of church attendance being a party. And that's what people want: a party. But know this mr. preacher: parties are supposed to be fun. You have nothing to offer us anymore.

Dr. Talk thinks that as part of the majority he his persecuted by the minority. This is same mentality the Nazis had towards the Jews and homosexuals. Good job. Jesus would be proud.

Three topics one should never bring up:
1. Religon
2. Politics
3. Sex

There are no right or wrong answers therefore everybody is either right or wrong regardless of what is said and nothing changes.
Reading the comments has proven that.

Who really cares and who are we to judge? If people care about each other let them do what they want to do, the almighty will judge all of us in the end. In the mean time if they want to get married and share benefits (health insurance for instance) let them, more power to them.

prizefighterinferno:"Although perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps gay people CHOOSE to be gay so they can be discriminated against, perhaps gay people CHOOSE to be gay so they are hated by others, and perhaps gay people CHOOSE to be gay so they can be denied basic rights like marriage, a civil union whatever you want to name it."
.
And perhaps I chose to become a Christian so I could be persecuted by people who think differently than I do. Sounds like you're just as hypocritical and intolerant as you claim Christians to be.

justsaynotomath:"Dr.talk, NO you missed the entire point ! i shouldn't have to be gay to marry the same sex. as an American i should be able to marry any human i want for any reason!"
.
So you have reasons for making your choices. You have reasons for choosing to support gay marriage. But, you're one of the few that advocate for marrying "any human." That would not be equality since heterosexuals cannot marry close relatives.

Another Interview With God:
http://www.wayofthemaster.com/intervieww...

Which number on the ten is homosexuality? Is it a real sin or is it a Mother Theresa is going to burn in hell sin because she didn't really believe in god even though she was a kind decent person, sin. You know a technical sin bigots use to discriminate and act like Nazis and not figuratively but rather factually like Nazis.

Fool: :) Do I detect a southern drawl there with y'all? Hee hee I say that alot but don't hear it much up here.

I figure we are who we are and the great thing is God loves us all (despite our flaws) and for that I am thankful. :)

Have a blessed and wonderful Easter!!

Sounds like a reasonable perspective, ncpanfan. I'd like to propose a partial solution to this conflict. Something you might consider discussing with your follow believers over the Easter holiday.

Why don't y'all come up with new terms or phrases to distinguish the state of being homosexual from the practice of homosexuality? In this way, you could retain your religious integrity with regard to sin while, at the same time, expressing compassion for someone who --for all you, I or anyone knows-- is simply the person they were made to be.

Not a complete solution but, in my opinion, a win-win step in the right direction.

fool: I think you are correct in your understanding. We all have choices to make on a daily basis. When faced with a situation do we decide to do right or wrong. The problem starts when what one might consider wrong, another does not and the arguing begins.

I am a christian but I am far from perfect. I have no right to judge others, that is not my place. I have a gay couple that are friends of ours. They are wonderful people and great to be around. While I don't necessarily agree with their lifestyle, I don't preach at them either. I accept them the way they are as they accept me the way I am (flaws and all) :)

Don't you people know that traditional marriage is between one man and one woman.
***************************
times are changing and it is no longer that way. I think once people realize this it will make things a little easier for everyone. I am straight I have a husband, but I would never hate another couple or even dislike them just because they are same sex, that is their choice, their live style, does not make them bad people at all.

I don't think the religious position regarding choice has anything to do with drives or urges. What they are saying is, I think, that choice comes in whether or not you express those urges. In other words, one should chose to repress them, not express them. Please correct me if I am wrong, believers.

(I'm not supporting their case, just trying to confirm my understanding of it.)

Don't you people know that traditional marriage is between one man and one woman. Republicans have to have this otherwise they would have to marry their mistresses and or gay lovers too. What a slipperly slope, quite literally, that would be.

You preach love, now practice it.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
this is right, all the people preaching but most of them sound full of anger not love, they seem like they are not happy with what they believe in, maybe they don't want gay people to be gay because gay people are probably happier than they are.

"You make some excellent point about homosexuality being a choice"

To DrTalk, and the rest of you who think this, you may want to further investigate. I certainly am not convinced being gay is entirely a choice, although certain aspects of it can be. Although perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps gay people CHOOSE to be gay so they can be discriminated against, perhaps gay people CHOOSE to be gay so they are hated by others, and perhaps gay people CHOOSE to be gay so they can be denied basic rights like marriage, a civil union whatever you want to name it. Open your eyes and your mind. "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Mohandas Gandhi

In no way am I attacking you, or the Christian faith, I am merely telling you what really happens. You preach love, now practice it.

GO, Iowa! Love is love.

Another reason why ALL must fight for equality. Separate but equal doesn't cut it. Only true equality is acceptable!

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/cnn-news...

Congrats Iowa! Now I have a reason to visit! :)

LATIN....sure did! I am thinking there is merit to the timing...don't you?
******************
i think it is good timing and it is something that will probably happen everywhere. For all of the religious people you may not like it but you will just have to deal with it. The funny thing is when I think of people being religious I think that they are probably kind hearted people who won't turn their backs on anyone and always want to try and help people. But since this forum has opened up I have noticed it is not that way. Religion has seemed to cause some people to be more evil thinking and heartless than most other people. I am not saying everyone who is religious acts like this but there is a handfull on here that are cold and heartless and seem like they don't have one caring bone in their body.

Faith groups increasingly lose gay rights fights

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30146878/

LATIN....sure did! I am thinking there is merit to the timing...don't you?

for all you religious wisconsin people did you see the other article today i hope that they pass the law and grant the same sex marriages here as well. lol

Lovetoscrap:
I think it's wonderful that you value your rights.
I bet gays do as well, or their lack thereof, I should say.

Sorry, it's been a long day. That post was directed to Nanny.

Nancy, I think we're about all argued out over this matter. I will never condone gay marriage. I will vote against it every time I have the opportunity. You may do the opposite of me or as you wish. You may call me names because I have the right to disagree with you. That is your right. I will cling to my rights while I still have them.

NANNY, very well said, and I along with you sympathize with those individuals also that have to deal with bigots and hatefulness on a daily basis. Just know you are all loved in our home and hearts! Prayers to you all!!!

Coming from a straight woman, with a LOT of gay friends, who flew out to Utah and California to assist in protesting the debacle that occurred there in the previous months....

I'm thinking that the "anti-gay-marriage" folks don't *think* they know a whole lot of gay people, where this would be a pertinent topic in their lives- and because of this, boy, you are LOUD about your protest that "it just isn't RIGHT!". I think those people should think again. I would urge you to scrutinize your own family, the grocery store clerk, your waiter, your florist, your finance accountant, etc. Gay people are *everywhere*. 10% of the population is a gross underestimation if we were to really swing open the closet doors and bring everyone out of hiding. And guess what? Everyday those people are NOT treated equally to you. This is 100% a civil rights issue.

I also think you are not understanding the difference between the term "wedding" and "marriage." Wedding ceremonies are generally held under "the eyes of God" in a religious type ceremony. The term "marriage" is a *contract* made in due form of law, by which free people reciprocally engage to live with each other during their joint lives, in the union of all things marriage, ie all of the legal benefits and entitlements provided to married couples.

Throughout the course of time, PRIOR to Christianity, there was marriage. So please spare us all the "God is marriage" soundtrack. Because it's not. And it never has been.

Marriage and wedding are not synonymous.

And please- to all of those who start going on about marrying goats, dogs, sisters and such... a giant "LOL" to you.

We're talking about people's lives, the short window you have on earth to find someone that you truly connect with and feel at one with. Why can't we just treat all relationships, between all people, equally. Doesn't seem that hard to understand. To all of the gay folks reading this... I truly am sorry that you have to live life each day with so many bigots in the world. It's unfortunate. And one day it won't be that way. This parallels much of what the Birmingham day racial riots were all about. We'll get there. Slowly, but surely.

I don't consider myself adding to scripture nor teaching anything. Just my own interpretation. We all can look at the identical thing and come to completely opposite conclusions. And I suppose until I truly make it to where I am suppose to go, I will probably contradict myself along the way, being I will learn new things everyday that may result in what I knew yesterday to be false. :)

Rummage...it could be questioned as to whom you are getting the help from. Since you are adding to scripture I would really question it before you tell someone it is right. You will be held accountable for incorrect teaching.

Rocky: Yes, Joint Ownership with Right of Survivorship is an option for real estate and such. Again, though, we are forcing same-sex couples to incur legal expenses that are not required for heterosexual couples in order to achieve the same benefits. And, for what reason?

Another big benefit that I missed is hospital visitation. Absent marriage, my brother (the bigot) for example, could prevent his son's partner (if he is ever fortunate to get past his father's hate and FIND a partner) from visiting. And, although I encourage everyone to have a Health Care Directive, wherein my nephew could designate his mate as his health care decision maker, that only becomes effective in the event of "persistent vegetative state," typically. And, of course, my brother could challenge even that document.

Then, too, a Will is contestable in probate, whereas marriage rights of inheritance are not.

Dr.talk, NO you missed the entire point ! i shouldn't have to be gay to marry the same sex. as an American i should be able to marry any human i want for any reason !

I just got this email. And I had to share because I believe it fits this discussion PERFECTLY!
http://www.theinterviewwithgod.com/popup...

Maryann, I am asking you for clarification here. In my heart what you wrote supports 'be as you may', if you will. That is MY interpretation. Is that what you are saying, and how you view it, or are you opposing my suggestion? If so, that is of no offense to me, I am just pointing out how differently one person to the next can perceive the scriptures of the bible. I think it is where your personal heart is, that determines what the scripture says to you, and how your personal relationship with 'your' father evolves. I do think that the scripture that states to love your Lord you will follow his ten commandments. (I don't have my bible in front of me, so I can't quote it exactly). And that to me can only be taken ONE way, which it to read the ten commandments, and follow them the best you can, and if I am not mistaken, loving a person of the same sex is not listed in the text as you read it. But of course, a person could perceive it to be there in their own heart. And my perception of him telling those who chose not to live his word will burn as twigs in a fire, is that fire represents our own haste and unforgivness of our own soul. Until we can let go of perceived judgments on OURSELVES we will be burning in that pit of despair and until we live the word and walk to the walk of peace, we will not know the word of God. (((I don't really know how this in depth of talk is coming to me, because as I have said before I don't attend church nor read the bible on a regular basis...I guess I am getting a little help...hehe).

And while you're reading that verse, read the ones before it. John 14:23-27, addressed to the apostles before they were sent out into the world to be persecuted:
Jesus replied, "If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.

All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.

This just came to me.... read John 14:27 and for all of you being attacked, take pride in that! :)

Cooper - thanks for the reply. Yeah, just "sin of homosexual acts' is a pretty weak argument. Nice to be able to agree there.

---

I'd have to consult with a lawyer friend of mine to find out more about determining inheritance rights in Wisconsin. You are correct in stating that it is automatic in marriage, but I find it difficult to believe that it is impossible to draw up a partnership contract that gives joint ownership of property with right of survivorship that avoids probate. I believe this could be done through a trust, but, again, I'm not a lawyer and would need to confirm this. So yes, a non-traditional couple does face obstacles (Including, possibly, probate) to obtain the same or similar right of married couples, . To me, however, that is not a compelling reason to change the definition of marriage. I would, however, not object to the establishment of a "civil union" that gave those rights (except that our amendment forbids it), just don't call it "marriage".

copperguy,
Here's the part in 2 Cor 6:14 that applies:
"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers"
.
So Christians should marry Christians and non-Christians should marry non-Christians.

Congratulations Iowa!

Copper..I loved that story. And I totally agree with Pastor Bills' philosophy! We aren't the ones who have the job, he does. :)

Again, not that it matters, but I went home last year for the retirement of the pastor I grew up with at my Christian church. I got to town a few days early to visit with family. I had also made an appointment to visit with Pastor Bill on his last day in the office. He was (and remains) very important to me since he was there through all of the deaths and other troubles of most all of my life.

I know that when our denomination first wrestled with gay issues, Pastor Bill was adamant about he "hate thin sin but love the sinner" view. At the time, he was strongly against ordination of gays. So, I was very eager to revisit the issue.

To my surprise, he offered what I think was a most moving reflection. I won't bore anyone with the details, only the finish. His view reflected what I think Jesus himself would have cautioned: Pastor Bill said something along the lines of, "If given the option of erring on the side of brotherly love and compassion or the side of improperly judging, I think God would rather I leave the judgement to Him."

Boy, do I miss Pastor Bill!

Sadly, the Bible gives no guidance on how to vote, so we have to work out our salvation ourselves in that realm. And while we're both sure God won't judge me for compassion, I'm quite wary on how He views my support of others' sin.

If I am wrong, God forgive me for my stupidity.

We all know homosexual unions will be legal everywhere in the not-so-distant future. So my opinion, no matter how lousy people think it is, will no longer matter. I hope if nothing else came out of this discussion, I hope people can see that my actions are not out of hate.

Peace to you, too, Copperguy. And thanks again for the discussion.

Bucky: I am most certainly not the one you will look to for spiritual guidance. But, for what it's worth, I am absolutely convinced that God will NOT judge you poorly for your compassion toward your fellow man!

Again, Peace!

Yep, you’re right, copperguy. The verses don’t speak of non-believers specifically (and as you noted, I did not say it did).

But, as you also say, it speaks of men married only to women, which is what is always addressed through the Bible. So the word of God implies rather strongly that marriage is only between a man and a woman. I would deign to say then that marriage between two men or two women is a sin in and of itself (sex act or no). And if it is a sin in and of itself, then I would be wrong to condone it.

Sorry rummagesalesrock, that nullifies your idea.

And as I said in a more recent post, if homosexuals are given the right to marry, I would not challenge it.

I GOT IT!!!! How about they place a clause on homosexual marriage licenses that say, you may be married, but you MUST abstain from any and all sexual activity. Then to all you Christians who state this is a sin could be all warm and fuzzy knowing that there was nothing unspeakable happening. Wow. How simple is that? LOL

Rocky: My point (and it seems to me that you agree), is that people use the "PRESUMED sin" of homosexual sex is reason to deny same-sex marriage licenses. And, to use "sin" as the rationale for denial is hypocritical since, as you say, all are sinners (Even Christians). So, if one uses the argument of, "I think that the two to be married are engaging in sin (i.e. homosexual acts), and they are therefore ineligible to be married," then that ineligibility extends to ALL PEOPLE, since all are sinners. Again, a marriage license is NOT a state authorization to have sex. It is a state authorization to become a couple committed to love, nurture, aid, assist, etc..

I wrote earlier about the expense and "bother" required to gain some of the rights of marriage through contract, instead. That is a burden that is being placed inequitably just because the same-sex couples are not like "most people."

Most importantly, I spoke of the right of inheritance. With a married couple, everything is held jointly, by law. When one spouse dies, the other becomes sole owner of everything...no lawyers, no probate court, etc..

That is a function that CAN NOT be achieved EXCEPT through marriage.

Cooper

I've really been loathe to get into the religious aspects of this discussion because I think is the weakest point to be made against gay marriage. I actually pretty much agree with you that if the only opposition is religion, then it should be dropped (the opposition, that is).

So my comments on religion are not said as arguments against gay marriage, but to address issues of the Christian faith, alone, OK?

--

Your comments in ####
Non-Christians are sinners, according to your faith. Since the passage you have quoted speaks of "half-Christian" marriages, we are still left with the "sinfulness" of non-Christian couples. #### True that the faith considers all sinners (Romans 3:23), even Christians are sinners, including married Christians. The sin nature is not related to marriage or non-marriage in any way. The difference with Christians is that they have accepted God's free gift of forgiveness and salvation by accepting the substitutionary act of Christ.

---

####And, again, if your opposition to same-sex marriage is based on the supposed condoning of the sexual sin, then you MUST oppose non-Christian marriage licenses as well. To do otherwise is complete hypocrisy, since sin IS sin. #### See, there is where you lose me. The non-Christian marriage is not, ever, called sinful. The people are sinners, but it is not the marriage that is the sin. (see above)

---

###If you are not opposed to the State issuing marriage licenses to non-Christian couples, then it is total hypocrisy to oppose the State issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.### See above. Sex OUTSIDE marriage is considered sinful. Sex WITHIN the bounds of matrimony (as defined man/woman) is not, even when between unbelievers. (Yea, God!)

----

###The marriage license extends rights and priveledges under the law, some of which CAN NOT be obtained even through the most well-executed legal document in existence. Not through contract, not through a will, nowhere.#### I'm listening.....such as?

very well said copper

OK. I saw nothing in the 2 Cor. passage that seems to apply.

In the 1 Cor. passage, as you indicated earlier, Buckyfan, it does talk about couples where one is a Christian and the other not. I agree with you there.

It does not seem to me to address a union of non-Christians. That is what I rather supposed from your earlier post, and it seems to be confirmed.

So, again, you fall back on the biblical address of husband and wife. But, there still is the problem that I spoke of earlier, where both are non-Christians.

Non-Christians are sinners, according to your faith. Since the passage you have quoted speaks of "half-Christian" marriages, we are still left with the "sinfulness" of non-Christian couples.

And, again, if your opposition to same-sex marriage is based on the supposed condoning of the sexual sin, then you MUST oppose non-Christian marriage licenses as well. To do otherwise is complete hypocrisy, since sin IS sin.

If you are not opposed to the State issuing marriage licenses to non-Christian couples, then it is total hypocrisy to oppose the State issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Again, this is not condoning the assumed "sinful act" of the couple. Rather, it is "loving the sinner while hating the sin."

The marriage license extends rights and priveledges under the law, some of which CAN NOT be obtained even through the most well-executed legal document in existence. Not through contract, not through a will, nowhere.

I was thinking 1 Cor. 7. Check out verses 1-17.

copperguy,
the verse is 2 Corinthians 6:14.

Buckyfan: One other thing...could you narrow down to at least the chapter in 1 Cor. that discusses marriage of non-Christians?

Thanks, again!

Before I say what I have to say here, let me first say this: I fight with everything I have to avoid typecasting folks. I know that classifying people on any basis is unfair. It was my lapse in that regard that caused you to "enter the fray" here. So, sometimes some good can come from an error.

Having said all of that (and take this in the spirit in which it is intended), I have to say that folks like you, buckyfan, are a great reminder of why NOT to typecast! There very much is a difference between a devotionally solid Christian versus those who really seem to hate in Christ's name. Again, thank you!

Oooh, opening a whole new can of worms. Divorce is always OK, it's the remarriage or dating after divorce part that gets sticky...

Thank you, too, copperguy for considering my arguments. I really enjoy discussing/debating with reasonable people who have rational arguments because it makes me think about what I believe and why. And I have taken a valuable piece of reasoning from our discussion.

As a side note, I concluded years ago, after reflecting on debates such as this, that if homosexual marriage becomes a law, I will not protest or fight against it.

I was tempted to write that many times in this thread, but I didn't want to muddy our debate. My only stopping point has always been the voting part. If this nation so chooses to legalize homosexual marriage, it would be no different to me than living in a country that allows abortion, pornography, divorce (except in cases of adultery), etc.

If marriage was intended to create more people, then all married heterosexual couples should be having children. Give married couples a 3 year grace period to start a family and then fine them every year they don't have kids. Sound ridiculous? You bet it does. Not all couples want or can have children. Does that mean their marriage shouldn't count? Any legal adult should be allowed to marry any other legal adult of their choice.

Likewise, buckyfan, you have me with that. I can't presume to know scripture, but I may read that section for context.

What I will leave you with is this: I don't think God will judge you harshly for extending a loving, "brotherly" compassion toward your fellow man.

I've given you some food for thought, and I thank you for reading and "listening" with a somewhat open mind. Peace.

copperguy: You make an excellent case for your thesis. Sure am glad I'm not arguing against YOU! (Note to self.)

VERY good argument, copperguy: In other words, non-believers are still sinning whether they are married or not, just as homosexuals are still sinning, married or not. Hard to argue against that.

But the bible speaks of non-believers marrying (1 Corinthians, for example, references new believers who are married to non-believers—so at one time they were both non-believers), it doesn’t speak of homosexual marriage.

All references of marriage are between a man and a woman. And because the bible also says homosexuality is a sin, I’m stuck believing that God doesn’t approve of homosexual unions. So, I’m still stuck.

It nice to see that Iowa is not in the stone age and allows equal rights for everyone.

Indysgirl, great posts yesterday.

for all the people who have problems with same sex marriages it really is not your problem to worry about you are not on either side of the wedding party so don't worry about what the happy couple will be doing with the rest of their lives happily married legally

Tatersmom: You are correct. And, to invoke religion as an argument against allowing one class of citizens to marry, while not invoking for another class, is hypocritical.

There is no "sin-o-meter."

Dr. Talk

I don't care what your bible says, a sin is a sin. For one sinner to judge another sinner is hypocritical, but I am sure you have another quote you can share with us to excuse that too. Who has the right to judge whether or not one sin is worse than another? Anyways, this article is about marriage which has nothing to do with religion unless you choose to make it about religion. Like I said, religion isn't a requirement for marriage so why are you all preaching? Marriage can happen in a court house, on a beach, in Vegas, and etc. and religion is in no way involved.

Those with any sin have no right to judge others, period, especially about what they do in the privacy and safety of their own home, among consenting adults
***********
this is very true and i do not know one person religious or not that is perfect and sin free

I will agree with your assertion that allowing non-Christians to immigrate gives you and others the opportunity to reach out to them. However, I doubt that ANY of those seeking to immigrate are so seeking in order to have Christians proselytize them. Some may be seeking our Nation's "freedom of religion," but not specifically to have Christians try to convert them.

You shoot a gaping hole in your theories, though, when you grant them the right to marry. Your argument is that homosexuality is a sin, so allowing the right to a legal instrument called a marriage license is condoning their alleged sinfulness and therefore wrong in God's eyes.

The conflict you create is this: Non-Christians are also sinners by the Christian definition. By allowing them the right to marry, you are condoning their sin, and condoning them potentially bringing offspring into this world who - following in their parent's guidance - are likely to become non-Christian. If you are afraid of God's ire, then non-Christians should ONLY be allowed to marry if they first convert to Christianity. Otherwise, you are condoning the "sinfulness" of their faith.

The point is, you can't have your cake and eat it too. There is no such thing as a "sin-o-meter." If your argument is that allowing same-sex couples to marry is condoning the sin in your eyes, that same argument ABSOLUTELY MUST apply to non-Christians. Otherwise, you are condemning yourself to an eternity in hell for condoning a marriage of sinfulness.

If you believe homosexuality is wrong, you have every right to belong to a Church which shares that belief. Time and time again, the "liberal" courts have ruled that they can not intercede in the beliefs of a Church. They can not enforce non-discrimination laws in Church employment or any other matter. THAT is where you "vote" against sinfulness. Not in granting freedoms or in inflicting national or legal oppression.

What your argument accomplishes is to rationalize your desire to oppress. It gives you a false sense of security by cloaking that oppression in your faith.

I'm saying that not to be mean-spirited. Rather, I am simply attempting to get you to open your eyes to the reality of the myth you have been led to believe.

I have no doubt that you are an absolutely sincere, devout Christian, and one who would not willingly engage in oppressive behavior. I am hopeful that I have given you some food for thought, and that you will somehow be able to - one day - realize that your faith in God is good and wonderful but it has been used to distort your own view of your behavior and attitudes in SOME areas.

justsaynotomath, if that ever happens, can I stop over for an occasional visit?

It talks about sin period. Just as Jesus asked those without sin cast the first stone.
Those with any sin have no right to judge others, period, especially about what they do in the privacy and safety of their own home, among consenting adults.

Tatersmom:"For all of you proclaimed Christians, weren't you taught that it was a sin to judge others? "
.
Oh good, someone else that misquotes that verse. That verse in context talks about judges others when we're committing the same sin.
.
"1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." Matthew 7:1-5

Copperguy: I will address your post from last night first. Bear in mind this is my thinking; I do not speak for other Christians… Let me explain how I was saved. I was a supervisor at my place of work and became friends with a conservative Christian who worked there. I knew she was a Christian and asked her all kinds of crazy questions about what she believed. She answered every one very nicely, and in spending time with her, I grew to really respect her and enjoyed her company, even though I didn’t agree with her beliefs. It was that relationship that caused me to really start looking at what the Bible said. And it is in that same way that I try to reach out to others (including Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, etc.). So, no, I would never prevent any non-believer from coming to this country; it gives me opportunity to share my faith with them in the same way my dear friend shared it with me.

I also believe through all the examples in the Bible that marriage is between a man and a woman, so I would never stand in the way of a man and woman (believer or no) from marrying. Besides, no person is without sin, so if Christians were to stand in the way of sinners getting married, no one (not even they themselves) would ever get married. Where I draw the line, though, is that I cannot vote for something that I believe goes against God’s word. Simply put, the difference for me is that sinners marry, but when the marriage itself is sinful, I cannot vote for it because I feel I will be judged by God for my actions.

In regards to your second post: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” that’s an interesting argument, but from what I’ve seen, the amendment states government can’t establish a state religion or make a law that would block religious groups. But people in those religious groups must operate within the law. So, people are arrested for practicing polygamy, child marriages and molesting children, but the church is allowed to continue.

I agree that no religion should be the arbiter of laws. That doesn’t mean that people should not be allowed to vote according to their faith. And because some Christians believe that the moral decay of a country directly correlates with the moral decay of Christians, it doesn’t stand to wonder that many fight against laws they see as morally wrong.

justsaynotomath:"i have been married for well over a decade and if my husband and i ever divorced i would shack up with a chick for sure. see i don't need a husband i want my husband and if he were not here any longer i would not marry another man. i would however get a female roommate and if being married helped our living situation that should be my choice ! not the government! stay out of my house and mind your own freaking business !"
.
You make some excellent point about homosexuality being a choice.

Wow, I can't believe the narrow-mindedness that I am reading here. After all, religion is not a requirement for marriage so why is religion even being discussed? I don't care what anybody's religion says, if it isn't a requirement than why even discuss it?

The only thing I will agree with is that gay people definitely affect our lives. You see gay people are doctors, nurses, policemen/women, firefighters, lawyers, and etc. These gay people are also sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, and so on. You get the picture. Other than that, these people cannot affect your lives unless you let them.

For all of you proclaimed Christians, weren't you taught that it was a sin to judge others? After all, if it is because of a sin that you go to hell then I guess that's where you'll be going also!!

It is being argued that people are not born gay, so how can we argue that people are born straight? After all, it is only a mindset right? As for people growing up to be gay because of how they are raised, you are wrong. I have three siblings, and one of them is gay. We all grew up in the same house, with the same parents, same rules/expectations and etc. So what are you saying? That my parents secretly raised and treated my sibling different than the rest of us? Jeez, I think some of you should get your nose out of the bible and quit preaching because it isn't making you any smarter! People need to use that which is extremely lacking....common sense.

I congratulate all the gays who are happy and living their life according to what makes them happy, instead of what society says will make them happy. I support my gay sibling 100% because I am secure and happy with who I am and don't need to judge other people to bring me happiness.

Are there multiple versions of the sin-o-meter, or just one? Can I get one at Wal Mart? Are batteries included, and is any assembly required?

COPPER....that would be the sticker wearing Christian way. Those are the ones that sit in CHurch every Sunday, sing their pretty little hymns, and claim to be a Christian because they do what society tells them to do. They lack the knowledge that our temple resides within. They don't feel any better leaving church then they did arriving. But by golly they have their little bumber sticker on their car, so they must be living the Christian life right? So many hypocrites thats for sure. And I am not saying anyone is "wrong" I am just saying, come on now, let's be consistent with our believes. If there is contradiction among oneself, then obviously they are confused in their own beliefs. So, next time maybe try a tattoo. LOL

This is all reminding me of a that famous Tshirt saying, "My daddy's stronger than your daddy". We all think "our" father is the best father, and really, he is! And no one else has the same relationship with "your" father as you do. Right?

Mikki: Isn't that the "Christian" thing to do: Pick and choose what parts of the Bible to follow and the particular groups to oppress?

You goof balls are still at this? :) Oh boy. Remember, you might think you believe something, but your mouth speaks the truth of your heart. And if there is negativity coming out of your mouth, then your heart is not full of the word as it should be, because the word is not negative. The sins of your fellow man are between them and God. It is not for us to decide. Others are NONE of our business....we have only one person to be responsible for, ourselves. So, no amount of bickering is going to solve this "mystery" or "problem". So you all might want to just let it be....remember the Beatles song? LOL?!

LMAO....you will eat lunch with two lesbians even though the Bible tells you not to, in the verse you quoted?
SO...you pick and choose what parts of the Bible to follow?

You are talking about judging people inside "a" church.
So don't eat with them! Nobody's asking you to!
But I would REALLY hope you're not comparing yourself to one of the disciples. Because honestly, I highly doubt you'd come close to measuring up.

i can see where you are coming from Rocky, I think it is totally fine not to agree with a person's sexual preference, as long as you do it without attacking the person's character. A person can be gay and still be the kindest person you may ever meet in your life. These couples are going to be married with or without everyone's blessings, and that is okay.

Buckyfan: I would, indeed, be interested in your response.

I do not for one minute begrudge anyone the right to view things that they perceive to be sin as sin. My view is simply that this Nation was founded on freedom of thought, life, and expression (among other principles). And, while the masses to have the right to cast actions that harm others as wrong, I do not extend that right to the oppression of others based on purely religious beliefs.

If there were a church (which there MAY be) that believes Jesus' relationship with Lazarus was more than what is portrayed, and that church therefore believed and taught that homosexuality was not only not bad, but actually Godly, then could they not have a legitimate First Amendment claim?

I am by no means saying that I would agree with their beliefs, but the First Amendment does guarantee that the government shall not make any laws regarding the establishment of relgion or free expression thereof. And a law that prohibits the expression of that religous tenet would be unlawful?

Bucky, Thanks. I was also going to bring up the verses regarding bringing a brother before the elders, then the church...haven't had time. I will later tonight. I have to go for now. It's going to be a busy week with Easter. Also, we are to judge the sin. We call it what it is. Like I said in previous posts. I am not trying to get gays not to be gay. I am against gays being allowed to marry. If they choose to live in a sinful relationship, that is their choice. I do not have to condone it nor embrace it. I will still call it sin. Because it is. I have sat down and eaten lunch with two lesbians and had a nice lunch. They knew and know where I stand. Did I preach at them the whole meal...no.

loves and fool: Thanks. Rawhide - the gay rights propaganda does not seek "civil unions" but "marriage". There is a difference. Latinmami2: The "lack of compassion" line is another red herring from the pro-gay agenda that says "don't argue the issue - attack the character of the opposition." If gay people want to have a loving relationship with each other, that is fine with me. I disagree with some of their choices (mainly, here, wanting to call it "marriage") , but I don't disagree with people treating each other in a loving manner.

Rocky, good answer (and yes, I appreciate the departure from the pure religious reasoning).
I think marriage has not simply "been a partnership between a man and a woman for the purpose of creating and raising a family" for quite some time. There are plenty of hetero couples that get married because they love each other and they never intent to raise a family. There are other couples that would be perfectly happy living together and raising a family and only get married because of financial reasons. Hetero couples have been allowed to do this and homosexual couples are asking for the same rights.
I am not gay so I don't know the "true agenda" behind this re-definition of marriage. However, simply based on fairness I (obviously) don't have a problem with the issue.

Mikki, how about this one (which defends my assertion that we are to point out sins to other believers, but not to those who don't believe;
1 Corinthians 5:11-13 (New International Version)
"But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. Expel the wicked man from among you."

Copperguy, I just got back online. If you're still interested, I'm willing to respond to your last comment to me. But it will have to be later today...

Using your logic, the only reason people would want gay marriage is because they are gay.
*************************
Well I think gay couples are probably primarily the ones who want gay marriage to be legal. For myself I am straight but I think it is great that a person can marry the person they are in love with even if they are the same sex, and I know that your religion tells you to not except gay couples, but in your heart don't you feel any compassion just for the simple fact that these are people just like you and me

Rocky, I too wish people would be more concerned with morphing word definitions or at least be open to discussing the issue. This isn't the realm of pedantic linguists. The abomination of language effects our lives daily. Eventually, words lose all practical meaning and become useless. Maybe this whole issue of gay marriage should be taken up with Webster instead of legislators. ;~)

Fine. NT
Apparently you forget Jesus talking about "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven."
Matthew 7:1 and Luke 6:37

Job 21:22 "Can anyone teach knowledge to God, since he judges even the highest?"
Or are you pretending to be higher than God, and know better than HE?

The state is not dictating to religions what a religious marriage is. The state is merely allowing civil unions between same sex couples. The only reason a religious marriage becomes a civil union is because the state allows that too. Just because something was a certain way in the past, doesn't mean is should be the same in the future. See women's voting rights and black slavery as more recent examples.

Good explaination Rocky.

Reality - a fair question (How does this effect you?) I'll do my best. Changing the definition of marriage changes everything about marriage. Marriage for personal satisfaction is a generally new concept. Historically and cross-culturally (in societies with organized religion and without), marriage has been a partnership between a man and a woman for the purpose of creating and raising a family. In many cultures it was and still is also a way to make alliances between families (arranged marriages). I will grant that the advent of marriage based on romantic love has already significantly diluted that original meaning, and the recent (last 60 years) explosion of divorce has only hastened that process. What is the result? Just look and see. Already we see history being re-written because we view things differently today. When we change marriage to include any 2 persons and base it solely on romantic love, we further dilute the meaning of this social institution and accept a lie (a man-man marriage led family is as good as a man-woman marriage led family - see studies that repeatedly and overwhelmingly show the BEST outcomes with man-woman led families). [BTW- yes we can all cite examples of bad man-woman led families and good woman-woman led families, but anecdotes are not statistics] With the new definition, now when we look into history and see that someone is married, it will no longer be assumed to be to a person of the opposite gender. Now we can revise even more history to reflect a pro-homosexual image of the world that is already ridiculously distorted. (Example - the frequently quoted 10% rule. A complete fallacy. Homosexuals generally comprise about 1 - 2% of the population at most.)

---

I tried to answer without using religious reasons, because we clearly don't all agree on religion. From my personal viewpoint, however, I see the end-run coming. The Bible teaches that sex outside marriage is sinful (call it fornication, adultery, etc...) regardless of whether it is homosexual or heterosexual. We re-define marriage and now the homosexual claims that their behavior is "blessed" just like the sexual relationship between a husband and wife is now. See? Re-define the word, re-write the rules.

---

I'm trying to raise kids who know the truth, but in this re-definition we are getting the law to recognize so many lies as acceptable. I realize it is my job to help them learn to discern the differences, but I also feel it is my job to defend the truth, even when it is unpopular. I accept that society is probably going to eventually move to the point where gay marriage is everywhere. It just becomes one more nasty lie that I have to explain.

I have known many many gays in my life and none have shown me any reason they should not be allowed to marry each other. not only that, they have relationships that last far longer then most marriages. yes they can get a lawyer and have the same rights as a married couple, but they are still not married. gay Americans should be treated like everyone else ! i have been married for well over a decade and if my husband and i ever divorced i would shack up with a chick for sure. see i don't need a husband i want my husband and if he were not here any longer i would not marry another man. i would however get a female roommate and if being married helped our living situation that should be my choice ! not the government! stay out of my house and mind your own freaking business !

latin, I admit I was harsh towards you previously and I am sorry about that. But you make it very hard to maintain my patience. In regards to the aids subject, I was answering a question that sew posted. If you would like to follow the thread, please re-read our posts. I am going to stop explaining things to you as you do not take the time yourself to figure out what is going on.

Using your logic, the only reason people would want gay marriage is because they are gay.

the only excuse anyone has for not wanting same sex marriages is that you don't like gay people which fine don't like them, but don't try and put logic behind being hateful and prejudice

okay so now people want to use the aids excuse for not liking homosexuals, well that really does not effect any of the straight people since they won't be sleeping with the homosexual who you say have aids right?

Mikki, then please show me the verses you are referring to and explain them in context as to how you got your information. I will do the same and show you exactly where in the Bible it not only tells us to judge sin, but shows us exactly how.

I'm following, I just think it's weird that you follow a god who is so arrogant.
I would think you'd want a god that rewarded you for being good, for the sake of being good, whether you believed in him or not.

Katy, You and I have different scientific information regarding how aids is spread. I have listed some statistics for you for the year 2007 in Wisconsin alone. 52.2% of all aids cases were from homosexual men in a man to man relationship. The other cases are directly related to a infected persons spreading the disease by other means.

Men who have sex with men 5024 52.2%
Men who have sex with men and inject drugs 668 6.9%
Men and Women Heterosexual Contact
(An infected person exposing a non-infected person) 1158 12%
Undetermined 1099 11.4%
Other 1667 17.5%
TOTAL 9616 100%

No, sorry, I am NOT confused.
It is GOD'S position to judge, not ours.
YOU are not God.

I know very well what the Bible says, thank you very much.

Mikki, you are confused. God doesn't hate people. He hates sin. And, we are to judge sin. Sin is wrong. Whether or not someone goes to heaven is between God and that person. The Bible does give lots of evidence though regarding the qualifications for going to heaven. So, in other words, judge the sin.

Hey Rocky,
You are correct. The gays ARE trying to change the definition of marriage. That's the whole point. However, changing the legal definition of marriage does not mean that only same sex marriages will be allowed. Your church is still welcome to practice your unique brand of religion. Specifically how does the new definition of marriage affect you?

"So you don't have to devote yourself to god-just need to be a good person?"
.
You're not following the conversation. fool_on_the_hill was asking about those that live in an "isolated ethnic culture." The witness of conscience applies to those that have never heard the gospel. And they will not be judged by any human definition of the word good. They will be judged by God's standard.

Thanks for clearing that up, DrTalk. It would be totally off-topic here, but I would like to carry that to its logical conclusion, sometime.

Reality - I know you see it as the christian "forcing" their beliefs on others. That is the fallacy of the gay rights agenda you have bought into. The reality, if you take the time to look at it in any sense of objectivity, is that the gay community is trying to force a complete change of the definition of "marriage" on the rest of us for the sole purpose of their own selfish goals. The gay community is the one that is imposing their views.

---

BTW - more evidence of the fallacy of the "christians" forcing their view is the fact that in California it isn't he "christians" but the "Mormans" and in other areas it is the "Muslims". This is NOT a religious issue except by the gay community placing blame.

So you don't have to devote yourself to god-just need to be a good person?

fool_on_the_hill "DrTalk, are you saying to the billions of humans who live their entire lives within the confines of some isolated ethnic culture that eternal Salvation is a privilege of birthplace?"
.
No. If they have never heard the gospel of Jesus Christ, then their conscience will be a witness to them.
http://www.reasonofthehope.com/2008/10/r...

RUSerious: I'm one who shares your "aberration" perspective. You do an excellent job of presenting an easily misunderstood concept with your clear and sensitive approach.

DrTalk, are you saying to the billions of humans who live their entire lives within the confines of some isolated ethnic culture that eternal Salvation is a privilege of birthplace?

prizefighterinferno,
"If you breath the bible, as I suspect many of you do, you do realize you are condemning billions of people am I correct?"
.
No, we are not condemning them, just their behavior. There's a difference.
.
"I believe I have heard "the only way to heaven is through (belief in) Christ"? If I am wrong please inform me; but if not I guess goodbye Hindus, Buddhists, and any other person who doesn't believe exactly what you believe. Which would be roughtly half the world."
.
Let me ask you a question: Who decides who can come over to your house and when? Can just anybody come over any time they wanted or do you make that decision? You do, right? Well, God decides who can go to heaven since it is His house. He sent everyone an invitation to Heaven: His son Jesus Christ (John 3:16). Jesus said "I am the way, the truth, and the light. No one comes to the father but by me." (John 14:6). God does not want any one to perish and wants everyone to repent(2 Peter 3:9). God is inviting everyone to Heaven, but you have to accept the invitation; you have to RSVP by accepting Jesus Christ.

Very good, ruserious. I can tell that you ARE serious. That is appreciated.

In strictest sense, you are correct. In a same-sex relationship there is no "husband/wife." So, I would have no problem having two versions of a marriage license: One for opposite sex and one for same-sex couples, if it is imperative that the labels "husband" and "wife" be used. I don't understand the importance of thos words being there, but if that's our one stumbling point, super duper!

I'm sure you recognize that a marriage has far broader importance than being roommates. Opposite-sex or same-sex marriages would bear equal responsibilities and priveleges. A room-mate doesn't have hospital visitation rights, doesn't share in property, etc., absent a written contract. And though some would argue that "all they have to do is get a contract," that places an undue burden of having to pay an attorney, take time off work, etc..

In Wisconsin, a will is subject to probate. If a person dies without a will, the property goes into probate. In a marriage, if one partner dies without a will, the surviving partner automatically gets the whole ball of wax. So, even with a contract, there are advantages that are not there if all that exists is a will or contract.

As you indicated, this is about the best I can explain it at this late hour.

This sounds really lawyerly to me. Gays want what straights have...to be married. If they wanted something else, they would be asking for something else. You never answered how a gay marriage "contract" (whatever that is) would be different from a straight one.

Of course it's not going to say husband and wife. What other differences do you want on the contract?

To all the "Christians" out there I ask you this. If you breath the bible, as I suspect many of you do, you do realize you are condemning billions of people am I correct? I believe I have heard "the only way to heaven is through (belief in) Christ"? If I am wrong please inform me; but if not I guess goodbye Hindus, Buddhists, and any other person who doesn't believe exactly what you believe. Which would be roughtly half the world. I say anybody can marry anybody. The day it is truly pronounced "wrong" for any person to love and want to show that love for someone else, same sex or otherwise, I certainly hope I'm not around. Practice open-mindedness as you preach. Also I apologize if I am just beating a dead horse here, there were 620 comments at the time of this post, I didn't study every one.

I said I avoided the phrase "separate but equal", and it was because of the atmosphere at one time in history when it didn't really mean that. Many things are truly separate but equal, and I believe this could qualify. I believe these are different types of unions...aren't they? The details (gender makeup) are different. The general components (humanness) are the same, and equal. The same as the rosters of the local scout troops should be. These components shouldn't be interchangeable. The "contracts" should be different to accommodate the specifics. Doesn't make it any more or less valid, but it differentiates it from other contracts with other details.
You wouldn't buy a car using a home mortgage contract. (Best analogy I could muster in the middle of the night.)

Roommates don't generally make lifelong committments to each other. They are not in love with each other, they may not even like each other.
I would think roommates are together for financial reasons, convenience.
There is a difference.
And just because you didn't use 'separate but equal' doesn't mean it wasn't your intent. Call it that or not-it is what it is.

Zoom-the analogy was not about the race. As I said, the goal of most people-gay and straight-is to enjoy the race on the way to the finish line. The analogy is the different vehicles. A gay union IS different from a straight union in many aspects. I'm not talking about basic aspects that can be enjoyed (or not) by any two people sharing the same residence, like sharing meals and pastimes. If you don't think those 2 types of unions are different, then does that mean you are "bi"? I want the fact that I share my life with a member of the opposite sex to be special. I DO want to belong to that club reserved for male/female couples. I want the fact that Joe and John want to share their life together to be special to them. They don't WANT to be with Mary or Sally. They want to be able to share that union, and it should be contracted into as just what it is, a civil union shared by same sex couples. I would think it should be just as important to them as it is to me, and only fair to each of us.
It shouldn't be complicated. It should be what it is. Why wouldn't they want that? A contract reserved especially for the union they espouse?
Well copperguy, I use aberration not as an insult, no more than I would insult anyone with a "variation" from what I think was intended by nature. But-I don't think being gay is a personal choice, either, any more than any "variation" is. Who can know for sure why gay people are gay, given that they cannot "join" in a "natural" way that is quite as beneficial (or fruitful) to them as opposite sexes can? Not to say that they don't find such physical unions enjoyable. I do hope you know what I mean. And I know they find every other aspect of their unions enjoyable, probably in varying degrees just like their straight counterparts.
Separate but equal...well, you know, I tried to avoid phrases that might sound like that, for just that reason. Of course, they are equal, but the couples are also different. They choose one union, I choose another, because we want to have the union that we desire. But their contract must be different because it will never say "husband and wife", it will say something else.
For those who say gay unions (or straight for that matter) are not about sex-then what is the major difference between either of these types of couples and any other 2 roommates? Not love ( I love many people I'm not "in love" with), not enjoying the same things. What?

The difference is their plumbing. When it comes to the issues of marriage: love, committment, living together, property issues, and maybe even in raising a family-it is a little thing. Their plumbing has nothing to do with any of those things. They can't conceive a child together, yes, I know. But raising a child-no matter whose, in a loving home has nothing to do with anyone's plumbing or what they do with it.

Hey, ruserious: I'm on the verge of becoming one of your biggest fans! You present a...fairly reasonable position.

First, (at the risk of going pc crazy), could you be persuaded to view homosexuality as a "variation" rather than an aberration? I don't at all think you intend the term to have a negative connotation, and suspect that "variation" might be more in line with what you're thinking. That's just a guess.

I can sort of agree with what you are saying, to a point. The "marriage club" is significantly different than a motorcycle race or a social club. It carries with it specific legal rights and responsibilities. And, I hope you can at least partially understand that having a license that's technically different is sort of like having separate restrooms for whites and blacks. Is "separate but equal" really acceptable? Or necessary?

I think you are on the right track. It's taken me many many years of friendships and relatives to really see things from others' eyes. You're admirably well on your way, and on behalf of my friends and family members who struggle with this, "Thank you!"

(I don't mean to ignore others who have stood up for equality here. It's just that after my earlier post about my nephew and my friend who committed suicide, I need this time to soften a bit.)

Every LITTLE difference? If it were a little difference, it would be a non-issue, as between blond or red-headed marriage certificate filers.
Children are often a product of male/female unions, so it should be considered as going with the "territory", so why a different license or contract?
But children are never, ever the natural product (as in an offspring from those 2 bodies) of same-sex unions. If children ever do become a natural byproduct of a same-sex unions, though, those contracts should also never have to be filed differently than contracts of childless same-sex unions. If they did require that, I'd be the first to speak against it!

Marriage isn't a race. The analogy doesn't make sense. There is no reason a marriage can't mean a union between two adults of the same sex. You're making this overly complicated, for no real purpose.

crafty, how many unwanted children and babies have you adopted? You and your ilk are against stem-cell research because you disingenuously scrounge for a false moral highground. The ignorance of religiosity is showing its danger in this way.

Then should those who want to have children after marriage have their certificate filed differently from those who don't want to have children?
There are going to be a whole lot of files if every little difference is separated from each other.

Of course they can call it a marriage-which-after all just means a "union". I mean it should not be the same exact contract, nor filed in the same way-as is union between male and female. I (yes, it's an opinion, like everyone else's) would think it should be represented accurately and precisely as a contract between same-sex individuals, not for "rights" or legal purposes, but because it IS different than a male/female marriage. Is there a reason that "male" or "female" is recorded on a birth or death certificate? Shouldn't legal certificates accurately represent what they are certifying?
I am trying to prevent nothing, Zoom. I am all for adult humans pairing as they (mutually) see fit, because I can't imagine denying anyone the opportunity to be happy just because they don't find happiness the same way as I do. (As long as no one gets hurt-i.e. a forced relationship with a non-consenting adult, or with a minor, or, heaven forbid-Fido.)
The 2 wheeled vehicle analogy? Far be it from me to deny you the right to try your moped against my Harley-but do you really think it's logical? Why don't you want to have your own race? I'd think you'd be proud, and deserve your own category. Wouldn't you?

If I'm the only one not getting the connection, someone please let me know. I'm confused.
Would you rather we talk about baby's rights? Like I said, lead me to the thread. Or do you want to talk about baby's rights on a gay marriage thread?
AHH!! Explain

They are totally unrelated topics. Babies dying sucks-it does. I'm really interested to see how you connect it to gay marriage.
Are they married gays killing the baby's, err...?

Gays have the right to marry each other because that is what's fair.
Babies die, 3,000 a day in America. Where are their rights? Meaning, Why do they not have a right to even LIVE, when gays have the right to live, and marry each other. How is that fair?

On a sidenote, I know that some plumbers like to put their pipe in unnatural places with female pipefittings too. Should they not allowed to be married?
I have yet to hear these contractual differences you want in place.

Ok. It's a knitting club. Why do they have to be seperate? Because of their vocation? What does it have to do with knitting?

I fail to see the point of calling a marriage between to PEOPLE anything other than 'marriage'.

Basically, through your analogies, you are trying to prevent human beings from joining the marriage 'club'. You think homosexuals are so different from you, that if they join, your club just won't be the same.

You could be the ignorant Harley rider and cry; 'No mopeds! They don't look like Harleys! They're not cool like us! They're not loud like us! Their engines are only two stroke!'

Or

You could be the compassionate Harley rider and say; 'Join us moped rider! You have two wheels, a motor and brakes! We see how much fun you're having with your moped! We are having fun with our Harleys! Isn't riding on two wheels fun?'

Homosexual unions are not all about sex, but my suggestion of one aspect of the homosexual aberration was just that, one aspect. One could expect most "marriages" to result in sexual intercourse, and therein lies one example of unnatural use of the plumbing. Like trying to combine two male (or female) pipe fittings. (I am not a plumber, I hope my analogy is correct.) But again-I believe it is an aberration of nature-not a chosen preference, and homosexuals should not be denied an opportunity for a relationship with a like-minded individual.
Segregation? Only in public restrooms. At least they'd have the luxury of going together. Hmmm, maybe heterosexual couples should feel discriminated against.
Right! The pipefitter and grocer would have to join (or start) a totally different chapter. Now you see my point.

What if the pipefitter and grocer both wanted to join a club totally unrelated to either being a pipefitter or grocer? Would they have to go to separate chapters?

At least RUSerious is acknowledging that homosexuality is biological. That's a start.

To paraphrase the rest of your thoughts, if I might:

JULIET:
'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.

What, that the plumbing is different so the meaning of their marriage should be different?
Really, in what ways should the contract be different?

RUSerious,
thank you for at least providing a rational line of reasoning against same sex marriage.

Pretty vague...

Life.

Their union is about love and attraction to each other, wanting to be together (hopefully). That's the same as any one else getting married. So they have sex different. You want to base their whole philosophy of life on how they have sex?
Some want kids, some don't. Just like straight people.
You want segregation-can you describe in what ways?

I just said I'd discuss it-why are you so testy?

Where are the babies rights regarding what?

Oh sorry I didn't know you were the moderator Sewaelizabeth. About the babies. I am trying to say, where are THEIR "rights"

One shouldn't hate a person for being gay-nor should you celebrate it. Being gay is an aberration, like being born with an extra leg. I wouldn't hate a baby born with three legs, he or she would be my equal in every way-but I would not celebrate his extra leg.
By "aberration" I mean, being gay is not natural, it is an aberration of nature-does anyone deny this? Check the plumbing of two gays-how does it fit compared to the natural, "meant-to-be" fit of man and woman? If society has the "right" to allow a same sex couple to "marry", why don't they end the debate and take the same "right" to provide gays with their own pact or contract-not the one that has bound man and woman since forever. Why not have their own unique contract? Their union is different, their contract should be different. A pipe fitter wouldn't join a Grocer's Union.
Think about a Harley rider entering a Harley race, would you fault him for not wanting to allow a moped rider to register for this race? Does it means he hates him? No. It means he thinks he should register for his own race. Some goals are the same-to enjoy the race and make it to the finish line, but the vehicle is different. The "vehicle" in a homosexual pairing is also different than the "vehicle" of a straight one. So, the two kinds of unions are inherently different. NOT the same. Like the race, there might be similarities, but they cannot be the exact same. Like comparing Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts.
I recall people being up in arms when a girl wanted to join the boy scouts.....both humans, both equal, but rather than combining the two equal but separate (by sex) organizations, it has been expected that each joins his own organization.

dub190, if you're back in, maybe you could answer how same sex marriage is going to eliminate straight people.

You're overly defensive. I never said a person doesn't have the right to post. That's silly. By the way, I didn't have to read past Argument #2 to see that fldpan didn't write it, so I didn't read the whole thing. Did you read the response I linked to?

I thought you gave up?

Where's the thread for that-I'd discuss it.

Equal rights for gay people, woohoo. Who cares about unborn living breathing babies!

If homosexuals have the right to get married, then certainly Fldpan has the right to post what he wants. He left due credit. Actually it wasn't the whole article. If you'd read it you would know that.

fldpan, here is the response to your post. I won't be a tool by copying and pasting the whole thing.
http://cynicsage.blogspot.com/2007/09/if...

Lovetoscrap posted today at 5:56pm: "sew...you conveniently forgot that the act of sex between two men has been the primary cause of millions of people dying from aids. That is how it hurts us all."

In fact, the HIV virus is the primary cause of millions of people dying from AIDS. Do you really believe that a virus appeared because of sex acts between men? Gad zooks, go back to Bio 101. The virus was first recognized as a "homosexual man disease," in the 80s. This was probably the most debilitating nickname ever given to a disease on the planet. First, it gave heterosexuals a false sense of security (not to mention intraveneous drug users and my own cousin, a hemophilia sufferer who died of it from contaminated transfusions). Second, because of homophobes such as yourself, it became a second class disease that didn't get the attention it should have for over 10 years.

The first cases of AIDS are suspected to have occured in the 50s, not when it was "discovered" in the 80s. And how about all of those complete families devastated by it in Africa through heterosexual contact? Entire countries are said to suffer over 40% infection rates. This was NOT propagated by homosexual contact alone. AIDS is most certainly NOT caused by homosexual contact, only propagated by it, the same way it is propagated by heterosexual contact, sharing needles and receiving contaminated blood products. Believing that the AIDS virus came into being through homosexual contact is like believing that kissing caused the mononucleosis virus to spontaneously appear on the face of the earth! Or that naughty children cause the chickenpox. Or any other superstitious sounding, uninformed spontaneous generation of disease you'd like to advocate for. All of them lack factual bases, are only supported by the weakest of circumstantial evidence and have been disproved by science.

boo to fldpan for copying and pasting a whole article from the internet.
http://www.nogaymarriage.com/tenargument...

dub190, You first had to learn what homosexuality was before you could be disgusted with it. Your disgust with homosexuality is based upon a prejudice. You were not born with a disgust for homosexuals, like a baby might be disgusted at the smell of cabbage.

Yeah, just like homosexuals are not attracted to the opposite sex so they choose not to have relations with them.
They don't choose the attraction but they choose to indulge it. Just like you and I.

Just remember this: The fact that I think homosexuals are disgusting is not a CHOICE I made. I was born that way.

"Marriage means nothing anymore."

You can thank heterosexuals for the 50% divorce rate. I'd say the heterosexuals aren't doing it right. Give the gays a chance at marriage, they might bring up the stats.

Legalization of same sex marriage would also increase adoption of all the babies the heterosexuals don't want, or can't take care of.
**************
very good point there would be less orphans. i like that idea every child could have a home to be loved in always a plus to that. shame on the people who thought there would be no more children lol silliest thing i ever heard

and the world end because there are same sex marriages out there
****************
sorry meant to put world will not end because of same sex marriages, my eyes are getting a little tired from reading nonsense about heads of lettuce and dogs and all that rubbish

Legalization of same sex marriage would also increase adoption of all the babies the heterosexuals don't want, or can't take care of.

Sew is now officially backed into a corner, and is not comprehending anything. Are you and Latinmami in the same room?
***************
i am sorry if you wish i would back down but honey will never happen so you can either skip over my posts and not read them or just deal with it. can you handle that i am sure you can

How are all the homosexuals going to have kids when there are no straight people anymore?
******************
do you really have to have someone explain to you on how same sex couples have children? I think you are a little smarter than that. In fact Iron Chef Cat Cora if anyone knows who that is well anyways she is in a same sex marriage and they have 3 children and 1 on the way both have been pregnant all the kids are related by having same donor. i say that proves that same sex couples can have children and the world end because there are same sex marriages out there

dub190..a head of lettuce??? You must have rented the same move I did!!!

dub190, how is same sex marriage going to eliminate straight people?

Soon we won't be able to even amuse ourselves. That, too, will be outlawed.
Self-love will be outlawed.
OH, THE HUMANITY!

I could only imagine the garage sale I could have....

I have a feeling my sense of humor is way too dry, a little too tongue in cheek.
oh well, as long as I amuse myself.

Backed into a corner? I comprehend things that make sense. And where are all the straight people going? I thought I was the one backed into a corner-now you're just being silly.-er.

Sew is now officially backed into a corner, and is not comprehending anything. Are you and Latinmami in the same room?
I give up. Marry a house or a head of lettuce for all I care.
Eliminate the human population.
Marriage means nothing anymore.
How are all the homosexuals going to have kids when there are no straight people anymore?
Clone them?

Can't lovestoscrap and latinmami2 kiss and make up already?

so, my being against same sex marriage gives you the right to discuss my sex life? I was going to say something smart...but I will refrain. LOL You are interesting, I will give you that!

Alright, I will tell you this much. I have an absolutely awesome sex life. My husband has absolutely noooooo complaints! Neither do I :)

Now can I be against same sex marriage? LOL
*************************
you know actually after this post i like you a little more :) your sex life has nothing to do with this just as a person marrying their dog has nothing to do with this either, and really i don't have a problem with you being against gay marriage that is your right your religion your beliefs, but i do have a problem with the thinking that it is the only way to live and it is the only right thing to do. i am not an evil person in fact i am a mother a wife and a hard worker at my job, but i don't believe in condeming someone for who they love and want to marry that is their choice their life to live, as long as it does not effect me or my family i am okay with it

God hates judgmental people, too.
So, I guess according to your logic, you'll be resting in hell with all the sodomites.
Don't drop the soap.

Buckyfan: Thanks for at least sticking to the subject at hand, rather than making outlandish attempts to divert into other areas.

As I was raised in a Christian church, we were taught that only the Christian God is the real God, and to worship under any other faith is sinful. "They shall not inherit the kingdom of God." (I think that's right!) I was also taught that sin is sin, and God doesn't have a "sin-o-meter" to measure the value of each individual "type" of sin.

So, according to Christian dogma, Hindus, Muslims, Budhists, Jews, atheists, Pagans, etc., are all sinners. Using the logic that a Christian cannot condone sinfulness, how does one justify not denying marriage licenses to those of non-Christian faiths? Or even allowing them to partake of the freedoms of our Nation? Should they not be denied immigration to the U.S.?

And, although I know that this question is not about gay marriages directly, it IS indirectly. Because you are using sinfulness as a reason to oppress one group, how to you justify not oppressing others?

I have a simple question that perhaps somebody on this post can answer. HOW WILL ISSUING A LEGAL MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE "FORCE" THE HOMOSEXUAL LIFESTYLE ON ANYBODY ELSE? Several people on this post have suggested it would. How EXACTLY will it do that? If you happen to have a gay couple living next door to you and they are suddenly given a marriage certificate, what has changed? They are still living together. They still are going about their lives as usual. Sure they can now file their taxes as married, but how does that force their lifestyle on you? Can anybody provide some SPECIFIC examples rather than the regurgitation of scripture?

I missed that one. Good point Zoom.
And I am so sorry scrap, I didn't realize that you had AIDs. Good luck to you.

"sew...you conveniently forgot that the act of sex between two men has been the primary cause of millions of people dying from aids. That is how it hurts us all."

Promoting marriage would encourage commitment and reduce promiscuity, just like a heterosexual marriage does.

Copperguy, that is a valid argument, but I still cannot by faith vote to allow homosexual marriage. It may seem oppressive because it's taking a perceived right away from someone, but I must walk the Christian walk according to my faith, and my faith tells me that practicing homosexuality is a sin.

We know that with marriage comes intimacy, which generally includes sex. So, as you say, it is not much of a leap to assume that homosexual marriage involves sin. I cannot in good conscience vote in favor of that sin, just as I couldn't with abortion, prostitution, the death penalty or any other act that God's word has convinced me is a sin.

The word of God contains a lot of things that many would see as oppressive: putting others first, forgiving, not getting drunk, no premarital sex (I'm not married, so this one is quite oppressive for me--I know someone is going to make comments on how I can have a child when I'm not married, but I didn't become a Christian until I was well into adulthood).

My faith demands that I do those things, no matter how oppressive I feel they are. So, I do them. Just as I vote against gay-marriage.

If anyone wants to discuss the legality of gay marriage-I'd be happy to join. All that other stuff...doesn't correlate in any way and it's not what I'm here to talk about.

So, now I'm for late-term abortions? Oh, boy.
I guess let's not discuss gay marriage. I guess let's just talk about religion, and marrying dogs, and abortion.
You don't know my view on everything. Ask me, I'll be happy to tell you. You know what assuming does tho.
I can't even argue that last post-it would be like arguing with an audio-taped message on repeat.

Oh, and Bucky, I did not take your post personally nor did I feel it was posted directly toward me :)

Bucky, you are right. I know what is coming and this behavior that gets me so worked up is only going to get worse. The Bible says it will and I believe it. It makes me so sad that so many people choose to turn away from God. I suspect that for some of the people on this post to turn to God it will have to be a near Paul experience. I have no illusions regarding anyone on here turning to Christianity because of the truth posted here. Most of those on here are doing what I am doing, venting over something they are passionate about.

Nazis evoked...this thread has jumped the shark.

"Incest produced babies can have genetic anomalies. That who is getting hurt. That's not what I'm arguing for or against tho."
-Why couldn't they just have a late term abortion?...That's where they rip out the living 7-8 month old baby in 6 pieces. In case you didn't already know, this is a LIBERAL ritual, you should have no problem with it.
[[
"Marriage is about two people choosing to commit to each other. Can a pet make that choice and voice it? That's not what I'm arguing for or against tho."
-Why only two people? Who are you to decide who someone marries? As long as no one gets hurt, what is wrong with fifteen wives?
My dog is my dog, I have his papers. if I want to marry him, why not? I OWN HIM, I BOUGHT HIM. Do you have any other reason I can't, other than my dog won't say yes to my proposal?
[[
My seat belt pinned me in my car and I almost drown. Therefore it's a fact that they are unsafe.
[
"This article isn't about those things-I thought gay marriage is what we were all discussing. No?"
-We are discussing the pros and cons of gay marriage. An open door to all sorts of people who believe all sorts of things, is what some would call "a slippery slope"
=
By the way, people who preached about the "slippery slope" of early Nazism, were looked at as fools.

buckyfan: I don't quite know how to put this, because I don't want you to think I lump you in with the hate-mongers on this site. I guess I will start with saying that I do understand your view - and fears - of God. Because that's what you've been taught and it's what you believe. You are equating the marriage license to sex. (And I'm not saying that as a slam against you...I believe that is perhaps an easy leap to make.)

Yet, a vote to RESTRICT the rights of a minority is still a vote for oppression. Again, I will not begrudge anyone the right to their religious beliefs. But, again, please go back to the attitude of "Hate the sin but love the sinner."

A license to love, nurture, and protect DOES NOT equate to "blessing" any sexual practices. A marriage license for heterosexual people is not tied to their sexual practices. There is no "restriction" on a marriage license to only have sex for procreation, in the missionary position, and not on Sundays. The license is NOT about sex, it is about love and a loving commitment.

So, the next time you are given a choice of whether or not to oppress people based on what you THINK their behavior is, stop and think. Really think about it.

Does your view of God say that He would want you to oppress love? Would He want you to hate the sinner because of what you think the sin is?

That's not the God that I think you believe in. It certainly is not the God that I believe in. My God would want me to extend a loving, caring shoulder for the oppressed to lean on. He would want me to SHOW (not just say) that He loves them.

Would you vote to ban issuing a marriage license to people who are not virgins on the account that you believe their pre-nuptial sex was sinful?

One more thing, Lovestoscrap, the reason I don't share my beliefs without being asked is because people know what conservative Christians think about homosexuality.

My hope is that if they can see that Christians love them still. The Bible makes it clear it is our job to point out sin to other believers, but it's not as clear about pointing out non-believers' sins. I know I would have never been saved if people had pointed out my sins and expected me to just change without truly believing.

I'm not trying to tell anyone they're wrong to argue the Christian side on this blog; in fact, when people bash Christians, it's vital that someone explain why we believe as we do. But if people are unwilling to hear or scoff at that reasoning, I just shake the dust off my sandals and move on.

so, my being against same sex marriage gives you the right to discuss my sex life? I was going to say something smart...but I will refrain. LOL You are interesting, I will give you that!

Alright, I will tell you this much. I have an absolutely awesome sex life. My husband has absolutely noooooo complaints! Neither do I :)

Now can I be against same sex marriage? LOL

LATINMAMI, you are CLEARLY confused. You said: "first off i did not say gays were nasty i said the people who want to marry their pets or sister like posted previously is nasty"

WHO THE HECK ARE YOU TO JUDGE A PERSON FOR THE WAY THEY WERE BORN! Just because YOU see it as "nasty" doesn't mean everyone does.
You sound ridiculous, and you are contradicting yourself in writing. Quit typing and READ! Go back and read my post I am sick of explaining EVERYTHING to you three times.
)))
You think Incest is nasty, there are people somewhere who don't. Just like homosexuality.
Are you starting to catch on yet?
******************
were you really born to marry your pet or your sister, sounds like you are just reaching out there into la la land to try and make a point. if you don't like gay people fine not a big deal but that does not give you the right to say whether or not they can be married, don't go to their wedding and don't invite them over to dinner then they can't bother you.

sew...you conveniently forgot that the act of sex between two men has been the primary cause of millions of people dying from aids. That is how it hurts us all.

latin...not hateful. I just don't feel the need to charm you with lies. The truth hurts sometimes. The truth doesn't always feel good. The truth isn't always easy to deal with. None the less, it is the truth. Homosexual behavior is an abomination to God. Period
********************
that's not truthful it's hateful and rude and really if you feel like no one has the right to say anything about you and your husband why do you feel like you have the right to comment on someone else's marriage

I am starting to sound bad here. Let me say this:
If you are homosexual, I don't really care, just leave your PDA's at home. Have some respect.
If you want to be partners I don't care, it's your life. I know many gay people, and I love them all. I am not uncomfortable around them. I AM uncomfortable redefining the definition of marriage.
Like I said before, it opens the door to all kinds of bad things. Polygamy, incestuous marriage, and other foolishness.
People should be able to do whatever they want behind closed doors, as long as there are no victims. Just have some respect.

Sew...If a woman wants to marry her daddy, who is getting hurt?
If I marry a dog, or lizard, or bird or whatever, who is getting hurt?
If I do drugs and kill myself who is getting hurt?
Wearing your seatbelt is the right thing to do? How did this come to be a fact? It is an opinion! My point proven.

Incest produced babies can have genetic anomalies. That who is getting hurt. That's not what I'm arguing for or against tho.
Marriage is about two people choosing to commit to each other. Can a pet make that choice and voice it? That's not what I'm arguing for or against tho.
Some drugs cause violent behavior. It would be other's I would worry about. Go ahead and kill yourself-I definately never said I was against that.
My seatbelt saved my life when I was younger.
Fact.
This article isn't about those things-I thought gay marriage is what we were all discussing. No?

Buckyfan my hats off. If we could all be so balanced with care and concern either way.
Humanity does exist and people that accept all ways of life with out giving up your own beliefs with out casting judgment is a beautiful thing.
Copperguy I'm sorry for your pain with out it we would never appreciate the good times, at least I know I wouldn't.

Lovestoscrap, I have been following this thread from the beginning and chose to step in only because I found copperguy's comment offensive. I did not accuse you of being a bigot, only suggested that if people are more disgusted by homosexuality than other sexual sins (premarital sex, etc.), there's a problem. If you felt it was directed specifically at you, sorry, that is not the case.

Please feel free to re-read my post.

LATINMAMI, you are CLEARLY confused. You said: "first off i did not say gays were nasty i said the people who want to marry their pets or sister like posted previously is nasty"

WHO THE HECK ARE YOU TO JUDGE A PERSON FOR THE WAY THEY WERE BORN! Just because YOU see it as "nasty" doesn't mean everyone does.
You sound ridiculous, and you are contradicting yourself in writing. Quit typing and READ! Go back and read my post I am sick of explaining EVERYTHING to you three times.
)))
You think Incest is nasty, there are people somewhere who don't. Just like homosexuality.
Are you starting to catch on yet?

Sew...If a woman wants to marry her daddy, who is getting hurt?
If I marry a dog, or lizard, or bird or whatever, who is getting hurt?
If I do drugs and kill myself who is getting hurt?
Wearing your seatbelt is the right thing to do? How did this come to be a fact? It is an opinion! My point proven.

I didn't see anyone except Indysgirl use the word hate.

God Loves Everyone
*some restrictions may apply

I actually had a button that says that.

Bucky-you have a right to vote on the matter if it's up for voting. If you did it because of your religious views-doesn't really matter in the long run. You did what you felt was right.
The thing that gets me is the people who are bashing gays and gay marriage and those that support it. People spewing all this hate-it's scary.

Correction, if I vote against the gay-marriage ban...

buckyfan, we don't have any tv channels in our home for that very reason. We have turned off countless movies because of illicit sexual scenes. Our daughter did not attend public school until she reached high school and had a firm foundation regarding creation vs. evolution. Our son will be home schooled. Our daughter wears a promise ring to remind her to be faithful to herself and her future husband. Did I cover everything? Yes, the act sex between two men does gross me out. It's not natural. Because I am against it, I am not a loving Christian. Too bad. If blindly accepting homosexuals is what defines a loving Christian, then I won't be one. I, of course, don't accept that definition. This conversation has been going on since this article ran. You should read it from the beginning and then you will know when things started getting a little hairy.

Yee-ikes! Ya step out for a bit to run some errands and all Hail breaks loose!

Thank you for answering my question, lovetoscrap. Have a nice day! :)

Copperguy, please don't wrap all conservative/fundamental Christians in that hate blanket you've conjured. Just because someone disagrees with a lifestyle does not automatically mean they rejoice when someone practicing that lifestyle dies, be it murder, suicide, accidental or whatever. In fact, if they're true Christians, they should be mourning.

While I live by the Bible, and I believe practicing homosexuality is a sin, I do not preach it at people. I have gay friends and family members (one was even my birth coach because he wanted to see a child born and didn't think he would ever have the opportunity as a gay man); they know I'm a conservative Christian. If they ask, I'll explain my beliefs. I hope they will understand and love me still just as I love them.

Am I a bigot because I believe homosexuality is a sin and voted my conscience regarding the Wisconsin gay-marriage amendment? Perhaps. But it was something I felt I must do because of my faith. I feel that if I vote in favor of such laws, God will judge me for it, and I try my hardest to be on the right side of God.

Finally, to those vehemently opposed and disgusted by homosexuality, I hope you examine yourselves to be sure that you also are as vehemently opposed and disgusted by premarital sex, couples who live together outside of marriage, watching TV shows where someone cheats on their spouse, etc. If not, you truly might be a bigot.

latin...not hateful. I just don't feel the need to charm you with lies. The truth hurts sometimes. The truth doesn't always feel good. The truth isn't always easy to deal with. None the less, it is the truth. Homosexual behavior is an abomination to God. Period.

copper i do agree that people who are like lovetoscrap that seem to have to condemn all the people who they believe are horrible sinners even if they are their own family members do play a part in people wanting to and taking their own lives, they do it because the people who are suppose to be their family turn them out and turn their backs on them. you are suppose to love your family with no restrictions. you can't have a child and say i will only love you as long as you are not gay. it does not work that way

latin, I wasn't the one who made this about sex, you did. Reread my posts and you will know my position on this subject. Again...reading comprehension?

oh and i did read the post and what i get from yours is that you are a person who is on their religious high horse and thinks they are better than any other person who does not share in your beliefs. if you are so christian then again why are you so hateful

Copper, you are right on two accounts. God did create him and God does love him. Although, God does and did hate the sin. I wouldn't presume to know whether or not he is in heaven. Only if he repented of his sin and asked for God's forgiveness before he killed himself. Neither one of us could possibly know that.

And that sir is his own fault. No one else's.

latin, you know nothing about my sex life. And I thank God I know nothing about yours. Frankly my sex life is no one's business but my husband's and mine. I don't have to justify anything to you, nor do I need to explain anything to you. You need to acquire some reading comprehension skills so you know what you are responding to. I believe the beginning of the post you are refering to has copper's name at the front of it. Read his post then you will understand what mine is about. It's called taking what you read and putting into context. I hope that helps you.
**********************
well then why are you so concerned with the lives of other people who are in love and want to get married

latin, you know nothing about my sex life. And I thank God I know nothing about yours. Frankly my sex life is no one's business but my husband's and mine. I don't have to justify anything to you, nor do I need to explain anything to you. You need to acquire some reading comprehension skills so you know what you are responding to. I believe the beginning of the post you are refering to has copper's name at the front of it. Read his post then you will understand what mine is about. It's called taking what you read and putting into context. I hope that helps you.

Actually, his suicide was because his family had disowned him. A good, "Christian" family! Yes indeed! He was not, himself "consumed by sin." His belief - as is shared by countless others - was that God created him and loved him. He chose to take his own life because he knew that God would welcome him where his own family hated him.

That, sir (or ma'am), was YOUR fault.

lovetoscrap- why are you so hateful if you are suppose to be so religious and full of morals?

Mikki...I can picture it and it about makes me puke.
*********************
maybe if you tried something other than missionary position you would not be so up tight

Copper...get over it already. When us Christians are so concerned about innocent life being murdered by their own mothers you call us all sorts of names,
****************************
this is not even about mothers who murder their own children this is about couples who are in love and want to be married just like everyone else

and exactly what does marrying your pet, sister, or wearing your seatbelt have to do with same sex marriage, there is not even one bit of logic behind that at all.

You know what Latinmami? I, and others here I'm sure, think being homosexual is "nasty". Did we say so yet? No. You are the one who pointed out what you think is "creepy"
********************
first off i did not say gays were nasty i said the people who want to marry their pets or sister like posted previously is nasty, get it straight i am all for same sex marriage i am not for marrying your pet or sibling

Yes, Mikki, I have discussed that theory also. Marriage is about love. These religios freaks are the ones who want to make it about sex. No one is asking for a license to have gay sex, for crying out loud. Only the religious freaks are making it about that. And, yes, that does make one wonder why they are so preoccupied with sex that it consumes them.

That's what has led me to the suspicion that they are harboring some deep inner desire to engage in that behavior, only their Bible says they can't. And if THEY can't then NOONE can.

Problem is, that's not the subject. The subject is a marriage license...a legal contract that is based on mutual love and a commitment to love, support, etc.. THEY have chosen to make it about sex.

Gay's having sex is unsavory to me as well. I don't want to see it or participate.
So I won't.
I'll just do my own thing

I think it is extremely ignorant to imply that non-christians do not have morals. Close your Bible and read a few books. Perhaps some classical literature or books of other religions or maybe even philosophy - which deeply explores the foundations of ethics and morality. I am a fairly educated woman and I have founded my own moral beliefs from my education, upbringing, and as an active participant in society; through compassion and understanding, not piety.

We live in a country that allows freedom of speech - freedom of expression, and freedom of religion, if chosing to practice one at all.

You can look the other way or internalize what you see and hate it because you do not agree. It is a waste of energy to HATE what you see because of your religious fundamentalism. It is destructive and opens doors for violence and intolerance. What do you think is going on in parts of the Middle East???

I believe people should be happy and live their own lives the way they see fit, as long as they aren't impeding the lifestyles of others or causing harm to another human being.

Don't wear your seatbelt then. I don't think it should be governed, but it's the right thing to do. Incest hurts people. Marrying your dog takes away the dogs choice-can it really make that choice?
We're saying that it's not hurting anyone else. Your examples don't correlate to that.
We don't understand it because it doesn't make sense in this particular senario.

Mikki...I can picture it and it about makes me puke.

Copper...get over it already. When us Christians are so concerned about innocent life being murdered by their own mothers you call us all sorts of names, backwards...living in the stone age and whatever else you can think of. Yet, when someone you love kills himself because they can't handle the pressures of their own sin, you freak and blame us Christians. Why don't you lay blame where it belongs? Suicide is not a good thing. But, this society is really good at laying the blame elsewhere instead of taking responsibility for their own actions.

I guess we're BOTH just a couple of sarcastic deviants. ;)

sewaelizebeth-no, I understood that.

I was just being sarcastic. Seems like the people against gays are so wrapped up in their sex lives, like they are spending all their time wondering what two gay people having sex look like, sound like, etc.
Otherwise, why would they care? They are taking the fantasy so darn far, it's becoming an obsession.

Heck, I know several heterosexual couples that have deviant sex. I sure the heck hope I am one of them. My hubby and I are happy.

You know what Latinmami? I, and others here I'm sure, think being homosexual is "nasty". Did we say so yet? No. You are the one who pointed out what you think is "creepy"

You are being so ignorant you don't even understand what I'm saying. IF I AM BORN WITH A PREDISPOSITION TO NOT WANT TO WEAR A SEATBELT, OR TO WANT TO COMMIT INCEST, OR MARRY MY DOG, ETC, I DID NOT MAKE THAT CHOICE. I WAS BORN THAT WAY. WHO ARE YOU AND THE GOVERNMENT TO TELL ME I CAN'T DO THOSE THINGS? YOU DON'T AGREE?
Just because YOU think it's gross to marry my dog, doesn't mean it's wrong, that's your logic not mine...

Do you understand yet?

Oh and I choose every day to not be gay. What a stupid question to ask when a person makes a choice.

ARE PEDOPHILES JUST BORN THAT WAY?

it really is ironic that some of the most religious people come off as evil you would they would be loving caring and excepting but they are not, they are judgmental not excepting, narrow minded and hurtful.

And I'm not lumping all people of religion into the particular religious set I was referring to. My mom and I had a talk about this article-she attends a Lutheran church every week, I'm an atheist. I'm glad to see that her view of her religion allows her to love and accept everyone.

Mikki: Sadly, those people pride themselves in each gay suicide. They pride themselves with events like that kid in Wyoming that got beaten and tied to a fence where he died (was it Matt Shepard?). That is their pride. Those are ACCOMPLISHMENTS in their eyes. They are ridding the world of sinners.

Soeone earlier posted something about "gay genes" and that they are a fact. Yet, our whacko Christians can't accept that the world is millions of years old, so how could they accept a scientific finding that doesn't support their hatred?

It is ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE for those religious whackos to allow anyone to believe differently than them and still be able to live life in the freedom that our Constitution supposedly guarantees.

And THEY want us to believe that GAY PEOPLE have a problem? OMG!

How can anyone who calls themselves "human," let alone "Christian" enjoy taking so many lives? Yet, THEY DO! When I spoke of them carrying that blood on their hands, they carry it as a BADGE OF HONOR!

Mikki-it was in quotes. I've heard that all gays are promiscuous and are deviant in their sexual behaviors from the religious set.
It was supposed to be sarcastic.

Rocky,
the point I think you are missing is this:

The Gay community isn't trying to force their way of life on others. They simply want to live the way they want to, and be equally recognized under the law.

The Christian status quo DOES want to force their way of life onto others. Their marriages get recognized by the law and they feel their religous views should be used to limit another group's ability to be lawfully wed.

Can you not see the difference? Allowing gay marriages does not hurt the Christian status quo. Banning gay marriages does hurt the gay community. Stop trying to punish the gay community because their lifestyle offends your religious beliefs.

Copper, I couldn't agree with you more.

My cousin passed away from AIDS back in the 80's. He was treated terribly by his own parents, people I loved and respected. I totally lost respect for them because of their ignorance.

They call themselves Christian. Well, MY Bible talks about tolerance, it talks about loving people, treating those as you would like to be treated. It talks about turning the other cheek.
It talks about how God gave us free will, and to me, if he has a penalties for sin, those people here judging others for sexual preference are sinning just as bad as they believe those "homosexuals" are.

I can't believe some people...it amazes me that people like this walk among us, and still manage to clothe and feed themselves without assistance.

does the bible teach you super religious people to be hateful?

scrap: You are likely correct in your statment that people are not on here for your "truth." Many of us are on here for JUSTICE and EQUALITY. Your "truth" is yours. My "truth" is mine.

You have EVERY RIGHT to shop where you wish. You have EVERY RIGHT to choose which television shows you watch, or which magazines you buy. NOTHING, NOTHING PREVENTS you from so choosing.

But people like you are causing my nephew to engage in very dangerous behavior because he is so AFRAID of his FATHER - my brother. THAT, scrap, is ABHORRENT! You claim to be so spiritual and religious, yet you are a HATEFUL, HATEFUL person.

You believe that YOU and your narrow-minded "bretheren" have the RIGHT to tell others how to live their lives. You tell them that they have the right to marry someone of the opposite sex, so they're being treated equally. You tell them, "You may NOT marry the person you love, and you can ONLY marry if you are willing to marry someone you DON'T LOVE!

I cannot write what I TRULY think of you, scrap, or my post would be deleted by staff.

You are an EVIL, HATEFUL, and PATHETIC human being (I use the term loosely, for there is nothing "human" about you). You choose to live a miserable life because the Bible makes you. Well, the Bible doesn't make you do anything. You follow it blindly, and that is your choice. But you have NO RIGHT to force others to do the same.

YOU, scrap, caused a dear friend of mine to commit suiced through your persecution. You carry his blood on your hands every day. I'm sure that's something of which you are PROUD!

If other people enjoying freedom "affects" you as you say it does, then YOU, not THEY, need psychiatric help! GET IT, and let other people live THEIR OWN LIVES!

Wait, now we're talking deviant sex?
Um.
I would really like to know what exactly is deviant. Because I think my husband and I need to have a serious discussion on what we can and cannot do in our own bedroom.

I think the 'deviant sex' is what scares them.

-don't come into my room then-and I'm straight

Like all christians only have sex just to have babies, come on, reallY?

Realybites wrote: "For all you Bible thumpers out there: If I am doing something that you feel is sinful and will certainly send my soul to Hell for eternity I hereby give you my permission to pray for my soul.
However, I do NOT give you my permission to meddle in my affairs and try to impose your moral values on me. Do NOT hang flyers on my door. Do NOT suggest I attend church more often. Do NOT tell me stories how God was able to keep you from drinking yourself to death.
Keep your high and mighty values to yourself. My soul burning in Hell does NOT affect your life here on Planet Earth. Mind your own business."

---

My response:

For all you Gay Rights pushers out there: If I am doing something that you feel is bigoted and will certainly send my soul to political correctness hell for eternity I hereby give you my permission to pray for me or meditate or do whatever you do.
However, I do NOT give you my permission to meddle in my affairs and try to impose your moral values on me. Do NOT hang flyers on my door. Do NOT suggest I attend sensitivity training. Do NOT tell me stories how sad and depressed you were until you discovered your TRUE sexuality. Keep your high and mighty values to yourself. My politically incorrect viewpoint does NOT affect who you can "love" here on Planet Earth. Mind your own business.

---

You see - both sides are trying to force their moral viewpoint. One (the one being perceived as "Christian" here) represents the status quo. One represents a major change. There is no "moral high ground' here.

fool, I would rather speak the truth than try and charm with lies. Not one of you are on here to seek the truth. I really don't care if you like me or not. That is not the goal. The religious of Jesus' day had a form of religion but wouldn't accept the truth. He stated it like it was. That is what is going on here. You have a form of religion without accepting the truth. He didn't care who He offended. Those of you on here need to hear the truth so one day when you stand before God and try and plead your case, you will be without excuse.

As it is, our rights have been violated. I suppose since gays want their rights outside their own home, then I can ask for my rights outside my own home. I can ask for appropriate programs on tv. People to speak in public without vulgar language. Public displays of affection, no matter who it is, should be kept in the privacy of one's own home. I have rights as well. You would do well to quit being so hypocritical and practice what you preach. When your non-moral lives effect mine, then I have the right to complain. Yes, it does effect me. I'll take my small grocery store check out line any day. Thank you very much.
************************************
so you do realize this is not little house on the prairie and that we are in the year 2009. You can be prude that is your right and choice but don't try to pretend or expect that everyone else is going to be as up tight and holier than thou as you are. you can preach all you want you can look down your nose and think you are better when really you are not. and by the way who died and made you god, to tell people they have no morals, how do you even know, are living with a same sex couple and you just know first hand that they are evil? yeah i doubt it

dub190:"Marriage is a lifelong mostly Christian vow between a man and a woman." You posted this April 5 at 5:45. You did not specify that you were discussing only Iowa marriage. Like many of the uninformed posters on this site, you backtrack when challenged. So, I reiterate, that 67% of the world population is non-Christian but virtually every single culture has a marriage ceremony. Are these non-Christian marriages somehow less in your eyes because they are not Christians? Or how about in Europe, where you aren't considered fully married until you go to the licencing agent (state) to have the civil ceremony performed (like our own licencing laws, with a mandatory ceremony included)? Cultures all over the world do things differently. It does not mean one is right and the rest are wrong. "There is more in this world, Horatio, than is dreamt of in your philosophy." (apologies to Shakespere).

As for you other generalizing, uninformed rants ("That's 33% of people on earth, not 33% of married people, or even Americans for that matter. Aren't most gays non religious? Most non religious people believe in evolution. How would anything EVER evolve, being homosexual? It is simply not natural. Oh wait Evolution is a fallacy...so?"), I am stunned that anyone can make such sweeping generalizations with so little knowledge. I don't pretend to know the spirituality of "most gays," but most of the gay people I know do not judge others based on ignorance. I also do not know the stance of most "non-religious people" on evolution. I DO know that some of the most spiritual people I know are scientists (as am I, a scientist, that is). Albert Einstein was one of the most passionately spiritual believers in God (he was Jewish, so this may be a loophole for you), not to mention one of the most brilliant scientists of the 20th century. As for 33% of the people on earth vs. 33% of the married people, in any given population, one extrapolates this information. If 33% of the world's population is Christian, it can be extrapolated that 33% of married people are Christians.

As for homosexuality precluding evolution, nobody is asking the entire world to participate in homosexual unions. It's like the red-headed or left-handed gene. It only comprises 5-10% of the population, but remains a viable gene. Educate yourself on the topics you feel compelled to comment on, especially if you insist on calling me on the carpet for a simple statement of FACT.

I did. What does any of your religion have to do with someone else getting married? I know, I know, you think it's immoral. I just couldn't see any connection with the legality of gay marriage in what you were writing.

Did you not read it?

So are you even talking about gay marriage, er....?

fool, I would rather speak the truth than try and charm with lies. Not one of you are on here to seek the truth. I really don't care if you like me or not. That is not the goal. The religious of Jesus' day had a form of religion but wouldn't accept the truth. He stated it like it was. That is what is going on here. You have a form of religion without accepting the truth. He didn't care who He offended. Those of you on here need to hear the truth so one day when you stand before God and try and plead your case, you will be without excuse.

As it is, our rights have been violated. I suppose since gays want their rights outside their own home, then I can ask for my rights outside my own home. I can ask for appropriate programs on tv. People to speak in public without vulgar language. Public displays of affection, no matter who it is, should be kept in the privacy of one's own home. I have rights as well. You would do well to quit being so hypocritical and practice what you preach. When your non-moral lives effect mine, then I have the right to complain. Yes, it does effect me. I'll take my small grocery store check out line any day. Thank you very much.

copper, Christmas isn't THAT far away...I say in a month or two we should see trees for sale at WalMart...

I know Christmas future is far away, and Christmas past is past, but are any of the right-wingers here familiar with the hymn, "O Holy Night?" It's one of my favorite songs, and I play it year-round.

"Truly, He taught us to love one another.
His law is love, and His gospel is peace.
Chains shall He break, for the slave is our brother.
And in His name all oppression shall cease."

Pretty much says it all!

Pees=an analogy to personal preference.
Sorry if it went over anyone's head.
(And the my hating pees doesn't correlate to hating gays-I'm for gay marriage)
Carrots=differences in beliefs and the role it plays-or doesn't play-in morality.

Scrap: "It is sad to watch when we can't open our doors, turn on our televisions, watch a movie, see magazines in the check out aisle unless we want to see the small percentage of people in this country who know how to whine and complain effectively and get their way."

~

Perhaps you should be more selective in your literature and television program choices if you do not like what you see.

Everyone is entitled to their own philosophies and religious beliefs, and if you look hard enough you will find it's a big big world outside of small-town grocery store magazine racks, cable television, and church on Sundays.

The Bible is a book full of guidelines and lessons in morality, but I don't think there is any room in modern society to take everything that is written there literally. It is impossible and any educated person that isn't drinking the Koolaid can point out the various hypocracies that arise from doing so.

Its unfortunate that some feel the need to impose their own stifling beliefs on others and are afraid to embrace change in the name of peace and tolerance.

If we hadn't acknowledged the human rights of the minority, we wouldn't have the equalities that our country prides itself in today. We would still be living amidst strict segregation laws and women would still not be able to vote.

To suggest that human beings who are enduring or have endured oppression and discrimination are a bunch of "whiners" is completely insensitive and narrow-minded.

Time for a pint of Ben & Jerry's!!!!!!

Congratulations Vermont!!!!!!!

I am curious...how does one "thump" a Bible?
I believe, but I don't force my beliefs on anyone.
I believe God has a sense of humor, and that is evident every single day on this earth.
If he wanted everyone made the same, since He made us, um, he would have made us ALL the same.

NaCl in abundance? (That's the chemical abbreviation for sodium chloride, also known as salt). Looks like there will be lots of it in Vermont soon, since everyone there will be turned to pillars of salt:

http://www.startribune.com/nation/425828...

well said reality, very much the truth if you want to live by your values and religion do so but don't try and force them on someone else

For all you Bible thumpers out there: If I am doing something that you feel is sinful and will certainly send my soul to Hell for eternity I hereby give you my permission to pray for my soul.
However, I do NOT give you my permission to meddle in my affairs and try to impose your moral values on me. Do NOT hang flyers on my door. Do NOT suggest I attend church more often. Do NOT tell me stories how God was able to keep you from drinking yourself to death.
Keep your high and mighty values to yourself. My soul burning in Hell does NOT affect your life here on Planet Earth. Mind your own business.

I guess the truth DOES hurt...

We went from lipstick lesbians, to donkey shows, to 'pees'.

Nice.

Just because I said love and marriage can exist without one another ......
**********************
why would you want to be in a marriage with someone you don't love? Is it because you think that it is the "right" thing to do according to your beliefs? I would never want to ever be in a marriage where there is no love, and to try and create a family based on a loveless marriage is a recipe for disfunctional children. IMO

alright so we have had same sex marriages compared to murders sex offenders, animal sex offenders and now peas and carrots. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs but you don't have to try and cram them down everyone else's throats nor do you need to think that your beliefs are the only ones that are correct. I don't think anyone who is against same sex marriage has said how it will directly effect them. Will it make you lose your job, your marriage, your family, your house? No most likely not so why do you people who are against this think you have the right to decide what people can have a family, a marriage, a house together with their spouse?

Oh, cooper, there you go again. (To quote Reagan). Just because I said love and marriage can exist without one another is not the same as saying that I am in an unhappy marriage, or to slander me with completely false innuendos about my personal life, but your post is the perfect example of the leaps of (il)logic that fuel this argument.

I'm just really craving some veggies, I think.

Point 1: people have different preferences, you may not understand it, doesn't make it unreal.

Point 2: My philosophy in life isn't for everyone, if you can't live and let live, then it is a problem. For you. Just you. No one is getting hurt here. People wanting to commit to each other legally is about THEM-not you or your beliefs.

So, I don't like pees. They look gross, they have a gross texture and I don't find them palatable. My dad likes pees. He can eat em by the spoonful. There is no way he can truly enjoy eating pees. I don't like them, they don't taste good, I don't understand how anyone can really like them. I just don't get it.

Anyway, let's say I read a book by some random people about some guy and I believed in the fables in the book and took them literally. I, and many others, decide to use this book as a moral compass. In the book it says you can't eat carrots on Wednesdays. It's morally unacceptable. I KNOW people are eating carrots on Wednesdays out there. (and some of them have said they were believers in the book) Anyway, for some book followers it just makes them so mad-it makes their belief that eating carrots on Wednesday is wrong-less. It defiles the whole meaning of carrot-less Wednesday. I, on the otherhand, find that in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really affect me. I see them carrying their carrots from the grocery store on Wednesday's and I just know what they are going to do with them. But it doesn't lessen my belief any. It doesn't hurt me. I don't have to eat them.

Thank you Tickle!!! God almighty....Thank you......This is NOT a religious issue.

copperguy, I should probably clarify my position a little. If you belive homosexuality is a sin, I respect that belief. The beauty of living in this country is that we have the freedom to choose a religion that suits our individual beliefs. However, I object to using religion as an argument against gay marriage because marriage is not a religious instutition. We have thousands of people in this country who are unemployed, have lost their homes, or lost their entire savings in the stock market. In the grand scheme of things, I think we have bigger problems to be focusing on right now instead of trying to legislate who people fall in love with.

tickle: You see, the difference is that you are comfortable and happy in your marriage. Those who spew their anti-same-sex-marriage venom are the ones who can't stand the thought of someone being with the one they love.

Perhaps you would be more sympathetic with them if you secretly wanted desperately to be with someone of your same sex, but your religion wouldn't allow it.

I'm beginning to see through their eyes now. (Boy is THAT a frightening thought!)

It amazes me reading all of these posts and the diversity of opinions. Some people went from gay marriage to murder, incest, and bestiality. Don't see a connection there. How is it that 2 gay people getting married diminishes my marriage? Do people really think that it will completely collapse society if made legal? And to all the arguments that homosexuality is a sin.....marriage is a LEGAL institution, not a religious one. Many people choose to get married in a church for whatever the reason, that doesn't make it a religious issue. I was married in my parent's house by a court commissioner and it was not legal until the license was signed and filed with the local court house. So I guess in the eyes of religion, I'm still living in sin because I wasn't married in a church.

This is exactly what scares me the most....I could only make it thru about half of this blog but a reoccuring argument seems to be driven by religion.....Why? Has anyone noticed what religion is doing to this world? Also marriage is not a religious issue. It is 100% controlled by govt. What exactly are the cons to gay marriage? Is it directly affecting anyone other then themselves? I have many opinions about the bible as well but this is defenatly not the forum to discuss this.

a same sex marriage does not effect anyone except the couple getting married and the only reason why the couple will have any problems is because of the people whose noses are stuck so high in the air think they are better than them. why worry about if someone of the same sex gets married you say they will go to hell well fine if that is what happens in the end still not anyone's problem except the happy married couple.

The U.S. Supreme Court, for example, struck down laws in southern states that prohibited racially mixed marriages. These antimiscegenation statutes were held to be unconstitutional in the 1967 case of Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 87 S. Ct. 1817, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1010, because they violated Equal Protection of the laws.

I love to cut and paste

from a site about the legal definition of marriage:
The traditional principle upon which the institution of marriage is founded is that a husband has the obligation to support a wife, and that a wife has the duty to serve. In the past, this has meant that the husband has the duty to provide a safe house, to pay for necessities such as food and clothing, and to live in the house. A wife's obligation has traditionally entailed maintaining a home, living in the home, having sexual relations with her husband, and rearing the couple's children.
Is this what you want?

Sure, that's only one definition.
The man and women thing is based on traditional views. Haven't traditional roles changed in heterosexual marriage?
You don't think it's right. Got it.
Don't marry someone of your same sex then.

So Rocky has now strengthened my suspicion. S/he said, "Love and marriage are not in lock-step. You can easily have one without the other."

So, because Rocky is unhappy with his/her spouse, then everyone should be subjected to the same unhappiness.

Again, I ask, are the people on the religious right jealous of those who think they should have the mate of their choice?

Do they so long to have a lover of their same sex (which is forbidden by their relgious philosophy) that they demand others be equally as miserable?

Perhaps they really want to make love to their dog? Their 7 year old niece/nephew? Their sister/brother?

Hmmmmmmm????????????

He doth protest too loudly!

mar·riage
Pronunciation: \ˈmer-ij, ˈma-rij\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry
Date: 14th century
1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b: the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c: the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected ; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3: an intimate or close union <the marriage of painting and poetry — J. T. Shawcross>

from Merriam-Webster

Traditions change. Would you rather everything being like it was at the beginning of time?

Will it affect your marriage? The definition is different?-oh my, call in the army. Just make sure none of them are gay.
It doesn't affect negatively all those who think it is right.
My question-how will it affect EVERYONE?

I have a question for you, lovetoscrap. I don't expect an answer but, if you do, I'd ask that you give it some quiet thought and reflection before answering honestly:

As you read over your own posts, do you think you are drawing people toward religion or driving them away?

I didn't say any of those things to you so don't direct it at me.
Furthermore, who gives me the right to decide? Well, who gives you the right to decide? I'm stating my opinion as are you.
And this is a time of change-only three states. What was it before? What will it be in the future? Back in the day blacks didn't have the same rights either, they were 'wrong' for asking.

sewaelizebeth Apr 7, 2009 at 8:59 a.m.
..
It will affect everyone because you have now re-defined a term “Marriage”, that has been used for thousands of years.
..
It use to define a relationship between men and women, to now encompass anything your world view wants (homosexuality, polygamy, bestiality, pedophilia) .
..
Up is down, Down id Up!

No-I asked how it would affect EVERYONE.
I'm not religious so you can throw that arguement out the window right now.
Will it make your marriage any less?
If so then maybe you should rethink YOUR vows.
I can't turn on the tv without seeing sexuality or 'sin' of any sort. I can't go anywhere without someone thumping me on the head with their bible.
If asking for the laws to expand to include everyone is whining-then women whined long ago for the right to vote. Do you find that distressing?

Hook, line and sinker. That's what many of you have taken from the homosexual agenda. Let's look at those "talking points" that I'm seeing repeated over and over again (Repeat a lie often enough and people will believe it is the truth!)

---

1. Make it a discussion of religious bigotry. Grade: A+ Very successful at making this the crux of the conversation. All discussion of how this is legal, not a religious question has been squelched.

---

2. Use the phrase "taking away our rights". Grade A. Up until about 4 years ago there was never a right to "marry whoever you want". There are tons of restrictions. Marriage has always only been allowed n the US between a man and an unrelated woman who agreed to the union. The "right" to marry a person of the same gender is completely new.

---

3. Deny any "slippery slope" arguments. Dismiss them as "alarmist". Grade A-. Once marriage means a union between any consenting people, why not allow plural marriage, man/boy marriage, etc...? Marriage to animals is a silly argument....they aren't people.

---

4. Compare to the ban on interracial marriage. Grade: A. Yes, there were some bans on interracial marriage and yes, they were wrong. Removing those bans. however, didn't change the basic definition of marriage as being between and man and a woman. This does.

----

5. Repeat the phrase: "You're deciding who I can love". Grade A
Fact is most people married for any length of time will tell you that Frank Sinatra was wrong. Love and marriage are not in lock-step. You can easily have one without the other.

----

I could go on, but, despite my disagreement with their position, I have to tip my hat to the propaganda machine that is the homosexual community. Never in history has such a small minority shaped the debate so brilliantly. Christians - if you had half the zeal and courage of these folks, your message would be amazing! Gay marriage is coming, not because it is "right", but because they framers of the argument have done their job perfectly.

Sew...But they love each other...you must have phobia because you think it's wrong. You must be a bigot, totally intolerant of what these people want. Call it any name you want, but who are you to decide what is right and wrong? Who gives you that authority? Marrying someone of the same sex is wrong as well. Having sex with someone of the same sex is wrong. It is also against the law in all but three states to marry a person of the same sex. What is so hard to understand about that? And I too thought we went over this.

Yes, it does impact my life. This country is digging itself deeper and deeper into a sinking pit of desparation. It is sad to watch when we can't open our doors, turn on our televisions, watch a movie, see magazines in the check out aisle unless we want to see the small percentage of people in this country who know how to whine and complain effectively and get their way. It's like a two year old throwing a fit and the parent not being the parent, giving in for fear of how they will look. Yes, it's a small group of people in this country that feel gays should have the right to disrupt the sanctity of the union of a man and wife in holy matrimony. Even in this generally liberal state, the popular vote said NO to gay marriage. Most people do not want it, believe it is wrong, and want to preserve the traditional ways of marriage.

The reason there is religion in this argument is simple, God's word says homosexuality is a sin and an ABOMINATION to God!! I absolutly agree with the bloggers who can't tolerate this! It is sin in the eyes of God. No matter what church you attend or don't attend! God created man to be with a woman. I would like to hear some of you who say we need to be tolerant of this to be tolerant of christianity once! I get attacked for that all the time and it seems to me the road does not go both ways for those who are touting tolerance. I am absolutly against sin and homosexuality is a sin clearly talked about in the bible. If you are going to quote what you think God would say then you need to read it and get it right. God is a loving God but he also just and therefore cannot go against his word and he does not tolerate sin. He forgives us if we are truly repentant and turn away from that sin, but not when we keep flaunting it in front of him.

Now that is called pedophilia. I thought we went over that.
What, specifically, is so scary about gays getting married. Tell me how it will affect everyone.

I have read about teachers being in love with their 13 year old students...and their students in love with them...so they should be allowed to marry?

They don't have the right to marry the person they are in love with. That is not the same. Is that so hard to admit?

Why is there even an argument of religion here? It doesn't matter what your religious beliefs are. They are not asking to marry in your church. They are asking for the same rights that everyone else is granted. Seperation of Church and State. Not everyone believes in your religion so how can laws be put forth in the name of religion? You can give the same old line about 'the sanctity of marriage' until you're blue in the face, but marriage is no longer sacred to most people. Why is it okay for celebritities to run off to Vegas and elope only to file for divorce several days later? It's okay for two people to get married just as long as they are of the opposite sex? There are a lot of same sex marriages that are a lot more stable than many same sex marriages I know. People need to mind their own business. Does it really impact your life if two men or two women commit their lives to each other? How can that possibly be a bad thing?!

You betcha I am intolerant of sin. We all should be and do what we can to change and get rid of the sin in our lives. As I stated before, it is special rights. Homosexuals have the same rights as we have right now. All of you who are saying "they just want the rights that everyone else has..." they already have them! So, was that so hard to admit?

You are no fool.
Good poke.
You are right, it would all still be equal.
Wretched-I do what I want and it just so happens that it doesn't hurt anyone, myself included. Give people credit for being intrinsicly good.
Fire and brimstone

lovetoscrap: My pole isn't quite ten feet but I'll give it a poke.

Your position is that current law is fair because any person --heterosexual and homosexual alike-- may now marry anyone of the opposite sex, right? Well, when Iowa's law comes takes effect, any person --heterosexual and homosexual alike-- will be able to marry anyone of EITHER gender. Since heterosexuals will also be free to marry any person of either gender, no special rights or privileges are being granted to anyone. In other words, the new law will be just as absurdly useless and irrelevant to you as the current law is to a homosexual.

By the way, your insulting comment to latinmami2 was totally unjustified and inappropriate.

Why doesn't everybody do what they want? Just live and let live. Don't ruin my mello man. You are just so harsh! Just be, man. People think because they live in this country that they are free. Boy are you wrong. Laws were inacted for stupid people so they would not do stupid things. Basically to stop us from hurting ourselves and others in the process. Now you are saying to yourself what does gay marriage have anything to do with hurting ourselves and others? Well, a homosexual act in and of itself is a sin against God and tears at the fiber of humanity. Whoa, gay marriage is a sin and should not be looked at as okay? You bet your bottom, oh man I should not of said bottom. Just because some people have their priorities screwed up it should not cause the rest of us to suffer.

-RummageSalesRock- I posted what I did because it seemed to me a person with your intelligence would get the joke. I in no way do I think you toke or whatever the kids are saying nowadays. See it from my point of view and I will see it from yours. I think that is what open debate is? Maybe just maybe or maybe not this issue will spark a debate that will send the country in the right direction. It will cause the corrupt poloticians to be thrown out on their ears. It will make people hit their knees and thank God for everything that they have and pray that their friends and enemies will be safe and we will all live together in peace and harmony. Man I love this country! I hope you do to!

Two words for this "issue" - WHO CARES!

Christ, live and let live........

dub190 seems to be the king/queen of the straw man argument.

There is no slippery slope. Allowing homosexuals to be married will not lead to the tolerance of pedophiles, incestuous relationships or bestiality. The same logic was probably used when the legality of interracial marriage was debated, but I hope by now we ALL see there is nothing wrong with that.

Why can't everybody "live and let live"? Laws are really only needed to clearly spell out what SHOULD be common sense. Don't drive too fast (unsafe). Don't kill (deprives someone of their freedon to live).

If the gay couple next door gets married, what have they taken from you? Nothing. The religious right will say gays are "forcing" their lifestyle on everybody. That is not any truer than straight people "forcing" their views on gays or religious people "forcing" their views on the non-religious.

Of course history has proven that common sense isn't so common....thus the lengthy discussions in this blog. Please don't tell me how to live my life and I will have the simple courtesy not to tell you how to live your life.

Perhaps we're not touching it with a ten foot pole because we're simply ignoring you? You are one of those who want to APPEAR like you are being reasonable, and that those on the other side are unreasonable.

In fact, what you are saying is that everyone is entitled to live the way they want, as long as that's the way YOU want. You are trying to use strict construction as a crutch to support your discriminatory view.

Using strict construction, many of the civil rights we have come to enjoy are not, in fact, to be enjoyed by all. For instance, the Sixth Amendment grants the right of the accused to a fair and speedy trial, "to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

So, in using strict construction, these rights do not apply to women. For, you see, the Constitution uses "him," "his," etc.. So that excludes females.

Your claim that the laws allow gay people to marry people of the opposite sex like saying that public accommodations do not need to provide separate restrooms for males and females. After all, a female could just as easily use a urinal, right? As long as a restroom is provided, there's no discrimination, and no need to accommodate the different sexes. If a female isn't comfortable using a urinal (or better, how about a trough), that's her problem.

Really good logic you have!

And, this will be my one and only post regarding your bigotry. Yes, I said "bigotry." And that's exactly what it is.

If you dress up a pig, all you get is a pretty pig. Dressing your bigotry in the prettiest of language still leaves us with bigotry.

You repeated the SAME thing several times. If you say it enough it will make sense? Apparently it didn't answer her question, maybe you should make up something else.

latin, what part don't you get? I have repeated the special rights issue several times, as have others on here. Do I need my daughter to translate to Spanish for you?

Well, I only support people marrying their pets if they are opposite sexes. Otherwise it would just be weird and wrong.
;)

I don't think people are really lobbying to marry their pets or siblings...that is just a stupid statement. If possible, keep the blog on track. People are acting like gay marriage will open the door to all sorts of bizarre things. Gay marriage isn't bizarre, just different than the norm, for the time being. Just because they never had daycare for children at the workplace doesn't mean it's not a good thing, it was just new. Now they have daycare at the workplace and it's working really well for people. But when it was first brought up, you would think people were talking about gay marriage! Open minds aren't a bad thing.

well it's time to call it a night enjoy battling for laws to allow you to marry your brother or your pet.

gays want equal rights, no one is letting them not wear their seat belt or assist a suicide or any of the other absurd comments that have been made, they want to be able to be married and live together as wife and wife or husband and husband. i still have yet to hear what are the special rules they are asking for?

dub, I have brought up the whole equal rights several times...no one touches it with a ten foot pole. Keep trying though...maybe someone will write something worth reading...besides the same old, same old. I feel sorry for Hannah. I think she is letting these guys get to her. Too bad to.

Of course you have your own opinions. And I have mine. This is blog where we are both just vehemently stating them. I don't think either of us is trying to change each other's minds-but just trying to show each other an angle the other may not have thought about.

Copperguy, if gays have the right to marry. I should also be allowed the right to do drugs, abstain from a seatbelt, marry my cousin, dog etc. Jethro can just get a late term abortion.

Equal is the term people keep using. Even though it already is equal. Any man or woman can marry anyone of the opposite sex.
*************
so basically as long as gays have rights you don't want to follow the rules, but if they don't have any rights you will be okay with all of the other laws, yeah that makes sense. i think we have gone way off track here and really all of these points are nonsense and some sort of creepy really

Latinmami,
If gays need the right to get married, then anyone should be able to marry as many people or animals or plants as they want. If not then that's unfair, and those people need equal rights. Do you have a problem with me marrying my dog? I'm not hurting anybody?

Copperguy, how many million+ year olds do you know? You have no idea how old the world is.
*********************
Do you people who are against same sex marriage have no other reasons to be against other than wanting to marry your pet. that is not even a logical reason or argument. the people who are quoting out of the bible at least make some sort of sense but comparing same sex marriages to doing your pet is not even close and is actually just down right nasty

Go back and re-read all my posts. It's not that I don't want gays to be married. My wife and I have gay friends that are married...speaks volumes on my character again now doesn't as well I'm betting. It was easy for you too jump to a conclusion because I don't agree with your ideals but that doesn't mean can't have my own opinions to agree with some aspects of gays and some not so much. An open mind is just like a parachute it only works when its open to both sides of an issue.

A beautiful ceremony for an often-times loveless marriage. Awesome!
How about a beautiful ceremony for a loving marriage-gays included.
Nah-that would compromise your delicate sensibilities.

IDK ask dub190 on the dog question...but I know some people from India look at pre-arranged marriage as tradition, not a business contract. I didn't see any exchange of goats or land, just a beautiful ceremony.

My dog barks once for yes, twice for no. :)

Copperguy, if gays have the right to marry. I should also be allowed the right to do drugs, abstain from a seatbelt, marry my cousin, dog etc. Jethro can just get a late term abortion.

Equal is the term people keep using. Even though it already is equal. Any man or woman can marry anyone of the opposite sex.

pre-arranged marriage isn't a love contract. It's a business deal.
My point was both people should love each other and want to marry the other.
Can your dog tell you that it wants to marry you?

And further, none of those instances seek to deny the rights of one class of people that are available to other classes of people (with the possible exception of doing drugs...we allow smokers and drinkers to consume harmful substances, so what's the diff? Subject for another forum).

dub:

Suicide is not illegal.
Assisted suicide results in death.
Don't know why you can't do drugs.
You need to wear your seatbelt because of the monetary cost to society for caring for crash victims.
Jethro can't marry his sister because they are both capable of reproduction and reproduction betwen close relatives creates malformed babies.
Not sure what "the donkey show" is.
Semi automatic rifles are not unlawful.

sew: a love contract=marriage? Lets ignore pre-arranged marriages completely? Comon now that is hardly equal.

I think if someone wants to kill themselves-it should be a personal choice. It would suck for everyone involved, but hey. I think assisted suicide should be permitted. Why make someone suffer or whatever because wanting to die is wrong? Jethro shouldn't procreate with his sister because of birth defects-give a kid a chance at a normal life!

Marriage is a love contract between two people. Hey if you really want to marry your dog, and your dog you-best wishes!
-And I don't think anyone should be made to wear their seatbelts-I do because it's for safety.

Sewaelizabeth, I was going to answer your question but Lovestoscrap did it for me. And God put in place free will, that's why he "allowed" people to be gay. That's why he "allows" abortion, or should I say murder.

Latinmami,
If gays need the right to get married, then anyone should be able to marry as many people or animals or plants as they want. If not then that's unfair, and those people need equal rights. Do you have a problem with me marrying my dog? I'm not hurting anybody?

Copperguy, how many million+ year olds do you know? You have no idea how old the world is.

Now maybe some of MY questions will be answered?

Why is suicide illegal? What about assisted suicide? Why can't I do drugs? Why do I need to wear MY seat belt? Why can't Jethro marry his sister? Why is the "donkey show" illegal in America? Those people aren't "hurting anybody" My semi auto rifle didn't hurt anybody, but the government is trying to take that.

madman- how would i know what sin you have done? you tell me!!!


I am done with this discussion.

OK, madman, since you brought it up ***evil grin here***:

I think you might be onto something with that "covet" part. I said it before and I'll say it again: Those who seek to deny same-sex couple the right to marry might just be dealing with their own deprivation. Seems to me they might be motivated by the old "If I can't have who I want, then you can have who you want" mentality. Maybe they're secretly jealous of anyone who gets to have the mate (romantic or sexual) of their choosing.

Can someone...ANYONE...tell me how allowing Adam and Steve or Jane and June to get married will somehow lessen MY marriage to my wife of 25+ years? Or anyone elses marriage, for that matter.

I also don't get how allowing gay marriage will somehow mean that we could then be able to marry animals. Or that we wouldn't be able to prosecute pedophiles.

PLEASE, somebody 'splain this to me!

Hannah...

...you said this, right?

"we are all sinners."

Tell me...what sin have I done?

I've never murdered anyone. I don't covet thy neighbors ass or wife. I respect my parents. I don't steal. As I have no us for a god, I guess you'd have me on the not having any god before me...so I guess I can live with that one. Same thing goes for the sabbath. What did I miss?

I haven't any real problem with someone believing that gay and lesbian couples shouldn't marry...IF and only if they don't try to put that belief on some book or what the pastor told them. Own it, make it your own idea. I will still disagree, but I'll respect that you hold YOUR OWN opinion, not someone elses idea of what you should believe.

I love how all these people say this is going down a slippery slope, has Canada gone down this slippery slope? Massachusetts? I don't see that they have changed to black holes or something since they allow gay marriage.
And like I said yesterday, the state of Iowa and its businesses are going to be the winners here! The will definitely have a nice economic stimulus with this and if you want to start up a wedding planning business that will cater to gay marriage, you will make a mint.

the fact of the matter is there are same sex couples and more and more states are allowing them to be married whether people think it is right or wrong.

latin, since right and wrong is to be determined by each individually, then who decides that murder, stealing, incest, pornagraphy, rape etc. are wrong. I am sure if you ask any of those people doing these types of things, they see nothing wrong with it. So, does that make it right? Another sign of that the end is coming...everyone doing what is right in his or her own eyes, not following God's ways.
*******************
are you really comparing being gay to being a murderer a robber or some other violent offender? i was waiting for someone to say that. How does a same sex couple effect you, they don't unless you are being forced to live with them, pay their bills, and be in their lives then you are not effecting them

I'm really surprised The Joker hasn't dropped in. He is the know all, be all, forecaster of yet to be around here...

Oops. Forgot Who we're talking about. Should have capitalized: such a Prankster.

And until 1992, the Earth was the center of the universe..

It's just God tricking us. But, hey, at least He (or She) has a sense of humor. And such a prankster!

Latinmami2: You might as well give up on rational discussion. The earth is flat. The earth has existed for 6000 years. Dinosaurs really became petroleum in a few years, not millions. A 90 year old can get pregnant. And people really do choose to be gay, no matter what science proves.

If god allowed em to be gay he musta screwed up.

Lovetoscrap: You asked about "murder, stealing, incest, pornagraphy, rape."

Well, for one, pornography is lawful, so we'll toss that one right away. We are talking about whether same-sex couples should legally be allowed to marry, remember?

As to the others you mentioned - which ARE unlawful - they all harm someone else. That's the difference.

Women and blacks were created to be women and black. Men were not created to be gay. Sorry, that argument doesn't wash with me :)

The special rights they are asking for is to marry someone of the same sex. That is special rights...not the same as everyone else. As it stands, they currently have the same rights as everyone else. A gay man can choose a woman and get married. Just like every other man.

Copperguy-shhhhh! Don't let the dinosaurs hear you, they think they're real.

Loving someone is promiscuous??
Oh, crap....

Bill: That's just TOO funny. Almost as good as "hell marys."

And God created the world so it would APPEAR to be billions of years old, just to fool the scientists!

Let's hear it for the Bible as the ABSOLUTE word of God, everyone!

latin, since right and wrong is to be determined by each individually, then who decides that murder, stealing, incest, pornagraphy, rape etc. are wrong. I am sure if you ask any of those people doing these types of things, they see nothing wrong with it. So, does that make it right? Another sign of that the end is coming...everyone doing what is right in his or her own eyes, not following God's ways.

which special rights are they asking for?

And for the longest time women couldn't vote. But they asked for their 'special' rights. Blacks and the separate but 'equal' crap-they asked for special rights-to be treated like the white folks. It was special tho because they're different.

See, Rep...you and I can disgree on one topic or point and still not be disagreeable! (I don't even remember what it was now.)

Cheers! And keep on posting!

Sewaelizebeth, JimPL didn't but I and the bible call it that. JimPL did ask about what Christ would do and the only way we can know that is by what's in the bible.
.
Copperguy, Tell you pastor not to worry, he can still marry. While he and his fiancee may believe that procreation is impossible for them, so did Abraham and Sarah, and she was 90 years old! I'm sure your pastor can tell you all about it.

I've said it more than once, but for those of you who refuse to address it I will say it again. Gays have the same rights as everyone else. They can marry someone of the opposite sex, just like everyone else. They are not asking for the "same" rights, they are asking for special rights.

hannah- maybe most gay people don't see it as them commiting a sin they are just thinking that they are in love and that is it, all people sin and some more than others, but that does not make us all bad people it just makes us human. being gay is harmless it does not hurt anyone else even for the people who are totally against it does not harm you, it is their choice and their lives to live and really don't need anyone to tell them what they are doing is wrong

My point is gays think their rights are so much more important than other peoples. I know gay marriage will one day be embraced by the entire country, then I can marry my dog, because marriage is just a stupid label.
*********************
i don't think that gay people think their rights are more important i think they want the same rights as other couples, and what is with comparing marriage to marrying your relatives and pets, what does that have to do with anything at all.

latinmami2-"the way you posted this makes it sound like you are saying all catholics are sinners because they can say their hail marys"

we are all sinners. we ask for forgivness. each denomation does it differently. I am not trying to be disrespeckful. sorry if you took it the wrong way.

I will try again. if it is a sin to be gay according to some of the beliefs here it doesnt seem they want to be forgiven if they continue this practice.

Because, you don't get to vote other people's rights away in a Constitutional democracy. The south would have never ended slavery.

Copperguy: good one! Poor bill was hung up on his pulpit of preaching about the sin of incest.

And does your dog want to marry you?

They're asking for the same rights-not more. How can you say they think their rights are more important. Validate that statement.

National popular vote on gay marriage. Why not?

In the previous question about the men who love each other, Bill responded with something about promiscuous behavior.
I don't recall Jim describing the couple as promiscuous.
And as far as a parade-how about Mardi Gras. Sure it's about something else but throw me some beads mister.
And-I've been at school all day but I want to respond about a statement made earlier that atheists don't believe in god because they don't want to answer for all the things that they do and the life they live or whatever.
Wouldn't you have to know someone first before you speak for them. And my actions in life are for a better little reality in my corner of the world. What things have I done that I don't want to answer for?

Katy, we are not talking about the whole world. We are talking about IOWA. That's 33% of people on earth, not 33% of married people, or even Americans for that matter.
Aren't most gays non religious? Most non religious people believe in evolution. How would anything EVER evolve, being homosexual? It is simply not natural. Oh wait Evolution is a fallacy...so?
I don't care if a person is gay.
What about ugly people who commit suicide? Or stupid people, or people who were molested? What do we do about them? Are they entitled to more?
If you are going to punish someone excessively for calling someone gay, you better do the same for fat, ugly, geeky kids because that just wouldn't be FAIR. The world isn't fair. It's not fair that fat people can't sit comfortably on a plane, it's unfair that tall people have to stoop down to get into a business, I could go on and on.
My point is gays think their rights are so much more important than other peoples. I know gay marriage will one day be embraced by the entire country, then I can marry my dog, because marriage is just a stupid label.

Unfortunately, not as many are teaching their children the difference between right and wrong.
*************************
this is again proof that you think that your beliefs are the only ones that are right. there are a lot of people who teach their children right from wrong but their children still fall in love with the same sex, that is that person's choice to fall in love with who they want to and as a parent you should not condemn your child for that you love your children unconditionally.

billnewbie, your last post was very well put. Thank you.

Latin, actually, it will not surprise me at all if same sex couples can marry legally in this state in the future. With all the desensitizing going on, future generations will be pushovers for this. It may take a little while yet as many of us adults still believe in right and wrong. Unfortunately, not as many are teaching their children the difference between right and wrong. I had to laugh at an earlier post when the poster stated that primetime tv was the heterosexual parade. NOT. Almost everything on television and in the movies has gay/lesbian roles in them. We have even noticed it in children's movies. It is very sad.

Billnewbie: My pastor and I want to thank you for saving him from legal prosecution and from an eternity in hell.

He and fiance (his wife of 40 years died a few years back) were planning to wed. I explained that since the two of them cannot procreate, their wedding would be wrong in God's eyes and a sham in the law's eyes.

Thanks for the resuce!

latin, if you are talking about Christianity and it's different denominations, then you are correct. If you are saying that Buddhists or Hindu's serve the same God as I do, then you are mistaken. I serve the same God as Lutherans, Baptists, Methodists...basically any Christian denomination that has it's foundation in Christ. I do not agree with everything that these different denominations teach, but Christ being preached is the most important part. If Christ is not preached, then it is not the truth.

as far as wisconsin saying you can't marry same sex couples (not talking about relatives) who is to say that won't happen in the future.

Latinmami2, there is someone who thinks they can tell you that you cannot marry a person you love, the State of Wisconsin, and it can be very persuasive. So I suggest that if you have plans to someday marry your brother, get a good lawyer first.
**********************
this is about marrying same sex couples not incest so not really sure what your creepy point is

latinmami, You would be much easier to understand if you would use punctuation. It takes me a few times of reading through your posts to try and decipher them. No, there are many different gods but only one true God. My God created the universe, was born of a virgin, died on a cross for all of our sins, rose again on the third day and is sitting at the right hand of the Father. He will return again for us and we will be judged. If we have accepted Him as our Lord and Savior and our hearts and lives reflect that, then we will spend eternity with Him. If not, we will spend eternity separated from God in hell. If this is not the God you serve, then you do not serve the same God as I do.
************************
you keep saying my god my god which makes it sound like your beliefs are the only ones out there that are possibly correct, your god happens to be many people's god but they have different beliefs than yours. your beliefs are not the only ones that are correct nor are they the only ones that make it possible to believe in your god. there are many different religions that believe in the same god but all have different views in their religions but that does not make any of them wrong it just means that they have different ways of believing.

when you have committed a sin you ask for forgiveness. do you them keep on sining the same sin over and over or do you try to be a better person? well i think catholics do. just have to do hell marys every week i guess.

***************
the way you posted this makes it sound like you are saying all catholics are sinners because they can say their hail marys

latinmami, You would be much easier to understand if you would use punctuation. It takes me a few times of reading through your posts to try and decipher them. No, there are many different gods but only one true God. My God created the universe, was born of a virgin, died on a cross for all of our sins, rose again on the third day and is sitting at the right hand of the Father. He will return again for us and we will be judged. If we have accepted Him as our Lord and Savior and our hearts and lives reflect that, then we will spend eternity with Him. If not, we will spend eternity separated from God in hell. If this is not the God you serve, then you do not serve the same God as I do.

Latinmami2, there is someone who thinks they can tell you that you cannot marry a person you love, the State of Wisconsin, and it can be very persuasive. So I suggest that if you have plans to someday marry your brother, get a good lawyer first.

It looks like the majority opinion here is that we can all believe what we want about God and that as long as we are sincere, that is all that counts. But the problem with that is it ignores the fact that God has certain set characteristics. What I believe about God may be different than what someone else believes about God or even what everyone else believes but some are closer to the truth than others. If we sincerely believe in God then we must be on a lifelong search for the truth about Him, desiring to get as close to the truth as we can. And we must guard ourselves very closely not to fall into wishful thinking that lead so many in the wrong direction, even to the point of rejecting Him. That wishful thinking is usually caused by a favorite sin. That explains why so many homosexuals can still call themselves Christian when the bible clearly states that homosexual acts are sin. They want to focus on a particular characteristic, such as “God = Love” and set that up as the preferred vision of Him. The reasoning is that God wouldn’t condemn a person who loves God who is simply enjoying the gift of sexuality, a gift given by God. That kind of rationalization is not unique to homosexual Christians as we all have fallen into that trap at one time or another. But that ignores His other attributes and it denies what He said about Himself and what He commanded us to do in His word, the bible. Claiming that the bible is not the word of God is a belief of those who reject Christianity, but that is a claim a Christian cannot make as the bible is the source of Christianity. In other words, for a Christian to deny the veracity of the bible is contradictory, an act of the skeptics not of the faithful. Certainly Christians can and do debate among ourselves the specific meanings of scripture, but a Christian cannot say that the bible is the work of humans alone and still be a Christian.

Actually, hannah, I think it's clear that you were knocking the Catholic faith. You imply that Catholics think they can commit all the sin they want because they think saying "Hail Mary's" will make it all ok.

Catholics have a right to be offended. I am not Catholic, and certainly am no fan of the Catholic Church. I do, however, believe that Catholics are just as "religious" as any other faith. And I grasp the importance of Hail Mary in the Rosary.

You have made an assumption about Catholics' attitude toward Hail Mary, even though you don't understand it. Just like you have assumed that gays "choose" to be gay. Just because you think things a certain way doesn't make your thought correct.

sorry hail marys

latinmami- how am i knocking the catholic religion- isnt that what happens?

Actually, maybe it was "Sister Bertha Better Than You." Oh, well, either way it still doesn't hold a candle to "hell marys."

Latin: Ray Stevens records songs filled with satire. In "The Mississippi Squirrel Revival," it's about him taking a squirrel to church with him in a shoe box. It points out how those who are so sanctimonious are often some of the biggest offenders.

Look for the .mp3 file and get it. It's great fun!

Here's a link to the lyrics. You ought to buy the .mp3 though. At 99 cents on real.com, it's a bargain for the laugh you'll get!

http://www.cowboylyrics.com/lyrics/steve...

i do not but would love to know what the meaning behind them were since you brought them up

Does anyone remember the Ray Stevens song, "The Mississippi Squirrel Revival?" Remember, "Sister Beulah Better Than You?"

religion aside would anyone in this forum actually listen if someone told you that it is not okay to marry your partner who you are in love with?

will never tell you "it's okay, you can do what feels right for you". Sorry.
*****************************
most people live their lives by doing what feels right for them.

I'll take a whack at JimPI's question. Two men who love each other are not necessarily homosexual nor does being in love automatically lead to a sexual relationship. But assuming that JimPI means "two gay men in love" as being in a sexual relationship then I think that Christ would tell them what he told the other promiscuous people he encountered. He would point out the iniquity in their actions and He would advise them to go and sin no more. His forgiveness is freely available to all that seek it, ourselves included, but if we will not be forgiven He does not force it on us.

This reminds me..G-fan...you still have some of my videos.
I want them back.

OMG! (no pun intended!) "hell marys"?!?!?!?!?!

Talk about sheep. And, sheep with bad ears at that!

What ever happened to knowing what you're talking about before you say it?!?!?!?!?!?

OMG! LAUGH, LAUGH, LAUGH!!!!!!!!

I honestly think that is the most absurdly comical thing I have ever seen written...especially given the holier than thou attitude!

OMG is that FUNNY!!!!!

latinmami2 you make a perfect point. Too bad some one will still argue their god is better than our god. Or there is no god at all. Hence the war rages on.

god is god, but how you perceive him and how the next person perceives normally isn't the same way and just because i don't have the same beliefs as you does not mean that i am not believing in the same god as you because i am it just is in a different way than you believe.

Jim, Jesus would say...Go and sin no more. If a person seeks forgiveness, that means they know they are doing wrong and are asking for repentance. If they truly are trying to change their ways, then they will be forgiven, with the expectation that they go and sin no more.

Rummage...Ummm....the word is love, God is the word...Ummmm...so what parts of the word do you not accept? It must be convenient to write your own word. I don't think that's how it works though.

Latin, yes, I am saying that my God, the creator of the heavens and the earth is the only true God. And His word is forever and inspired and true. I am not, nor will I ever tell you it's ok to worship any other God, because it is not. I respect your freedoms to worship what you want, I will never condone it. I will never tell you "it's okay, you can do what feels right for you". Sorry.

hannah, that is what i am talking about, you have now knocked the catholic religion with your "hell marys". we should all be able to have our beliefs and not have to number 1 cram them down people's throats like it is the only thing that is right and number two step in someone else's shoes to see where they might be coming from and by doing that you could learn something.

when you have committed a sin you ask for forgiveness. do you them keep on sining the same sin over and over or do you try to be a better person? well i think catholics do. just have to do hell marys every week i guess.

I've got coupons to clip, the paper had TONS of them yesterday. Time to plan the bargain hunts! :)

Lake asked:I wonder what family structure is ideal? Who is it ideal for?
Looking at the majority of families world wide would be a good start.
Also how about families based on a union or commitment to one another that is more than just love. It seems that love has been beaten into the ground for worthiness of marriage. After all the purpose of marriage is to proclaim your love to one another, conjoin resources and procreation. What happens when love isn't once what it was when family grows and competes for love in many ways. So the basis that a marriage only needs love is a complete false pretense. They call it the honeymoon stage for a reason. It seems to wear off at an alarming rate with marriage based on love alone and divorce rates.

LATIN...AGREED. But the funny thing is, many Christians think it is their job to judge, that God isn't strong enough to take care of himself. That is what I don't understand! God Loves each and EVERYONE of us as if we are the only one that exists. Remember that all, and rebuke the nay sayers. Good Luck to all homosexual couples, I support you, and even if you aren't able to have a union in "marriage", it doesn't matter. What matters is what's in your heart. And as far as the legal stuff, get a lawyer draw up some documents and be on your way with life. Live it now, because now is all you got! :) NOW I am REALLY moving on...LOL.

religion can be battled all day because no matter how you put your opinion if it is based on religion the next person is not going to agree with it. The bottom line is that the marriages are going to take place regardless of what any of us think and it is something that people need to think about and decide if it a battle you want to have because it is really a waste of energy to say NO about the marriages

The Word is Love,
God is the Word,
therefore, The Word is Love.

Agreed latinmami.

Ok, I can't resist
JIM...Jesus would say, I love you. There is no condemnation in Jesus' eyes, only man's. At least that's what my heart tell me. I have done plenty of sinful things in my life, and I have yet to have God disown me. I am still loved by him! Come on now, let's sing....Jesus loves me this I know.... :)

I wonder what family structure is ideal? Who is it ideal for?
*********************
for me i think anyone is ideal for it as long as the children are provided for, loved and safe. Which any couple can do that, gay or straight. We don't have a right to tell people not to get married or to have kids and i am sure most of us would not want anyone telling us who we should love or whether or not we should of had kids

The argument, homosexual marriage confounds the "definition of marriage" is valid, Rocky, and one that others have touched upon here. Some stress that point in the slippery slope argument.

The only clean and fair solution, as Couchsit and I have suggested, is getting the government totally out of the marriage business.

Here's a question for the Christians here.

If Jesus were to come up on two gay men who honestly and truly loved each other, what do you think Jesus would say to them?

Would Jesus, ahem, forgive them?

I wonder what family structure is ideal? Who is it ideal for?

Marriage = a union between a man and a woman. This has been the case for thousands of years. It has, in the past, included polygamy, but even then it was between a man and women and never between the women. The law in Wisconsin upholds this tradition. The law in Iowa does not. That is all.
*********************
times are changing rapidly which is something people need to realize, what happened in 1990 is not the same that is going on in 2009. You never know Wisconsin may change at some point. Marriage now equals two people who are in love with each other whether people approve or not

You make some excellent points, Rocky.
+
In your post you ask: "What is a "family", and how has it been defined, across cultures, for the past 3000 years?" I wonder that, too. See, the family structure has been altered over the years. Look at the increase in divorce rates, the increase in grandparents raising their grandchildren as proof of this. The structure is ever evolving in response to our social expectations. It is not a stagnant structure. I believe that it should be a structure that allows same-sex couples to have a family. No one can define what family structure works the best, as that is different for each set of circumstances.

Kisses to all, I need to find something more fun to blog about. :)

WRENCHED, because I have a different veiw than YOU, I must be smoking something? Well, how Christian of you to assume such things! If being at peace is considered sucking on a pipe, then I suck on pipes nonstop all day long, their called my peace pipes. You ought to find one. Silly person!

That's right, latinmami2. Sadly, too many religious folk are truth-avoiders.

Let's clarify a few things:
---

Marriage = a union between a man and a woman. This has been the case for thousands of years. It has, in the past, included polygamy, but even then it was between a man and women and never between the women. The law in Wisconsin upholds this tradition. The law in Iowa does not. That is all.

--

Romantic love does not require marriage, nor does marriage require romantic love (see: arranged marriage). Nobody has suggested legislating who can love who. This is not a ban on, or acceptance of homosexual love, but instead is a question of "what does 'marriage' mean?".

---

Marriage provides certain legal protections and rights. Most of those same protections are available through legal contracts, powers of attorney, wills, etc... Some are not.

---

The question of gay marriage is not so much a religious one as a status question. Although many base their opposition on religious reasons, I believe it is better to focus on the enormous impact of a fundamental change in the meaning of "marriage" and "family" that the homosexual community is trying to force down the throats of the people. They have (brilliantly) framed the debate as one of "bigotry" where a right that has never existed is being "denied by an oppressive religious majority". In fact the opposite is true. It is the homosexual community that is forcing a change, and one that completely re-defines the nature and structure of the family as it has always been known.

----

So I say throw out the religious arguments. Look at precedent. What is a "family", and how has it been defined, across cultures, for the past 3000 years? Why has it been that way? Why is it pretty much the same across cultures and religions? What benefit is there to making such a radical change (other than the benefit to the gay person seeking to "legitimize" their feelings). Why does the gay person need to have this "marriage" label to feel equal? Do the proponents really think that adding this new "right" will change general public perception - or the willingness to be openly gay?

----

lol. I should have thought of that one...

"Show me a parade that was only based on heterosexual couples displaying them selves as sex objects or there sexuality?"

Not sure, but I think that's called "prime time television". ;~)

fool_on_the_hill - i think it is a great thing to do, when i first got together with my husband and learned that his parents were jehovah witnesses i actually accepted an invitation to do some bible study sessions with them just so i could really see what their religion was about other than the stero types that are out there. And like i said before if everyone was willing to step outside their comfort zone just once they might find that while doing this they could take the combination of what they have learned in their own religion and someone else's religion and put it together and run with that. i know for myself i believe in god but also because of seeing so many different religions believe in a little bit of everything from all of them and have put it together and i have made by own rainbow religion

Why would heterosexuals have a parade? Furthermore, if we wanted to, what's stopping us?

Lake:To put a little perspective on what you touched on. Show me a parade that was only based on heterosexual couples displaying them selves as sex objects or there sexuality?

Gazettefan: I understand that you're against gay marriage because you see it as an attempt to slam the public with "their" lifestyle. Imagine how gays feel towards heterosexuals? To be constantly bombarded by all of those people with different beliefs...
+
Hannah, by the way, since you're so positive that being gay is a "choice," when was it you decided to be heterosexual? I mean it had to be a conscious decision, right? Because although I am not that sure about a lot of things, one thing I am sure of is that I am a heterosexual. I just can't tell you WHEN I CHOSE to be that way, though.
+
Perhaps wrenched and lovestoscrap are right. Maybe we who are tolerant of same-sex marriage will be in "hell" when we die. That is a possibility. Perhaps they will be. That's also a possibility. There are several FACTS, though. First of all, I never "damned" anyone for their differences, or for being different from me. Secondly, starting April 24th, homosexuals who want to get married, can in Iowa. CONGRATULATIONS.

Wayne F. Placek Grants

The Wayne F. Placek Grants support scientific research to increase the general public's understanding of homosexuality and to alleviate the stress that gay men and lesbians experience in this and future civilizations. Since 1995, the Placek Fund has granted more than $1 million.

The grants support empirical research from all fields of the behavioral and social sciences on any topic related to lesbian, gay, or bisexual issues. Proposals are especially encouraged for empirical studies that address the following topics:

* heterosexuals' attitudes and behaviors toward lesbians and gay men, including prejudice, discrimination, and violence;
* family and workplace issues relevant to lesbians and gay men; and
* subgroups of the lesbian and gay population that have historically been underrepresented in scientific research.

Amount: Two $15,000 grants are available in research support.

The APA funds gay research how is that a non biased source?

Amen, latinmami! I've always encouraged my children to except invitations to churches and I'm an atheist.

yeah i have been to a few different churches in my life with friends and families, i have gone to a catholic church, non denominational, luthern, christian and my in-laws are jehovah witnesses, and from seeing all the different religions there has been something from each one that makes sense to me about god and i think that if people were more open minded about religion and did at least try once in their life time to visit a different church there might be more unity in religion among people

Yes, latinmami, that's how believers cause so much harm in the world: by insisting that everyone have their beliefs.

lovetoscrap -how is your god real and someone else's god is not? god is god no matter how you chose to believe in him there is not written rule on how you should and that is why there are so many different religion. what you said is just really telling everyone that your beliefs are the only ones that are correct

Seperation of church and state people. It's that simple.

Who cares.......Don't like it, don't look!

Rummage, lay off the pipe it is ruining your perception of the truth.

lovestocrap, is largely voicing the mentality of al quida.

LOVETOSCRAP...I agree to disagree with you. Although, I am not a 'new ager'. Love has exsisted from the beginning of time if I am not mistaken. One thing I would like to point out to you that saddens me though. You stated you would much rather believe God than your heart. That saddens me because our hearts and souls is where God resides. But, I don't feel any ill feelings towards you, I just choose to live life out from beneath the wrath of fear. God Bless you as he blesses me. :)

Rummage...your new aged version of god and my God are two very different Gods. You can believe your "feel good" version of god all you want. That is up to you. When you start confusing the real God, Yahweh, with your god is where the problems begin. The Bible says the the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. I never stated that God does not love everyone...don't know where you got that from. God does indeed love everyone. In fact He loves everyone so much that He died for each and everyone of us. If you, who only knows love to a certain extent discipline your child because you love him/her, then God who is much wiser than all of us put together wouldn't discipline His children out of love? I don't understand your logic. As for knowing what lies beyond...I read the Bible and know what lies beyond. If you actually believed in the one true God, the Maker of the universe, then you would know why there is a hell and why people choose to go there instead of spending eternity with God. And yes, God doesn't send people to hell, they choose to disobey God and the end result is hell. When we discipline our children, we let children know that the consequences of their behavior is what caused the discipline to occur. Also, I would much rather follow God's word than to follow my own heart. The Bible is very clear on the condition of man's heart and it is not worth trusting. If I really didn't care about you and those who are heading on the road to destruction...I would follow my own heart and try not to offend anyone, make them feel good. My heart at it's core, along with yours and everyone else's is most concerned with themselves. You can tell yourself differently all you want.

Gays can do what they want in private. But I'm against gay marriage. The whole point of gay marriage is to impose their life style on the public in general. It's probably only a small number of them who want to do this -the radical ones.

They can work out the contractual benefits of marriage by other contractual means.

Wrenched, all I have to say is I feel so bad for you. I wish you could just 'be'. I do believe your learned philosophy of "God's Will" was passed down from a long line of fearful family members who didn't smile an awful lot. If it works for you, AND your children than that is fine, but if your children resist your way of thinking, it isn't your right to tell them what God expects, that is between them and God. As far as your responsiblity as a parent, you are responsible to raise your children to follow the laws of the earth. Period. God and your child will work out their personal relationship just fine, they don't need YOU to bridge the gap.

Rummagesalesrock, my interpretation is neccessary for my kids sake when they go against God. If they tell me they are gay they clearly are NOT LISTENING TO GOD!!!!

lakennedy, here is a scenario for you. My religion is in favor of murder, rape, incest, sodamy, adultry and not paying taxes ever. What you are saying to me is that if you believe whatever it is okay just as long as you have a bible, believe in God even though you and I both know that they contradict theselves by what they believe and how they worship God. That to me makes no sense at all. If you are a doormat for everyone you will fall for anything even Obama! You wonder why the country is in the toilet one of the main reasons is because of the fact that nobody wants to stand up for anything. They all are sheep, they just want to follow, must not say anything, must be p.c., must be p.c., must be p.c.! What a load of crap you and I both know it!

Wrenched, I have to agree with you when you say if our country get's it together with God we will see all things come together. The reason I agree with you, is because God = Love, and with Love you can't go wrong. Love does not boast, love does not brag...etc.

Wrenched, why don't you let God tell your child(in the event they were to come to you and tell you they were gay) if he/she is sinning or not? I think he can speak just fine on his own. Your interpretation isn't necessary.

dub190- no they wont become extinct. the gay female couple will go to a party and have a man do his thing in a cup and then put it into the woman and they male role of the female couple will have a baby with her female role partner. Sorry but in my opinion this is MESSED up.Will the twins be gay too because they were raised in this atmosphere? or will they be BORN that way NOT!!! What happens to that father? does he have rights? do we know who did that in the cup? Who injected this girl?true story here of one of my relatives.

LOVETOSCRAP ~ your interpretation is fine for you, but I refuse to accept your way. Who are you to know what lies beyond? Sure, the foundation should be followed, but I refuse to live life in fear even if it is 'respectfully'. My God would not want me to fear him. Respect him....YES. And I tell you what, yes, I do dicipline my children out of love, and after their 'offense' (i.e. sin) I still love them, and they are still welcome in my HOUSE! As I along with EVERY other child of GOD will be welcome in his house. Sure, my children along with EVERYONE else will be repeat offenders of their sins, and eventually when they are tired of the punishment, they will have remorse, and what happens when we have remorse, according to 'your' way? We are forgiven. Your way is the way that turn people away from a wonderful experience. YOUR LEARNED knowledge is what prevents many from loving. I can tell you for sure that your "understandings" are not from experience, because the end has not happened for you or I, and we have no way of talking to those who have faced their maker to validate your sentiments. Therefore, if this is your comfortable exsistence, than live it, but don't tell others that God doesn't love them for this reason or that, THAT IS NOT YOUR RIGHT! Only GOD is responsible for his feelings. You are not powerful enough to persuade him who is worthy of his love and who isn't. If you think God is about punishing, you have a lot to learn. You are believing what you read, how about just for once believe what is in your heart?! And I refuse to believe that a heart is full of fear. But, if your way works for you, by all means, go ahead and continue your walk, but I tell you what, I honestly believe that you probably aren't a peaceful human being at the end of the day if you invest so much energy in pointing out all of the sins of others. Boy, that doesn't leave to much time to have a personal relationship with God now does it?

btw-Sorry no time to blog at home I am too busy.