[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by nittiley

rhetorical: how do true christians, who love, deal with the outcome of alleged biblical mandates to “not love?” aside from the oft-repeated, ‘hate the sin, love the sinner’ admonition.. there are real world repercussions to, say, denying humans civil rights – recently seen in north carolina’s ‘pro marriage’ law.

the law is so vaguely worded it can be extended to unmarried heterosexual couples.

where in the bible does it say to micro-manage & separate human lives? not loving, one could argue.

one could also term it something else.. but those words are not conducive to any family friendly / exclusive of a real, & also loving, rest of the world format.

I'm not sure what the Law is about or exactly what the issue is here...

But I don't think being against same-sex marriages means one does "not" love. It simply means that same-sex couples cannot have legally recognized marriages; It does not mean that we don't love the individual. Not sure if that is what you meant.

[valis]

Originally Posted by Drabdr

I'm not sure what the Law is about or exactly what the issue is here...

But I don't think being against same-sex marriages means one does "not" love. It simply means that same-sex couples cannot have legally recognized marriages; It does not mean that we don't love the individual. Not sure if that is what you meant.

IMO, it does do exactly that. This year my wife and celebrated our 10th wedding anniversary; we did NOT celebrate our 10th civil union anniversary.

Who am I, or anyone, to state that someone cannot get married? This has always been a big stick in my craw, as it's pretty damn un-christian to butt into someone else's lives and tell them they can't do this or that.

IMO, of course.

Regardless, this is off-topic, and I reckon a thread will be started on it shortly, especially after Obama actually showing some guts and stating he is for same-sex marriage.

Weird to say it, but well done, Mr. President.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by valis

IMO, it does do exactly that.

No, it doesn't.

This year my wife and celebrated our 10th wedding anniversary; we did NOT celebrate our 10th civil union anniversary.

That's because you and your wife are indeed married. You are a nut and a bolt; not two bolts. Two people of the same sex cannot (by definition) be married. Period.

Who am I, or anyone, to state that someone cannot get married? This has always been a big stick in my craw, as it's pretty damn un-christian to butt into someone else's lives and tell them they can't do this or that.

IMO, of course.

Umm... that would be society. A good majority of America is against same-sex marriage. Do whatever you want in your life; that's fine. But a legally-recognized marriage-nope.

Regardless, this is off-topic, and I reckon a thread will be started on it shortly, especially after Obama actually showing some guts and stating he is for same-sex marriage. Weird to say it, but well done, Mr. President.

Well... he's alienated the rest of America. He's just trying to flame his liberal base. I'm sure it will work.

[valis]

I'm not going to debate this Brad.......period.

IMO, you are wrong. Period.

IMO, it's very un-christian to force YOUR beliefs on what marriage should be on other members of society. Period.

To me, it literally makes no sense.

Whatever. This type of attitude disgusts me so much I try to distance myself as far from possible from it. It's close-minded, disrespectful, discriminatory, and about as UN-christian as one can get, and just flat out disgusts me.

Anyhow, I've seen enough; un-subscribing from this one.

peace.

[wowzer]

Originally Posted by valis

I'm not going to debate this Brad.......period.

IMO, you are wrong. Period.

IMO, it's very un-christian to force YOUR beliefs on what marriage should be on other members of society. Period.

To me, it literally makes no sense.

Whatever. This type of attitude disgusts me so much I try to distance myself as far from possible from it. It's close-minded, disrespectful, discriminatory, and about as UN-christian as one can get, and just flat out disgusts me.


peace.

for the record...
I'm about as religious as a stump.

religions/christians or otherwize have no place period telling two people what they can and can't do.

I don't understand it but, if two males or two females want to live together and be married so be it.

[Drabdr]

My apologies if I came across unchristian. I've dropped the ball somewhere, if that is the case.

I have stated clearly that I believe homosexuality (along with many other things) are sin. It's not me saying that. Same with me observing someone running a stop sign and stating they broke the law.

I respect if someone feels homosexuality is OK. Differences of opinion.

As far as the homosexual... they are to be loved. I know some, consider them my friends, and never pass judgment upon them. They know my stance, and we respect each other's points of view. Their lifestyle choice is theirs to make.

Having a legally recognized marriage is something which moves towards the institution of marriage; and not necessarily a religious stance or point of view. A legal marriage is one man/ one woman (and... for life).

There is a difference between respecting a lifestyle and a choice. It's another to legally recognize that which (by definition) is not a marriage.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by wowzer

I don't understand it but, if two males or two females want to live together and be married so be it.

But you are saying two completely different things here.

If they want to live together... sure. That's their right.

But having a legally recognized marriage... that's a separate issue.

[wowzer]

Originally Posted by Drabdr

But you are saying two completely different things here.

If they want to live together... sure. That's their right.

But having a legally recognized marriage... that's a separate issue.

Well then skip the living together part...

Religion/your myth book, has no place saying, or influencing/law, whatever your "definition" is.

[nittiley]

Originally Posted by Drabdr

But you are saying two completely different things here.

If they want to live together... sure. That's their right.

But having a legally recognized marriage... that's a separate issue.

it's my understanding the way this law was worded, it has left the gate open for potential problems regarding unmarried non-gay humans now. it could prevent a male/female couple from excising many of their rights:

Some lawyers say the measure is vaguely worded and could impact the state’s 150,000 straight couples who live together but are unmarried. Others warn it may invalidate domestic violence protections, undercut child custody arrangements and jeopardize hospital visiting rights

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/5/9...ping_amendment

it's bad enough to tell homosexuals they can't having their love recognized by marriage.. but what unmitigated gall to indirectly force heterosexual couples to get married as opposed to co-habitating.

think of hospital visiting rights.. can you imagine being denied being able to see someone you love because you don't have some legal document? !

which is why i asked how on earth anyone could pull this sort of thing out of the bible & apply it in this manner?!

[valis]

Originally Posted by wowzer

for the record...
I'm about as religious as a stump.

religions/christians or otherwize have no place period telling two people what they can and can't do.

I don't understand it but, if two males or two females want to live together and be married so be it.

a voice of sanity in an otherwise highly bigoted world.........

[Wino]

Originally Posted by wowzer

Well then skip the living together part...

Religion/your myth book, has no place saying, or influencing/law, whatever your "definition" is.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by wowzer

Well then skip the living together part...

Religion/your myth book, has no place saying, or influencing/law, whatever your "definition" is.

If a marriage is not a legally recognized symbiotic joining of one man and one woman, Please define what a marriage is.

[ckphilli]

Originally Posted by valis

IMO, it does do exactly that. This year my wife and celebrated our 10th wedding anniversary; we did NOT celebrate our 10th civil union anniversary.

Who am I, or anyone, to state that someone cannot get married? This has always been a big stick in my craw, as it's pretty damn un-christian to butt into someone else's lives and tell them they can't do this or that.

IMO, of course.

Regardless, this is off-topic, and I reckon a thread will be started on it shortly, especially after Obama actually showing some guts and stating he is for same-sex marriage.

Weird to say it, but well done, Mr. President.

Tim, can you start a new thread on this starting from your post? I have much to say about this subject and would like to respond to all...but not further derail the bible thread. Unless you guys are cool with it, in which case I shall respond away.

[LauraMJ]

I would just like to clarify that, IMO, it is NOT the "bigots" against the "homosexuals" but rather people who disagree about the nature of the most basic unit of society (marriage).

which is why i asked how on earth anyone could pull this sort of thing out of the bible & apply it in this manner?!

Which shows my point right here. You (I'm guessing) believe that marriage is defined as including any two people.......Mormons believe marriage is defined as including one male and as many females as wanted,.........believers of the Bible believe that marriage is defined as one man and one woman based on a large number of verses that specifically discuss marriage.

I don't agree with some definitions.......but I try not to call THEM bigoted because they don't believe the same as me.

[nittiley]

Originally Posted by Drabdr

If a marriage is not a legally recognized symbiotic joining of one man and one woman, Please define what a marriage is.

a couple - where said couple gets to decide about being together, or not. & with all human & civil rights remaining intact (regardless of legality of the arrangement or not).