A Reasonable Solution To The Gay Marriage Debate

[Katzndogz]

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God who created Adam, a man, and then made Eve, a woman. This is what God has ordained as the normal means by which we carry out his command to fill the earth (Gen. 1:28). What God has set up is what is right -- not what sinful man sets up.

However, unlike other sins, homosexuality has a severe judgment administered by God Himself. This judgment is simple: they are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:24). As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing, and then they go and promote it and condemn others who don't participate in their sin. So, without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance and trusting in Jesus. Without Jesus, they will have no forgiveness. Without forgiveness, there is no salvation. Without salvation, there is only damnation in eternal hell.

So now ask yourself about compromise again.... Hmmmm.... Sorry, I can't find one. I refuse to support the evil sick plan of these disgusting turd punchers.

If your religion says you should not engage in homosexual activity, then maybe you shouldn't

Now, show me the part where you get to force your religious views on others

Show me the part where you have to accept the religious views of others forced on you.

If your religion says you should not accept homosexual activity as normal, no one should be required to do that.

 

[BluePhantom]

God is mentioned in every major document leading up to the final wording of the Constitution for OUR NATION. For example, Connecticut is still known as the "Constitution State" because its colonial constitution was used as a model for the United States Constitution. Its first words were: "For as much as it has pleased the almighty God by the wise disposition of His Divine Providence…"

Most of the fifty-five Founding Fathers who worked on the Constitution were members of orthodox Christian churches and many were even evangelical Christians. The first official act in the First Continental Congress was to open in Christian prayer, which ended in these words: "...the merits of Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Savior. Amen". Sounds Christian to me!

Ben Franklin, at the Constitutional Convention, said: "...God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"

John Adams stated so eloquently during this period of time that; "The general principles on which the fathers achieved Independence were ... the general principles of Christianity ... I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that the general principles of Christianity are as etemal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God."

Later, John Quincy Adams answered the question as to why, next to Christmas, was the Fourth of July this most joyous and venerated day in the United States. He answered: "...Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer’s mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?" Sounds like the founding of a Christian nation to me. John Quincy Adams went on to say that the biggest victory won in the American Revolution was that Christian principles and civil government would be tied together In what he called an "indissoluble" bond. The Founding Fathers understood that religion was inextricably part of our nation and government. The practice of the Christian religion in our government was not only welcomed but encouraged.

Sounds like "THE NATION" you speak of was build on these same beliefs. You live in a free nation able to do whatever you please because of christians that fought and sacrificed themselves. Homosexuality goes against everything this NATION was built upon. So try again...

"God" is mentioned occasionally in official documents....Jesus never. The freedom of religion was central to their beliefs and the freedom from state sponsored religion and laws based upon religion made up the first sixteen words of the very first thing they guaranteed the people. Some of the FFs were very religious men. Some were not and in fact the most influential (i.e. Jefferson and Adams just to name a couple ) were at best agnostic. To suggest that Franklin, of all people, would endorse Christianity in government is an appalling display of historical ignorance. BTW...you do realize that JQA was not a founding father, right?

Regardless, Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) established the "Lemon Test" which identifies whether a law is constitutional in regards to religion.

1) The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;

2 The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;

3) The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

If any of these 3 prongs are violated, the government's action is deemed unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.


Your argument violates all three of these criteria and is therefore completely irrelevant from a legal perspective.

The Lemon Test - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

 

[garyganu]

I am unaware of 1,400 benefits. I challenge you list 10 that are not related to children.

I'm thinking of these off the top of my head so they are in no particular order:

1. Military recognition of a legal spouse resulting in increased allowance for quarters and relocation of the spouse when executing permanent change of station orders. No children required.

2. Military health care for the spouse. No children required.

3. Eligibility for the spouse under Military Survivor Benefits Program if the retired members dies. No children required.

4. For honorably discharged veterans and retirees, burial of the spouse next to the service member in National Veteran's Cemeteries. No children required.

5. Tax free transfer of real property to a spouse. No children required.

6. The exemption from the Estate Tax applicable to the sale of a primary home, only Civil Marriage does that. (When a home is sold a single person can claim up to $250,000 in an exemption, $500,000 for a Civilly Married couple. When one spouse dies the surviving spouse can still claim the married exemption for up to two years after the death if the home is sold. No children required.

7. Spousal privilege against testifying in a criminal court case against a spouse. No children required.

8. Establishment of a family relationship for the spouse under the Family Medical Leave Act so that one spouse can care for an injured or sick spouse in a job protected status. No children required.

9. The ability to file join income tax statements. No children required.

10. Survivor benefits for Social Security whereby a spouse can receive benefits at the deceased spouses rate if they were married for a certain period and the deceased spouses benefit as/is higher then the surviving spouses benefit. No children required.

11. Sponsorship of a spouse for immigration purposes and preferential resident alien status. No children required.

12. Federal exemption from Federal Unemployment Tax when one spouse works for another as part of a small business. No children required.

13. Filing joint bankruptcy. No children required.

14. Legal next-of-kin status recognized by all 50-states and the federal government for emergency medical decisions. No children required.

15. Ability to file wrongful death claims against an individual or organization responsibile for the death of a spouse. No children required.

16. Preferential hiring of spouses of a veteran for federal jobs. No children required.

17. Right of property inheritance upon the death of a spouse under tax free status. No children required.

18. Consideration of spousal income under certain federal insured home loan programs. No children required.

19. Access to Hope and Lifetime learning credit programs for taxes for the education of a spouse. No children required.

20. The additional cost of health care insurance provided by employer to cover a spouse is not treated as taxable income for a legally married spouse. Such coverage for a non-spouse is treated as income for the individual and is therefore taxed. No children required.​

Sorry, I know you only asked for 10, but hey, I was on a roll.

>>>>

Civil unions and legal contracts between partners can remedy most of your objections without redefining the word marriage.

 

[rightwinger]

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God who created Adam, a man, and then made Eve, a woman. This is what God has ordained as the normal means by which we carry out his command to fill the earth (Gen. 1:28). What God has set up is what is right -- not what sinful man sets up.

However, unlike other sins, homosexuality has a severe judgment administered by God Himself. This judgment is simple: they are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:24). As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing, and then they go and promote it and condemn others who don't participate in their sin. So, without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance and trusting in Jesus. Without Jesus, they will have no forgiveness. Without forgiveness, there is no salvation. Without salvation, there is only damnation in eternal hell.

So now ask yourself about compromise again.... Hmmmm.... Sorry, I can't find one. I refuse to support the evil sick plan of these disgusting turd punchers.

If your religion says you should not engage in homosexual activity, then maybe you shouldn't

Now, show me the part where you get to force your religious views on others

Show me the part where you have to accept the religious views of others forced on you.

If your religion says you should not accept homosexual activity as normal, no one should be required to do that.

Nobody is forcing you to accept homosexual marriage as normal. In fact, you are free to hate anyone you wish

What you can't do is force the government to accommodate your hatred

 

[WinterBorn]

God is mentioned in every major document leading up to the final wording of the Constitution for OUR NATION. For example, Connecticut is still known as the "Constitution State" because its colonial constitution was used as a model for the United States Constitution. Its first words were: "For as much as it has pleased the almighty God by the wise disposition of His Divine Providence…"

Most of the fifty-five Founding Fathers who worked on the Constitution were members of orthodox Christian churches and many were even evangelical Christians. The first official act in the First Continental Congress was to open in Christian prayer, which ended in these words: "...the merits of Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Savior. Amen". Sounds Christian to me!

Ben Franklin, at the Constitutional Convention, said: "...God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"

John Adams stated so eloquently during this period of time that; "The general principles on which the fathers achieved Independence were ... the general principles of Christianity ... I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that the general principles of Christianity are as etemal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God."

Later, John Quincy Adams answered the question as to why, next to Christmas, was the Fourth of July this most joyous and venerated day in the United States. He answered: "...Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer’s mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?" Sounds like the founding of a Christian nation to me. John Quincy Adams went on to say that the biggest victory won in the American Revolution was that Christian principles and civil government would be tied together In what he called an "indissoluble" bond. The Founding Fathers understood that religion was inextricably part of our nation and government. The practice of the Christian religion in our government was not only welcomed but encouraged.

Sounds like "THE NATION" you speak of was build on these same beliefs. You live in a free nation able to do whatever you please because of christians that fought and sacrificed themselves. Homosexuality goes against everything this NATION was built upon. So try again...

Try again?? The US Constitution states there will be a separation of church & state. The US Supreme Court has consistently ruled that way.

Please show me anywhere that states you have the right to base our laws on your religion??

Yes, many of our founding fathers were christians. But many were also deists and not christians. Plus, you have to take into account that people could be run out of town or even killed for not being christians.

Perhaps you have heard of this little thing called the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution?? It contains some important words that you might want to know:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".

Now you can argue whether or not this creates a separation of church and state. But you cannot possibly quote biblical scripture as a reason for not allowing gay marriage without being in complete violation of this amendment.

 

[Networker1100]

God is mentioned in every major document leading up to the final wording of the Constitution for OUR NATION. For example, Connecticut is still known as the "Constitution State" because its colonial constitution was used as a model for the United States Constitution. Its first words were: "For as much as it has pleased the almighty God by the wise disposition of His Divine Providence…"

Most of the fifty-five Founding Fathers who worked on the Constitution were members of orthodox Christian churches and many were even evangelical Christians. The first official act in the First Continental Congress was to open in Christian prayer, which ended in these words: "...the merits of Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Savior. Amen". Sounds Christian to me!

Ben Franklin, at the Constitutional Convention, said: "...God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"

John Adams stated so eloquently during this period of time that; "The general principles on which the fathers achieved Independence were ... the general principles of Christianity ... I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that the general principles of Christianity are as etemal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God."

Later, John Quincy Adams answered the question as to why, next to Christmas, was the Fourth of July this most joyous and venerated day in the United States. He answered: "...Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer’s mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?" Sounds like the founding of a Christian nation to me. John Quincy Adams went on to say that the biggest victory won in the American Revolution was that Christian principles and civil government would be tied together In what he called an "indissoluble" bond. The Founding Fathers understood that religion was inextricably part of our nation and government. The practice of the Christian religion in our government was not only welcomed but encouraged.

Sounds like "THE NATION" you speak of was build on these same beliefs. You live in a free nation able to do whatever you please because of christians that fought and sacrificed themselves. Homosexuality goes against everything this NATION was built upon. So try again...

"God" is mentioned occasionally in official documents....Jesus never. The freedom of religion was central to their beliefs and the freedom from state sponsored religion and laws based upon religion made up the first sixteen words of the very first thing they guaranteed the people. Some of the FFs were very religious men. Some were not and in fact the most influential (i.e. Jefferson and Adams just to name a couple ) were at best agnostic. To suggest that Franklin, of all people, would endorse Christianity in government is an appalling display of historical ignorance. BTW...you do realize that JQA was not a founding father, right?

Regardless, Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) established the "Lemon Test" which identifies whether a law is constitutional in regards to religion.

1) The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;

2 The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;

3) The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

If any of these 3 prongs are violated, the government's action is deemed unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.


Your argument violates all three of these criteria and is therefore completely irrelevant from a legal perspective.

The Lemon Test - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

What a sad warped perception... Anyway you can twist facts to fit your sick agenda for this country. I can't wait for the next civil war.

 

[BluePhantom]

Causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire: (click on link) Causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire

excerpt: One of the main causes for the Fall of the Roman Empire was the Decline in Morals. The decline in morals, especially in the rich upper classes, nobility and the emperors, had a devastating impact on the Romans. Immoral and promiscuous sexual behaviour including adultery and orgies. Emperors such as Tiberius kept groups of young boys for his pleasure, incest by Nero who also had a male slave castrated so he could take him as his wife, Elagabalus who forced a Vestal Virgin into marriage, Commodus with his harems of concubines enraged Romans by sitting in the theatre or at the games dressed in a woman's garments. The decline in morals also effected the lower classes and slaves. Religious festivals such as Saturnalia and Bacchanalia where sacrifices, ribald songs, lewd acts and sexual promiscuity were practised. Bestiality and other lewd and sexually explicit acts were exhibited in the Colosseum arena to amuse the mob. Brothels and forced prostitution flourished. Widespread gambling on the chariot races and gladiatorial combats. Massive consumption of alcohol. The sadistic cruelty towards both man and beasts in the arena.

So Tiberius and Nero's sexual practices in 14 - 68 AD was a major contributor to Rome's collapse under Justinian II in 578 AD.....over half a millennium later? Not to mention that Tiberius was Rome's second emperor and Nero was the fifth. I tend the recall that Rome expanded quite dramatically after them. Who the fuck wrote that website? You?

 

[WinterBorn]

I am unaware of 1,400 benefits. I challenge you list 10 that are not related to children.

I'm thinking of these off the top of my head so they are in no particular order:

1. Military recognition of a legal spouse resulting in increased allowance for quarters and relocation of the spouse when executing permanent change of station orders. No children required.

2. Military health care for the spouse. No children required.

3. Eligibility for the spouse under Military Survivor Benefits Program if the retired members dies. No children required.

4. For honorably discharged veterans and retirees, burial of the spouse next to the service member in National Veteran's Cemeteries. No children required.

5. Tax free transfer of real property to a spouse. No children required.

6. The exemption from the Estate Tax applicable to the sale of a primary home, only Civil Marriage does that. (When a home is sold a single person can claim up to $250,000 in an exemption, $500,000 for a Civilly Married couple. When one spouse dies the surviving spouse can still claim the married exemption for up to two years after the death if the home is sold. No children required.

7. Spousal privilege against testifying in a criminal court case against a spouse. No children required.

8. Establishment of a family relationship for the spouse under the Family Medical Leave Act so that one spouse can care for an injured or sick spouse in a job protected status. No children required.

9. The ability to file join income tax statements. No children required.

10. Survivor benefits for Social Security whereby a spouse can receive benefits at the deceased spouses rate if they were married for a certain period and the deceased spouses benefit as/is higher then the surviving spouses benefit. No children required.

11. Sponsorship of a spouse for immigration purposes and preferential resident alien status. No children required.

12. Federal exemption from Federal Unemployment Tax when one spouse works for another as part of a small business. No children required.

13. Filing joint bankruptcy. No children required.

14. Legal next-of-kin status recognized by all 50-states and the federal government for emergency medical decisions. No children required.

15. Ability to file wrongful death claims against an individual or organization responsibile for the death of a spouse. No children required.

16. Preferential hiring of spouses of a veteran for federal jobs. No children required.

17. Right of property inheritance upon the death of a spouse under tax free status. No children required.

18. Consideration of spousal income under certain federal insured home loan programs. No children required.

19. Access to Hope and Lifetime learning credit programs for taxes for the education of a spouse. No children required.

20. The additional cost of health care insurance provided by employer to cover a spouse is not treated as taxable income for a legally married spouse. Such coverage for a non-spouse is treated as income for the individual and is therefore taxed. No children required.​

Sorry, I know you only asked for 10, but hey, I was on a roll.

>>>>

Civil unions and legal contracts between partners can remedy most of your objections without redefining the word marriage.

Most? So being close is fine with you? And isn't having separate standards for different groups pretty much the definition of bigotry and prejudice??

I don't mind you being prejudice. But I demand that our government not be.

The fact that you insist that a gay couple who have lived together in a mongamous relationship for 40 years must hire a lawyer to get the same benefits that are automatically granted to any straight couple who go to the courthouse for a quickie marriage, is far more disgusting than any redefining of a word.

That you demand that a portion of our population be denied basic benefits based on semantics is a sign of hatred more than anything.

 

[BluePhantom]

What a sad warped perception... Anyway you can twist facts to fit your sick agenda for this country. I can't wait for the next civil war.

Translation: "well.....I guess I can't really refute any of that factually so I will just call you sad, warped, and sick". Gotcha,

 

[WinterBorn]

God is mentioned in every major document leading up to the final wording of the Constitution for OUR NATION. For example, Connecticut is still known as the "Constitution State" because its colonial constitution was used as a model for the United States Constitution. Its first words were: "For as much as it has pleased the almighty God by the wise disposition of His Divine Providence…"

Most of the fifty-five Founding Fathers who worked on the Constitution were members of orthodox Christian churches and many were even evangelical Christians. The first official act in the First Continental Congress was to open in Christian prayer, which ended in these words: "...the merits of Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Savior. Amen". Sounds Christian to me!

Ben Franklin, at the Constitutional Convention, said: "...God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"

John Adams stated so eloquently during this period of time that; "The general principles on which the fathers achieved Independence were ... the general principles of Christianity ... I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that the general principles of Christianity are as etemal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God."

Later, John Quincy Adams answered the question as to why, next to Christmas, was the Fourth of July this most joyous and venerated day in the United States. He answered: "...Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer’s mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?" Sounds like the founding of a Christian nation to me. John Quincy Adams went on to say that the biggest victory won in the American Revolution was that Christian principles and civil government would be tied together In what he called an "indissoluble" bond. The Founding Fathers understood that religion was inextricably part of our nation and government. The practice of the Christian religion in our government was not only welcomed but encouraged.

Sounds like "THE NATION" you speak of was build on these same beliefs. You live in a free nation able to do whatever you please because of christians that fought and sacrificed themselves. Homosexuality goes against everything this NATION was built upon. So try again...

"God" is mentioned occasionally in official documents....Jesus never. The freedom of religion was central to their beliefs and the freedom from state sponsored religion and laws based upon religion made up the first sixteen words of the very first thing they guaranteed the people. Some of the FFs were very religious men. Some were not and in fact the most influential (i.e. Jefferson and Adams just to name a couple ) were at best agnostic. To suggest that Franklin, of all people, would endorse Christianity in government is an appalling display of historical ignorance. BTW...you do realize that JQA was not a founding father, right?

Regardless, Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) established the "Lemon Test" which identifies whether a law is constitutional in regards to religion.

1) The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;

2 The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;

3) The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

If any of these 3 prongs are violated, the government's action is deemed unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.


Your argument violates all three of these criteria and is therefore completely irrelevant from a legal perspective.

The Lemon Test - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

What a sad warped perception... Anyway you can twist facts to fit your sick agenda for this country. I can't wait for the next civil war.

What he quoted has been consistently accepted by the highest courts in our country. That you call it "twisting facts" shows a lack of genuine argument.

Be careful what you wish for. The majority of the population is becoming more and more tolerant of homosexuality. The next civil war might just destroy your ilk rather than create the theocracy you seem to crave.

 

[garyganu]

I'm thinking of these off the top of my head so they are in no particular order:

1. Military recognition of a legal spouse resulting in increased allowance for quarters and relocation of the spouse when executing permanent change of station orders. No children required.

2. Military health care for the spouse. No children required.

3. Eligibility for the spouse under Military Survivor Benefits Program if the retired members dies. No children required.

4. For honorably discharged veterans and retirees, burial of the spouse next to the service member in National Veteran's Cemeteries. No children required.

5. Tax free transfer of real property to a spouse. No children required.

6. The exemption from the Estate Tax applicable to the sale of a primary home, only Civil Marriage does that. (When a home is sold a single person can claim up to $250,000 in an exemption, $500,000 for a Civilly Married couple. When one spouse dies the surviving spouse can still claim the married exemption for up to two years after the death if the home is sold. No children required.

7. Spousal privilege against testifying in a criminal court case against a spouse. No children required.

8. Establishment of a family relationship for the spouse under the Family Medical Leave Act so that one spouse can care for an injured or sick spouse in a job protected status. No children required.

9. The ability to file join income tax statements. No children required.

10. Survivor benefits for Social Security whereby a spouse can receive benefits at the deceased spouses rate if they were married for a certain period and the deceased spouses benefit as/is higher then the surviving spouses benefit. No children required.

11. Sponsorship of a spouse for immigration purposes and preferential resident alien status. No children required.

12. Federal exemption from Federal Unemployment Tax when one spouse works for another as part of a small business. No children required.

13. Filing joint bankruptcy. No children required.

14. Legal next-of-kin status recognized by all 50-states and the federal government for emergency medical decisions. No children required.

15. Ability to file wrongful death claims against an individual or organization responsibile for the death of a spouse. No children required.

16. Preferential hiring of spouses of a veteran for federal jobs. No children required.

17. Right of property inheritance upon the death of a spouse under tax free status. No children required.

18. Consideration of spousal income under certain federal insured home loan programs. No children required.

19. Access to Hope and Lifetime learning credit programs for taxes for the education of a spouse. No children required.

20. The additional cost of health care insurance provided by employer to cover a spouse is not treated as taxable income for a legally married spouse. Such coverage for a non-spouse is treated as income for the individual and is therefore taxed. No children required.​

Sorry, I know you only asked for 10, but hey, I was on a roll.

>>>>

Civil unions and legal contracts between partners can remedy most of your objections without redefining the word marriage.

Most? So being close is fine with you? And isn't having separate standards for different groups pretty much the definition of bigotry and prejudice??

I don't mind you being prejudice. But I demand that our government not be.

The fact that you insist that a gay couple who have lived together in a mongamous relationship for 40 years must hire a lawyer to get the same benefits that are automatically granted to any straight couple who go to the courthouse for a quickie marriage, is far more disgusting than any redefining of a word.

That you demand that a portion of our population be denied basic benefits based on semantics is a sign of hatred more than anything.

I don't believe in any standards for "groups" in America. We are all individuals. Our constitution does not address groups, only individuals. We are all entitled to equal justice under the law. People with homosexual desires are not excluded from getting married. Gay activists are demanding that we redefine marriage. The redefinition of marriage is not a right. Marriage is not even mentioned in the constitution.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Swinging has never been the foundation of any successful society neither is sexual debauchery. This type of thing usually signals the downfall of a society. The family unit has always been the foundation of successful societies.

Really? Might I suggest you do some research into Rome? That was a damn successful society, man and their culture engaged in what you would call sexual debauchery for several centuries and yet continued to grow in power. How about the Greeks? There was a whole lot of sexual debauchery going on there and they did pretty well. How about Egypt? They had blowout orgies for thousands of years while continuing to grow and expand and increase their power.

When the debauchery became widespread in these societies, it led to their downfall as it is leading to ours.

All civilizations fall but not because of debauchery. You have no solid evidence to conclude such a thing.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

Homosexuality is clearly condemned by the Bible. It goes against the created order of God who created Adam, a man, and then made Eve, a woman. This is what God has ordained as the normal means by which we carry out his command to fill the earth (Gen. 1:28). What God has set up is what is right -- not what sinful man sets up.

However, unlike other sins, homosexuality has a severe judgment administered by God Himself. This judgment is simple: they are given over to their passions. That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:24). As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing, and then they go and promote it and condemn others who don't participate in their sin. So, without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance and trusting in Jesus. Without Jesus, they will have no forgiveness. Without forgiveness, there is no salvation. Without salvation, there is only damnation in eternal hell.

So now ask yourself about compromise again.... Hmmmm.... Sorry, I can't find one. I refuse to support the evil sick plan of these disgusting turd punchers.

We are governed by the Constitution, not your interp of the Bible.

 

[WinterBorn]

Civil unions and legal contracts between partners can remedy most of your objections without redefining the word marriage.

Most? So being close is fine with you? And isn't having separate standards for different groups pretty much the definition of bigotry and prejudice??

I don't mind you being prejudice. But I demand that our government not be.

The fact that you insist that a gay couple who have lived together in a mongamous relationship for 40 years must hire a lawyer to get the same benefits that are automatically granted to any straight couple who go to the courthouse for a quickie marriage, is far more disgusting than any redefining of a word.

That you demand that a portion of our population be denied basic benefits based on semantics is a sign of hatred more than anything.

I don't believe in any standards for "groups" in America. We are all individuals. Our constitution does not address groups, only individuals. We are all entitled to equal justice under the law. People with homosexual desires are not excluded from getting married. Gay activists are demanding that we redefine marriage. The redefinition of marriage is not a right. Marriage is not even mentioned in the constitution.

But the reasons given for denying gays access to marriage is religious dogma. And basing laws on a single religion's laws is clearly unconstitutional.

Also, marriage has been redefined in the past and it did not lead to the downfall of the world. This will not do that either.


Since I rose to your challenge, let me challenge you. Give me some reasons against gay marriage that do not have to do with religion, and then tell me how allowing gay marriage would effect you at all??

 

[JakeStarkey]

God is mentioned in every major document leading up to the final wording of the Constitution for OUR NATION. For example, Connecticut is still known as the "Constitution State" because its colonial constitution was used as a model for the United States Constitution. Its first words were: "For as much as it has pleased the almighty God by the wise disposition of His Divine Providence…"

Most of the fifty-five Founding Fathers who worked on the Constitution were members of orthodox Christian churches and many were even evangelical Christians. The first official act in the First Continental Congress was to open in Christian prayer, which ended in these words: "...the merits of Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Savior. Amen". Sounds Christian to me!

Ben Franklin, at the Constitutional Convention, said: "...God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"

John Adams stated so eloquently during this period of time that; "The general principles on which the fathers achieved Independence were ... the general principles of Christianity ... I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that the general principles of Christianity are as etemal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God."

Later, John Quincy Adams answered the question as to why, next to Christmas, was the Fourth of July this most joyous and venerated day in the United States. He answered: "...Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer’s mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?" Sounds like the founding of a Christian nation to me. John Quincy Adams went on to say that the biggest victory won in the American Revolution was that Christian principles and civil government would be tied together In what he called an "indissoluble" bond. The Founding Fathers understood that religion was inextricably part of our nation and government. The practice of the Christian religion in our government was not only welcomed but encouraged.

Sounds like "THE NATION" you speak of was build on these same beliefs. You live in a free nation able to do whatever you please because of christians that fought and sacrificed themselves. Homosexuality goes against everything this NATION was built upon. So try again...

"God" is mentioned occasionally in official documents....Jesus never. The freedom of religion was central to their beliefs and the freedom from state sponsored religion and laws based upon religion made up the first sixteen words of the very first thing they guaranteed the people. Some of the FFs were very religious men. Some were not and in fact the most influential (i.e. Jefferson and Adams just to name a couple ) were at best agnostic. To suggest that Franklin, of all people, would endorse Christianity in government is an appalling display of historical ignorance. BTW...you do realize that JQA was not a founding father, right?

Regardless, Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) established the "Lemon Test" which identifies whether a law is constitutional in regards to religion.

1) The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;

2 The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;

3) The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

If any of these 3 prongs are violated, the government's action is deemed unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.


Your argument violates all three of these criteria and is therefore completely irrelevant from a legal perspective.

The Lemon Test - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

What a sad warped perception... Anyway you can twist facts to fit your sick agenda for this country. I can't wait for the next civil war.

From whom? The minority wacks like you? Your neighbors will stand you against the wall if you are raise arms against the nation.

 

[Networker1100]

"God" is mentioned occasionally in official documents....Jesus never. The freedom of religion was central to their beliefs and the freedom from state sponsored religion and laws based upon religion made up the first sixteen words of the very first thing they guaranteed the people. Some of the FFs were very religious men. Some were not and in fact the most influential (i.e. Jefferson and Adams just to name a couple ) were at best agnostic. To suggest that Franklin, of all people, would endorse Christianity in government is an appalling display of historical ignorance. BTW...you do realize that JQA was not a founding father, right?

Regardless, Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) established the "Lemon Test" which identifies whether a law is constitutional in regards to religion.

1) The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;

2 The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;

3) The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

If any of these 3 prongs are violated, the government's action is deemed unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.


Your argument violates all three of these criteria and is therefore completely irrelevant from a legal perspective.

The Lemon Test - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

What a sad warped perception... Anyway you can twist facts to fit your sick agenda for this country. I can't wait for the next civil war.

What he quoted has been consistently accepted by the highest courts in our country. That you call it "twisting facts" shows a lack of genuine argument.

Be careful what you wish for. The majority of the population is becoming more and more tolerant of homosexuality. The next civil war might just destroy your ilk rather than create the theocracy you seem to crave.

January 12, 2012
Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.
Overall, the nation has grown more polarized over the past decade
by Lydia Saad
PRINCETON, NJ -- Political ideology in the U.S. held steady in 2011, with 40% of Americans continuing to describe their views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This marks the third straight year that conservatives have outnumbered moderates, after more than a decade in which moderates mainly tied or outnumbered conservatives.

Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.

I'm really not worried about it.... You seem to have some strange illusion that you are a majority... Sorry to burst your bubble...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Network misunderstands that even a sizable minority thinks like him on this issue. Americans don't, and the under forty generations are overwhelmingly in favor of universal marriage. End of story.

 

[WinterBorn]

What a sad warped perception... Anyway you can twist facts to fit your sick agenda for this country. I can't wait for the next civil war.

What he quoted has been consistently accepted by the highest courts in our country. That you call it "twisting facts" shows a lack of genuine argument.

Be careful what you wish for. The majority of the population is becoming more and more tolerant of homosexuality. The next civil war might just destroy your ilk rather than create the theocracy you seem to crave.

January 12, 2012
Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.
Overall, the nation has grown more polarized over the past decade
by Lydia Saad
PRINCETON, NJ -- Political ideology in the U.S. held steady in 2011, with 40% of Americans continuing to describe their views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This marks the third straight year that conservatives have outnumbered moderates, after more than a decade in which moderates mainly tied or outnumbered conservatives.

Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.

I'm really not worried about it.... You seem to have some strange illusion that you are a majority... Sorry to burst your bubble...

You seem to be operating under the delusion that all conservatives oppose homosexuals and gay marriage. Or that this single issue makes one conservative or liberal. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I am quite conservative on most issues. I am pro-2nd amendment, pro-tax reform, anti-affirmative action, and pro individual rights.

But if you look at the numbers of people who are tolerant of gays and pro-gay marriage, your numbers would change.

 

[PredFan]

Network misunderstands that even a sizable minority thinks like him on this issue. Americans don't, and the under forty generations are overwhelmingly in favor of universal marriage. End of story.

lots of people feel differently on things as they get older. There is no guarantee that tolerance of gay marriage will stay steady as the population gets older. the recent vote in California tends to show that perhaps the majority of voters are not supportive of gay marriage, and you certainly cannot say that it was only older people voting. We live in a country that was designed to follow the rule of law, and voting shouldn't enter into it, but to say that the anti-gay marriage croud will die off is most likely not true.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Looking at the trending over the last four decades on sexuality, teenage mother hood, single mothers, plural relationships, universal marriage, civil rights, and so forth, predfan, it is obvious the trending on this is leaving the Networks behind. It is pretty safe to say this is a done deal.