Barb
Carpe Scrotum
SSM activists should disagree, if they are sincere. They are demanding we make it our national business to change the definition of marriage. What is interesting is that some on the board seem ready to compromise by eliminating marriage entirely, which means they do not value it.
The definition is come to by SOME churches. What we propose is that the STATE come up with a more inclusive word, and the CHURCHES can follow their INDIVIDUAL convenience.
Then why is it when I suggest that the term civil unions be used regarding the legal contract of a married couple for ALL couples regardless of sexual orientation and keeping Marriage as a Rite of the Church with no legal benefits whatsoever, do I get called just about every name in the book by people who support "gay marriage" on this site?
Immie
I dunno.