Matrimony

[asterism]

The Government calls me "Married." Apparently the definition of marriage is being redefined, so say the critics of gay marriage. So I looked at my wedding tape and I didn't find any instance of the word "married" or "marriage." Words mean things folks.

I am in a holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. Who cares if the government calls my situation a "marriage?" Yes, I am married. The government calls it that. However, I am not bound "til death due us part" by marriage since the government has a mechanism for my marriage to end. My Church has a mechanism for annulment, but that is a situation where there never was a proper holy Matrimony.

So I don't get this whole "redefinition of marriage" thing. Who cares?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The Government calls me "Married." Apparently the definition of marriage is being redefined, so say the critics of gay marriage. So I looked at my wedding tape and I didn't find any instance of the word "married" or "marriage." Words mean things folks.

I am in a holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. Who cares if the government calls my situation a "marriage?" Yes, I am married. The government calls it that. However, I am not bound "til death due us part" by marriage since the government has a mechanism for my marriage to end. My Church has a mechanism for annulment, but that is a situation where there never was a proper holy Matrimony.

So I don't get this whole "redefinition of marriage" thing. Who cares?

Obviously you do.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The Government calls me "Married." Apparently the definition of marriage is being redefined, so say the critics of gay marriage. So I looked at my wedding tape and I didn't find any instance of the word "married" or "marriage." Words mean things folks.

I am in a holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. Who cares if the government calls my situation a "marriage?" Yes, I am married. The government calls it that. However, I am not bound "til death due us part" by marriage since the government has a mechanism for my marriage to end. My Church has a mechanism for annulment, but that is a situation where there never was a proper holy Matrimony.

So I don't get this whole "redefinition of marriage" thing. Who cares?

The majority of Americans care.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Government calls me "Married." Apparently the definition of marriage is being redefined, so say the critics of gay marriage. So I looked at my wedding tape and I didn't find any instance of the word "married" or "marriage." Words mean things folks.

I am in a holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. Who cares if the government calls my situation a "marriage?" Yes, I am married. The government calls it that. However, I am not bound "til death due us part" by marriage since the government has a mechanism for my marriage to end. My Church has a mechanism for annulment, but that is a situation where there never was a proper holy Matrimony.

So I don't get this whole "redefinition of marriage" thing. Who cares?

What an incredible bunch of bullshit word-parsing.

If you don't care, then stay the fuck out of the argument. But please don't tell the rest of us that WE are not allowed to care simply because you have decided not to based on a load of fuzzy circular thinking. Judging by this post, I hope the day never comes when my opinion-forming is bound to your "thought processes", if they can be called that.

 

[del]

The Government calls me "Married." Apparently the definition of marriage is being redefined, so say the critics of gay marriage. So I looked at my wedding tape and I didn't find any instance of the word "married" or "marriage." Words mean things folks.

I am in a holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. Who cares if the government calls my situation a "marriage?" Yes, I am married. The government calls it that. However, I am not bound "til death due us part" by marriage since the government has a mechanism for my marriage to end. My Church has a mechanism for annulment, but that is a situation where there never was a proper holy Matrimony.

So I don't get this whole "redefinition of marriage" thing. Who cares?

What an incredible bunch of bullshit word-parsing.

If you don't care, then stay the fuck out of the argument. But please don't tell the rest of us that WE are not allowed to care simply because you have decided not to based on a load of fuzzy circular thinking. Judging by this post, I hope the day never comes when my opinion-forming is bound to your "thought processes", if they can be called that.

rest easy.

thought clearly has nothing to do with your *opinion-forming*.

have a super day

 

[Madeline]

The rest of you are one up on me. I have read the Op three times and still can't tell if asterism favors, opposes or simply has no opinion on same sex marriage.

 

[asterism]

The Government calls me "Married." Apparently the definition of marriage is being redefined, so say the critics of gay marriage. So I looked at my wedding tape and I didn't find any instance of the word "married" or "marriage." Words mean things folks.

I am in a holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. Who cares if the government calls my situation a "marriage?" Yes, I am married. The government calls it that. However, I am not bound "til death due us part" by marriage since the government has a mechanism for my marriage to end. My Church has a mechanism for annulment, but that is a situation where there never was a proper holy Matrimony.

So I don't get this whole "redefinition of marriage" thing. Who cares?

Obviously you do.

How so?

I asked a question because I simply don't understand the basis for the disagreement. Why are people who are married before God concerned with a government civil process?

 

[asterism]

The Government calls me "Married." Apparently the definition of marriage is being redefined, so say the critics of gay marriage. So I looked at my wedding tape and I didn't find any instance of the word "married" or "marriage." Words mean things folks.

I am in a holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. Who cares if the government calls my situation a "marriage?" Yes, I am married. The government calls it that. However, I am not bound "til death due us part" by marriage since the government has a mechanism for my marriage to end. My Church has a mechanism for annulment, but that is a situation where there never was a proper holy Matrimony.

So I don't get this whole "redefinition of marriage" thing. Who cares?

What an incredible bunch of bullshit word-parsing.

Ok, that's an interesting statement. I'm curious if you think words mean things or not.

If you don't care, then stay the fuck out of the argument.

Ah. Dissenting opinions are not allowed if the basis is "I don't care about the government's changing dynamics since they don't affect the sanctity of my situation." Ok, which dissenting opinions are allowed by you? In other words who would you NOT tell to "stay the fuck out?"

But please don't tell the rest of us that WE are not allowed to care

First show me where I did that since I told nobody any such thing.

simply because you have decided not to based on a load of fuzzy circular thinking. Judging by this post, I hope the day never comes when my opinion-forming is bound to your "thought processes", if they can be called that.

So you have no actual argument then correct? That's all I can conclude since you went straight to the personal attacks. When is it my turn to borrow that whip?

 

[asterism]

The rest of you are one up on me. I have read the Op three times and still can't tell if asterism favors, opposes or simply has no opinion on same sex marriage.

Crafty ain't I?

That's my attempt to view the process from a logical basis, not the emotion-driven bias of people on both sides of the argument. Perhaps I failed, but I think it's an interesting perspective.

 

[rightwinger]

The rest of you are one up on me. I have read the Op three times and still can't tell if asterism favors, opposes or simply has no opinion on same sex marriage.

Crafty ain't I?

That's my attempt to view the process from a logical basis, not the emotion-driven bias of people on both sides of the argument. Perhaps I failed, but I think it's an interesting perspective.

As long as each person receives equla treatment under the law...who cares?

Let Churches marry people. If gays find a church tolerant of their lifestyle, let them choose that church. If their existing church is intollerant.....move to a faith that doesn't condemn you

The government should just provide civil unions to everyone

 

[Madeline]

So, is your position that the government can do whatever it wishes as to marriage, because yours takes its meaning from the religious ceremony?

(And yes, you are crafty.)

 

[007]

Who cares?

Who cares who cares?

 

[Big Black Dog]

I thought "matrimony" was the public oath that signaled the beginning of the "Yes, dear!" phase of the committed relationship. Am I wrong?

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Government calls me "Married." Apparently the definition of marriage is being redefined, so say the critics of gay marriage. So I looked at my wedding tape and I didn't find any instance of the word "married" or "marriage." Words mean things folks.

I am in a holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. Who cares if the government calls my situation a "marriage?" Yes, I am married. The government calls it that. However, I am not bound "til death due us part" by marriage since the government has a mechanism for my marriage to end. My Church has a mechanism for annulment, but that is a situation where there never was a proper holy Matrimony.

So I don't get this whole "redefinition of marriage" thing. Who cares?

What an incredible bunch of bullshit word-parsing.

If you don't care, then stay the fuck out of the argument. But please don't tell the rest of us that WE are not allowed to care simply because you have decided not to based on a load of fuzzy circular thinking. Judging by this post, I hope the day never comes when my opinion-forming is bound to your "thought processes", if they can be called that.

rest easy.

thought clearly has nothing to do with your *opinion-forming*.

have a super day

Yet another person whose version of "thought" is utterly undesirable in connection with anything I do.

Now that I am comforted by the knowledge that nothing I do would meet approval in BizarroDelWorld, I am certain to have a super day.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Government calls me "Married." Apparently the definition of marriage is being redefined, so say the critics of gay marriage. So I looked at my wedding tape and I didn't find any instance of the word "married" or "marriage." Words mean things folks.

I am in a holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. Who cares if the government calls my situation a "marriage?" Yes, I am married. The government calls it that. However, I am not bound "til death due us part" by marriage since the government has a mechanism for my marriage to end. My Church has a mechanism for annulment, but that is a situation where there never was a proper holy Matrimony.

So I don't get this whole "redefinition of marriage" thing. Who cares?

Obviously you do.

How so?

I asked a question because I simply don't understand the basis for the disagreement. Why are people who are married before God concerned with a government civil process?

While I fully recognize that I am wasting oxygen shouting into an empty black void, I'm bored enough to answer anyway.

It's because they're two different things. There's the relationship I have in the eyes of God, my husband, and myself, and then there's the recognition of the government. One is not the other, nor dependent thereon. God doesn't give a rat's ass what the government does or doesn't recognize, and the government is equally uninterested in what God does or doesn't recognize.

 

[Madeline]

Well now that we have that all cleared up, there'll be no more opposition to gay marriage?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The Government calls me "Married." Apparently the definition of marriage is being redefined, so say the critics of gay marriage. So I looked at my wedding tape and I didn't find any instance of the word "married" or "marriage." Words mean things folks.

I am in a holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. Who cares if the government calls my situation a "marriage?" Yes, I am married. The government calls it that. However, I am not bound "til death due us part" by marriage since the government has a mechanism for my marriage to end. My Church has a mechanism for annulment, but that is a situation where there never was a proper holy Matrimony.

So I don't get this whole "redefinition of marriage" thing. Who cares?

Obviously you do.

How so?

I asked a question because I simply don't understand the basis for the disagreement. Why are people who are married before God concerned with a government civil process?

Short answer:

A marriage certificate is a legal binding contract therefore marriage must be legally defined. It has been defined as a union between one man and woman in the Defense of Marriage Act and upheld by the Supreme Court in Murphy v Ramsey. The Supreme court also ruled that marriage is a states rights issue in Loving v Virginia.

 

[asterism]

Obviously you do.

How so?

I asked a question because I simply don't understand the basis for the disagreement. Why are people who are married before God concerned with a government civil process?

Short answer:

A marriage certificate is a legal binding contract therefore marriage must be legally defined. It has been defined as a union between one man and woman in the Defense of Marriage Act and upheld by the Supreme Court in Murphy v Ramsey. The Supreme court also ruled that marriage is a states rights issue in Loving v Virginia.

Ok, I get that. However what is the resistance by religious groups on a government contract? There's little resistance on easy civil divorces even though Churches have much more stringent criteria.

I really don't get it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

How so?

I asked a question because I simply don't understand the basis for the disagreement. Why are people who are married before God concerned with a government civil process?

Short answer:

A marriage certificate is a legal binding contract therefore marriage must be legally defined. It has been defined as a union between one man and woman in the Defense of Marriage Act and upheld by the Supreme Court in Murphy v Ramsey. The Supreme court also ruled that marriage is a states rights issue in Loving v Virginia.

Ok, I get that. However what is the resistance by religious groups on a government contract? There's little resistance on easy civil divorces even though Churches have much more stringent criteria.

I really don't get it.

The resistance is that WE are the government in this country, and WE do not wish to officially throw the weight of official government, ie. societal, sanction behind homosexual "marriages".

And if you think there's "little resistance" to easy civil divorces, you obviously don't know a lot of religious people.

 

[rightwinger]

Short answer:

A marriage certificate is a legal binding contract therefore marriage must be legally defined. It has been defined as a union between one man and woman in the Defense of Marriage Act and upheld by the Supreme Court in Murphy v Ramsey. The Supreme court also ruled that marriage is a states rights issue in Loving v Virginia.

Ok, I get that. However what is the resistance by religious groups on a government contract? There's little resistance on easy civil divorces even though Churches have much more stringent criteria.

I really don't get it.

The resistance is that WE are the government in this country, and WE do not wish to officially throw the weight of official government, ie. societal, sanction behind homosexual "marriages".

And if you think there's "little resistance" to easy civil divorces, you obviously don't know a lot of religious people.

WE elect officials to represent us. The government is comprised of three branches. The judicial branch is responsible for protecting the rights of the minority from the majority.

The rights others are allowed to receive is not subject to a vote