NY Gay Marriage Baggage

[del]

No you are trying to force your religous views on me. No one can convice me that gay marriage is supported by the Bible. Why dont you list some versus that support your claim?

Romans 1:26-27

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their woman did change the natural use into that which is against nature.

And like wise the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another: men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.


Leviticus 18:22, 24

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind, it is abomination. Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things



Deuteronomy 23:17-18

There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.

Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the LORD thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

the bible isn't god.

all you need to know about god is that you aren't

Again somebody who does not read their bible.

St.John 1:1 In the begining was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

All I am doing is proving the the bible does not endorse gay marriage. I do not claim to be God. When you make statments like that it make you look ignorant.

all you're doing is flapping your gums; you've proven nothing

 

[manifold]

This is the NY legislature legislating... isn't that exactly what so many have been promoting for a few years now?

I guess all that grandstanding about 'activist' judges was just a red herring attempt to hide anti-queer bigotry.

But whatcha gonna do?

 

[del]

This is the NY legislature legislating... isn't that exactly what so many have been promoting for a few years now?

I guess all that grandstanding about 'activist' judges was just a red herring attempt to hide anti-queer bigotry.

But whatcha gonna do?

it's those activist legislators making law from the legislature.

commies

 

[martybegan]

Isn't the current fight now over the exemptions for religous organizations? Basically allowing churches/synogouges/mosques/temples to deny performing the ceremony, or recognizing the civil marriage as valid? It probably includes exemptions for religously affiliated organziations such as Knights of Columbus.

 

[boedicca]

My thoughts on this:

Civil unions are a legal construct; any two people should be able to form one (and no this is not advocacy for polygamy and people having relationships with animals). Contractually combining assets and liabilities, and having standing regarding in critical care situations should be legally recognized.

Marriage is a private matter, and the government should stay out of it, which also includes not using the tax code to socially engineer, reward, or punish relationships (if marriage is so important, why do we continue to have a marriage penalty).

 

[tonystewart1]

the bible isn't god.

all you need to know about god is that you aren't

Again somebody who does not read their bible.

St.John 1:1 In the begining was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

All I am doing is proving the the bible does not endorse gay marriage. I do not claim to be God. When you make statments like that it make you look ignorant.

all you're doing is flapping your gums; you've proven nothing

Listen I have shown you in the Bible where God does not endorse homosexualtiy. I do not advocate violence toward homosexuals nor do I hate them. But they can not say that the bible supports their lifestyle. It does not. So yes I have proven the bible takes a dim view toward homosexuals. That was no great stretch to do anyway. Everyone knows what the bible says about it. Its been reapeated many times over.

Your mad because you cant take the bible and prove me wrong. I am sorry but the bible does not support the current feel good everybody is okay mood. If you are gay and you do not repent you will go to hell. Its that simple. I do not want anyone to go to hell but I will not let anyone say that the bible supports their lifestyle when it plainly does not.

 

[Two Thumbs]

The state gets involved so it can charge a fee and legitimise some level of wasted paper.

Then it's all about taxes.

Single working people are punished for being both single and employed, by having to pay a higher rate of tax for being single and for paying tax b/c they have a job.

this guv involvement drives people 2 directions. Either to marriage, for the tax relief or onto welfare, where you get more money as a single mother than as a family.

As far as the before god stuff; That's up to the different churches. As it is, they don't have to wed anyone, and if the state chooses tyranny and forces them to have gay weddings, there will be no wedding.

Also, as it is, gays can get church wedding now, if they can find one. Since it isn't leagally binding, it's meaningless to the state and to anything else that would be a benefit of getting wed.

 

[martybegan]

My thoughts on this:

Civil unions are a legal construct; any two people should be able to form one (and no this is not advocacy for polygamy and people having relationships with animals). Contractually combining assets and liabilities, and having standing regarding in critical care situations should be legally recognized.

Marriage is a private matter, and the government should stay out of it, which also includes not using the tax code to socially engineer, reward, or punish relationships (if marriage is so important, why do we continue to have a marriage penalty).

The argument against polygamy will get much weaker if same sex unions/marriage become widespread law. I am not going into the fearmongering of animal/underage/toaster type relationships becoming legal due to same sex marriage, as those are lacking the one component needed, consent.

But in the near future I do see polygamous people trying to jump on the bandwagon to get thier relationships certifed by the state. They contain the one needed component the others have: consent.

 

[manifold]

My thoughts on this:

Civil unions are a legal construct; any two people should be able to form one (and no this is not advocacy for polygamy and people having relationships with animals). Contractually combining assets and liabilities, and having standing regarding in critical care situations should be legally recognized.

Marriage is a private matter, and the government should stay out of it, which also includes not using the tax code to socially engineer, reward, or punish relationships (if marriage is so important, why do we continue to have a marriage penalty).

The argument against polygamy will get much weaker if same sex unions/marriage become widespread law. I am not going into the fearmongering of animal/underage/toaster type relationships becoming legal due to same sex marriage, as those are lacking the one component needed, consent.

But in the near future I do see polygamous people trying to jump on the bandwagon to get thier relationships certifed by the state. They contain the one needed component the others have: consent.

And why should polygamy be banned?

 

[martybegan]

My thoughts on this:

Civil unions are a legal construct; any two people should be able to form one (and no this is not advocacy for polygamy and people having relationships with animals). Contractually combining assets and liabilities, and having standing regarding in critical care situations should be legally recognized.

Marriage is a private matter, and the government should stay out of it, which also includes not using the tax code to socially engineer, reward, or punish relationships (if marriage is so important, why do we continue to have a marriage penalty).

The argument against polygamy will get much weaker if same sex unions/marriage become widespread law. I am not going into the fearmongering of animal/underage/toaster type relationships becoming legal due to same sex marriage, as those are lacking the one component needed, consent.

But in the near future I do see polygamous people trying to jump on the bandwagon to get thier relationships certifed by the state. They contain the one needed component the others have: consent.

And why should polygamy be banned?

Good question, from a legal standpoint. From a moral standpoint it depends on your moral basis, as certain religons/customs approve of it.

 

[LumpyPostage]

I knew it was only a matter of time before the toaster haters came out of the woodwork. Toasters have made positive contributions to society for many years. Are you going to eat your scrambled eggs with cold bread? Of course not.

We toast the most. Get used to it.

 

[Two Thumbs]

The only requirement for a contract to be binding is that all people involved are old enough and mentally capable to consent.

The laws against palygamy are unconstitutional, as well as the defense of marriage act.

Still can't wed a child or an animal.

 

[del]

Again somebody who does not read their bible.

St.John 1:1 In the begining was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

All I am doing is proving the the bible does not endorse gay marriage. I do not claim to be God. When you make statments like that it make you look ignorant.

all you're doing is flapping your gums; you've proven nothing

Listen I have shown you in the Bible where God does not endorse homosexualtiy. I do not advocate violence toward homosexuals nor do I hate them. But they can not say that the bible supports their lifestyle. It does not. So yes I have proven the bible takes a dim view toward homosexuals. That was no great stretch to do anyway. Everyone knows what the bible says about it. Its been reapeated many times over.

Your mad because you cant take the bible and prove me wrong. I am sorry but the bible does not support the current feel good everybody is okay mood. If you are gay and you do not repent you will go to hell. Its that simple. I do not want anyone to go to hell but I will not let anyone say that the bible supports their lifestyle when it plainly does not.

when i say the bible supports gays, i'll let you know, otay?

the bible was written by men and is every bit as much an expression of god's will as this month's copy of mechanix illustrated.

if it brings you comfort, good on you.

 

[rightwinger]

The argument against polygamy will get much weaker if same sex unions/marriage become widespread law. I am not going into the fearmongering of animal/underage/toaster type relationships becoming legal due to same sex marriage, as those are lacking the one component needed, consent.

But in the near future I do see polygamous people trying to jump on the bandwagon to get thier relationships certifed by the state. They contain the one needed component the others have: consent.

And why should polygamy be banned?

Good question, from a legal standpoint. From a moral standpoint it depends on your moral basis, as certain religons/customs approve of it.

I have never seen a reason that polygamy should be illegal and punishable by prison. You are legally allowed to be married and have a mistress on the side. You can even have children with that mistress, even if you are a governor.

It only becomes illegal if you try to establish legal responsibility for that second family

 

[LumpyPostage]

If procreation is the most important aspect of marriage than polygamy should be encouraged.

 

[Intense]

I have never understood what the big deal was with "gay marriage". Gays can not marry. Marriage is a religious institution.

When me and my wife got married we entered into a civil union based on the states definition and a marriage before God. Let the gays have civil unions so they can share each others health insurance etc. Most states recognize couples living together as being financially linked.

But they will never be married. God does not approve and no matter how many chruches reject what the bible plainly says they can not be married.

Churches already marry gay couples...We were married in a religious ceremony in a religious institution almost two decades before the state of CA granted us our legal marriage license.

I have no issue with that, if the Church participated voluntarily, which in your case it did.

 

[manifold]

And why should polygamy be banned?

Good question, from a legal standpoint. From a moral standpoint it depends on your moral basis, as certain religons/customs approve of it.

I have never seen a reason that polygamy should be illegal and punishable by prison. You are legally allowed to be married and have a mistress on the side. You can even have children with that mistress, even if you are a governor.

It only becomes illegal if you try to establish legal responsibility for that second family

And you can also legally fuck consenting adult strangers. It only becomes illegal when you charge them.

Go figure.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Isn't the current fight now over the exemptions for religous organizations?

No.

Basically allowing churches/synogouges/mosques/temples to deny performing the ceremony, or recognizing the civil marriage as valid? It probably includes exemptions for religously affiliated organziations such as Knights of Columbus.

It's already in the law that has been proposed.

S 10-B. APPLICATION. 1. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW,
20 PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION NINE OF SECTION TWO HUNDRED NINETY-TWO OF THE
21 EXECUTIVE LAW, A CORPORATION INCORPORATED UNDER THE BENEVOLENT ORDERS
22 LAW OR DESCRIBED IN THE BENEVOLENT ORDERS LAW BUT FORMED UNDER ANY OTHER
23 LAW OF THIS STATE OR A RELIGIOUS CORPORATION INCORPORATED UNDER THE
24 EDUCATION LAW OR THE RELIGIOUS CORPORATIONS LAWS SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE
25 IN ITS NATURE DISTINCTLY PRIVATE AND THEREFORE, SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO
26 PROVIDE ACCOMMODATIONS, ADVANTAGES, FACILITIES OR PRIVILEGES RELATED TO
27 THE SOLEMNIZATION OR CELEBRATION OF A MARRIAGE.​

Bills


>>>>

 

[tonystewart1]

all you're doing is flapping your gums; you've proven nothing

Listen I have shown you in the Bible where God does not endorse homosexualtiy. I do not advocate violence toward homosexuals nor do I hate them. But they can not say that the bible supports their lifestyle. It does not. So yes I have proven the bible takes a dim view toward homosexuals. That was no great stretch to do anyway. Everyone knows what the bible says about it. Its been reapeated many times over.

Your mad because you cant take the bible and prove me wrong. I am sorry but the bible does not support the current feel good everybody is okay mood. If you are gay and you do not repent you will go to hell. Its that simple. I do not want anyone to go to hell but I will not let anyone say that the bible supports their lifestyle when it plainly does not.

when i say the bible supports gays, i'll let you know, otay?

the bible was written by men and is every bit as much an expression of god's will as this month's copy of mechanix illustrated.

if it brings you comfort, good on you.

I see where our disconnect is. I see the bible as the Word of God. Not just a book and not concieved by man. If you look at the bible that way then yes you will not ever understand what I am trying to tell you. Thats okay. I will pray for you.

 

[Intense]

Churches already marry gay couples...We were married in a religious ceremony in a religious institution almost two decades before the state of CA granted us our legal marriage license.

I am very happy for you that you found happiness but God does not recognize that marriage. The bible is really plain and simple on that matter. Sorry.

No man of God can be forced to marry gay couples. Every preacher I know will not marry gay couples they will go to jail first.

Of course God recognises our marriage...just as much as yours. What a ridiculous thing for you to say....speaking for God...just because YOU personally don't know any ministers who will marry gay couples is NOT the end all and be all. Very arrogant of you...speaking for God and all ministers. This is the kind of arrogance that is trying to force YOUR religious views on our laws.

In truth I find arrogance on both sides of the equation. From a personal perspective, us not being perfect, answering to our Maker, Each, bearing ones own cross, we give account, All are at God's Mercy, None have achieved on our own, Bodecea. We carry our burdens, each, and do the best we can. Vices and addictions effect us all in one way or another, to one level or degree or another. Maybe we can both start out with a pledge to do no harm. Try making a difference everyday. Is it enough to know , not that God is on your side, but you are on God's side. I do not ask God to justify my misdirection, but take satisfaction in knowing that at least in one way, I may be privileged to serve his. Bear witness and tell the truth about what you see. Build on that.