Pro-Christian Legislation vs. Anti-Christian Legislation

[tigerbob]

There's no exclusion, as there's no "heterosexual" mentioned in the first place.

So gays can be included?

 

[AllieBaba]

In what? Not in marriage, which has a specific definition, specific to men and women.

But certainly in everything else that isn't defined by heterosexual components.

 

[tigerbob]

In what? Not in marriage, which has a specific definition, specific to men and women.

But certainly in everything else that isn't defined by heterosexual components.

Church "marriage", or marriage in general (even if it is termed something different)?

I'm assuming you have no objection to gay couples who go through a form of civil ceremony to cement their partnership having access to the same rights and benefits that a couple married in the sight of God have?

 

[AllieBaba]

So long as they don't call it a marriage.

 

[KittenKoder]

We'll call it Gayriage then.

 

[tigerbob]

So long as they don't call it a marriage.

Yeah - sorry - I just read your post #90, which explains your views pretty definitively.

Thanks for taking the trouble to answer again anyway.

 

[Evangelical]

Do we have to subsidize their "gayrige"? Because if we do then no, they can't do that either.

 

[KittenKoder]

Do we have to subsidize their "gayrige"? Because if we do then no, they can't do that either.

We already know you are against all marriage ... no need to repeat it ...

 

[Evangelical]

Do we have to subsidize their "gayrige"? Because if we do then no, they can't do that either.

We already know you are against all marriage ... no need to repeat it ...

You cannot subsidize their marriage because that affronts Christians, who are the majority and sorry but this isn't a nation of individuals, groups have some say in what happens.

 

[AllieBaba]

Wait...what marriages are being subsidized?

I've been married and I never received any subsidy...

 

[Evangelical]

Wait...what marriages are being subsidized?

I've been married and I never received any subsidy...

You file jointly and receive a reduced taxation due to dependency, so you are subsidized.

 

[AllieBaba]

Oh, well...you can get subsidized for a lot of things. Including being a single parent.

I really don't give much of a shit about that.

 

[Evangelical]

Oh, well...you can get subsidized for a lot of things. Including being a single parent.

I really don't give much of a shit about that.

Yes, but I'm saying you cannot have gay marriage because what they are really after is that subsidy and Christians refuse.

 

[tigerbob]

Do we have to subsidize their "gayrige"? Because if we do then no, they can't do that either.

We already know you are against all marriage ... no need to repeat it ...

You cannot subsidize their marriage because that affronts Christians, who are the majority and sorry but this isn't a nation of individuals, groups have some say in what happens.

For those Christians that object, they generally object to the term marriage, not to the idea of equal rights / benefits. Rights and benefits derive from the State, not the church.

 

[AllieBaba]

Righto.

 

[Evangelical]

We already know you are against all marriage ... no need to repeat it ...

You cannot subsidize their marriage because that affronts Christians, who are the majority and sorry but this isn't a nation of individuals, groups have some say in what happens.

For those Christians that object, they generally object to the term marriage, not to the idea of equal rights / benefits. Rights and benefits derive from the State, not the church.

Wrong... The Conflict Between Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty

Representative of most Evangelical views.

It's about the right of the church to deny homosexuals employment, and to not pay for immoral activities. In gay marriage states it is already happening that churches are being forced to go against their morals.

 

[KittenKoder]

Do we have to subsidize their "gayrige"? Because if we do then no, they can't do that either.

We already know you are against all marriage ... no need to repeat it ...

You cannot subsidize their marriage because that affronts Christians, who are the majority and sorry but this isn't a nation of individuals, groups have some say in what happens.

No, you can't subsidize anything legally without everyone agreeing to it, and many of us who are single for life for whatever reason would probably not want to pay for them in any way, so by saying it that way you are giving us reason to pass a law banning all marital rights, thus ... you hate all marriage, because believe me, in this day and age the single members of this country more likely outweigh the married couples politically. If you did like marriage you wouldn't be tempting us in such a way, now would you?

 

[AllieBaba]

Oh I get it.

Sort of like the attempts to have certain parts of the bible declared "hate speech" in order to muzzle preachers.

 

[KittenKoder]

You cannot subsidize their marriage because that affronts Christians, who are the majority and sorry but this isn't a nation of individuals, groups have some say in what happens.

For those Christians that object, they generally object to the term marriage, not to the idea of equal rights / benefits. Rights and benefits derive from the State, not the church.

Wrong... The Conflict Between Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty

Representative of most Evangelical views.

It's about the right of the church to deny homosexuals employment, and to not pay for immoral activities. In gay marriage states it is already happening that churches are being forced to go against their morals.

*eye roll* That's just lame. Sorry, but the churches are not forced into marrying anyone and some have denied performing the rights to couples not in their congregation legally and no one has complained, they just go to someone who is already willing or a Justice of the Peace which is not religiously aligned.

 

[Evangelical]

For those Christians that object, they generally object to the term marriage, not to the idea of equal rights / benefits. Rights and benefits derive from the State, not the church.

Wrong... The Conflict Between Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty

Representative of most Evangelical views.

It's about the right of the church to deny homosexuals employment, and to not pay for immoral activities. In gay marriage states it is already happening that churches are being forced to go against their morals.

*eye roll* That's just lame. Sorry, but the churches are not forced into marrying anyone and some have denied performing the rights to couples not in their congregation legally and no one has complained, they just go to someone who is already willing or a Justice of the Peace which is not religiously aligned.

I didn't say they were forced to marry someone, I said they were forced to hire homosexuals because in gay marriage states, where homosexuals are publicly gay through marriage, a church can single them out for discrimination employment wise.

You should really listen to Dr. Albert Mohler instead of thinking you know what the issue really is...the liberals have lied to you.