A Reasonable Solution To The Gay Marriage Debate

[BDBoop]

Um.....okay. Matthew 19 states the words of Jesus very clearly: "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh.[/U] Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

Which Corinthians are you speaking of, First Corinthians or second Corinthians?

roflmao!!

Because, - what. It'd kill you to pick up a bible and find out for yourself?

Not my job to back up your points. It's yours.

That wasn't my point, liver lips. L2Read.

 

[Buford]

You just inserted religion into a government debate.

You lose.

No he didn't. Saying marriage is between a man and a woman isn't a religious statement.

However marriage was initially the domain of the church; when the church actually was the government. Then the government horned in. And it's still trying to horn in, thanks to people like you.

Yes it is. That's what he is basing it on.

He's a fundy.

Jesus was a fundy and Jesus was also a bigot because Jesus said marriage is a man and a woman. Not only that, but millions and millions of people who lived on this planet from the very beginning of civilization were homophobic bigots because they believed marriage is a man and a women. Astounding reasoning. You're smart. You should write a book.

 

[BDBoop]

No he didn't. Saying marriage is between a man and a woman isn't a religious statement.

However marriage was initially the domain of the church; when the church actually was the government. Then the government horned in. And it's still trying to horn in, thanks to people like you.

Yes it is. That's what he is basing it on.

He's a fundy.

Jesus was a fundy and Jesus was also a bigot because Jesus said marriage is a man and a woman. Not only that, but millions and millions of people who lived on this planet from the very beginning of civilization were homophobic bigots because they believed marriage is a man and a women. Astounding reasoning. You're smart. You should write a book.

Thanks. Because you just proved you're not a Christian, you are a troll who uses religion to play your little troll games.

 

[Buford]

Yes it is. That's what he is basing it on.

He's a fundy.

Jesus was a fundy and Jesus was also a bigot because Jesus said marriage is a man and a woman. Not only that, but millions and millions of people who lived on this planet from the very beginning of civilization were homophobic bigots because they believed marriage is a man and a women. Astounding reasoning. You're smart. You should write a book.

Thanks. Because you just proved you're not a Christian, you are a troll who uses religion to play your little troll games.

Naw. I just expose your ignorance and double standard crap.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

As long as no one is forced to recognize something against their religion, then people can do what they want.

And the gov't should recognize those marriages and any civil ceremony weddings?

I believe marriage laws are a state matter.

And equal access to those laws are a Constitutional matter.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Agree. Marriage is a man and a woman. That violates nothing.

You just inserted religion into a government debate.

You lose.

No he didn't. Saying marriage is between a man and a woman isn't a religious statement.

However marriage was initially the domain of the church; when the church actually was the government. Then the government horned in. And it's still trying to horn in, thanks to people like you.

This doesn’t make any sense, as usual.

Secular marriage law is contract law, written by the states; it has nothing to do with religious rituals concerning marriage.

In the United States church and State are held separate, per the Constitution. As private entities, religious organizations are not subject to Constitutional mandate, only law-making jurisdictions must allow same-sex couples access to their marriage laws.

Religion doesn’t factor into the issue, and is consequently irrelevant.

Anyone who makes a ‘religious argument’ is either exhibiting her ignorance or attempting to deflect the issue away from the failed conservative ‘argument.’

 

[BDBoop]

You just inserted religion into a government debate.

You lose.

No he didn't. Saying marriage is between a man and a woman isn't a religious statement.

However marriage was initially the domain of the church; when the church actually was the government. Then the government horned in. And it's still trying to horn in, thanks to people like you.

This doesn’t make any sense, as usual.

Secular marriage law is contract law, written by the states; it has nothing to do with religious rituals concerning marriage.

In the United States church and State are held separate, per the Constitution. As private entities, religious organizations are not subject to Constitutional mandate, only law-making jurisdictions must allow same-sex couples access to their marriage laws.

Religion doesn’t factor into the issue, and is consequently irrelevant.

Anyone who makes a ‘religious argument’ is either exhibiting her ignorance or attempting to deflect the issue away from the failed conservative ‘argument.’

Or. You know.

Both.

 

[koshergrl]

You just inserted religion into a government debate.

You lose.

No he didn't. Saying marriage is between a man and a woman isn't a religious statement.

However marriage was initially the domain of the church; when the church actually was the government. Then the government horned in. And it's still trying to horn in, thanks to people like you.

This doesn’t make any sense, as usual.

Secular marriage law is contract law, written by the states; it has nothing to do with religious rituals concerning marriage.

In the United States church and State are held separate, per the Constitution. As private entities, religious organizations are not subject to Constitutional mandate, only law-making jurisdictions must allow same-sex couples access to their marriage laws.

Religion doesn’t factor into the issue, and is consequently irrelevant.

Anyone who makes a ‘religious argument’ is either exhibiting her ignorance or attempting to deflect the issue away from the failed conservative ‘argument.’

You moron, I didn't make a religious argument. BDBoop said religion was inserted into the conversation when it wasn't. So take your brilliant retort and re-direct it towards her. You both seem to have difficulty with the language.

 

[BDBoop]

No he didn't. Saying marriage is between a man and a woman isn't a religious statement.

However marriage was initially the domain of the church; when the church actually was the government. Then the government horned in. And it's still trying to horn in, thanks to people like you.

This doesn’t make any sense, as usual.

Secular marriage law is contract law, written by the states; it has nothing to do with religious rituals concerning marriage.

In the United States church and State are held separate, per the Constitution. As private entities, religious organizations are not subject to Constitutional mandate, only law-making jurisdictions must allow same-sex couples access to their marriage laws.

Religion doesn’t factor into the issue, and is consequently irrelevant.

Anyone who makes a ‘religious argument’ is either exhibiting her ignorance or attempting to deflect the issue away from the failed conservative ‘argument.’

You moron, I didn't make a religious argument. BDBoop said religion was inserted into the conversation when it wasn't. So take your brilliant retort and re-direct it towards her. You both seem to have difficulty with the language.

Yes it was. And most of the people against same-sex marriage base that belief on the Bible. So just because YOU don't doesn't mean it doesn't happen and that it is happening right in this thread.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Let’s review the more common arguments against allowing same-sex couples access to marriage laws and why these arguments fail.

Marriage is Sacred and a Sacrament

Irrelevant.

As the Constitutional mandate applies only to public sector jurisdictions, no religious institution may be compelled to administer religious marriage rituals to same-sex couples.

Marriage is for Raising Children; Gay Couples are Unnatural & Unnatural Unions Cannot Be Marriage

False.

As already established, if same-sex couples are prohibited from marriage for this reason then infertile opposite-sex couples must be excluded from marriage for the same reason.

Gay Marriage Will Undermine the Institution of Marriage.

False.

Marriage is a union between equals, gender is irrelevant; a marriage contract is an agreement between two equal parties to make a commitment to each other, in exchange for which they are entitled to stipulated benefits and privileges as provided by law.

Gay Marriage is Incompatible with Religious Liberty

False.

Allowing same-sex couples equal access to marriage law as required by the 14th Amendment in no way interferes with ‘religious liberty.’ Obeying the Constitution in this matter infringes on no religious tenet, no person of a given faith is compelled to enter into a same-sex marriage contract against his will, and no religious institution is required to allow same-sex couples access to their marriage rites.

Marriage as a Cultural Symbol

Irrelevant.

The Supreme Court has held that because something is perceived to be ‘historic’ or ‘traditional’ does not justify that practice to be continued if found offensive to the Constitution. See: Bowers v. Hardwick

That marriage has ‘always been’ between a man and a woman is legally immaterial. If that were a valid argument then segregation and miscegenation would still be legal, as some might well consider both ‘traditional.’

 

[koshergrl]

This doesn’t make any sense, as usual.

Secular marriage law is contract law, written by the states; it has nothing to do with religious rituals concerning marriage.

In the United States church and State are held separate, per the Constitution. As private entities, religious organizations are not subject to Constitutional mandate, only law-making jurisdictions must allow same-sex couples access to their marriage laws.

Religion doesn’t factor into the issue, and is consequently irrelevant.

Anyone who makes a ‘religious argument’ is either exhibiting her ignorance or attempting to deflect the issue away from the failed conservative ‘argument.’

You moron, I didn't make a religious argument. BDBoop said religion was inserted into the conversation when it wasn't. So take your brilliant retort and re-direct it towards her. You both seem to have difficulty with the language.

Yes it was. And most of the people against same-sex marriage base that belief on the Bible. So just because YOU don't doesn't mean it doesn't happen and that it is happening right in this thread.

No, it wasn't. Please point out the reference to religion (outside your own noggin) in the statement "Marriage is between a man and a woman". What is the religious reference?

You realize you are saying, as you always do, that the reality is something other than the facts. Just because you think there's a religious connection in someone's MIND doesn't mean they introduced religion into the conversation.

 

[koshergrl]

And please link the stats that back up your statement "most of the people against same-sex marriage" feel that way because of religion. The majority of the American population is against it. It isn't about religion. It's about protecting the stable, traditional family that we know is the ideal unit for raising children. That's the beginning, middle and end...and it has nothing to do with religion.

The extremist minority thinks if they can MAKE this a religious issue, they will scare people into supporting them.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Fourteenth Amendment's promise that no person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws must co exist with the practical necessity that most legislation classifies for one purpose or another, with resulting disadvantage to various groups or persons. Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney, 442 U.S. 256, 271" 272 (1979); F. S. Royster Guano Co. v. Virginia, 253 U.S. 412, 415 (1920). We have attempted to reconcile the principle with the reality by stating that, if a law neither burdens a fundamental right nor targets a suspect class, we will uphold the legislative classification so long as it bears a rational relation to some legitimate end. See, e.g., Heller v. Doe, 509 U. S. ___, ___ (1993) (slip op., at 6).

Romer, Governor of Colorado, et al. v. Evans et al., 517 U.S. 620 (1996).

Laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marriage law meet neither standard, as they manifest an undue burden to a fundamental right and lack ‘a rational relation to some legitimate end.’

Objecting to same-sex marriage on religious grounds is neither rational nor legitimate.

 

[koshergrl]

Once again, who is objecting to it on a religious basis?

Not me.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Let’s review the more common arguments against allowing same-sex couples access to marriage laws and why these arguments fail.

Marriage is Sacred and a Sacrament

Irrelevant.

As the Constitutional mandate applies only to public sector jurisdictions, no religious institution may be compelled to administer religious marriage rituals to same-sex couples.

Marriage is for Raising Children; Gay Couples are Unnatural & Unnatural Unions Cannot Be Marriage

False.

As already established, if same-sex couples are prohibited from marriage for this reason then infertile opposite-sex couples must be excluded from marriage for the same reason.

Gay Marriage Will Undermine the Institution of Marriage.

False.

Marriage is a union between equals, gender is irrelevant; a marriage contract is an agreement between two equal parties to make a commitment to each other, in exchange for which they are entitled to stipulated benefits and privileges as provided by law.

Gay Marriage is Incompatible with Religious Liberty

False.

Allowing same-sex couples equal access to marriage law as required by the 14th Amendment in no way interferes with ‘religious liberty.’ Obeying the Constitution in this matter infringes on no religious tenet, no person of a given faith is compelled to enter into a same-sex marriage contract against his will, and no religious institution is required to allow same-sex couples access to their marriage rites.

Marriage as a Cultural Symbol

Irrelevant.

The Supreme Court has held that because something is perceived to be ‘historic’ or ‘traditional’ does not justify that practice to be continued if found offensive to the Constitution. See: Bowers v. Hardwick

That marriage has ‘always been’ between a man and a woman is legally immaterial. If that were a valid argument then segregation and miscegenation would still be legal, as some might well consider both ‘traditional.’

Sodomy is illegal people are arrested for doing it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Every Wednesday, Eddie and Jobo take their mics to the Cook County Courthouse to see why people are there. This morning’s stories ranged from normal to downright bizarre! There was people looking for child support, someone busted for underage drinking and even a story about a brother and sister looking to get married!

Read more: A Brother & Sister Want To Get Married? Find Out The Whole Story On Eddie & Jobo’s What Are You In For? A Brother & Sister Want To Get Married? Find Out The Whole Story On Eddie & Jobo’s What Are You In For?

 

[BDBoop]

And please link the stats that back up your statement "most of the people against same-sex marriage" feel that way because of religion. The majority of the American population is against it. It isn't about religion. It's about protecting the stable, traditional family that we know is the ideal unit for raising children. That's the beginning, middle and end...and it has nothing to do with religion.

The extremist minority thinks if they can MAKE this a religious issue, they will scare people into supporting them.

The creation of marriage is recorded in Genesis 2:23-24: "The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called “woman,” for she was taken out of man.’ For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh." God created man and then made woman to complement him. Marriage is God’s “fix” for the fact that “it is not good for the man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18).

There are many Biblical references to man and woman being the standard, and just about any fundy in this thread can reference them for you, chapter and verse.

 

[Montrovant]

Sodomy is illegal people are arrested for doing it.

Not in the US as far as I know.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Sodomy is illegal people are arrested for doing it.

Not in the US as far as I know.

You were saying?

Man Charged With Sodomy, Child Molestation | FOX2now.com

Elmore County man charged with sodomy, child sex abuse | Crime | Wetumpka News

More details emerge after pastor charged with sodomy, child porn - KFVS12 News & Weather Cape Girardeau, Carbondale, Poplar Bluff

Guyton man charged with solicitation of sodomy, enticing a child - WTOC-TV: Savannah, Beaufort, SC, News, Weather & Sports

Jack man charged with rape, sodomy | Dothan Eagle

The Sullivan Independent News » Sullivan Man Charged In Sodomy Case

Man charged with sexual abuse and sodomy of teenager | Crime Beat

Man Arrested On Sex Offense, Sodomy | News | Upper Marlboro News

 

[WinterBorn]

Sodomy is illegal people are arrested for doing it.

Not in the US as far as I know.

You were saying?

Man Charged With Sodomy, Child Molestation | FOX2now.com

Elmore County man charged with sodomy, child sex abuse | Crime | Wetumpka News

More details emerge after pastor charged with sodomy, child porn - KFVS12 News & Weather Cape Girardeau, Carbondale, Poplar Bluff

Guyton man charged with solicitation of sodomy, enticing a child - WTOC-TV: Savannah, Beaufort, SC, News, Weather & Sports

Jack man charged with rape, sodomy | Dothan Eagle

The Sullivan Independent News » Sullivan Man Charged In Sodomy Case

Man charged with sexual abuse and sodomy of teenager | Crime Beat

Man Arrested On Sex Offense, Sodomy | News | Upper Marlboro News

Looks like all but one of these stories involved children. And in that one the age of the victims was not available.

The SCOTUS has ruled (Lawrence v. Texas) that anti-sodomy laws are unconstitutional.

Also, I hope you realize that if you favor anti-sodomy laws you are trying to outlaw oral sex? Do you really want blowjobs to be crimes?