Some Gays Turn Attention to Civil Unions

[Polk]

Was your head in the ground while this was going on last year? Do your own googleing. What I said is correct, the Mormon church did not give any money to groups over prop 8. You don't like it, I can tell. Still looking for a scapegoat, are you?

45 percent of out-of-state funding for pro-Prop 8 came from Utah.

Was it you that asked someone to provide a link earlier in this thread?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have a link to support this?

Sure do.

The Utah-centered Mormon Church actively organized support for Prop. 8 and raised significant funds in both that state and California. Every congregation was read a letter in support of the bigoted ballot measure and urged to donate and raise funds. About 45 percent of donations to ProtectMarriage.com from outside California came from Utah, much more than any other state. (Mercury News, Oct. 24)

press

 

[Valerie]

Was your head in the ground while this was going on last year? Do your own googleing. What I said is correct, the Mormon church did not give any money to groups over prop 8. You don't like it, I can tell. Still looking for a scapegoat, are you?

45 percent of out-of-state funding for pro-Prop 8 came from Utah.

Was it you that asked someone to provide a link earlier in this thread?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have a link to support this?

We would have activists attempting to force churches to marry them because "separate but equal" was unconstitutional.

Churches have been and will continue to be able to discriminate in who they wish to marry, for whatever reason.
Your commentary on that is a

You are wrong.

Activists would attempt to force their desires upon the church. They have been doing it for years as it is. It is not that churches will not be able to decide who they will marry, but, homosexual activists will continue to attempt to force churches to marry them until they win.

I believe that the vast majority of people would accept civil union legislation as long as the legislation took the State out of the marriage business. However, I also believe that there are some out there that will not accept such a compromise.

Immie

Immie, I think this is a fallacy...Or it has become a (deliberate?) misunderstanding from the Church perspective?

I'd like to see just ONE instance of this ever happening...Gays trying to force their will upon the CHURCH?

Gays are not trying to force CHURCHES to marry them, they are trying to force the state LAWS to recognize their committed partnerships equally.

 

[CurveLight]

If you give them the same bennies as Marriage then why......call it something else?
Wow many legal loopholes lawyers would make?

I'm curious about something. Why do all the bigots against gay marriage silently endorse legalized pedophilia? Do yo really find a higher moral value in a 50 year old banging a 13 year old than two adults of the same sex? What, exactly does that moral code look like? Thank you in advance.

It's the other way around buddy. Many of the folks who support Same Sex marriage are also in support of NAMBLA

Unless you have some proof to back up that statement, I will say that you simply made that inflammatory statement up...in other words, you lied.

Hell no he won't back it up. Like most homophobes he turns a blind eye to obvious facts then invents shit to try and conceal it.

 

[CurveLight]

Was your head in the ground while this was going on last year? Do your own googleing. What I said is correct, the Mormon church did not give any money to groups over prop 8. You don't like it, I can tell. Still looking for a scapegoat, are you?

45 percent of out-of-state funding for pro-Prop 8 came from Utah.

Was it you that asked someone to provide a link earlier in this thread?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have a link to support this?

We would have activists attempting to force churches to marry them because "separate but equal" was unconstitutional.

Churches have been and will continue to be able to discriminate in who they wish to marry, for whatever reason.
Your commentary on that is a

You are wrong.

Activists would attempt to force their desires upon the church. They have been doing it for years as it is. It is not that churches will not be able to decide who they will marry, but, homosexual activists will continue to attempt to force churches to marry them until they win.

I believe that the vast majority of people would accept civil union legislation as long as the legislation took the State out of the marriage business. However, I also believe that there are some out there that will not accept such a compromise.

Immie

Gay marriage has been in MA for about five years. How many lawsuits can you show that have been filed against churches trying to force them to marry gays?

 

[Immanuel]

45 percent of out-of-state funding for pro-Prop 8 came from Utah.

Was it you that asked someone to provide a link earlier in this thread?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have a link to support this?



You are wrong.

Activists would attempt to force their desires upon the church. They have been doing it for years as it is. It is not that churches will not be able to decide who they will marry, but, homosexual activists will continue to attempt to force churches to marry them until they win.

I believe that the vast majority of people would accept civil union legislation as long as the legislation took the State out of the marriage business. However, I also believe that there are some out there that will not accept such a compromise.

Immie

They have been doing it for years as it is.

Prove it

Look at California. San Francisco to be exact.

Look at Massechuesetts.

This entire debate is about making marriage available to all.

Some links to the issue:

New Yorkers Protest Gay Marriage Ban Outside Mormon Church - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

http://www.allornotatall.org/protest-at-anti-gay-pastor-rick-warrens-church/

We are going to hold a peaceful protest with a positive tone outside his church the Sunday before he delivers the invocation in D.C. to let him know that we are not some radical, crazy fringe group that is merely looking to be appeased. It is time for us to go stand outside his homophobic bubble and show him the harm that he is causing. Show him that he cannot use religion and the Bible as a weapon. Show him that we are not child molesters or polygamists and that we are not looking to marry our pets. Show him that we are also kind, decent humans who deserve the same treatment in the eyes of the law as every member of his congregation.

This is about forcing churches to succumb to the pressure and to accept and marry gays in church. This is a war waged against the doctrine of the church and nothing short of complete acceptance will suffice to appease the activists.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

45 percent of out-of-state funding for pro-Prop 8 came from Utah.

Was it you that asked someone to provide a link earlier in this thread?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have a link to support this?

Sure do.

The Utah-centered Mormon Church actively organized support for Prop. 8 and raised significant funds in both that state and California. Every congregation was read a letter in support of the bigoted ballot measure and urged to donate and raise funds. About 45 percent of donations to ProtectMarriage.com from outside California came from Utah, much more than any other state. (Mercury News, Oct. 24)

press

Thank you.

Immie

 

[paperview]

Was it you that asked someone to provide a link earlier in this thread?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have a link to support this?



You are wrong.

Activists would attempt to force their desires upon the church. They have been doing it for years as it is. It is not that churches will not be able to decide who they will marry, but, homosexual activists will continue to attempt to force churches to marry them until they win.

I believe that the vast majority of people would accept civil union legislation as long as the legislation took the State out of the marriage business. However, I also believe that there are some out there that will not accept such a compromise.

Immie

Prove it

Look at California. San Francisco to be exact.

Look at Massechuesetts.

This entire debate is about making marriage available to all.

Some links to the issue:

New Yorkers Protest Gay Marriage Ban Outside Mormon Church - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

http://www.allornotatall.org/protest-at-anti-gay-pastor-rick-warrens-church/

We are going to hold a peaceful protest with a positive tone outside his church the Sunday before he delivers the invocation in D.C. to let him know that we are not some radical, crazy fringe group that is merely looking to be appeased. It is time for us to go stand outside his homophobic bubble and show him the harm that he is causing. Show him that he cannot use religion and the Bible as a weapon. Show him that we are not child molesters or polygamists and that we are not looking to marry our pets. Show him that we are also kind, decent humans who deserve the same treatment in the eyes of the law as every member of his congregation.

This is about forcing churches to succumb to the pressure and to accept and marry gays in church. This is a war waged against the doctrine of the church and nothing short of complete acceptance will suffice to appease the activists.

Immie

Your link does not prove that.

No law says churches have to marry ANYONE, nor is anyone looking to make a law. They can discriminate against a religion if they so chose - and according to the CRA, that is illegal - OUTSIDE OF A CHURCH!

 

[Immanuel]

45 percent of out-of-state funding for pro-Prop 8 came from Utah.

Was it you that asked someone to provide a link earlier in this thread?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have a link to support this?

Churches have been and will continue to be able to discriminate in who they wish to marry, for whatever reason.
Your commentary on that is a

You are wrong.

Activists would attempt to force their desires upon the church. They have been doing it for years as it is. It is not that churches will not be able to decide who they will marry, but, homosexual activists will continue to attempt to force churches to marry them until they win.

I believe that the vast majority of people would accept civil union legislation as long as the legislation took the State out of the marriage business. However, I also believe that there are some out there that will not accept such a compromise.

Immie

Gay marriage has been in MA for about five years. How many lawsuits can you show that have been filed against churches trying to force them to marry gays?

So, because no law suits have yet been filed, that means that gay activists are not pushing the issue?

Activists know that at this point in time, they would lose such a battle based upon the Separation between church and state issues. That does not mean they are satisfied with separate but equal. The timing is not right, but the battle is not over by a long shot

They would not be protesting churches if this were only a legal issue.

Immie

 

[Valerie]

Prove it

Look at California. San Francisco to be exact.

Look at Massechuesetts.

This entire debate is about making marriage available to all.

Some links to the issue:

New Yorkers Protest Gay Marriage Ban Outside Mormon Church - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

ALLorNotAtAll.org » Blog Archiv » Protest at Anti-Gay Pastor Rick Warren’s Church

We are going to hold a peaceful protest with a positive tone outside his church the Sunday before he delivers the invocation in D.C. to let him know that we are not some radical, crazy fringe group that is merely looking to be appeased. It is time for us to go stand outside his homophobic bubble and show him the harm that he is causing. Show him that he cannot use religion and the Bible as a weapon. Show him that we are not child molesters or polygamists and that we are not looking to marry our pets. Show him that we are also kind, decent humans who deserve the same treatment in the eyes of the law as every member of his congregation.

This is about forcing churches to succumb to the pressure and to accept and marry gays in church. This is a war waged against the doctrine of the church and nothing short of complete acceptance will suffice to appease the activists.

Immie

Your link does not prove that.

No law says churches have to marry ANYONE, nor is anyone looking to make a law. They can discriminate against a religion if they so chose - and according to the CRA, that is illegal - OUTSIDE OF A CHURCH!

Also, it is already legal for a church to discriminate against heterosexual couples who may not meet their religious and/or legal requirements. That anyone was ever trying to force CHURCHES to marry people is a fallacy that was recently brought into the gay marriage debate by those who want to convolute the argument.

 

[Immanuel]

Prove it

Look at California. San Francisco to be exact.

Look at Massechuesetts.

This entire debate is about making marriage available to all.

Some links to the issue:

New Yorkers Protest Gay Marriage Ban Outside Mormon Church - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

ALLorNotAtAll.org » Blog Archiv » Protest at Anti-Gay Pastor Rick Warren’s Church

We are going to hold a peaceful protest with a positive tone outside his church the Sunday before he delivers the invocation in D.C. to let him know that we are not some radical, crazy fringe group that is merely looking to be appeased. It is time for us to go stand outside his homophobic bubble and show him the harm that he is causing. Show him that he cannot use religion and the Bible as a weapon. Show him that we are not child molesters or polygamists and that we are not looking to marry our pets. Show him that we are also kind, decent humans who deserve the same treatment in the eyes of the law as every member of his congregation.

This is about forcing churches to succumb to the pressure and to accept and marry gays in church. This is a war waged against the doctrine of the church and nothing short of complete acceptance will suffice to appease the activists.

Immie

Your link does not prove that.

No law says churches have to marry ANYONE, nor is anyone looking to make a law. They can discriminate against a religion if they so chose - and according to the CRA, that is illegal - OUTSIDE OF A CHURCH!

Where did I ever state that any law required it? Hint: I did not.

That is very different than what I said.

I stated that activists were pushing for complete acceptance from the church which would necessarily mean that the church would marry them as well. I stated that they, the activists, would not be satisfied with, "separate but equal".

No where did I ever say that the law required... or would in the future... that churches marry homosexuals. Activists want acceptance. Whether or not they ever acheive that goal is yet to be decided.

Immie

 

[paperview]

Look at California. San Francisco to be exact.

Look at Massechuesetts.

This entire debate is about making marriage available to all.

Some links to the issue:

New Yorkers Protest Gay Marriage Ban Outside Mormon Church - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

ALLorNotAtAll.org » Blog Archiv » Protest at Anti-Gay Pastor Rick Warren’s Church

This is about forcing churches to succumb to the pressure and to accept and marry gays in church. This is a war waged against the doctrine of the church and nothing short of complete acceptance will suffice to appease the activists.

Immie

Your link does not prove that.

No law says churches have to marry ANYONE, nor is anyone looking to make a law. They can discriminate against a religion if they so chose - and according to the CRA, that is illegal - OUTSIDE OF A CHURCH!

Where did I ever state that any law required it? Hint: I did not.

That is very different than what I said.

I stated that activists were pushing for complete acceptance from the church which would necessarily mean that the church would marry them as well. I stated that they, the activists, would not be satisfied with, "separate but equal".

No where did I ever say that the law required... or would in the future... that churches marry homosexuals. Activists want acceptance. Whether or not they ever acheive that goal is yet to be decided.

Immie

Your link said it. Reread what you quoted to see if it makes sense.

As Valerie, bod, and others here have told you, it's a fallacy, and you seek to keep hyping it.

I'm sure this won't stop your dishonest rants on this matter though.

 

[Immanuel]

Your link does not prove that.

No law says churches have to marry ANYONE, nor is anyone looking to make a law. They can discriminate against a religion if they so chose - and according to the CRA, that is illegal - OUTSIDE OF A CHURCH!

Where did I ever state that any law required it? Hint: I did not.

That is very different than what I said.

I stated that activists were pushing for complete acceptance from the church which would necessarily mean that the church would marry them as well. I stated that they, the activists, would not be satisfied with, "separate but equal".

No where did I ever say that the law required... or would in the future... that churches marry homosexuals. Activists want acceptance. Whether or not they ever acheive that goal is yet to be decided.

Immie

Your link said it. Reread what you quoted to see if it makes sense.

As Valerie, bod, and others here have told you, it's a fallacy, and you seek to keep hyping it.

I'm sure this won't stop your dishonest rants on this matter though.

I'm sorry, but I don't see what you are attempting to state.

Are you saying that gays do not want to be accepted by all of us including the church and that they do not want to be married by the church?

Of course, not all of them are interested in a church wedding, but many of them are.

And simply because you, Valerie, Bod and others do not agree with me, does not make me wrong. Nor does it make me dishonest.

Immie

 

[paperview]

Then, Immie, you would be able to prove it by showing evidence of where gays and lesbians have tried to force churches to marry them.

Until you do, you are blowing smoke.

 

[CurveLight]

Was it you that asked someone to provide a link earlier in this thread?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have a link to support this?



You are wrong.

Activists would attempt to force their desires upon the church. They have been doing it for years as it is. It is not that churches will not be able to decide who they will marry, but, homosexual activists will continue to attempt to force churches to marry them until they win.

I believe that the vast majority of people would accept civil union legislation as long as the legislation took the State out of the marriage business. However, I also believe that there are some out there that will not accept such a compromise.

Immie

Prove it

Look at California. San Francisco to be exact.

Look at Massechuesetts.

This entire debate is about making marriage available to all.

Some links to the issue:

New Yorkers Protest Gay Marriage Ban Outside Mormon Church - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

http://www.allornotatall.org/protest-at-anti-gay-pastor-rick-warrens-church/

We are going to hold a peaceful protest with a positive tone outside his church the Sunday before he delivers the invocation in D.C. to let him know that we are not some radical, crazy fringe group that is merely looking to be appeased. It is time for us to go stand outside his homophobic bubble and show him the harm that he is causing. Show him that he cannot use religion and the Bible as a weapon. Show him that we are not child molesters or polygamists and that we are not looking to marry our pets. Show him that we are also kind, decent humans who deserve the same treatment in the eyes of the law as every member of his congregation.

This is about forcing churches to succumb to the pressure and to accept and marry gays in church. This is a war waged against the doctrine of the church and nothing short of complete acceptance will suffice to appease the activists.

Immie

You are conflating issues and I hope it is not purposeful. Warren's church will not allow gays to attend and that is what the protest was about...not gay marriage. As a Christian I would say any church that rejects gays are rejecting Christ himself. To segregate based on what they deem as one sin while allowing all other sinners to attend is a doctrine of self righteous hypocrisy.

 

[Immanuel]

Then, Immie, you would be able to prove it by showing evidence of where gays and lesbians have tried to force churches to marry them.

Until you do, you are blowing smoke.

Then kindly explain what all the protests at churches is all about, especially the pre Prop 8 protests simce many of the post Prop 8 protests were in relation to the churches' stance on that issue itself and the donations provided to fight Prop 8.

Are you denying that gay protesters have attempted to force the church to "accept" them for what they are? Are you denying that part of acceptance, in their opinions, would be marrying them and accepting their marriages?

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Prove it

Look at California. San Francisco to be exact.

Look at Massechuesetts.

This entire debate is about making marriage available to all.

Some links to the issue:

New Yorkers Protest Gay Marriage Ban Outside Mormon Church - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

ALLorNotAtAll.org » Blog Archiv » Protest at Anti-Gay Pastor Rick Warren’s Church

We are going to hold a peaceful protest with a positive tone outside his church the Sunday before he delivers the invocation in D.C. to let him know that we are not some radical, crazy fringe group that is merely looking to be appeased. It is time for us to go stand outside his homophobic bubble and show him the harm that he is causing. Show him that he cannot use religion and the Bible as a weapon. Show him that we are not child molesters or polygamists and that we are not looking to marry our pets. Show him that we are also kind, decent humans who deserve the same treatment in the eyes of the law as every member of his congregation.

This is about forcing churches to succumb to the pressure and to accept and marry gays in church. This is a war waged against the doctrine of the church and nothing short of complete acceptance will suffice to appease the activists.

Immie

You are conflating issues and I hope it is not purposeful. Warren's church will not allow gays to attend and that is what the protest was about...not gay marriage. As a Christian I would say any church that rejects gays are rejecting Christ himself. To segregate based on what they deem as one sin while allowing all other sinners to attend is a doctrine of self righteous hypocrisy.

To be clear, what I am attempting to say is that activists will not stop at simple civil unions. They want complete acceptance. I cannot say that I disagree with them either.

To be clear, I believe that all state sanctioned marriages should be civil unions, a contract bound by law not religious in any manner. Anyone who wants to be married by the church, should be able go to a church and get married... gay or straight. I do not, however, believe that a church's doctrine should be forced to "accept" homosexuals. HOWEVER, I, too, find it hypocritical of the church to condemn and exclude homosexuals in manners not placed upon other sinners.

Immie

 

[Valerie]

Where did I ever state that any law required it? Hint: I did not.

That is very different than what I said.

I stated that activists were pushing for complete acceptance from the church which would necessarily mean that the church would marry them as well. I stated that they, the activists, would not be satisfied with, "separate but equal".

No where did I ever say that the law required... or would in the future... that churches marry homosexuals. Activists want acceptance. Whether or not they ever acheive that goal is yet to be decided.

Immie

Your link said it. Reread what you quoted to see if it makes sense.

As Valerie, bod, and others here have told you, it's a fallacy, and you seek to keep hyping it.

I'm sure this won't stop your dishonest rants on this matter though.

I'm sorry, but I don't see what you are attempting to state.

Are you saying that gays do not want to be accepted by all of us including the church and that they do not want to be married by the church?

Of course, not all of them are interested in a church wedding, but many of them are.

And simply because you, Valerie, Bod and others do not agree with me, does not make me wrong. Nor does it make me dishonest.

Immie

I don't think you're being "dishonest", I just think you've fallen for the Church rhetoric that has deliberately mischaracterized the "evil gay agenda" in this manner.

Despite any particular individual emotions on the subject, "The Gay Agenda" has never asserted their "rights" to receive the Holy Sacrament of Marriage in any Church! In fact, a big part of their legal argument affirms the separation of Church and State...The Church [DOMA] can not dictate to the State which committed relationships it can legally recognize as equal...so Civil Marriage or Civil Union is being sought by committed homosexual couples so they will be equally recognized under the LAW, not under the CHURCH!

 

[bodecea]

Was it you that asked someone to provide a link earlier in this thread?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have a link to support this?



You are wrong.

Activists would attempt to force their desires upon the church. They have been doing it for years as it is. It is not that churches will not be able to decide who they will marry, but, homosexual activists will continue to attempt to force churches to marry them until they win.

I believe that the vast majority of people would accept civil union legislation as long as the legislation took the State out of the marriage business. However, I also believe that there are some out there that will not accept such a compromise.

Immie

Prove it

Look at California. San Francisco to be exact.

Look at Massechuesetts.

This entire debate is about making marriage available to all.

Some links to the issue:

New Yorkers Protest Gay Marriage Ban Outside Mormon Church - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

ALLorNotAtAll.org » Blog Archiv » Protest at Anti-Gay Pastor Rick Warren’s Church

We are going to hold a peaceful protest with a positive tone outside his church the Sunday before he delivers the invocation in D.C. to let him know that we are not some radical, crazy fringe group that is merely looking to be appeased. It is time for us to go stand outside his homophobic bubble and show him the harm that he is causing. Show him that he cannot use religion and the Bible as a weapon. Show him that we are not child molesters or polygamists and that we are not looking to marry our pets. Show him that we are also kind, decent humans who deserve the same treatment in the eyes of the law as every member of his congregation.

This is about forcing churches to succumb to the pressure and to accept and marry gays in church. This is a war waged against the doctrine of the church and nothing short of complete acceptance will suffice to appease the activists.

Immie

No, these are legitimate protests against an out of state controlled religious organization
spending millions of dollars in CA to maintain Segregation. I'm proud to have been at some of those protests too.

 

[bodecea]

Was it you that asked someone to provide a link earlier in this thread?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but do you have a link to support this?



You are wrong.

Activists would attempt to force their desires upon the church. They have been doing it for years as it is. It is not that churches will not be able to decide who they will marry, but, homosexual activists will continue to attempt to force churches to marry them until they win.

I believe that the vast majority of people would accept civil union legislation as long as the legislation took the State out of the marriage business. However, I also believe that there are some out there that will not accept such a compromise.

Immie

Gay marriage has been in MA for about five years. How many lawsuits can you show that have been filed against churches trying to force them to marry gays?

So, because no law suits have yet been filed, that means that gay activists are not pushing the issue?

Activists know that at this point in time, they would lose such a battle based upon the Separation between church and state issues. That does not mean they are satisfied with separate but equal. The timing is not right, but the battle is not over by a long shot

They would not be protesting churches if this were only a legal issue.

Immie

We were protesting churches becoming involved in a LEGAL issue.

Isn't it odd that you don't have a problem with the church sticking it's nose into civil matters...isn't it?

 

[Immanuel]

Your link said it. Reread what you quoted to see if it makes sense.

As Valerie, bod, and others here have told you, it's a fallacy, and you seek to keep hyping it.

I'm sure this won't stop your dishonest rants on this matter though.

I'm sorry, but I don't see what you are attempting to state.

Are you saying that gays do not want to be accepted by all of us including the church and that they do not want to be married by the church?

Of course, not all of them are interested in a church wedding, but many of them are.

And simply because you, Valerie, Bod and others do not agree with me, does not make me wrong. Nor does it make me dishonest.

Immie

I don't think you're being "dishonest", I just think you've fallen for the Church rhetoric that has deliberately mischaracterized the "evil gay agenda" in this manner.

Despite any particular individual emotions on the subject, "The Gay Agenda" has never asserted their "rights" to receive the Holy Sacrament of Marriage in any Church! In fact, a big part of their legal argument affirms the separation of Church and State...The Church [DOMA] can not dictate to the State which committed relationships it can legally recognize as equal...so Civil Marriage or Civil Union is being sought by committed homosexual couples so they will be equally recognized under the LAW, not under the CHURCH!

Payperview is the one that called me dishonest.

so Civil Marriage or Civil Union is being sought by committed homosexual couples so they will be equally recognized under the LAW, not under the CHURCH!

When I first entered this discussion, I made it clear that the majority of people both gay and straight would accept civil unions. Perhaps you missed the distinction between majority and activists?

I am certain that the most people both homosexuals and heterosexuals believe that state sanctioned civil unions, both gay and straight, is a compromise that fits well. But, I believe the devout activists, the extremists, (on both sides) will not be satisfied with this middle of the road answer. That was all I was trying to say.

Immie