Those opposed to "gay marriage" will you explain your position to me?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please don't scapegoat Islam because you're mad about what marriage is and is not. That's sort of a cheap shot. I'm Catholic and fully know that God is in charge... Of you too.

I'm not "scapegoating Islam." I'm merely pointing out that running a government under what you perceive to be God's laws is called Sharia. "To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/; also shari'a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], "legislation") means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion."
- Wikipedia

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please don't scapegoat Islam because you're mad about what marriage is and is not. That's sort of a cheap shot. I'm Catholic and fully know that God is in charge... Of you too.

I'm not "scapegoating Islam." I'm merely pointing out that running a government under what you perceive to be God's laws is called Sharia. "To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/; also shari'a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], "legislation") means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion."
- Wikipedia

It's funny how you liberals turn into bigots when people don't fall lock step into your beliefs. You took a shot at Islam. Anyone reading this can see and now you're back-peddling. You're as narrow-minded as the Sharia law you made fun of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please don't scapegoat Islam because you're mad about what marriage is and is not. That's sort of a cheap shot. I'm Catholic and fully know that God is in charge... Of you too.

I'm not "scapegoating Islam." I'm merely pointing out that running a government under what you perceive to be God's laws is called Sharia. "To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/; also shari'a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], "legislation") means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion."
- Wikipedia

One's perception of God's laws are irrelevant. They're spelled out in the Bible and, as annoying as it may be, can't be changed by man. You're being a non-believer doesn't some how protect you from responsible for respecting it. That's a choice you make. So be it. A marriage is still between a man and a woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, who really gives a sh*t? You know morally, logically it doesn't make sense. Stop baiting people.

OP: I give a shit, or I would not have asked. I am not baiting, I really want to understand if I am missing something here.

Because despite what we've been told by the "medical establishment," there is nothing natural or right about homosexuality. Now before you jump all over me for that statement, I will be the first to say that all of us have problems, failings, sin, whatever you want to call it in some area. But it is not in the best interest of society for the government to encourage the failings in people by presenting them as normal and natural.

You can't argue with stupid

You're right. So please leave the conversation now... thanks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please don't scapegoat Islam because you're mad about what marriage is and is not. That's sort of a cheap shot. I'm Catholic and fully know that God is in charge... Of you too.

I'm not "scapegoating Islam." I'm merely pointing out that running a government under what you perceive to be God's laws is called Sharia. "To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/; also shari'a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], "legislation") means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion."
- Wikipedia

One's perception of God's laws are irrelevant. They're spelled out in the Bible and, as annoying as it may be, can't be changed by man. You're being a non-believer doesn't some how protect you from responsible for respecting it. That's a choice you make. So be it. A marriage is still between a man and a woman.

NP here. That is your position. Nothing more. And it is increasingly irrelevant.

Eighteen countries and many of our States recognize marriages between same sex partners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
NP here - I have to say, the anti-gay marriage people are not making much of a case.

Good thing your assessment of our "case" is irrelevant. We actually don't need to make a case. The Bible does it for me. Again, I acknowledge the civil unions of the LGBT community. But, it is not a marriage. About the only thing it has in common with marriage is two separate humans pledging life long oneness. That vow between men and women is holy. Not so between two same sex couples. Even if that annoyed me, wouldn't change it. I'm not in control of the Bible. It is what it is.

Why do you think everyone should be governed by your bible, in this country where we have a separation of church and state? It really isn't relevant to the discussion.

The Bible is not mine. It's a holy book that explains who we are, why we are here and how we are supposed to live out of respect to God. I do believe all of mankind is required to live by its tenants. However, it's not my business if you chose not to. That's on you. Still, you can't change the definition of marriage. It's not within your imagined power. Sorry, don't shoot the messenger.

Actually, in this country, marriage is defined by the states. Look it up. Each individual state has its own rules about who can and cannot get married. I grant you most of these laws are rooted in religion, but the fact is they are civil, not religious, laws. Religious marriage is separate.

For example: I am Jewish. To get married in the eyes of my home state, Pennsylvania, I had to obtain a state marriage license in which the state verified that I was not my fiancé's sister, mother, etc, or other prohibitively close relation. To get married in the eyes of my religion, I had to be married by a rabbi and sign a Hebrew legal document called a ketubah. To get divorced in the eyes of the state, I would have to get a civil divorce. But even if I did, I could not marry again within my religion unless I also obtained a religious divorce called a get.

Now, the question of gay marriage is whether the STATE should permit it. It has nothing to do with whether your religion, my religion, or anyone else's religion will permit it. Like it or not, your religion does not govern state laws. You may think it should, but the reality is that it does not. Which is why, although you may think it an abomination that two men or two women marry, your views will never carry the day so long as those who make the laws rely on logic and not religion. Thank G-d.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
NP here - I have to say, the anti-gay marriage people are not making much of a case.

Good thing your assessment of our "case" is irrelevant. We actually don't need to make a case. The Bible does it for me. Again, I acknowledge the civil unions of the LGBT community. But, it is not a marriage. About the only thing it has in common with marriage is two separate humans pledging life long oneness. That vow between men and women is holy. Not so between two same sex couples. Even if that annoyed me, wouldn't change it. I'm not in control of the Bible. It is what it is.

Why do you think everyone should be governed by your bible, in this country where we have a separation of church and state? It really isn't relevant to the discussion.

The Bible is not mine. It's a holy book that explains who we are, why we are here and how we are supposed to live out of respect to God. I do believe all of mankind is required to live by its tenants. However, it's not my business if you chose not to. That's on you. Still, you can't change the definition of marriage. It's not within your imagined power. Sorry, don't shoot the messenger.

Actually, in this country, marriage is defined by the states. Look it up. Each individual state has its own rules about who can and cannot get married. I grant you most of these laws are rooted in religion, but the fact is they are civil, not religious, laws. Religious marriage is separate.

For example: I am Jewish. To get married in the eyes of my home state, Pennsylvania, I had to obtain a state marriage license in which the state verified that I was not my fiancé's sister, mother, etc, or other prohibitively close relation. To get married in the eyes of my religion, I had to be married by a rabbi and sign a Hebrew legal document called a ketubah. To get divorced in the eyes of the state, I would have to get a civil divorce. But even if I did, I could not marry again within my religion unless I also obtained a religious divorce called a get.

Now, the question of gay marriage is whether the STATE should permit it. It has nothing to do with whether your religion, my religion, or anyone else's religion will permit it. Like it or not, your religion does not govern state laws. You may think it should, but the reality is that it does not. Which is why, although you may think it an abomination that two men or two women marry, your views will never carry the day so long as those who make the laws rely on logic and not religion. Thank G-d.

Not true. There is nothing logical about permitting homosexual marriage. It's merely the government reacting to current whims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please don't scapegoat Islam because you're mad about what marriage is and is not. That's sort of a cheap shot. I'm Catholic and fully know that God is in charge... Of you too.

I'm not "scapegoating Islam." I'm merely pointing out that running a government under what you perceive to be God's laws is called Sharia. "To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/; also shari'a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], "legislation") means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion."
- Wikipedia

It's funny how you liberals turn into bigots when people don't fall lock step into your beliefs. You took a shot at Islam. Anyone reading this can see and now you're back-peddling. You're as narrow-minded as the Sharia law you made fun of.

Reading comprehension. She actually took a shot at Christianity, using conservative Christians' bleating about Sharia law as a sarcastic comparator. As in, if Catholics insist that everyone define marriage based on Catholic beliefs, that's just the same as Muslims in Sharia law countries requiring that everyone obey Islamic law whether they are Muslim or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
NP here - I have to say, the anti-gay marriage people are not making much of a case.

Good thing your assessment of our "case" is irrelevant. We actually don't need to make a case. The Bible does it for me. Again, I acknowledge the civil unions of the LGBT community. But, it is not a marriage. About the only thing it has in common with marriage is two separate humans pledging life long oneness. That vow between men and women is holy. Not so between two same sex couples. Even if that annoyed me, wouldn't change it. I'm not in control of the Bible. It is what it is.

Why do you think everyone should be governed by your bible, in this country where we have a separation of church and state? It really isn't relevant to the discussion.

The Bible is not mine. It's a holy book that explains who we are, why we are here and how we are supposed to live out of respect to God. I do believe all of mankind is required to live by its tenants. However, it's not my business if you chose not to. That's on you. Still, you can't change the definition of marriage. It's not within your imagined power. Sorry, don't shoot the messenger.

Actually, in this country, marriage is defined by the states. Look it up. Each individual state has its own rules about who can and cannot get married. I grant you most of these laws are rooted in religion, but the fact is they are civil, not religious, laws. Religious marriage is separate.

For example: I am Jewish. To get married in the eyes of my home state, Pennsylvania, I had to obtain a state marriage license in which the state verified that I was not my fiancé's sister, mother, etc, or other prohibitively close relation. To get married in the eyes of my religion, I had to be married by a rabbi and sign a Hebrew legal document called a ketubah. To get divorced in the eyes of the state, I would have to get a civil divorce. But even if I did, I could not marry again within my religion unless I also obtained a religious divorce called a get.

Now, the question of gay marriage is whether the STATE should permit it. It has nothing to do with whether your religion, my religion, or anyone else's religion will permit it. Like it or not, your religion does not govern state laws. You may think it should, but the reality is that it does not. Which is why, although you may think it an abomination that two men or two women marry, your views will never carry the day so long as those who make the laws rely on logic and not religion. Thank G-d.

Very well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please don't scapegoat Islam because you're mad about what marriage is and is not. That's sort of a cheap shot. I'm Catholic and fully know that God is in charge... Of you too.

I'm not "scapegoating Islam." I'm merely pointing out that running a government under what you perceive to be God's laws is called Sharia. "To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/; also shari'a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], "legislation") means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion."
- Wikipedia

One's perception of God's laws are irrelevant. They're spelled out in the Bible and, as annoying as it may be, can't be changed by man. You're being a non-believer doesn't some how protect you from responsible for respecting it. That's a choice you make. So be it. A marriage is still between a man and a woman.

NP here. That is your position. Nothing more. And it is increasingly irrelevant.

Eighteen countries and many of our States recognize marriages between same sex partners.

You're entitled to feel that way and every country on earth might agree with that. None of that trumps the Bible. Man doesn't decide what a marriage is, God does. It's between a man and a woman and always will be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please don't scapegoat Islam because you're mad about what marriage is and is not. That's sort of a cheap shot. I'm Catholic and fully know that God is in charge... Of you too.

I'm not "scapegoating Islam." I'm merely pointing out that running a government under what you perceive to be God's laws is called Sharia. "To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/; also shari'a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], "legislation") means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion."
- Wikipedia

One's perception of God's laws are irrelevant. They're spelled out in the Bible and, as annoying as it may be, can't be changed by man. You're being a non-believer doesn't some how protect you from responsible for respecting it. That's a choice you make. So be it. A marriage is still between a man and a woman.

NP here. That is your position. Nothing more. And it is increasingly irrelevant.

Eighteen countries and many of our States recognize marriages between same sex partners.

You're entitled to feel that way and every country on earth might agree with that. None of that trumps the Bible. Man doesn't decide what a marriage is, God does. It's between a man and a woman and always will be.

Except in the states where its not. Bet that just burns you up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
NP here - I have to say, the anti-gay marriage people are not making much of a case.

Good thing your assessment of our "case" is irrelevant. We actually don't need to make a case. The Bible does it for me. Again, I acknowledge the civil unions of the LGBT community. But, it is not a marriage. About the only thing it has in common with marriage is two separate humans pledging life long oneness. That vow between men and women is holy. Not so between two same sex couples. Even if that annoyed me, wouldn't change it. I'm not in control of the Bible. It is what it is.

Why do you think everyone should be governed by your bible, in this country where we have a separation of church and state? It really isn't relevant to the discussion.

The Bible is not mine. It's a holy book that explains who we are, why we are here and how we are supposed to live out of respect to God. I do believe all of mankind is required to live by its tenants. However, it's not my business if you chose not to. That's on you. Still, you can't change the definition of marriage. It's not within your imagined power. Sorry, don't shoot the messenger.

Actually, in this country, marriage is defined by the states. Look it up. Each individual state has its own rules about who can and cannot get married. I grant you most of these laws are rooted in religion, but the fact is they are civil, not religious, laws. Religious marriage is separate.

For example: I am Jewish. To get married in the eyes of my home state, Pennsylvania, I had to obtain a state marriage license in which the state verified that I was not my fiancé's sister, mother, etc, or other prohibitively close relation. To get married in the eyes of my religion, I had to be married by a rabbi and sign a Hebrew legal document called a ketubah. To get divorced in the eyes of the state, I would have to get a civil divorce. But even if I did, I could not marry again within my religion unless I also obtained a religious divorce called a get.

Now, the question of gay marriage is whether the STATE should permit it. It has nothing to do with whether your religion, my religion, or anyone else's religion will permit it. Like it or not, your religion does not govern state laws. You may think it should, but the reality is that it does not. Which is why, although you may think it an abomination that two men or two women marry, your views will never carry the day so long as those who make the laws rely on logic and not religion. Thank G-d.

Not true. There is nothing logical about permitting homosexual marriage. It's merely the government reacting to current whims.

What's illogical about the government agreeing that equal protection under the law extends to ALL individuals in society?

Whatever. The world is leaving you behind. You don't matter, bigot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please don't scapegoat Islam because you're mad about what marriage is and is not. That's sort of a cheap shot. I'm Catholic and fully know that God is in charge... Of you too.

I'm not "scapegoating Islam." I'm merely pointing out that running a government under what you perceive to be God's laws is called Sharia. "To Arabic-speaking people, sharia (/????ri???/; also shari'a, shar??ah; Arabic: ?????? šar??ah, IPA: [?a?ri??a], "legislation") means the moral code and religious law of a prophetic religion."
- Wikipedia

One's perception of God's laws are irrelevant. They're spelled out in the Bible and, as annoying as it may be, can't be changed by man. You're being a non-believer doesn't some how protect you from responsible for respecting it. That's a choice you make. So be it. A marriage is still between a man and a woman.

NP here. That is your position. Nothing more. And it is increasingly irrelevant.

Eighteen countries and many of our States recognize marriages between same sex partners.

You're entitled to feel that way and every country on earth might agree with that. None of that trumps the Bible. Man doesn't decide what a marriage is, God does. It's between a man and a woman and always will be.

In your own little world you might think that the Bible is the supreme law, but in the United States of America and in dozens of other countries it is not.

[Anonymous]

Religion may not play any role at all for someone opposing gay marriage. Non religious persons. atheists, oppose gay marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Religion may not play any role at all for someone opposing gay marriage. Non religious persons. atheists, oppose gay marriage.

No evidence of that here! And I've never heard of it.

Got a citation?