Gay marriage ruins it for the rest of us

Jack said:
Traditional Marriage is about being with the person (persons) you want to have children with and bring up together as a Family Unit.

The 'gay marriage' thing kind of distorts that. Without the biological children aspect, I'm not sure what the meaning of 'Marriage' is anymore.

Maybe it's like "Roommates that want to have a better tax deal"?
Click to expand...
Actually marriage was originally done to unit family alliances. It had nothing to do with love, children were very much a by product of the union and a gaurantee the alliance or property would stay in the family. Marriages were usually arranged and the couple generally had little say in the matter.
 
CharlesTheGreat said:
If you really want to know...

Marriage is intended as a union of man and woman before God, and nothing else. No sooner could a man marry another man than he could marry his house, and a woman could no sooner marry another woman that she could marry her dog, because she loves it so much. It is the union of two opposite but complimentary elemements to make one whole. In this way gay marriage trivializes the union, "ruining" it for heterosexual couples. And yes, frivolous marriage by other heterosexual couples trivializes it, too.

Not only this, but homosexuality is a sin that disgusts God. Marriage does not reconcile it. The gay community perverts love, making it about sex, saying "I can love anyone I want to!" True, Jesus calls us to love everyone, but not to have sex with anyone. Sex is intended for the marriage of two souls and for making children.

Of course, this is from a theological standpoint. I don't think the church should ever allow gay marriage. However, I don't think the government should have any hand in marriage at all, especially in a country that states freedom of religion as a fundamental right.

Sent from my SM-J700T1 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
This is the USA, keep your religion out of our laws.
 
kudzu said:
Yes, but the couple has to sign the contract before the licensed is filed. Really it is law 101.. Simple legal theory.
Click to expand...

Your reply means nothing.

1. You have to get a License from the State.
2. You have to pay for it.
3. The State decides what a 'Marriage' is.

So ... should the State be in the business of issuing 'Licenses'?
And ... what is the definition of 'Marriage' now?
 
Jack said:
Last I heard, you need to get a License or Permit (with accompanying fee) before you can get married.
If the State is NOT party to the contract, why can't a woman have 4 husbands?
Click to expand...

In discussions, I've noticed that those who claim marriage is about equality, people should be able to marry the person they love, etc. quite often are willing to decline that equality to types of marriages they oppose.
 
Phantasmal said:
Actually marriage was originally done to unit family alliances. It had nothing to do with love, children were very much a by product of the union and a gaurantee the alliance or property would stay in the family. Marriages were usually arranged and the couple generally had little say in the matter.
Click to expand...

OK. I'm good with that. My perception is that the early Greeks realized the Family Unit was the best way to raise the next generation. It was about the children.
So ... what is the definition of 'Marriage' today???
 
Jack said:
Your reply means nothing.

1. You have to get a License from the State.
2. You have to pay for it.
3. The State decides what a 'Marriage' is.

So ... should the State be in the business of issuing 'Licenses'?
And ... what is the definition of 'Marriage' now?
Click to expand...


According to the 10th amendment, since marriage isn't a delegated power to the federal government, it's reserved to the States individually to decide. Marriage isn't a federal issue. If it were, why aren't marriage licenses a federal license rather than one issues by the state where the marriage takes place?
 
Frank Apisa said:
Still didn't answer my questions, C.

Are you actually saying that gays should be treated the way the god of the Bible suggests?

Really?

I mean, truly?

Stone them to death because that is what your god wants?
Click to expand...
Since you're being thick-headed, yes. I believe in the Bible. But your interpretation of the Bible is incorrect. Gays will receive their punishment or salvation on judgement day as God decides for them. I will not cast stones at them because I know that I too have been sinful, and beg God for forgiveness.

Romans 12:19
Matthew 7:5

I pray that you continue your reading and come to the same conclusion.

Sent from my SM-J700T1 using Tapatalk
 
CharlesTheGreat said:
Mock my God as a sky fairy as you will, but if you want marriage to be a legal contract keep it that way. Don't use the force of the state to also force churches and individuals with the same convictions as me to celebrate such a union.

I praise God that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of those bakers in Colorado.

Sent from my SM-J700T1 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Rhetoric, no church is forced to marry anyone, in fact, a church would not marry my friends, they politely told them to go elsewhere and they were a heterosexual couple.
 
One fact many Catholics do not know...is that marriage is strictly between the two parties. The church actually does not marry people...the priest, bishop, or cardinal performing at a marriage...is not actually doing the marrying.

Each sacrament (of which marriage is one) has an "ordinary minister" (the person or persons charged with performing the sacrament)...

...and the "ordinary minister" of the sacrament of marriage...is "the bride and groom."

The ground Catholics stand on regarding marriage...is not actually solid. The "ordinary minister" presumably can both be male or female...and the ensuing marriage valid in Catholicism.
 
CFM said:
In discussions, I've noticed that those who claim marriage is about equality, people should be able to marry the person they love, etc. quite often are willing to decline that equality to types of marriages they oppose.
Click to expand...

I agree with your Statement. Polygamy is illegal here in the US. But, when Muslims come here with their 4 wives, each is recognized as being a 'wife' by the United States.
 
Jack said:
OK. I'm good with that. My perception is that the early Greeks realized the Family Unit was the best way to raise the next generation. It was about the children.
So ... what is the definition of 'Marriage' today???
Click to expand...
A contract between two people.
 
CFM said:
According to the 10th amendment, since marriage isn't a delegated power to the federal government, it's reserved to the States individually to decide. Marriage isn't a federal issue. If it were, why aren't marriage licenses a federal license rather than one issues by the state where the marriage takes place?
Click to expand...

When I say 'State', I mean the governing authority. My position is, "Why is the 'State' involved in 'Marriage'?
 
Phantasmal said:
Rhetoric, no church is forced to marry anyone, in fact, a church would not marry my friends, they politely told them to go elsewhere and they were a heterosexual couple.
Click to expand...



Why did the church refuse to marry the heterosexual couple?
 
Last edited:
Jack said:
I agree with your Statement. Polygamy is illegal here in the US. But, when Muslims come here with their 4 wives, each is recognized as being a 'wife' by the United States.
Click to expand...
I believe you are mistaken, polygamy is illegal in the USA, you can only declare one wife.
 
CharlesTheGreat said:
If you really want to know...

Marriage is intended as a union of man and woman before God, and nothing else. No sooner could a man marry another man than he could marry his house, and a woman could no sooner marry another woman that she could marry her dog, because she loves it so much. It is the union of two opposite but complimentary elemements to make one whole. In this way gay marriage trivializes the union, "ruining" it for heterosexual couples. And yes, frivolous marriage by other heterosexual couples trivializes it, too.

Not only this, but homosexuality is a sin that disgusts God. Marriage does not reconcile it. The gay community perverts love, making it about sex, saying "I can love anyone I want to!" True, Jesus calls us to love everyone, but not to have sex with anyone. Sex is intended for the marriage of two souls and for making children.

Of course, this is from a theological standpoint. I don't think the church should ever allow gay marriage. However, I don't think the government should have any hand in marriage at all, especially in a country that states freedom of religion as a fundamental right.

Sent from my SM-J700T1 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
This is the USA, keep your religion out of our laws.
 
CharlesTheGreat said:
If you really want to know...

Marriage is intended as a union of man and woman before God, and nothing else. No sooner could a man marry another man than he could marry his house, and a woman could no sooner marry another woman that she could marry her dog, because she loves it so much. It is the union of two opposite but complimentary elemements to make one whole. In this way gay marriage trivializes the union, "ruining" it for heterosexual couples. And yes, frivolous marriage by other heterosexual couples trivializes it, too.

Not only this, but homosexuality is a sin that disgusts God. Marriage does not reconcile it. The gay community perverts love, making it about sex, saying "I can love anyone I want to!" True, Jesus calls us to love everyone, but not to have sex with anyone. Sex is intended for the marriage of two souls and for making children.

Of course, this is from a theological standpoint. I don't think the church should ever allow gay marriage. However, I don't think the government should have any hand in marriage at all, especially in a country that states freedom of religion as a fundamental right.

Sent from my SM-J700T1 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I agree with most of that except the government part.
The government Has to give equal rights to all citizens,so secular marriage has to be available to all.
As for churches,I wouldn't attend a church that performs gay marriage.
 
Jack said:
When I say 'State', I mean the governing authority. My position is, "Why is the 'State' involved in 'Marriage'?
Click to expand...

When I used the word State, I was referring to the 50 entities to which the Constitution gave the authority to regulate marriage.

The answer to your question of why is the government involved is answered by the 10th amendment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top