Defending a Higher Law: Why We Must Resist Same-sex “Marriage”

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
WillieWonka said:
  1. What church has been forced to accept gay marriage as sacred? When and where did this happen? Did the doctrines of the church change? Who forced the change in doctrine about the sacred? Has the Catholic Church been forced to accept gay marriage as sacred? Has the catechism been changed?
  2. How does sex education cause STDs? Exactly what part of the curriculum over and above the necessary part caused STDs? What was learned that increased STDs? And how did gay marriage cause that learning?
  3. Exactly what does “forcing of a physically harmful ideology down the throats of the citizens” mean? How is an individual citizen forced? How do you force an ideology down my throat? What do you do? What do I do? Excatly what action am I forced to take? How does that work? Exactly what is the harm to the citizen? How do we detect that harm?
  4. How did gay marriage cause Catholic priests to molest kids in countries all over the world for the past fifty years? How did gay marriage cause Catholic bishops all over the world to cover up and support those abusers? Does the Church blame all this on gay marriage?
  5. How is my consideration of your speech harmful to anyone. Exactly what is the harm caused you by my ideas about your ideas?
  6. How does one protect a child from homosexuality? How does one protect a child from heterosexuality? Are children protected from heterosexuality? Are those same protections useless against homosexuality? Exactly what does one do to protect kids?
Click to expand...
  1. catholicexchange.com/2008/06/04/112780/ (as an example…forced to accept or shut up)
  2. When easily available birth control is required, “safe sex” is taught, and condom usage taught, kids think they are safe to do wat they want. No duh teaching sex ed doesnt make stds but it makes ppl think they are safe from them when they’re not.
  3. requiring gay couples to be shown in txt books, brought in as speakers, etc (shown as the norm) makes an unhealthy sexual decision seem acceptable
  4. Again it is making homosexuality the norm. What i meant here is the homosexual involvement in the scandal was nicely covered up all too often due to this fear of demoralizing the agenda
  5. i was being repetitive here, sry :). I’m not saying gays can’t call themselves married and do what they want, but the legalization of their marriage means it is becoming “illegal” to be against their actions
    6.i did not mean this as being homosexual (i dont know if ppl are born gay or not and dont really care either way, i dont think with most ppl they are trying to make trouble by being gay or anything) What i meant was in teaching church beliefs (the same held by many other religions) you are considered a bigot, even though your beliefs are in line with scientific fact (here i refer to the health problem arising to homosexual activity). I even read a newspaper article where they changed the gender of one of the members involved in a molestation case to make it heterosexual not homosexual. This is the type of stuff to which i was referring.
hope that clears things up
God Bless
 
Benadam said:
Suppose a school of philosophy began a campaign to convince the masses that Atheism was just another religious movement disguised as ‘unbelief’. The masses are buying into it. Soon the word becomes attached to an entirely different concept than what atheism is in reality. ( sound familiar?)The word is trashed and what atheism really is no longer has an authentic expression. A condition that threatens it’s very existence.

The problem is, the marital bond isn’t being treated as a reality or even a possible reality, by those who are trying to redefine it. Your remarks are clearly of that view or else it would be obvious to you how it, as a reality, can be subverted if the word attached to it defines something other than what it is.
Click to expand...
The reality? Civil marriage is whatever the couple chooses. All it takes is $25, birth certificates, and two witnesses. That’s all. No further requirements. Nothing.

Want to end marriage? No problem. Sign a few papers and it is no more.

So, how can that be reduced beyond what it is? That’s the reality. Haldf of all marriages end in divorce. This has been the situation since before anyone ever mentioned gay marriage.
 
1catholic said:
  1. catholicexchange.com/2008/06/04/112780/ (as an example…forced to accept or shut up)
  2. When easily available birth control is required, “safe sex” is taught, and condom usage taught, kids think they are safe to do wat they want. No duh teaching sex ed doesnt make stds but it makes ppl think they are safe from them when they’re not.
  3. requiring gay couples to be shown in txt books, brought in as speakers, etc (shown as the norm) makes an unhealthy sexual decision seem acceptable
  4. Again it is making homosexuality the norm. What i meant here is the homosexual involvement in the scandal was nicely covered up all too often due to this fear of demoralizing the agenda
  5. i was being repetitive here, sry :). I’m not saying gays can’t call themselves married and do what they want, but the legalization of their marriage means it is becoming “illegal” to be against their actions
    6.i did not mean this as being homosexual (i dont know if ppl are born gay or not and dont really care either way, i dont think with most ppl they are trying to make trouble by being gay or anything) What i meant was in teaching church beliefs (the same held by many other religions) you are considered a bigot, even though your beliefs are in line with scientific fact (here i refer to the health problem arising to homosexual activity). I even read a newspaper article where they changed the gender of one of the members involved in a molestation case to make it heterosexual not homosexual. This is the type of stuff to which i was referring.
hope that clears things up
God Bless
Click to expand...
  1. There are numerous problems with the Canadian human rights commissions. The problems stem from the commissions, not gay marriage. These commissions also investigate speech about Muslims, Indians, and women. Anyone can bring a complaint for anything. And nobody has been forced to do anything, certainly not change the meaning of church doctrine or what is considered sacred.
  2. So what does gay marriage have to do with theaching safe sex?
  3. Showing gays in a book is forcing ideology down citizens throats. How about showing Catholic priests in a book? Is that forcing ideology down the throats of the citizens?
  4. The priests were molesting kids before there even was a homosexual movement. And they did it in countries where there was no homosexual movement. The bishops and the Church policy of putting the welfare of the Church above the welfare of kids was the problem, not gay marriage.
  5. NA
  6. So, someone thinks you are a bigot for saying what the Church teaches? So what? People have opposed the Church for 2,000 years. Gay marriage has nothing to do with that. We all have people who disagree with us. Big deal.
 
WillieWonka said:
The reality? Civil marriage is whatever the couple chooses. All it takes is $25, birth certificates, and two witnesses. That’s all. No further requirements. Nothing.

Want to end marriage? No problem. Sign a few papers and it is no more.

So, how can that be reduced beyond what it is? That’s the reality. Haldf of all marriages end in divorce. This has been the situation since before anyone ever mentioned gay marriage.
Click to expand...
I can’t disagree with you about civil marriage. But, thinking that civil society can define marriage again demonstrates that the reality of marriage doesn’t exist in your view.

Civil society isn’t the source of marriage but marriage is the source of civil society. That being so, the reality of marriage isn’t defined by unions civil society calls marriage.

Civil law has reduced marriage because it has excluded law that ‘binds’ two people in a state of matrimony.
 
Benadam said:
I can’t disagree with you about civil marriage. But, thinking that civil society can define marriage again demonstrates that the reality of marriage doesn’t exist in your view.

Civil society isn’t the source of marriage but marriage is the source of civil society. That being so, the reality of marriage isn’t defined by unions civil society calls marriage.

Civil law has reduced marriage because it has excluded law that ‘binds’ two people in a state of matrimony.
Click to expand...
State legislatures create civil marriage. That’s how civil society defines civil marriage. My view has nothing to do with what the legislature does.
 
Benadam said:
WillieWonka;5571769:
I am wrong. Real marriage does exist in your view. But what you describe is the reality of a condition not marriage. You describe a necessary prerequisite for gay unions to even be considered a marriage.
Click to expand...
Civil marriage certainly does exist. I don’t define the requirements for civil marriage. The legislature does that. I simply relate what the legislatures has done.
Click to expand...
 
WillieWonka said:
State legislatures create civil marriage. That’s how civil society defines civil marriage. My view has nothing to do with what the legislature does.
Click to expand...
well , I’m defending a higher law…and it is the law that true marriage is bound too. 😃
 
yep. I think marriage is also an anthropological study and it’s roots as an institution is better understood within that dicipline. I think you most likely think that too.
 
WillieWonka said:
  1. There are numerous problems with the Canadian human rights commissions. The problems stem from the commissions, not gay marriage. These commissions also investigate speech about Muslims, Indians, and women. Anyone can bring a complaint for anything. And nobody has been forced to do anything, certainly not change the meaning of church doctrine or what is considered sacred.
  2. So what does gay marriage have to do with theaching safe sex?
  3. Showing gays in a book is forcing ideology down citizens throats. How about showing Catholic priests in a book? Is that forcing ideology down the throats of the citizens?
  4. The priests were molesting kids before there even was a homosexual movement. And they did it in countries where there was no homosexual movement. The bishops and the Church policy of putting the welfare of the Church above the welfare of kids was the problem, not gay marriage.
  5. NA
  6. So, someone thinks you are a bigot for saying what the Church teaches? So what? People have opposed the Church for 2,000 years. Gay marriage has nothing to do with that. We all have people who disagree with us. Big deal.
Click to expand...
I told you when you asked this would be a moral ? not a political reason, necessarily. I believe financially gay marriage does not work with the State (as i said earlier). Gay marriage does not = the sum of the gay movement, but in accepting one you give credence to the other. So…keeping that in mind, to avoid further repetition…

1.It was an example. You are right, ppl can complain about anything. But, when you give legal legitimacy to gay marriage you in turn create legitimacy to more irrational hate-crimes. I’d like to see someone get arrested in Canada for disagreeing with the church (i am saying this facetiously)
  1. As stated before, the gay movement helped implement the sex ed we have today. a lot of good it did us.
  2. last time i saw a catholic priest in required public school reading…never :confused:
  3. Before there was a homosexual movement…clarify before :confused:
    //before the movement to get active homosexuals ordained and into positions of power??//before kinsey’s bs? before freud?
    //before what gay movement are you referring …?
    (and yes, i know there are always bad apples…)
  4. I agree, it doesnt matter wat ppl think, even without the laws ppl will disagree. The laws, i know this is repetitive, give credence to irrational “hurts”
 
1catholic said:
I told you when you asked this would be a moral ? not a political reason, necessarily. I believe financially gay marriage does not work with the State (as i said earlier). Gay marriage does not = the sum of the gay movement, but in accepting one you give credence to the other. So…keeping that in mind, to avoid further repetition…

1.It was an example. You are right, ppl can complain about anything. But, when you give legal legitimacy to gay marriage you in turn create legitimacy to more irrational hate-crimes. I’d like to see someone get arrested in Canada for disagreeing with the church (i am saying this facetiously)
  1. As stated before, the gay movement helped implement the sex ed we have today. a lot of good it did us.
  2. last time i saw a catholic priest in required public school reading…never :confused:
  3. Before there was a homosexual movement…clarify before :confused:
    //before the movement to get active homosexuals ordained and into positions of power??//before kinsey’s bs? before freud?
    //before what gay movement are you referring …?
    (and yes, i know there are always bad apples…)
  4. I agree, it doesnt matter wat ppl think, even without the laws ppl will disagree. The laws, i know this is repetitive, give credence to irrational “hurts”
Click to expand...
  1. Canadian human rights comissions accept complaints from gays regardles of gay marriage. Gay marriage is not the reason gays can file complaints.
  2. You have yet to demonstarte how sexeducation harms anyone. Your position is that the more one learns about sex, the more danger they are in.
  3. You told us pictures of gays in books constituted forcing an ideology down citizens throats. So, do pictures of Catholic priests in books force ideology down citizens throats?
  4. The gay movement began at Stonewall in 1969.
  5. NA
  6. Who exactly is hurt by the ideas of people who disagree with the Catholic Church? How are they hurt? What are the ideas and what is the specific harm? Note about 85% of the earth’s population disagrees with the Cathiolic Church on fundamental doctrine.
 
WillieWonka said:
  1. Canadian human rights comissions accept complaints from gays regardles of gay marriage. Gay marriage is not the reason gays can file complaints.
  2. You have yet to demonstarte how sexeducation harms anyone. Your position is that the more one learns about sex, the more danger they are in.
  3. You told us pictures of gays in books constituted forcing an ideology down citizens throats. So, do pictures of Catholic priests in books force ideology down citizens throats?
  4. The gay movement began at Stonewall in 1969.
  5. NA
  6. Who exactly is hurt by the ideas of people who disagree with the Catholic Church? How are they hurt? What are the ideas and what is the specific harm? Note about 85% of the earth’s population disagrees with the Cathiolic Church on fundamental doctrine.
Click to expand...
  1. I realize that. I am here referring to a broader movement… once again, i feel financially speaking gay marriage doesnt work. I am talking about the problems, not religiously per se, with the movement. It wasn’t always that you could get in trouble for quoting the bible in canada.
  2. No, the more inaccuracies (kinsey…) they are taught and when they are taught more than is necessary for their age. Tell me ALL of this is good to be teaching kids in a nearly condoning manner, “Finland
    In Finland, sexual education is usually incorporated into various obligatory courses, mainly as part of biology lessons (in lower grades) and later in a course related to general health issues. The Population and Family Welfare Federation provides all 15-year-olds an introductory sexual package that includes an information brochure, a condom and a cartoon love story.
    [edit]France
    In France, sex education has been part of school curricula since 1973. Schools are expected to provide 30 to 40 hours of sex education, and pass out condoms, to students in grades eight and nine. In January 2000, the French government launched an information campaign on contraception with TV and radio spots and the distribution of five million leaflets on contraception to high school students.[13]
    [edit]Germany
    In Germany, sex education has been part of school curricula since 1970. Since 1992 sex education is by law a governmental duty.[14]
    It normally covers all subjects concerning the growing-up process, body changes during puberty, emotions, the biological process of reproduction, sexual activity, partnership, homosexuality, unwanted pregnancies and the complications of abortion, the dangers of sexual violence, child abuse, and sex-transmitted diseases, but sometimes also things like sex positions. Most schools offer courses on the correct usage of contraception.”
    amazon.com/Unprotected-Psychiatrist-Political-Correctness-Profession/dp/1595230254
  3. Show me one place where any form of religious or sexual situation is REQUIRED in text books. Why then should txt books have to make special room for gay images.
  4. ok 1969 (that cuts out more than 1/2 of its history, this might be an “official” date but for looking at its influence you should really start from the beginning…Freud, kinsey, “Hirschfeld, whose life was dedicated to social progress for homosexual and transgender people, formed the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft (Institute for Sexology) in 1919,” "The Russian Revolution of 1917 decriminalised homosexuality and recognised same-sex marriage. This was a remarkable step in Russia of the time - which was very backward economically and socially, and where many conservative attitudes towards sexuality prevailed. This step was part of a larger project of freeing sexual relationships and expanding women’s rights - including legalising abortion, granting divorce on demand, equal rights for women, and attempts to socialise house-work. " To name a few earlier moments in histor)
    A. There were a growing number of ACTIVE gay bishops
  • Examples:*
    “A staunch theological liberal throughout his episcopate, Archbishop Rembert Weakland retired on May 24, 2002, having reached the mandatory retirement age of 75 and amid revelations that he had paid money, out of diocesan funds, to a former graduate student Paul Marcoux,[5] an alleged gay lover.[6][7]
    Other recent sex scandals involving Roman Catholic bishops have includedJuan Carlos Maccarone in Argentina in 2005 and Francisco Domingo Barbosa Da Silveira in Uruguay in 2009.”
    “81% of the reported victims of child sexual abuse by Catholic clergy were boys.”
    And for clarity’s sake, I’m not saying gay=child molester, I am trying to show how the environment created by greater acceptance of homosexual activities is a compatible environment to homosexual activity in the priesthood (which is supposed to be celibate all together)
    B. movie after “69” that shows homosexual activity within the priesthood in a positive light en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_Appeal_(film
    C. “Dr. James Alison (born 1959) is a Catholic Priest, theologian and author. He is noted for his work on gay issues and the application of René Girard’s anthropological theory in theology.
    James Alison studied at Blackfriars, Oxford University, and earned his bachelors degree and doctorate in Theology from the Jesuit Theology Faculty in Belo Horizonte, Brazil. He was a member of the Dominican Order - his Master’s degree is a Dominican Lectorate - from 1981 to 1995. He has lived and worked in Mexico, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile and the United States. Currently he is based in São Paulo, Brazil.
    His expressed disagreement with regards to the official (Roman Catholic) Church teaching on homosexuality is itself based on the official Church teaching concerning Nature, Grace and Original Sin (see homosexuality and Roman Catholicism).”
D. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_bishops#Roman_Catholic_Church_in_modern_times
"Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, a retired bishop in the diocese of Detroit, has consistently been a supporter of New Ways Ministry and has also called for homosexual priests and bishops to “come out” and be truthful to themselves and others. " (what happened to the vow of celibacy)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavender_Mafia
  1. I was not referring to the Catholic Churches teaching, just scientific fact that the body isn’t made for homosexual activity. Of course they can do wat they want but why condone, even approve it
 
1catholic said:
  1. I realize that. I am here referring to a broader movement… once again, i feel financially speaking gay marriage doesnt work. I am talking about the problems, not religiously per se, with the movement. It wasn’t always that you could get in trouble for quoting the bible in canada.
  2. No, the more inaccuracies (kinsey…) they are taught and when they are taught more than is necessary for their age. Tell me ALL of this is good to be teaching kids in a nearly condoning manner, “Finland
    In Finland, sexual education is usually incorporated into various obligatory courses, mainly as part of biology lessons (in lower grades) and later in a course related to general health issues. The Population and Family Welfare Federation provides all 15-year-olds an introductory sexual package that includes an information brochure, a condom and a cartoon love story.
    [edit]France
    In France, sex education has been part of school curricula since 1973. Schools are expected to provide 30 to 40 hours of sex education, and pass out condoms, to students in grades eight and nine. In January 2000, the French government launched an information campaign on contraception with TV and radio spots and the distribution of five million leaflets on contraception to high school students.[13]
    [edit]Germany
    In Germany, sex education has been part of school curricula since 1970. Since 1992 sex education is by law a governmental duty.[14]
    It normally covers all subjects concerning the growing-up process, body changes during puberty, emotions, the biological process of reproduction, sexual activity, partnership, homosexuality, unwanted pregnancies and the complications of abortion, the dangers of sexual violence, child abuse, and sex-transmitted diseases, but sometimes also things like sex positions. Most schools offer courses on the correct usage of contraception.”
    amazon.com/Unprotected-Psychiatrist-Political-Correctness-Profession/dp/1595230254
  3. Show me one place where any form of religious or sexual situation is REQUIRED in text books. Why then should txt books have to make special room for gay images.
  4. ok 1969 (that cuts out more than 1/2 of its history, this might be an “official” date but for looking at its influence you should really start from the beginning…Freud, kinsey, “Hirschfeld, whose life was dedicated to social progress for homosexual and transgender people, formed the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft (Institute for Sexology) in 1919,” "The Russian Revolution of 1917 decriminalised homosexuality and recognised same-sex marriage. This was a remarkable step in Russia of the time - which was very backward economically and socially, and where many conservative attitudes towards sexuality prevailed. This step was part of a larger project of freeing sexual relationships and expanding women’s rights - including legalising abortion, granting divorce on demand, equal rights for women, and attempts to socialise house-work. " To name a few earlier moments in histor)
    A. There were a growing number of ACTIVE gay bishops
  • Examples:*
    “A staunch theological liberal throughout his episcopate, Archbishop Rembert Weakland retired on May 24, 2002, having reached the mandatory retirement age of 75 and amid revelations that he had paid money, out of diocesan funds, to a former graduate student Paul Marcoux,[5] an alleged gay lover.[6][7]
    Other recent sex scandals involving Roman Catholic bishops have includedJuan Carlos Maccarone in Argentina in 2005 and Francisco Domingo Barbosa Da Silveira in Uruguay in 2009.”
    “81% of the reported victims of child sexual abuse by Catholic clergy were boys.”
    And for clarity’s sake, I’m not saying gay=child molester, I am trying to show how the environment created by greater acceptance of homosexual activities is a compatible environment to homosexual activity in the priesthood (which is supposed to be celibate all together)
    B. movie after “69” that shows homosexual activity within the priesthood in a positive light en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_Appeal_(film
    C. “Dr. James Alison (born 1959) is a Catholic Priest, theologian and author. He is noted for his work on gay issues and the application of René Girard’s anthropological theory in theology.
    James Alison studied at Blackfriars, Oxford University, and earned his bachelors degree and doctorate in Theology from the Jesuit Theology Faculty in Belo Horizonte, Brazil. He was a member of the Dominican Order - his Master’s degree is a Dominican Lectorate - from 1981 to 1995. He has lived and worked in Mexico, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile and the United States. Currently he is based in São Paulo, Brazil.
    His expressed disagreement with regards to the official (Roman Catholic) Church teaching on homosexuality is itself based on the official Church teaching concerning Nature, Grace and Original Sin (see homosexuality and Roman Catholicism).”
D. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_bishops#Roman_Catholic_Church_in_modern_times
"Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, a retired bishop in the diocese of Detroit, has consistently been a supporter of New Ways Ministry and has also called for homosexual priests and bishops to “come out” and be truthful to themselves and others. " (what happened to the vow of celibacy)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavender_Mafia
  1. I was not referring to the Catholic Churches teaching, just scientific fact that the body isn’t made for homosexual activity. Of course they can do wat they want but why condone, even approve it
Click to expand...
  1. You told us churches had been forced to accept gay marriage as sacred. You haven’t backed that up.
  2. You told us sex education caused STDs. Can you get back to that? What does thta have to do with gay marriage?
  3. You claim pictures of gays in books is forcing ideology down citizens throats. So, what about pictures of those priests? Does a picture of a priest in abook force ideology down citizens’ throats? What do pictures of gays in books have to do with gay marriage?
  4. Gay marriage did not exist during the Russian revolution in 1917. How could it have caused anything then?
  5. You claim there are active gay Catholic bishops. OK. How did gay marriage make Catholic bishops gay?
  6. You tell us people consider ou a bigot if you teach something. So what? Who cares? What does that have to do with gay marriage?
 
WillieWonka said:
  1. You told us churches had been forced to accept gay marriage as sacred. You haven’t backed that up.
  2. You told us sex education caused STDs. Can you get back to that? What does thta have to do with gay marriage?
  3. You claim pictures of gays in books is forcing ideology down citizens throats. So, what about pictures of those priests? Does a picture of a priest in abook force ideology down citizens’ throats? What do pictures of gays in books have to do with gay marriage?
  4. Gay marriage did not exist during the Russian revolution in 1917. How could it have caused anything then?
  5. You claim there are active gay Catholic bishops. OK. How did gay marriage make Catholic bishops gay?
  6. You tell us people consider ou a bigot if you teach something. So what? Who cares? What does that have to do with gay marriage?
Click to expand...
  1. I didn’t say they were forced to accept it, I said EITHER they accept it or they have to be quiet about what they believe
2.I didn’t say it in and of itself created STD’s, I said it led to looser lifestyles which helps breed STDs
  1. Again, I have given an answer on gay marriage. here i was just talking about there agenda. I don’t think the pictures directly correspond with marriage. My issue with legalized marriage is the financial situation. My issue with the pictures is that they portray a dangerous lifestyle as a norm to school kids. Why not show pictures of ppl smoking pot? I have no problems with having a hindu, a minister, a priest, or anyone for that matter as long as they aren’t an advertisement for a physically harmful lifestyle
  2. Gay marriage? I was talking about the gay movement, they didn’t get marriage off the bat.
5.Again, at the agenda NOT marriage.
  1. is this dejavu or have answered this already? While repetitive, my point was that now some opinions are becoming “illegal” Yes ppl will disagree with you, and who cares, but legally they should have no power against you
 
1catholic said:
  1. I didn’t say they were forced to accept it, I said EITHER they accept it or they have to be quiet about what they believe
2.I didn’t say it in and of itself created STD’s, I said it led to looser lifestyles which helps breed STDs
  1. Again, I have given an answer on gay marriage. here i was just talking about there agenda. I don’t think the pictures directly correspond with marriage. My issue with legalized marriage is the financial situation. My issue with the pictures is that they portray a dangerous lifestyle as a norm to school kids. Why not show pictures of ppl smoking pot? I have no problems with having a hindu, a minister, a priest, or anyone for that matter as long as they aren’t an advertisement for a physically harmful lifestyle
  2. Gay marriage? I was talking about the gay movement, they didn’t get marriage off the bat.
5.Again, at the agenda NOT marriage.
  1. is this dejavu or have answered this already? While repetitive, my point was that now some opinions are becoming “illegal” Yes ppl will disagree with you, and who cares, but legally they should have no power against you
Click to expand...
Here’s what you said in post #248.

*"First, let me say i am including Canada in this cuz they are so close to home
  1. a loss of religious freedoms (wow are we seeing some of the same effects as abortion) - forcing of churches to accept both marriages as sacred or stopping them from preaching their beliefs"*
The word EITHER is not there.

Now, if you won’t acknowledge your words, I wish you well, and will move on.
 
WillieWonka said:
Here’s what you said in post #248.

*"First, let me say i am including Canada in this cuz they are so close to home
  1. a loss of religious freedoms (wow are we seeing some of the same effects as abortion) - forcing of churches to accept both marriages as sacred or stopping them from preaching their beliefs"*
The word EITHER is not there.

Now, if you won’t acknowledge your words, I wish you well, and will move on.
Click to expand...
the word OR is there…same thing:choocho:
 
‘You told us pictures of gays in books constituted forcing an ideology down citizens throats. So, do pictures of Catholic priests in books force ideology down citizens throats?’

a PICTURE of a gay person doesnt force homosexuality down anyones throat…no…

but declaring June as ‘National LGBT month’ does…just like during the ‘African American’ month we have to celebrate Martin Luther King, next year do I have to look forward to celebrating people with a different sex life?? lol…thats something worth celebrating??? I mean, wether you agree with it or not, we need to take a month out and celebrate someones sex life??? and how are they going to handle that in the schools?? by reading materials, learning about homosexual things…

I just dont see why?? I mean, a kid has to know how a man and woman has sex, or their reproductive system for obvious reasons…but why go into homosexual acts??? what do they have to learn from it?? its POINTLESS. learning how homosexual people have sex is in NO WAY going to benefit my child. all its going to do is 1. let he/she know how they do it ((great…)) or 2. make her think its ok, and maybe open a door up for her ((NO THANX…))
 
and before any one goes there I have no problem celebrating MLK or African American PEOPLE…but homosexual ACTS are NOT a PEOPLE…its a lifestyle…I’ve never heard of an EX african american…

and you can say ‘oh well those homosexuals that are EX homosexuals were sent to CAMPS’ but thats BS…I’ve never heard of those ‘camps’ until i came to this website…and have NEVER heard of anyone whose actually been there…

But I can name at least 7 people, easy off the top of my head that used to do ‘homosexual acts’ or were ‘bi sexual’ myself included, that no longer have any desire to do so anymore…and not because of ‘god’ or the ‘church’ or anything…its just something they ‘grew out of’ or they found their spouse and wondered what the heck they were thinking doing all of that foolin’ around etc…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top