Illinois passes same sex marriage bill

  • Thread starter Thread starter LittleFlower378
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What gets me is the heterosexuals are afraid gay marriage will ruin their marriages…I laugh because if that were true gays would be very powerful people. However, they are just like anyone else. To those who think it will destroy straight marriages, your marriage was a sham in the 1st place, there are obviously more problems then gays ruining it, Put the blame where it belongs, not on gay marriage. Speaking of “straight” marriages, if it is soooo wonderful why is there over a 50% divorce rate - can’t blames it on gays because the divorce rate has been this high way before gay marriages started passing.
 
JTD_Eagle1 said:
If you are truly pro marriage “equality”, than this would be supported as well. It does sound sort of crazy, which it is, but the same thing would have been said about same sex “marriage” 10-15 years ago. I am not surprised at anything this country allows anymore.
Click to expand...
A Marriage is bewteen 2 “consenting” adults - animals can not consent.
 
barts61 said:
What gets me is the heterosexuals are afraid gay marriage will ruin their marriages…I laugh because if that were true gays would be very powerful people. However, they are just like anyone else. To those who think it will destroy straight marriages, your marriage was a sham in the 1st place, there are obviously more problems then gays ruining it, Put the blame where it belongs, not on gay marriage. Speaking of “straight” marriages, if it is soooo wonderful why is there over a 50% divorce rate - can’t blames it on gays because the divorce rate has been this high way before gay marriages started passing.
Click to expand...
I’m not afraid that a gay relationship will ruin my marriage. I just can’t understand how anyone can call a gay relationship a marriage.

Speaking of divorce rates, how that rate doing amongst the gays who think they are married??
 
  • “I just can’t understand how anyone can call a gay relationship a marriage”.* The same could be said about heterosexual marriages - everyone knows the relationship is doomed from the start, except for the couple, and then end up divorced a short time later…some relationship that was. I know and have known many gay couples who love each other and are committed to one another - why should they be denied the same benefits that heterosexual couples get?
As for the “divorce” rate amongst gays, since not all states have same sex marriage you can’t find an accurate number. That being said, however, not any worse then the straights that cheat on their spouses, are busted for child pornography or sexually assaulting (raping) a child or women, priest that rape the alter boys…etc.
 
Brendan said:
Actually Freaky is right on the mark, sex SHOULD only be practiced in marriage.

But, by definition, homosexuals are not interested in the sex within an actual marriage.
Click to expand...
By definition, homosexuals are not interested in the sex within an actual marriage? I know a lot of heterosexuals with the same interest - sex without marriage…I know many homosexuals that would love to get married, like their straight counterparts and not just for the sex…
 
Zoltan_Cobalt said:
I just can’t understand how anyone can call a gay relationship a marriage.
Click to expand...
Well, you could literally call something by any name you can utter/write/type. And if other people understand the meaning that you’ve assigned to the word it could be used for communication even if they choose not to employ the word that way. So the “how” question is pretty easy.

Pardon my mistakes. Sent from my mobile device.
 
barts61 said:
  • “I just can’t understand how anyone can call a gay relationship a marriage”.* The same could be said about heterosexual marriages -
Click to expand...
That would be true if marriage and a homosexual relationship were the same …but they are not. There is no such thing as a "heterosexual marriage.
barts61 said:
everyone knows the relationship is doomed from the start,
Click to expand...
Everyone?..no they don’t. I don’t know that.
barts61 said:
I know and have known many gay couples who love each other and are committed to one another - why should they be denied the same benefits that heterosexual couples get?
Click to expand...
I know a couple of straight guys who room together. They will be entitled to the benefits that married couples get as soon as they find nice girls to marry. Same applies to homosexuals.
barts61 said:
As for the “divorce” rate amongst gays, since not all states have same sex marriage you can’t find an accurate number. That being said, however, not any worse then the straights that cheat on their spouses, are busted for child pornography or sexually assaulting (raping) a child or women, priest that rape the alter boys…etc.
Click to expand...
Oh I would expect the divorce rate amongst homosexuals to be FAR greater. Studies show that even when “married”… homosexuals still “cruise”.

As to priests raping alter boys…I know that doesn’t prove that all homosexuals are pedophiles but every priest convicted in that scandal was an admitted homosexual and in most cases a very outspoken homosexual.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
Well, you could literally call something by any name you can utter/write/type. And if other people understand the meaning that you’ve assigned to the word it could be used for communication even if they choose not to employ the word that way. So the “how” question is pretty easy.

Pardon my mistakes. Sent from my mobile device.
Click to expand...
I suppose I could call an apple an orange but that would not change the biological aspect of the apple. I suppose some lost souls would then think the two fruits were the same…but that would not be physically possible.

There is a difference and it needs to be well defined.
 
Oregon just passed it, too, upon the ruling by a Federal Judge that the ban on same sex marriage in Oregon was unconstitutional. (The activists are lobbying the legislation under the banner of Equality and I think, maybe, that’s how it got though. Not sure). Anyway, some folks here went to the Supreme Court as of a week ago to overturn that Judge’s ruling and it was denied. So same sex marriage is permanent law in Oregon.

There’s no possible way to overturn it, now and we’ll just have to live with it.

We’ll see the consequences of this 20 years from now.

Personally, I think Marriage itself should be totally separate from State and that’s the problem to begin with. It’s a flaw in the system. Marriage is a sacrament, so what right does the state have in issuing marriage licenses in the first place? The authority to administer the sacrament of Marriage is under the authority of the church alone, and not the state.

It’s an issue of church and state. Right now there exists a blend of church and state with regard to marriage. I presume the reason for it is for tax purposes?? The state should keep its nose out of peoples marriages. Period.

Same sex couples want recognition, discounts for joint tax filings and the insurance benefits that married couples enjoy. I understand that. I might be in favor of some sort of secular union but fear that, at some point, same-sex couples will eventually intimidate the churches into performing marriage ceremonies. If the state forces the issue upon the churches, it would open the door for the state to impose all sorts of regulations upon the churches.

I wish there could be some sort of compromise: one being totally secular and one being totally religious so that we could still maintain separation of church and state.

Same sex marriage does appear to violate church and state … but it’s within a system that is wrongly mixing church and state in the first place! The states’ involvement in marriages is a weak point in our system and it has allowed this.

There should be no such thing as “marriage licenses” in the first place. The state’s involvement has allowed this loophole.

I do have gay friends and some wanting to marry. They’re nice people. It’s hard to say no to friends, BUT in the long run, I believe same-sex marriage will be bad for society as a whole.
 
Zoltan_Cobalt said:
I suppose I could call an apple an orange but that would not change the biological aspect of the apple. I suppose some lost souls would then think the two fruits were the same…but that would not be physically possible.

There is a difference and it needs to be well defined.
Click to expand...
Proponents of gay marriage are probably more likely conceptualizing marriage as a social construct, not a biological one. So the apple/orange metaphor doesn’t come into play. I understand in marriage as described in Catholicism on is obligated to be open to the possibility of new life and not do anything to obstruct the possibility. But outside of Catholicism homosexuals and heterosexuals don’t necessarily share the view of that obligation. So I think the reproductive aspect has a lesser impact on non Catholics.
 
Zoltan_Cobalt said:
That would be true if marriage and a homosexual relationship were the same …but they are not. There is no such thing as a "heterosexual marriage.

Everyone?..no they don’t. I don’t know that.

I know a couple of straight guys who room together. They will be entitled to the benefits that married couples get as soon as they find nice girls to marry. Same applies to homosexuals.

Oh I would expect the divorce rate amongst homosexuals to be FAR greater. Studies show that even when “married”… homosexuals still “cruise”.

As to priests raping alter boys…I know that doesn’t prove that all homosexuals are pedophiles but every priest convicted in that scandal was an admitted homosexual and in most cases a very outspoken homosexual.
Click to expand...
Why would 2 straight same sex people want to get married to each other if they are not sexually attracted to one another? To say for the “benefits” that come with marriage is bogus - subjecting ones self to being married to someone your not attracted to for benefits only married couples receive is beyond my comprehension.

regarding to convicted priest are homosexuals: many child molesters cannot be meaningfully described as homosexuals, heterosexuals, or bisexuals (in the usual sense of those terms) because they are not really capable of a relationship with an adult man or woman. Instead of gender, their sexual attractions are based primarily on age. These individuals – who are often characterized as fixated – are attracted to children, not to men or women. psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
 
josh987654321 said:
May I ask barts61, what is marriage to you? 🙂

Thank you for reading
Josh
Click to expand...
Sure you may ask.

To me marriage is a legal binding commitment between two consenting adults (same sex included), that mutually care and love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together (forgoing all others).

This marriage may or may not include children, because not all women are able to conceive, and some people (selfish or not) prefer not to have children. Just because you have in inability to produce children (whether biologically due to infertility or because you both have the same “parts”) -this should not negate the definition of marriage.
 
barts61 said:
Sure you may ask.

To me marriage is a legal binding commitment between two consenting adults (same sex included), that mutually care and love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together (forgoing all others).

This marriage may or may not include children, because not all women are able to conceive, and some people (selfish or not) prefer not to have children. Just because you have an inability to produce children (whether biologically due to infertility or because you both have the same “parts”) -this should not negate the definition of marriage.
Click to expand...
May I ask again 🙂

If that’s how society wants to define it, why do they need to call that marriage? why not civil unions?

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
barts61 said:
Why would 2 straight same sex people want to get married to each other if they are not sexually attracted to one another? To say for the “benefits” that come with marriage is bogus - subjecting ones self to being married to someone your not attracted to for benefits only married couples receive is beyond my comprehension.
Click to expand...
I agree.

So then when it comes to same sex marriage, I believe it comes to the sexual acts of homosexuality, and that’s where I cannot support it, as I believe the sexual acts of homosexuality means to use the bodies organs in a manner in which they are not designed to be used for. Now if they want to do that, than okay, I wouldn’t support a law to criminalize it, but I don’t wish to support a law which relates that to marriage.

I believe people can see that our sexual organs are designed to be used a certain way, I’m no biologist or anything, but for me, one quick study of the human anatomy, the sexual compatibility and complementarity between a man and a woman that produces new life, I see marriage as pretty clear. However I also believe there are many men and women who are like Pilate, upon having the Truth in front of them, they can only think of saying, ‘What is truth?’ As Pilate, they refuse to see the truth, because they are afraid, because truth makes demands, truth implies obligations, truth implies commitment and because once we acknowledge the truth, living with the status quo becomes harder. However, as the light uncovers our sins, Love and Mercy is also there ready to cover them.

Diary of St Faustina -

"My mercy is greater than your sins and those of the entire world. Who can measure the extent of my goodness? For you I descended from heaven to earth; for you I allowed myself to be nailed to the cross; for you I let my Sacred Heart be pierced with a lance, thus opening wide the source of mercy for you. Come, then, with trust to draw graces from this fountain. I never reject a contrite heart. Your misery has disappeared in the depths of My mercy" (Diary, 1485).

"Oh, if sinners knew My mercy, they would not perish in such great numbers. Tell sinful souls not to be afraid to approach Me; speak to them of My great mercy" (Diary, 1396).

I remember reading something from C.S. Lewis where he said that the biggest stumbling block for people admitting an objective moral law, is that they also have to admit that they have failed to keep it.
New Testament:
Matthew 19:4-6

4 Jesus answered, “Don’t you know that in the beginning the Creator made a man and a woman? 5 That’s why a man leaves his father and mother and gets married. He becomes like one person with his wife. 6 Then they are no longer two people, but one. And no one should separate a couple that God has joined together.”

Mark 10:6-9

6 But in the beginning God made a man and a woman. 7 That’s why a man leaves his father and mother and gets married. 8 He becomes like one person with his wife. Then they are no longer two people, but one. 9 And no one should separate a couple that God has joined together.”
Click to expand...
Thank you for reading
Josh
 
josh987654321 said:
May I ask again 🙂

If that’s how society wants to define it, why do they need to call that marriage? why not civil unions?

Thank you for reading
Josh
Click to expand...
Was tried before. It didn’t quite work. From an old Associated Press article:
The biggest area of inequality was in regards to employment benefits for spouses. Many employers refused to offer same-sex couples the same health insurance benefits as married couples.
Massachusetts is the only state in the United States to allow gay marriage and a study there found that gay couples did not have the same kinds of problems with employers and health insurance.
The New Jersey commission found that people in civil unions were not treated the same way as married couples by government agencies, employers and others. One of the big issues is that people do not understand what civil unions are and how they differ from marriage.
Click to expand...
 
ThinkingSapien said:
Shared this in another thread and may be worth considering for an answer to your question.

youtube.com/watch?v=ZZZ6QB5TSfk
Click to expand...
Thank you for sharing that with me ThinkingSapien. 🙂

So may I ask, what did you think of that youtube video ThinkinSapien? is there a definition of marriage? or were all those definitions just as valid as the other?

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
ThinkingSapien said:
Was tried before. It didn’t quite work. From an old Associated Press article:
The biggest area of inequality was in regards to employment benefits for spouses. Many employers refused to offer same-sex couples the same health insurance benefits as married couples.
Massachusetts is the only state in the United States to allow gay marriage and a study there found that gay couples did not have the same kinds of problems with employers and health insurance.
The New Jersey commission found that people in civil unions were not treated the same way as married couples by government agencies, employers and others. One of the big issues is that people do not understand what civil unions are and how they differ from marriage.
Click to expand...
Why did they refuse to offer same sex couples the same health insurance benefits as married couples? I’m not sure how calling it ‘marriage’ changes anything in that regard?

Thank you for reading
Josh
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top