Same sex marrage.

  • Thread starter Thread starter YipYupYep
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ajecphotos said:
All a load of fuss over nothing!

Gay or not, its only a cake being made not the baker marrying them!!
Click to expand...
It’s not just about the cake. It’s about all of the religious objection issues that will arise from gay marriage. The cake is just a useful focal point for debate. Other professions are in play as well. There was the case of counseling student Julea Ward (a black Christian woman by the way) who was forced to undergo “remediation” to “change the error of her ways” because she referred a gay couple to another therapist (a common practice in this profession) because she could not provide the services for them honestly without contradicting her faith. She won the court case and the university settled. The RFRA laws are just to clarify and reaffirm religious freedom in this unprecedented new era where committed religious believers are a minority and LGBT + their supporters a majority.

If LGBT activists are still under the impression that they are powerless victims in a hostile society, that illusion should be shattered by Indiana. The tables have turned, and minority rights (orthodox believers are a minority now) must be respected. And if they aren’t, it’s up to people of faith to mobilize and speak up.
 
If a private business, do what you want, its yours.

Public, different story…
 
someperson555 said:
This attitude towards homosexuality and sexuality is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
You are conflating two issues. The question of whether or not homosexuality is immoral is not the issue. The issue is whether or not marriage should be redefined to completely exclude its primary purpose - i.e. to create a relationship between a child and its natural parents. You seem to think that the heart of the dispute is a moral judgment about the value of the relationship between two persons, when in fact it’s not. It’s about the children.
40.png
someperson555:
There is nothing sinful about legalizing same sex marriage since it is frankly none of any religions business if two gay people want a civil marriage, or if a straight person wants a polygamous marriage.
Click to expand...
Whether or not it is sinful is not the heart of the debate. People can be morally neutral on the question of whether or not homosexual acts are immoral and still object to the redefinition of marriage because of its harmful impact on society. (Consider the fact that the founders of Dolce & Gabana - two openly “gay” men - have recently stated their public objection to “gay marriage” because of the harmful impact it has on children. Notably, they do not object to children being raised by a “gay” parent. What they object to is a child being raised without their mother and/or their father when they are raised by a “married” same-sex couple. In a nutshell, this is the heart of the Catholic objection to the redefinition of marriage.
40.png
someperson555:
You know whats really insane? Is that abortion was legal while same sex marriage is still viewed as taboo. That says A LOT about American catholics. Apparently murdering a baby is not as bad as homosexuality or sex outside of marriage.
Click to expand...
I think it says a lot about America, not just us Catholics. And the Pro-Life movement within the Catholic Church addresses both of these issues because both are an attack on the family.
40.png
someperson555:
Its so insane that on tv its ok to show all kinds of violence yet if you show any nudity the moralists get all hootie tootie.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that gratuitous violence and gratuitous nudity have no place on TV.
40.png
someperson555:
Making a cake for a gay wedding isnt really such a big deal.
Click to expand...
You’re entitled to your opinion on the matter. But for those who feel that providing what is in effect a centerpiece of the celebration would be a cause for scandal, they should have the right to decline to participate.
40.png
someperson:
I mean I don’t share the Catholic churchs view on sexual Morality but EVEN IF I DID I fail to see how its a sin to merely bake gay people a cake. Its not like YOURE the one getting married. I think this is just an opportunity for overly zealous people to flex their catholicism and say " look everyone, im such a GOOD Catholic)
Click to expand...
But it can be perceived as participation in the celebration of an event that is personally objectionable. Shouldn’t someone have the right to politely decline, especially if there are other bakeries that could provide the cake?

Peace,
Robert
 
homosexual marriage is NOT an attack on the family. so what if two parents are of the same sex?
 
it is so insulting and an absolute betrayal that you want to have small government, a government that isn’t involved in your lives, except when it comes to marriage. marriage has always been a private institution. legalizing gay marriage is the first step towards privatizing marriage so that government wouldn’t ever have to regulate it.
 
HDLSeanWileyTin said:
it is so insulting and an absolute betrayal that you want to have small government, a government that isn’t involved in your lives, except when it comes to marriage. marriage has always been a private institution. legalizing gay marriage is the first step towards privatizing marriage so that government wouldn’t ever have to regulate it.
Click to expand...
Legalizing so-called gay “marriage” INCREASES the size and scope of government.

In New Jersey, gay conversion therapy is banned. What message does that send? That if you’re gonna be GBLTQ, you’ve got to be GLBTQ OUR way, OR ELSE!

And how about bakers and florists getting fined thousands of dollars by so-called “human rights” commissions? Is that small government?

So-called gay marriage isn’t really about civil rights or equality, it’s just another worthless, immoral entitlement that costs the state more money in the long run because of the instability of such relationships.

Furthermore, whether or not one is insulted is irrelevant. That’s just the calling card for progressive causes that cannot stand on merit.
 
HDLSeanWileyTin said:
homosexual marriage is NOT an attack on the family. so what if two parents are of the same sex?
Click to expand...
Two parents in the biological sense cannot be of the same sex.

Furthermore, so-called gay “marriage” is absolutely an attack on the family. :yup: :sad_yes:
 
but those therapies don’t work. being gay is part of someone. so what if a couple can’t have a baby? you could use that logic to say that infertile couples are an attack on the family. after all, they can’t have any babies either.
 
straight infertile couples. and don’t you go saying “oh but it’s between a man and a woman” because it shouldn’t matter whether or not a man or a woman has a child or not. all that matters is love. people are coming to that realization now thanks to advanced technology.
 
oh, and you complain of being called right wing extremists yet you attack pro-gay marriage supporters by calling them “left wingers” and “progressives”, shame on you. i’m a libertarian, and there are some conservatives and other right wingers that support gay marriage. there are all sorts of people across the entire political spectrum that support gay marriage, and the same goes for people that oppose it. we should really stop accusing each other of being “left wing” or “right wing” because the spectrum is useless.
 
gay marriage may be harmful in your church’s view, but there are other religions that don’t see it that way. for many years, you would have laws that would prohibit that stuff and make it a crime to perform such things, and that would keep gays in the closet because they would be considered “disordered” which they aren’t.
 
HDLSeanWileyTin said:
straight infertile couples. and don’t you go saying “oh but it’s between a man and a woman” because it shouldn’t matter whether or not a man or a woman has a child or not. all that matters is love. people are coming to that realization now thanks to advanced technology.
Click to expand...
HDLSeanWileyTin, if “all that matters is love” then how can we limit marriage at all? Can I not love several people at once, or love my sibling, or love a child? Can I not love an inanimate object or an animal?

Marriage by its nature involves a sexual relationship between a man and a woman which is ordered toward procreation. This is what marriage is and it is only when we start trying to extend the definition to include other things that we head down the slippery slope of marriage being “all about love.”
 
marriage shouldn’t be limited. now incest, child marriages and bestiality aren’t marriages because the first one is abuse, and the next two because children and animals can’t consent.
 
i can’t even believe you would even call bestiality “marriage”
 
and what if someone doesn’t view marriage the same way you do? what are you gonna do about them? keep them from getting married the way they see fit?
 
you just want to defend what you believe to be marriage and trample on the rights of others to practice marriage as they define it.
 
divorce is even more threatening and yet i don’t see you trying to prohibit that.
 
Sean,

Would it be possible for you to include all your objections to my post in one response? It reads like rapid fire.

I think you misunderstood me. I’m not saying that bestiality is marriage. I’m arguing that of course it isn’t, because it does not fit within the nature of what marriage is. But by your logic, a group of twelve consenting adults should be able to legally marry if they all love each other because it isn’t abusive. Do you see where I’m going with this?
 
HDLSeanWileyTin said:
i for one am a libertarian. i don’t think it should be prohibited. in fact, i don’t think any marriage should be prohibited. marriage is a religious institute and should be kept out of government.
Click to expand...
Consider the reverse: government should be kept out of religion. If marriage is just a civil union regulated and “approved of” by a government agency, marriage can be defined as anything. The government could define marriage as the bond between a driver who REALLY likes his/her car or the union of a pet cat and a pet rabbit. Sounds silly? Because it is! Marriage is not a contract or just a legal binding as our secular brothers and sisters would have you believe. Marriage came from God for a purpose. To fulfill that God-given purpose requires one woman and one man in sacramental union for life.
 
HDLSeanWileyTin said:
homosexual marriage is NOT an attack on the family. so what if two parents are of the same sex?
Click to expand...
What is your definition of “family”? Would it include progeny or offspring from a sexual union of the married couple? Can a “family” also include adopted persons under the age of consent? Yes but what is the rule not the exception. Offspring from the man and woman. God designed man and woman with that in mind; not so single men or single women would adopt so they could have “families”. To advocate, to believe and express this belief to the youth, does no service to them in the eyes of God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top