Government Drops Defense Of Anti-gay-marriage Law

There are many passages in post Jesus era scriptures, Corinthians, Romans, Revelations, The Apocalypse of Peter (not in the standard bible canon) etc. I have more of an issue with non-religious people insisting on being married in a Christian church than homosexuals (though I disagree with it, it is of less importance than my first issue) however, it makes no sense. Marriage, in a Christian church, done by a Christian priest/pastor/vicar should be solely for those who are Christians as it is not only a pledge to each other but a pledge to God. I don't disagree with non-religious people getting married at registry offices as some people are however.

I honesty find it interesting that this is your point of contention, not the whole 'gay sex is wrong' thing.

It raises an interesting loop-hole which I'm not sure you've considered:

Are you OK with a gay Christian couple getting married in a church?

This is turning into a thread about how gays can't be Christians. If I weren't atheist I would be up in arms, but I honestly don't give a ***. I'm sure someone does though, and that's what bothers me.

I agree with starr. However, isn't marrying throught he church the only way to marry in america?

Weasel, that's exactly the preconception I'm trying to challenge.

By saying the concept behind these people's beliefs is extreme you imply that they are also extreme. While some people are undoubtedly this way most are not. By attaching that concept to everyone who opposes gay marriage all you do is further polarize the two sides and make a compromise more difficult.

I'm not saying it shouldnt be discussed further. But its pointless to question old posts that have already been clarrified in later posts. So ya, lrn2 read. Just sayin

Go to Vegas... Elvis will marry you!

Nope. In the U.S. you go to city hall with your partner to get a marriage certificate (basically stating that you're allowed to get married).

Then you take it to someone who is licensed by the state to officiate it. This can include many people: Priests, pastors, judges, shrimp-boat captains, and even dudes who just happened to take an online certification class. Once they officiate it and sign off, they send in your filled out marriage certificate and the deed is done.

So that means gays CAN marry in America? I thought this was about if America should allow them to marry or not <.<

Currently, only heterosexual couples can get a marriage certificate.

Edit: In most states.

I do think gay sex is wrong from a religious view point (and other reasons, but they're off topic), but I also know that noone is married or given in marriage in God's kingdom (Matthew 22:29-30) so I am less worried about Atheists than homosexual Christians being married, because if they are truly Christian then they would repent for their sins if God asked them what they want.

Why do you say that?
Because you feel that if someone has extremist ideals on one subject they are automatically extremist?
That's ridiculous and you know it.
I think your just getting uppity because you have no other arguments since you jumped on that and ignored the rest of my post.
So since you apparently don't know how to read I will copy paste what I said earlier that you felt wasn't ... discuss-able I guess?
I'll even leave out the part we've already discussed!

I can keep up your whole childish learn to read bit.
So keep trying to convince yourself that you illustrated some magical catch-all point that can't be argued against and ignore anything other than.

I nowhere said anything like that if you're trying to accuse me of it, I didn't read other people's responses if you're addressing them however.

No, most states will not issue a marriage liscense to same sex couples.

Ah ok thanks. Well I think they should do it like in Germany. Go get married in the city hall thing. ( You basically just sign papers) then you can do that ceremony in the church if you want and are not gay. Not even sure if gays are allowed to do the ceremony here

So Weasel was right: you do think gay people can't be Christians, at least not REAL Christians, because being gay is inherently un-Christian?

One final question: why should your beliefs about who should or shouldn't be allowed to be married in a church carry any weight with society? In other words, why is this an issue that should be decided by majority vote and not, say, the Supreme Court?

Keep in mind that there are churches run by gays and lesbians who want the right to marry same-sex couples -- because whether you regard them as Christian or not, they regard themselves as Christian. Let me be clear about my question: I'm not asking why you should have a say in whether or not churches, such as the one you attend, should be forced to marry gay couples against their will (I'm not suggesting any forcing be done at all), I'm asking why you should have a say in whether or not these other churches, which you do not attend, should be allowed to marry the same-sex couples which they wish to marry.

Put simply: why should your religious beliefs dictate the religious lives of others?

because he finds their actions contradictory to the book that they believe in.

you mean that book written by man whose dates, times, and stories are so flawed they dont even make sense?

yup.
can't be a christian without em :P

but honestly, it just depends on how you want to display yourselves as.
wombat illustrates this point better than i lol.

Nashville to get its first MARRIED priest

just so he can keep his hands off the little altar boys.

Alright guys, I'm sure there are plenty of other crack-a-joke-at-theists'-expense threads around.

This attitude though is why we still fight over the same things instead of progressing. If we can compromise on this issue than we can also find solutions to budget problems and welfare problems and education problems and so forth. We simply cannot afford the my way or the highway approach when we live in a country that has a 50/50 split on so many important issues. There is a reason we are stuck in neutral while other countries move forward.

We have to be able to work together even if that means giving concessions that we dont really want to give.

I wasn't cracking jokes at all.
KFH's article was interesting lol.

relevant on terms of marriage at least.

So you accuse me of something, then even after stating that I don't believe what you tried to put into my mouth, you write another post again trying to put the same words into my mouth?

I think heterosexual fornication is wrong from a religious view point. Now try and reword that into something that makes me look discriminative.

Are you religious?

Or are you saying that it's wrong to call yourself religious and practice....oh wait you said heterosexual.
now i must hit on that and derail....woooo
jk.
but back on that track, are you saying it's wrong to call yourself religious and have homosexual fornication without seeing that it is a "sin"

We sure can afford the 'my way or the highway approach': it's called the court system. It's historically been very useful at ending oppression by the majority (like we see here), where 'compromise' is really just code for: "We don't want to give up our unfair privileges."

The reason we're still fighting over this instead of progressing forward is because a bunch of incredibly rich Republicans funded a massive, very successful campaign to scare the public into thinking that gay marriage would undermine The American FamilyTM and corrupt our schools, and so when gay marriage was enacted in many states (progress) we had a massive voter backlash (regress.) Soon enough, though, it won't matter anymore, because enough people in government are realizing that this issue isn't something that should be determined by majority vote anyways: it's an issue of civil liberties within the scope of the Constitution, and should be addressed by the courts.

Im not an Atheist, Im a non-religious Catholic. I make fun of religious people al the time due to their sheeple-minded attitudes and their beliefs that if they leave their life in the hands of an imaginary being, they'll be able to inherit treasure or some ***like that.

I think you're confused. I'm not Weasel. Look at the names beside the people commenting to you.

Now will you answer my questions?

Yes, I consider myself a REAL Christian (to use his own terms against him) even though I fornicate, lie, etc, I do not think any of these things are any worse than being a homosexual. The point I'm making is I don't do them in Church or in the name of God, or as a pledge to God. I don't think I can make this any clearer than that, there is nothing discriminative with what I am saying about homosexuals not being allowed to be married in Church.

Just because I'm bored, I'm going to reply to this >.>

Nearly every major historical event in the Biblical timeline from the life of David (in about 1050 B.C.E.) until the end of the New Testament era (about 95 C.E.), has either outside support (from other cultures) or archaeological backing.