(January 3, 2014 at 10:33 pm)Lek Wrote: Can't believe it. Although I am morally opposed to gay marriage because of my faith, I'm with you on this one. So many people, including me, are upset by the redefining of an institution that we consider sacred. If the states just gave everybody equal rights under a civil union, I think it would quell much of the opposition. You're right that the state has no business saying who is married or not. A couple could apply for a civil union and they would receive all the legal benefits. Marriages would be performed by churches or whatever and would be a private matter.

This is so strange to me. Surely you're aware that the institution of marriage neither began with your religion, or remained the same during its incorporation into your religion, yes? Care to take me through the thinking that, now that you consider it religious, it's now sacrosanct? I just... I don't get it.

Ever here the statement, "you poke it, you own it", that goes far beyond beer bottles my friend.

[This is so strange to me. Surely you're aware that the institution of marriage neither began with your religion, or remained the same during its incorporation into your religion, yes? Care to take me through the thinking that, now that you consider it religious, it's now sacrosanct? I just... I don't get it.
[/quote]

It's an institution in this country (USA). It's always been the same since we became a nation. To Christians, it's considered sacred having begun with Adam and Eve.

/facepalm.

So because you believe in Adam and Eve we all have to pretend like they actually existed to protect your feelings? This is exactly what is problematic about religion. It's a club, but they expect nonmembers to follow club rules.

By the way, when Adam and Eve was written, it wasn't christianity.

[quote='pineapplebunnybounce' pid='575918' dateline='1388807701']
/facepalm.

So because you believe in Adam and Eve we all have to pretend like they actually existed to protect your feelings? This is exactly what is problematic about religion. It's a club, but they expect nonmembers to follow club rules.

By the way, when Adam and Eve was written, it wasn't christianity.

Why can't we come to an agreement that would benefit both sides? I have to come to realize that even though I don't agree with the concept of gay marriage, all citizens deserve equal rights. Why can't the other side recognize what marriage means to others. Civil unions are a compromise that could work and many end the fighting.

Why don't you consider what marriage means to gay people?

My position is people can marry whoever they want. I'm not forcing people who do not want to get married to get married. But you are saying those who want to should not because it would hurt your feelings. Why can't you think about their feelings?

(January 3, 2014 at 11:50 pm)Lek Wrote: [This is so strange to me. Surely you're aware that the institution of marriage neither began with your religion, or remained the same during its incorporation into your religion, yes? Care to take me through the thinking that, now that you consider it religious, it's now sacrosanct? I just... I don't get it.

It's an institution in this country (USA). It's always been the same since we became a nation. To Christians, it's considered sacred having begun with Adam and Eve.
[/quote]And the constitution guarantees freedom of religion, which does not mean freedom to force your religion onto others. What if homosexuals want to form their own church & say that marriage is sacred to them & that they want to ban straight marriage. Would you be okay with that, because after all, it is sacred to them.

(December 17, 2013 at 2:54 pm)NoraBrimstone Wrote:

(December 17, 2013 at 8:39 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: What is hilarious is that (currently a discussion with a religious friend) their bigest objection is that the "churches" will be FORCED to marry gay couples?

Sorry but WTF? hock:

Yes, that argument was going around here, too. Probably still is. lol
Churches have the right to refuse to marry any couple. Couples where one or both people have been married before get turned down by Churches all the time. They just go and find another Church. The same will happen with this. There are Churches that are planning to offer weddings to same-sex couples, and they were unhappy when Churches were nearly excluded from being permitted to perform the marriages after the Church Of England threw a tantrum about the "Definition Of Marriage" being changed (You know, like the way the Church Of England was founded so that Henry VIII could redefine marriage to enable him to divorce Catherine of Aragon without the Pope's permission and marry Anne Boleyn.)

AHHHHHHHH My Bete Noir

The Church of England was NOT founded by Henry VIIII it was founded by St.Augustine. Henry VIII stayed a Catholic his whole life. He was a schismatic and NOT a heretic. He didn;t divorce Ann Boleyn, he had the marriage annulled.

The Church of England in its modern form dates to Elizabeth I

---

(December 19, 2013 at 11:44 am)NoraBrimstone Wrote:

(December 19, 2013 at 10:50 am)là bạn điên Wrote: The Church of England was NOT founded by Henry VIII. How many fucking time s a year I have to address this

I dunno. One?

Before 1534, the Church Of England was Catholic. I didn't think I needed to clarify that I meant it was then founded as an independent church and faith in its own right. It's hardly relevant to the topic.

What religion do you think the church was in 1535? Certainly wasn't protestant. What religion do you thing England was in 1557? Heres a clue the initials are R.C. and it isn't refomed calvinism

I fellatio'd a man and I liked it.
The taste of that cherry fapstick!

(January 4, 2014 at 3:10 am)Belac Enrobso Wrote: I fellatio'd a man and I liked it.
The taste of that cherry fapstick!

I am SOOOOO happy for you.