(March 19, 2012 at 5:42 pm)tobie Wrote:(March 19, 2012 at 5:25 pm)StatCrux Wrote:(March 19, 2012 at 5:12 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:(March 19, 2012 at 5:06 pm)StatCrux Wrote: EXACTLY the problem is the term marriage, the proposals are to allow civil "marriages" for same sex couples, not civil "partnerships" how many times do I have to state this? If the proposals were to allow civil partnerships to be performed by religious institutions, fine. Its the use of the term marriage that is the problem
Nobody is forcing your church, or any church to perform such ceremonies. Only those churches who wish to perform them.
Where the FUCK do you get off trying to dictate to the rest of the religious (and non-religious) what the meaning of marriage is?
maybe you're right, lets just give up and start having cermonies for women to marry their cats and be done with the whole issue...I'm sure other churches would be happy to perform the "marriage" ceremony for cat lovers...
So a marriage between two people of the same sex is a ridiculous as a marriage between two different species? I thought we'd moved on from the dark ages.
Hey "who the FUCK am I" to say that marriage to cats is wrong? I'm sure cat lovers would use similar arguments to justify their views on marriage
