Originally Posted by Guest

What you say in your second statement above is correct. But, here is the problem. The CIVIL rights of homosexuals has not been the issue, as civil unions have been allowed for some time. The problem erupted when there was an insistence that they be allowed to be married in churches and in the eyes of God. To those of us of faith, who perceive marriage as a holy sacrament, and based on biblical scripture, as between a man and a woman (note the Bible speaks in terms of husbands and wives), it then becomes an abomination from that perspective. To me, it does not matter whether I view homosexuality as right or wrong - just like anyone else they are Americans and deserve the same respect and civil rights as any citizen of this country. On that we can agree. I just don't understand the push to desecrate other people's religious beliefs when they already had the rights of every other married couple, with the recent additions of healthcare benefits for partners, adoption, etc.

As far as your first statement above, the concern is that the effects can be far reaching. In other words, what's next? Who else will take claim to marriage rights and how much further will it dilute the sanctity of the biblical marriage covenant? IMHO, it is the beginning of a moral free fall.

And what will your reaction be if the Supreme Court rules later this spring in favor of same-sex marriage in all states? Thirty-seven states already have made same-sex marriage legal, but the highest court's ruling would include all 50 states.

Originally Posted by Guest

And what will your reaction be if the Supreme Court rules later this spring in favor of same-sex marriage in all states? Thirty-seven states already have made same-sex marriage legal, but the highest court's ruling would include all 50 states.

Not sure what you are asking here......my reaction? What would change? Just because society says that something is right that I believe not to be, are you asking if I will change my mind? If so, the answer would be an emphatic "no". The bible I go by tells me that I am in this world but not of it. It also says that in many ways I will be hated by it - so be it - as long as my response is not to hate back, I'm good with that.

Originally Posted by Guest

What is moral? Who determines what is or is not Moral? I feel sermon on the mount is moral. I feel FOX network is immoral. I have witnessed the most perverted immoral marages between a man and a women. I have also witnessed the most loving wonderful marriages between two women and also between two men as the most honorable loving relationships in my long life.

Going from the Sermon on the Mount to Fox News on your personal sliding scale of morality ...

I think that is a bit unhinged actually. ... in fact a lot unhinged.

Originally Posted by Guest

Going from the Sermon on the Mount to Fox News on your personal sliding scale of morality ...

I think that is a bit unhinged actually. ... in fact a lot unhinged.

Thank you! I was struggling with how to answer that post, but I think you did it for me.

Originally Posted by Guest

It's difficult to understand how a gay or lesbian marriage effects a heterosexual marriage. If you don't believe in same-sex marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex, but don't infringe on another person's civil rights.

The term gay marriage is an oxymoron. Civil unions, equal protection, non-discrimination ... no one is opposed to that.

But rewriting the definition of marriage that has permeated civilization for thousands of years, and opening the doors to the inevitable perversions that "progressives" will eventually insist on (polyamory, polygamy, pedophilia, bestiality etc) is foolish and destructive to society.

This should not even be a controversial topic.

Originally Posted by Guest

The term gay marriage is an oxymoron. Civil unions, equal protection, non-discrimination ... no one is opposed to that.

But rewriting the definition of marriage that has permeated civilization for thousands of years, and opening the doors to the inevitable perversions that "progressives" will eventually insist on (polyamory, polygamy, pedophilia, bestiality etc) is foolish and destructive to society.

This should not even be a controversial topic.

Wow, talk about a homophobe!

Personal best regards.

Wow..... you are all living in the dark ages. Sexual preference is genetic.... not a choice. Start reading scientific facts and not mythological nonsense from religious texts. Of course Obama is against it.... any logical thinking sane person would be. This is what leads to categorizing and prejudice.

Originally Posted by Guest

Wow, talk about a homophobe!

Personal best regards.

Not homophobic at all ... just a statement of reality when it comes to what's best for society overall.

Originally Posted by Guest

here is the problem. The CIVIL rights of homosexuals has not been the issue, as civil unions have been allowed for some time. The problem erupted when there was an insistence that they be allowed to be married in churches and in the eyes of God. To those of us of faith, who perceive marriage as a holy sacrament, and based on biblical scripture, as between a man and a woman (note the Bible speaks in terms of husbands and wives), it then becomes an abomination from that perspective. To me, it does not matter whether I view homosexuality as right or wrong - just like anyone else they are Americans and deserve the same respect and civil rights as any citizen of this country. On that we can agree. I just don't understand the push to desecrate other people's religious beliefs when they already had the rights of every other married couple, with the recent additions of healthcare benefits for partners, adoption, etc.

I'm sorry but your analysis and concerns are completely contrary to the gay rights movements goals. Marriage is not a civil union. There are specific laws both Federal and state which clearly differentiate the benefits of marriage vs a civil union. Married people can file a joint tax return, civil union cannot. Married people can inherit without tax or probate, civil union cannot. Married can have pensions, hospital visits, protection of privileged communications etc etc. What the gay rights movement has been fighting to achieve for decades it that all the civil rights afforded to married couples apply fully to married gay couples. Not a single gay rights organization has ever insisted that a religious ceremony must be made available although they have wished it would be and many denominations that read the same holy book you do have agreed that they will perform those ceremonies. Marriage is a legal contract. A religious marriage that does not include a legal contract (a government issued marriage license signed and returned to the state) is just a religious service. Your religion is not under attack. Your attempt to force your religion's definition of a proper legal contract is under attack as it denies equal protection to gay persons.

Your errant belief that the rights of gay persons to adopt is established shows your lack of awareness of the thrust of the GOP to thwart gay adoption. Today
Florida House Approves Bill To Let Adoption Agencies Refuse Gay Parents

There is no legal recognition of civil unions by the state of Florida. The courts have ruled that Florida must allow gay marriage just this year. Prior to that Florida did not, and our GOP leaders fought every attempt to allow either civil unions or marriage. Some democratic controlled local governments had establish domestic partnership regulations but they did not have any force on the state courts.

Originally Posted by Guest

WOW, Sir with the utmost respect, I am apauled at your understanding of human rights and the Christion Faith. Please, go to see your spiritual leader/advisor for counseling. You are so far off the accepted normal, it brings tears to my eyes. I love all man, but I must say, I have reason to fear you sir.

Dear Guest: Point to one word thought or action in my post that would give you reason to fear me? Did I not approach this topic with an acknowledgement of concern and respect for GLBT's. Did I not say hate the sin but love the sinner.

Personally I believe that each person has his/her personal view and relationship with God. I am at a loss when it comes to the God concept but do marvel at the greatness of nature and the heavens This a work in progress for me owing to the incongruity of nature suffer the little children, etc

My views with topics such as GLBT, abortion and along those lines is as a naturalist. So that in this case I view homosexuality as abnormal just the same as any malady. I have heard many homosexuals announce that homosexuality was not a choice and that since a young age knew they felt different. Does that not denote a biological difference ? And the concept of man-women relationship fit nature's demands for replenishing the species. Yes I understand the advancement in science on this issue but it still has to evolve around nature's model

What homosexuals call defending their civil rights really boils down to you must accept and validate that my homosexuality is normal.

Ask any straight guy how he feels if approached by a gay. The last thing you will hear any of them say is that they were "flattered".

In summary I have no desire to interfere in the lives of people who just want to fit into society but don't brow beat me to accept this lifestyle as normal because it is not and passing a law in every state to legitimize same sex marriage doesn't make it right it only demonstrates the political cowardice of our national leaders and justices.

Personal Best Regards:

Originally Posted by Guest

I'm sorry but your analysis and concerns are completely contrary to the gay rights movements goals. Marriage is not a civil union. There are specific laws both Federal and state which clearly differentiate the benefits of marriage vs a civil union. Married people can file a joint tax return, civil union cannot. Married people can inherit without tax or probate, civil union cannot. Married can have pensions, hospital visits, protection of privileged communications etc etc. What the gay rights movement has been fighting to achieve for decades it that all the civil rights afforded to married couples apply fully to married gay couples. Not a single gay rights organization has ever insisted that a religious ceremony must be made available although they have wished it would be and many denominations that read the same holy book you do have agreed that they will perform those ceremonies. Marriage is a legal contract. A religious marriage that does not include a legal contract (a government issued marriage license signed and returned to the state) is just a religious service. Your religion is not under attack. Your attempt to force your religion's definition of a proper legal contract is under attack as it denies equal protection to gay persons.

Your errant belief that the rights of gay persons to adopt is established shows your lack of awareness of the thrust of the GOP to thwart gay adoption. Today
Florida House Approves Bill To Let Adoption Agencies Refuse Gay Parents

The problem with our communication seems to be the difference between your definition of marriage and mine. Many couples (straight and gay) have civil ceremonies at a court house. Although by law, that is a legal union, it is not considered a marriage by many people of faith. To those of faith, marriage is a holy sacrament performed in a church where one is making a commitment before God and asking for His blessing. The latter is what I am opposed to for gay couples - not sure if that clears up the intent of my comments or not. As far as any other legal rights that gays are able to obtain through our legislature, I have no control over that, so it is what it is. I am just not convinced that it is a good thing for society as a whole and that is JMHO.

Originally Posted by Guest

The problem with our communication seems to be the difference between your definition of marriage and mine. Many couples (straight and gay) have civil ceremonies at a court house. Although by law, that is a legal union, it is not considered a marriage by many people of faith. To those of faith, marriage is a holy sacrament performed in a church where one is making a commitment before God and asking for His blessing. The latter is what I am opposed to for gay couples - not sure if that clears up the intent of my comments or not. As far as any other legal rights that gays are able to obtain through our legislature, I have no control over that, so it is what it is. I am just not convinced that it is a good thing for society as a whole and that is JMHO.

Do you also oppose divorced couples from being married in a church where one is making a commitment before God? How about adulterers? Aren't both of these sins mentioned in the bible?

Originally Posted by Guest

Dear Guest: Point to one word thought or action in my post that would give you reason to fear me? Did I not approach this topic with an acknowledgement of concern and respect for GLBT's. Did I not say hate the sin but love the sinner.

Personally I believe that each person has his/her personal view and relationship with God. I am at a loss when it comes to the God concept but do marvel at the greatness of nature and the heavens This a work in progress for me owing to the incongruity of nature suffer the little children, etc

My views with topics such as GLBT, abortion and along those lines is as a naturalist. So that in this case I view homosexuality as abnormal just the same as any malady. I have heard many homosexuals announce that homosexuality was not a choice and that since a young age knew they felt different. Does that not denote a biological difference ? And the concept of man-women relationship fit nature's demands for replenishing the species. Yes I understand the advancement in science on this issue but it still has to evolve around nature's model

What homosexuals call defending their civil rights really boils down to you must accept and validate that my homosexuality is normal.

Ask any straight guy how he feels if approached by a gay. The last thing you will hear any of them say is that they were "flattered".

In summary I have no desire to interfere in the lives of people who just want to fit into society but don't brow beat me to accept this lifestyle as normal because it is not and passing a law in every state to legitimize same sex marriage doesn't make it right it only demonstrates the political cowardice of our national leaders and justices.

Personal Best Regards:

Did you feel the same when inter-racial marriages was legalized?

Originally Posted by Guest

Did you feel the same when inter-racial marriages was legalized?

Then it was based on a man and a woman. The closet door was not even ajar at that time!