Eating catfish is just as sinful as homosexuality

[mal]

Tell me what right they are being denied?

They are choosing not to marry a person of the opposite sex, they have that choice.

It isn't like somebody is saying, "You can't be married!"

They can be married, if they marry somebody of the opposite sex. And they can be married in any church that will marry them as homosexual couples. But they don't have the *right* to force the rest of the world to call their living arrangement "marriage" when it doesn't meet the definition of the word.

Pretty simple, really.

Full marriage rights in all states as would any straight couple. But I see that you support discrimination based on gender.

There is no Discrimination Based on Gender in Marriage Law as it Stands Nationally now.

You can get Married, Bodey...

You just can't Redefine Marriage to Suit your Choice.

Reflect what Nature gave you, or get a Contract.



peace...

 

[mal]

I feel like I've fallen into an argument with mentally retarded children. I sort of feel bad.

So...where IS that ban on murderers getting married?

There's nothing wrong with a pedophile and murderer being given a chance to bond together for the rest of their lives if they're opposite sex, but boy oh boy if 2 law abiding tax paying gay citizens wanna get married my morals won't stand for it!!!!!!

That has to be most Retarded Comparison in the History of this Debate...



peace...

 

[Dr.Drock]

So...where IS that ban on murderers getting married?

There's nothing wrong with a pedophile and murderer being given a chance to bond together for the rest of their lives if they're opposite sex, but boy oh boy if 2 law abiding tax paying gay citizens wanna get married my morals won't stand for it!!!!!!

That has to be most Retarded Comparison in the History of this Debate...



peace...

It's a perfect comparison to a legal marriage and an illegal one.

If someone is a pedophile or a murderer and they want a straight marriage, yay, hooray let's make it happen asap.

If a law-abiding, tax paying gay person wants to get married, certain people with crooked moral compasses have a fit.

 

[mal]

There's nothing wrong with a pedophile and murderer being given a chance to bond together for the rest of their lives if they're opposite sex, but boy oh boy if 2 law abiding tax paying gay citizens wanna get married my morals won't stand for it!!!!!!

That has to be most Retarded Comparison in the History of this Debate...



peace...

It's a perfect comparison to a legal marriage and an illegal one.

If someone is a pedophile or a murderer and they want a straight marriage, yay, hooray let's make it happen asap.

If a law-abiding, tax paying gay person wants to get married, certain people with crooked moral compasses have a fit.

You Defy your Natural Design and the other 95% of Society that doesn't want to call it something it's Naturally NOT, have the Crooked Moral Compass?...

Nice.



peace...

 

[Dr.Drock]

That has to be most Retarded Comparison in the History of this Debate...



peace...

It's a perfect comparison to a legal marriage and an illegal one.

If someone is a pedophile or a murderer and they want a straight marriage, yay, hooray let's make it happen asap.

If a law-abiding, tax paying gay person wants to get married, certain people with crooked moral compasses have a fit.

You Defy your Natural Design and the other 95% of Society that doesn't want to call it something it's Naturally NOT, have the Crooked Moral Compass?...

Nice.



peace...

I'm straight as an arrow, I can assure you that it's quite obvious you've thought about gay sex about 21871638172517587 times more than I have.

95% of society is straight? What's that matter? 95% of people being straight CERTAINLY doesn't mean 95% of people have a problem with gay marriage or homosexuality, nothing anywhere close to that.

In fact, now a majority of americans favor gay marriage being valid.

 

[Political Junky]

Leviticus 11:9-12

Leviticus 11:9-12
King James Version (KJV)
9These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.

10And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

11They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.

12Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

 

[mal]

Leviticus 11:9-12

Leviticus 11:9-12
King James Version (KJV)
9These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.

10And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

11They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.

12Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

Leviticus 11 is about Food...

Leviticus 18 is about Unlawful Sexual Relations...

Jewish Cerimonial Law in 11... Moral Law in 18.

And here's what God said about some things in 18:

21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: Lev. 20.1-5 I am the LORD.

22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Lev. 20.13

23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. Ex. 22.19 · Lev. 20.15, 16 · Deut. 27.21

24 ¶ Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:

Seems God saw Beastiality as "Confusion", but Homosexuality as an "Abomination"...

Stop Comparing Rules about Food to Moral Law...

They have nothing to do with each other and are not even in the same Chapter.

They are 7 Chapters Seperated.



peace...

 

[Dr.Drock]

Leviticus 11:9-12

Leviticus 11:9-12
King James Version (KJV)
9These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.

10And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

11They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.

12Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

Leviticus 11 is about Food...

Leviticus 18 is about Unlawful Sexual Relations...

Jewish Cerimonial Law in 11... Moral Law in 18.

And here's what God said about some things in 18:

21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: Lev. 20.1-5 I am the LORD.

22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Lev. 20.13

23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. Ex. 22.19 · Lev. 20.15, 16 · Deut. 27.21

24 ¶ Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:

Seems God saw Beastiality as "Confusion", but Homosexuality as an "Abomination"...

Stop Comparing Rules about Food to Moral Law...

They have nothing to do with each other and are not even in the same Chapter.

They are 7 Chapters Seperated.



peace...

So you care about Jewish Moral Law but not Jewish Ceremonial Law?




That makes perfect sense............................

 

[mal]

Leviticus 11:9-12
King James Version (KJV)
9These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.

10And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

11They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.

12Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

Leviticus 11 is about Food...

Leviticus 18 is about Unlawful Sexual Relations...

Jewish Cerimonial Law in 11... Moral Law in 18.

And here's what God said about some things in 18:

21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: Lev. 20.1-5 I am the LORD.

22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Lev. 20.13

23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. Ex. 22.19 · Lev. 20.15, 16 · Deut. 27.21

24 ¶ Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:

Seems God saw Beastiality as "Confusion", but Homosexuality as an "Abomination"...

Stop Comparing Rules about Food to Moral Law...

They have nothing to do with each other and are not even in the same Chapter.

They are 7 Chapters Seperated.



peace...

So you care about Jewish Moral Law but not Jewish Ceremonial Law?




That makes perfect sense............................

They aren't Analagous...

They aren't in the same Chapter, and Christs Blood changed MANY things...

But one thing is Consistent from Old to New...

Homosexuality is an Abomination and Sin 100% of the time it's Talked about.

It's this Easy... If you are a Proud Homosexual, you have no place in the Christian Church.

Find another Faith.



peace...

 

[Ravi]

Leviticus 11 is about Food...

Leviticus 18 is about Unlawful Sexual Relations...

Jewish Cerimonial Law in 11... Moral Law in 18.

And here's what God said about some things in 18:

21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: Lev. 20.1-5 I am the LORD.

22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Lev. 20.13

23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. Ex. 22.19 · Lev. 20.15, 16 · Deut. 27.21

24 ¶ Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:

Seems God saw Beastiality as "Confusion", but Homosexuality as an "Abomination"...

Stop Comparing Rules about Food to Moral Law...

They have nothing to do with each other and are not even in the same Chapter.

They are 7 Chapters Seperated.



peace...

So you care about Jewish Moral Law but not Jewish Ceremonial Law?




That makes perfect sense............................

They aren't Analagous...

They aren't in the same Chapter, and Christs Blood changed MANY things...

But one thing is Consistent from Old to New...

Homosexuality is an Abomination and Sin 100% of the time it's Talked about.

It's this Easy... If you are a Proud Homosexual, you have no place in the Christian Church.

Find another Faith.



peace...

Um, homosexuality wasn't mentioned. Anal sex was.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Leviticus 11 is about Food...

Leviticus 18 is about Unlawful Sexual Relations...

Jewish Cerimonial Law in 11... Moral Law in 18.

And here's what God said about some things in 18:

21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: Lev. 20.1-5 I am the LORD.

22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Lev. 20.13

23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. Ex. 22.19 · Lev. 20.15, 16 · Deut. 27.21

24 ¶ Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:

Seems God saw Beastiality as "Confusion", but Homosexuality as an "Abomination"...

Stop Comparing Rules about Food to Moral Law...

They have nothing to do with each other and are not even in the same Chapter.

They are 7 Chapters Seperated.



peace...

So you care about Jewish Moral Law but not Jewish Ceremonial Law?




That makes perfect sense............................

They aren't Analagous...

They aren't in the same Chapter, and Christs Blood changed MANY things...

But one thing is Consistent from Old to New...

Homosexuality is an Abomination and Sin 100% of the time it's Talked about.

It's this Easy... If you are a Proud Homosexual, you have no place in the Christian Church.

Find another Faith.



peace...

So if you don't follow Jewish Moral Law you have no place in a Christian Church.


Thanks, that clears up everything, proceed on.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Leviticus 11:9-12
King James Version (KJV)
9These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.

10And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

11They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.

12Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

Leviticus 11 is about Food...

Leviticus 18 is about Unlawful Sexual Relations...

Jewish Cerimonial Law in 11... Moral Law in 18.

And here's what God said about some things in 18:

21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: Lev. 20.1-5 I am the LORD.

22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Lev. 20.13

23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. Ex. 22.19 · Lev. 20.15, 16 · Deut. 27.21

24 ¶ Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:

Seems God saw Beastiality as "Confusion", but Homosexuality as an "Abomination"...

Stop Comparing Rules about Food to Moral Law...

They have nothing to do with each other and are not even in the same Chapter.

They are 7 Chapters Seperated.



peace...

So you care about Jewish Moral Law but not Jewish Ceremonial Law?




That makes perfect sense............................

Christians eat ham sandwiches and have pig roasts (also prohibited under Judaic law).

My question is........why are Christians beating gays over the head with Judaic law?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Fiddlesticks, oh pompous gasbag. People of different colors got married quite routinely, I promise you. And the definition has always been one man, one woman,

And they have equal protection under the law. Gay people cannot be disciminated against because they're gay. however, they can't be married because MARRIAGE means ... you got it, one of each.

They're perfectly welcome to write wills and such naming one another as beneficiaries, and set up accounts together, and raise children together, and enter into contracts together, and get insurance together, etc. and so forth. There is no right they are being denied...except the right to pretend they meet the definition of married couples.

It was against the law for people of different colors to get married here if one of them was white for 200 years.
Your problem is you have no clue about the facts involved with the history of this country.
You live a sheltered life in LAH LAH land.
If they can do all the things you claim then why not allow them to also get married?
How does that affect you? Are you married? Why do you care?
What is the big deal? It is a NON ISSUE.
Pave the roads, police the streets and 1001 other things COME FIRST.
Figure them out and then we can talk about gay marriage. Until then, who gives a shit? Let them marry. No brainer. Doesn't affect anyone other than the busy body old maids that have nothing else to gossip about.
Sounds like you fit that bill.

Lol...I'm quite well versed in history. You said marriage was only for white people, and you were wrong.

Nor do I live a sheltered life. I know an ignoramus when I see one, and you fit the bill. We are not talking about race, which is a completely different ball of wax. Men and women were denied the right to marry (as other men and women do) based upon their color, and that was wrong. They were actually being denied the right based upon their skin.

Gays aren't being denied the right. They have the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, which is, by definition, what marriage is. If they want some other sort of union, say, a union with a person of the same sex, they are welcome to have that. What they DON'T have a right to do is force people to call their alternate union a "marriage" since it isn't a marriage.

They could just call it something else, but it's all about them forcing their sexual lifestyle into the spotlight.

Actually, they stated mixed marriages were illegal, and they were until 1967.

United StatesMain article: Interracial marriage in the United States

Overturned on 12 June 1967Interracial marriage in the United States has been fully legal in all U.S. states since the 1967 Supreme Court decision that deemed anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional, with many states choosing to legalize interracial marriage at much earlier dates. The United States has many ethnic and racial groups and interracial marriage is fairly common among most of them. Multiracial Americans numbered 6.8 million in 2000, or 2.4% of the population. Now statistics show that they number 6.1 million or 2% in July 2006[12]

Interracial marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As far as saying they have the "right" to marry someone of the opposite gender, yet they DON'T have the right to marry who they actually love.

Sounds more like you're forcing YOUR sexual orientation on the gays.

 

[mal]

Leviticus 11 is about Food...

Leviticus 18 is about Unlawful Sexual Relations...

Jewish Cerimonial Law in 11... Moral Law in 18.

And here's what God said about some things in 18:

21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: Lev. 20.1-5 I am the LORD.

22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Lev. 20.13

23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. Ex. 22.19 · Lev. 20.15, 16 · Deut. 27.21

24 ¶ Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:

Seems God saw Beastiality as "Confusion", but Homosexuality as an "Abomination"...

Stop Comparing Rules about Food to Moral Law...

They have nothing to do with each other and are not even in the same Chapter.

They are 7 Chapters Seperated.



peace...

So you care about Jewish Moral Law but not Jewish Ceremonial Law?




That makes perfect sense............................

Christians eat ham sandwiches and have pig roasts (also prohibited under Judaic law).

My question is........why are Christians beating gays over the head with Judaic law?

Homosexuality is an Abomination Against God EVERY time it's Mentioned in the New and Old Testament... NEVER Embraced... Condoned... Or OK'd...

At no Time did God change his Mind on Fucking your Sister, your Dog or the Same Sex.

Fact.

So pick another Book.



peace...

 

[mal]

As far as saying they have the "right" to marry someone of the opposite gender, yet they DON'T have the right to marry who they actually love.

Sounds more like you're forcing YOUR sexual orientation on the gays.

50 year old Same Sex Siblings can't Marry no matter how much they Love each other.

Irrelevant.

As for Forcing anything...

It is the Homosexual Community that wants to say that they aren't the way Nature Designed them and that Society must Embrace that Defiance as Equal.



peace...

 

[koshergrl]

It was against the law for people of different colors to get married here if one of them was white for 200 years.
Your problem is you have no clue about the facts involved with the history of this country.
You live a sheltered life in LAH LAH land.
If they can do all the things you claim then why not allow them to also get married?
How does that affect you? Are you married? Why do you care?
What is the big deal? It is a NON ISSUE.
Pave the roads, police the streets and 1001 other things COME FIRST.
Figure them out and then we can talk about gay marriage. Until then, who gives a shit? Let them marry. No brainer. Doesn't affect anyone other than the busy body old maids that have nothing else to gossip about.
Sounds like you fit that bill.

Lol...I'm quite well versed in history. You said marriage was only for white people, and you were wrong.

Nor do I live a sheltered life. I know an ignoramus when I see one, and you fit the bill. We are not talking about race, which is a completely different ball of wax. Men and women were denied the right to marry (as other men and women do) based upon their color, and that was wrong. They were actually being denied the right based upon their skin.

Gays aren't being denied the right. They have the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, which is, by definition, what marriage is. If they want some other sort of union, say, a union with a person of the same sex, they are welcome to have that. What they DON'T have a right to do is force people to call their alternate union a "marriage" since it isn't a marriage.

They could just call it something else, but it's all about them forcing their sexual lifestyle into the spotlight.

Actually, they stated mixed marriages were illegal, and they were until 1967.

United StatesMain article: Interracial marriage in the United States

Overturned on 12 June 1967Interracial marriage in the United States has been fully legal in all U.S. states since the 1967 Supreme Court decision that deemed anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional, with many states choosing to legalize interracial marriage at much earlier dates. The United States has many ethnic and racial groups and interracial marriage is fairly common among most of them. Multiracial Americans numbered 6.8 million in 2000, or 2.4% of the population. Now statistics show that they number 6.1 million or 2% in July 2006[12]

Interracial marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As far as saying they have the "right" to marry someone of the opposite gender, yet they DON'T have the right to marry who they actually love.

Sounds more like you're forcing YOUR sexual orientation on the gays.

NO, since marriage is the specific contract between a MAN and a WOMAN, love has nothing whatever to do with whether or not a union is defined as "marriage".

Marriage does not equal "two people love each other". That's just love.

Marriage equals "man and woman are joined together by contract".

If the term meant "love" then I'd be with you, anyone can love anyone.

But it doesn't. It is a specific term for a specific sort of contract, and it is defined by the fact that the participants are of the opposite sex.

End of story. Quit trying to force everybody to accept a new definition. The majority rejects it.

 

[ABikerSailor]

So you care about Jewish Moral Law but not Jewish Ceremonial Law?




That makes perfect sense............................

Christians eat ham sandwiches and have pig roasts (also prohibited under Judaic law).

My question is........why are Christians beating gays over the head with Judaic law?

Homosexuality is an Abomination Against God EVERY time it's Mentioned in the New and Old Testament... NEVER Embraced... Condoned... Or OK'd...

At no Time did God change his Mind on Fucking your Sister, your Dog or the Same Sex.

Fact.

So pick another Book.



peace...

* Of 32,000 verses in the Bible, only five directly mention homosexuality.
* The Qur'an only directly mentions homosexuality once.
* Leviticus, the book of the Bible which stipulates death for homosexuality, requires the same punishment for adultery, pre-marital sex, disobedient children and blasphemy.
* The Biblical Jesus does not condemn homosexuality.
* The destruction of the Biblical city of Sodom was due to their mistreatment of strangers.
* The Bible never condemns same sex marriage.
* The Biblical David and Jonathan had a formal same-sex union.
* 'Traditional marriage' in the Bible includes polygamy.
* No known sacred text forbids same sex marriage.
* Very few sacred texts even mention homosexuality.
* Hindu and other far eastern sacred texts do not condemn homosexuality.
* Homosexuality is not unnatural, it is practised by hundreds of species of animals.

Internet Sacred Text Archive Home

 

[ABikerSailor]

Lol...I'm quite well versed in history. You said marriage was only for white people, and you were wrong.

Nor do I live a sheltered life. I know an ignoramus when I see one, and you fit the bill. We are not talking about race, which is a completely different ball of wax. Men and women were denied the right to marry (as other men and women do) based upon their color, and that was wrong. They were actually being denied the right based upon their skin.

Gays aren't being denied the right. They have the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, which is, by definition, what marriage is. If they want some other sort of union, say, a union with a person of the same sex, they are welcome to have that. What they DON'T have a right to do is force people to call their alternate union a "marriage" since it isn't a marriage.

They could just call it something else, but it's all about them forcing their sexual lifestyle into the spotlight.

Actually, they stated mixed marriages were illegal, and they were until 1967.

United StatesMain article: Interracial marriage in the United States

Overturned on 12 June 1967Interracial marriage in the United States has been fully legal in all U.S. states since the 1967 Supreme Court decision that deemed anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional, with many states choosing to legalize interracial marriage at much earlier dates. The United States has many ethnic and racial groups and interracial marriage is fairly common among most of them. Multiracial Americans numbered 6.8 million in 2000, or 2.4% of the population. Now statistics show that they number 6.1 million or 2% in July 2006[12]

Interracial marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As far as saying they have the "right" to marry someone of the opposite gender, yet they DON'T have the right to marry who they actually love.

Sounds more like you're forcing YOUR sexual orientation on the gays.

NO, since marriage is the specific contract between a MAN and a WOMAN, love has nothing whatever to do with whether or not a union is defined as "marriage".

Marriage does not equal "two people love each other". That's just love.

Marriage equals "man and woman are joined together by contract".

If the term meant "love" then I'd be with you, anyone can love anyone.

But it doesn't. It is a specific term for a specific sort of contract, and it is defined by the fact that the participants are of the opposite sex.

End of story. Quit trying to force everybody to accept a new definition. The majority rejects it.

So, you can get married if you're gay, you just can't marry the person that you'd actually WANT to marry? Sounds like a real joy there.

Incidentally, I have known of couples who DID marry who were gay while I was stationed in the Navy. Wanna know why they did it? So they could live off base.

I still think that gays in LTR's should have the same legal rights as other people who marry. Why? Because a marriage contract comes with some specific legal rights (like access to a person while in the hospital if they're hurt or sick), as well as tax benefits.

 

[mal]

Christians eat ham sandwiches and have pig roasts (also prohibited under Judaic law).

My question is........why are Christians beating gays over the head with Judaic law?

Homosexuality is an Abomination Against God EVERY time it's Mentioned in the New and Old Testament... NEVER Embraced... Condoned... Or OK'd...

At no Time did God change his Mind on Fucking your Sister, your Dog or the Same Sex.

Fact.

So pick another Book.



peace...

* Of 32,000 verses in the Bible, only five directly mention homosexuality.
* The Qur'an only directly mentions homosexuality once.
* Leviticus, the book of the Bible which stipulates death for homosexuality, requires the same punishment for adultery, pre-marital sex, disobedient children and blasphemy.
* The Biblical Jesus does not condemn homosexuality.
* The destruction of the Biblical city of Sodom was due to their mistreatment of strangers.
* The Bible never condemns same sex marriage.
* The Biblical David and Jonathan had a formal same-sex union.
* 'Traditional marriage' in the Bible includes polygamy.
* No known sacred text forbids same sex marriage.
* Very few sacred texts even mention homosexuality.
* Hindu and other far eastern sacred texts do not condemn homosexuality.
* Homosexuality is not unnatural, it is practised by hundreds of species of animals.

Internet Sacred Text Archive Home

Jesus doesn't Condemn Beastiality or Incest either...

But he did Define Marriage.

Man and Woman. Bet.

And Homosexuality is only Condemned in the New and Old Testaments.

Never otherwise.



peace...

 

[WorldWatcher]

NO, since marriage is the specific contract between a MAN and a WOMAN, love has nothing whatever to do with whether or not a union is defined as "marriage".

Not true for a couple of reasons. There are mulitple countries in the world and mulitple religions that define "marriage" (whether civil or religious) as a man and MORE THAN ONE woman.

In this country in 9 legal entities that recognize Civil Marriage as between non-related consenting adults. "A MAN and A WOMAN" is not universal.

Marriage does not equal "two people love each other". That's just love.

True enough. Civil Marriage establishes as a government public act (i.e. contract) a family relationship where non existed before. Love is not required.

You can enter into a Civil Marriage with no religious component and not have it recognized by a religious organization. You can also enter into a Religious Marriage with no civil recognition.

Under the context of secular law, there is Civil Marriage which exists with the execution of the "contract" under the law.

Marriage equals "man and woman are joined together by contract".

Depends on where you live. In some places that is true. In other places it is two non-related consenting adults. In other places it is multiple (i.e. more than two) adults.

But it doesn't. It is a specific term for a specific sort of contract, and it is defined by the fact that the participants are of the opposite sex.

No it's not, that's an opinion. It's defined by the law (when addressing Civil Marriage) and the definition changes depending on location.

End of story.

Hardly. Attitudes are changing.

2000 number of entities recognizing Same-sex Civil Marriage = 0

2000 percentage supporting Same-sex Civil Marriage ~ 35%

2011 number of entities recognizing Same-sex Civil Marriage = 9

2011 percentage supporting Same-sex Civil Marriage ~ 53%

Quit trying to force everybody to accept a new definition. The majority rejects it.

>>>>