Posted on 04/01/2013 4:56:56 AM PDT by xsmommy
The state and federal govts recognize certain relationships in various places in law. With the moral decay in our society we can either attempt to remove all traces of marriage from our laws (which is unlikely to happen) or recognize that people are now free to live in whatever kind of partnership that they wish.
Now, it gets more interesting once they start trying to force everyone to accept gay marriages. But that is another day.
And that is why I said leave it to the states-I think if people in those relationships want to be accepted as being in the mainstream, they might just move to SanFran, somewhere in Vermont, etc to live and work, because there are people in more conservative states who will not accept them as “one of the guys” at work or otherwise-they will be polite and impersonal, and no more.
There is a huge difference between mere tolerance and acceptance/inclusion. I’ve worked with several homosexuals over the years, and that is how they are/were treated by every straight person at work. The more “out” they are, the more they are ignored.
I don’t find most homosexuals very tolerant of straight people in any case-not even my former neighbor was-many of them are clannish, ill mannered and inconsiderate of others. They do not practice what they preach about acceptance or tolerance.
I’m traveling tomorrow, so may not be able to post a thread.
I can do it.
Thanks. If you don’t see one by 8, go ahead.
have you read about it or are you just reacting off the top of your head? because i have only read a little, but the problem that it creates is real. If it is a RULE and rules are to mean something, you can’t pick and choose which rules are meaningful and which are not. Disregarding this rule gives the leftwingers in the Church the cover to disregard anything else they consider inconvenient or abhorrent to their leftwing philosophy. The crux of it is was this a RULE of some sort. Your interpretation is not necessarily the correct one and unless you can point to something that says this is not a big deal, i am going to assume that Fr. Z is correct.
I don’t think you fully understand the point here, bc Protestants do not have a central authority etc. I will look for something that lays out exactly what the point of the controversy is and post it today.
if you have to find out about an engagement like that on facebook some butts need beat!!!
Oh, it’s an April Fool’s Day joke. We had a lengthy conversation the day before and there was no mention of it. I was confident she would have called me before putting it on FB. I was confident it was a joke.
well, oops....ONE of my clocks says it’s after 8 and I posted then realized it was still 4 minutes away. oh, well
You’re turning me on, baby!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.