Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In aftermath of Maine, gays step up their attacks on the Church
American Papist ^ | November 5, 2009 | Thomas Peters

Posted on 11/05/2009 10:08:05 AM PST by NYer

click here to read article

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-60 last
To: RobbyS
I understand what you are saying, and many people think that includes the state granting you the right to get married. When you break it down, the state grants you the equivolence of a legal business partnership. You are partners in law as far as owning property. If the state also would say you are legal partners in the care of your kids too, this would allow them to handle the legal issues through the courts without them taking on the religious role of granting you the right to get married, or conducting marriage ceremonies which is a religous function. Does that make sense to you? Can you see how this would keep gays from leaning on the government for a religious marriage license, or a marriage ceremony from a judge or justice of the peace? I feel this ceremonial part of getting married is the exclusive domain of churches, to conduct as their particular doctrine dictates. Thus, the government would grant legal partnerships, and churches would conduct marriage cerimonies over and above the government issued partnership to hetro sexual couples.
51 posted on 11/05/2009 4:47:43 PM PST by 1776 Reborn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: cradle of freedom; RobbyS; massmike
When was there ever same sex marriage in human history?

These relationships were popular in ancient times in Rome and Greece and other civilizations as well. They were probably never elevated to the distinction of marriage but then, historically, were there any truly civil ceremonies to celebrate the union of a man and woman back then? I don't know.

What this teaches us is that, as a civilization, we are crumbling as we return to the pagan roots of society. The Governor the state of NY just issued a Press Release calling for an 'extraordinary' session of the state legislature to resolve certain issues before the end of the year. Among these is 'Providing same-sex couples the same opportunity to enter into civil marriages as opposite-sex couples' As fellow freeper 'massmike' has already pointed out, the governor's ratings can't drop much lower. The legislators have certainly watched the coverage of the vote in Maine and can interpret that to mean votes for or against them in next year's election. From what I understand, there are not enough votes to pass this legislation. Otherwise, you can expect that on next year's ballot, NY citizens will countermand this bill with an electoral vote.

52 posted on 11/05/2009 4:48:24 PM PST by NYer ( "One Who Prays Is Not Afraid; One Who Prays Is Never Alone"- Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“Pagan” if by that you mean a deification of the state, or science. The old pagans, at least, looked for a reality behind appearances. Today’s pagans worship only power.

53 posted on 11/05/2009 5:02:40 PM PST by RobbyS (he)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: 1776 Reborn

IMHO, gays are mad, in the sense that Paul uses the term in Romans. I don’t like the idea of letting mad men set the rules of our society. But as to marriage, I think it more than a contract, and as I said, an institution with a dignity separate from the dignity of the state, and the primary unit of civil society. I don’t want to see society dissolves into a collective of individuals—the literal atomization of our society.

54 posted on 11/05/2009 5:08:52 PM PST by RobbyS (he)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

I’m trying to defend the institution of marriage by removing it from the government and giving it back to
the churches. The gays will get legal unions (partnerships) ultimately from the government, but they don’t have to be
granted marriages if that is part is returned to the church domain. Some people can’t see the distinction, I think there is a huge one.......

55 posted on 11/05/2009 5:16:28 PM PST by 1776 Reborn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: max americana

I’m very sorry to hear it.

56 posted on 11/05/2009 5:26:28 PM PST by OriginalChristian (If you can't get LIFE right, nothing else you think or say matters...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 1776 Reborn
It is shocking if one believes in a separation of politics and religion,

Is that the same seperation that happens when dimocRATS campaign in a black church in Harlem? These people are shameless.

57 posted on 11/05/2009 6:54:48 PM PST by YankeeReb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 1776 Reborn

It’s not Benedict’s Church, it’s Christ’s Church. If you have an issue with the Church’s teaching on homosexuality, bypass the shift manager (Benedict) and go right to the owner (Christ).

I love how the “peace and justice” people bastardize Christ’s time on earth- they try to use him as the poster boy for liberal causes. However, there is an inconvenient truth to Christ: he’s politically incorrect yesterday, today, and forever.

Do you honestly think Christ espoused homosexual relations? Christ loves all, but there is a difference between loving the sin and loving the sinner.

Jesus was a devout Jew who held the importance of Jewish moral law. Homosexual acts were/are verboten among the Jewish people. Hell, Jesus confronted the adulterer woman in the Gospels. Do you think he’d be easier on a gay? No. Atleast heterosexual relations are natural.

Christ also said to the adulterer woman “You are forgiven, sin no more”. The whole gay marriage thing won’t stop homosexual acts, but will only perpetuate and normalize them, which is abominable and contradict’s Christ’s message.

58 posted on 11/05/2009 9:33:24 PM PST by Debacled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jvette

There will be no end to their demands.

If they succeed in gaining monogamous same-sex marriage, they will then move on to getting polygamy and group marriage legalized.

This is part of the master plan of gay activists. First, they wanted to establish the legal concept of same-sex marriage, then move on to legalizing other types of relationships.

What’s troubling to me, and seldom addressed, is that they insist that it has to be marriage or nothing for the gay community. I think that the relationships of married couples raising children is more significant to society than two childless adults of the same sex. Thus, I think it’s appropriate for marriage to be opposite sex, while some other status is the norm for same-sex.

Society should not be forced to treat all types of relationships equally. They are trying to force society to treat same-sex and eventually group relationships in the same way, with the same legal status.

59 posted on 11/06/2009 5:51:59 PM PST by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

They will also use the legality to try to force churches to perform those marriages. They have used it to force business owners to recognize and subsidize same sex partners. You are right, they will push and push.

As a side note, my daughter is a freshman at SDSU. She loves San Diego!

60 posted on 11/07/2009 8:32:02 AM PST by Jvette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-60 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson