Posted on 06/14/2015 6:23:10 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
There's also family invitations, which don't require friendship to turn up in your mailbox. Please see post #22.
No. I found out a young man my wife and I knew decided he was actually a woman and began dressing like one.
She asked me if I wanted to see ‘him’ in the store where ‘he’ was working as a clerk.
I said “No.” I was afraid I wouldn’t be able to stop laughing.
Same same.
Yes, by protesting out front.
Well, what if a packer married a muncher?
BTT!
Why not?... not all christians are christians..
as all jews are not jews.. or Mormons mormons..
some men act like women and actually think they are..
when their men acting like women..
I have declined several wedding invitations. The author is correct that attendance is implicit endorsement of the event being celebrated, and that endorsement is a central aspect of your presence. When a colleague divorced his wife to marry his secretary, I declined the subsequent wedding invitation. When he divorced the new wife to marry the new secretary, I also declined. The second time, he took offense, and I was not invited to the next wedding (to his next secretary).
As for gay “marriage”, I will never attend such a farce, nor will I pretend that it has any connection to holy matrimony. If it is a family member, my response will be as polite as possible, but I will not attend. If someone tries to pressure me or corner me into saying where I stand on that farce, then he had better be ready for an honest answer. I would never give my reasons for declining any business proposition, but I’ll respond clearly if it’s a social invitation and someone will not accept a vague answer.
There is the legal contract that the state recognizes. I don’t care about that. States can do what they want.
My wife and I made a contract before God, with the gathered folks and a Priest as witnesses. She and I could enter into THAT contract. Homosexuals cannot.
My argument has always been that the State has no business in marriage.
I certainly wouldn't and I wouldn't give a hoot about who was hurt, offended or otherwise put off.
Just because it is a relative doesn’t mean I’m going to attend or acknowledge. I have a couple of gay cousins. Didn’t care to associate with them when I was a kid and didn’t know what was up and I don’t today. In the past 25 years, I saw them from afar once at their pos father’s funeral and didn’t speak to them. In fact, didn’t want to attend the funeral so stayed at the car and was only there to chauffer an elderly relative. The female one is a HS girls coach - imagine that. The male one wears tassels on his shoes and posts pictures of him posing pretty with his dogs.
“Well, what if a packer married a muncher?”
lololol......It seems highly unlikely.....I mean “Why would they?”
I am not one to peek into someone’s bedroom, and I resent someone inviting me into theirs as a spectator like the LGBT community does.........
While you weren’t married by the state, you still made a contract and the state lays out the rules by how it is entered into and, more importantly, how it can be dissolved......
Should you and your wife divorce, God forbid, the state will try and see that the rights to assets are protected for both parties......unfortunately the church, nor you and your wife will perform that function.....
Attendance is endorsement.
1Corinthians 5:
[9] I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
[10] Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
[11] But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat [12] For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
[13] But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
No
Well, if the normal American public hadn't let the queers destroy the institution of traditional marriage, it would have been perfect.
Every packer in the US could partner up with a muncher that he could tolerate, and get married...then live separate lives. They'd have health insurance, favorable tax treatment....everything. They wouldn't even have to see each other.
If they had any respect for normals...that's probably what would have happened.
But, of course...THEY DON'T!
Yeah I think you’re right about that!
“Lester Kinsolving used to make the same argument.”
Never heard of him. It sounds like I’m better off for it.
“(Rush hired a lip-reader to find out what they were saying. It included lots of f-bombs.)”
I’m not sure how much stock I put in that...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTRmyXX6ipU
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.