Who Cares who Marries Who?

[SANDMAN5]

How about the surety of the Muslim cleric who has dedicated his life to Alah?  That guy is full of crap... and we agree on that.  But YOUR cleric, is beyond question.
Nice.
Bottom line... logic need not apply. 
Jabba 

FWIW
It appears YOU have been suckered by Satan. It happens. You may not know it but
the Bible predicts other religions (such as Islam)..... "false prophets....wolves in
sheeps clothing....etc". And this was several centuries before Islam was invented.

[ComradBlack]

How about the surety of the Muslim cleric who has dedicated his life to Alah?  That guy is full of crap... and we agree on that.  But YOUR cleric, is beyond question.

Nice.

Bottom line... logic need not apply. 

Jabba 

I see you still fail to understand simple concepts
And your gonna be the arbitrator on Logic ?
Thats laughable.


A Muslim marriage has significant meaning to Muslum's.
A Hindu marriage has significant meaning to Hindu's
A Jewish marraige has significant meaning to Jews.
A Judeo-Christian marriage has significant meaning to Christians.
A Secular marriage has significant meaning to secularist.

As one can ascertain ... the term "Marriage" can and does carry many defintions and meaning to different people.
And I think that is the heart of the debate on this subject.

You appear to want to turn this topic of marriage into a debate about which one of the above belief systems is more right or more wrong.
Which isnt the topic at hand.
The topic is Marriage and who cares ... and obviously different people have presented differing convictions that stem from their personal worldview.

Marriage is a subjective term that is relative and tentative to a individual based on his or hers perception of reality.

Ive seen you on the other hand ... have a few times seen your post immediately following my post ( which suggest they are directed at my previous post)
With silly comments that have no logical connection to with what Ive written.

Just mindless conjectures framed in way to perhaps make yourself appear brilliant ... but falls short because there is no way to connect your postulation with what I have written.
Or illogical

If it is your objective to demean others of their religious beliefs on marriage ... such as in your quote ... "Islam" ... then have at it.

Redherrings are also know as a fallacy of logical debate.

[Jabba]

I have NO intent of demeaning anyones religious beliefs. 

I don't want churches to perform or honor gay marriages.  I just think they should be able to file a joint tax return, and have spousal survivorship rights.  The legal right to make end of life decisions.  Stuff like that.  That's as far as it goes. 

It doesn't matter what WE think.  They are gonna be queer no matter what.  I can't see the skin off my ass if we let them file a joint tax return, and make an end of life decision for each other.

That's really the extent to which I support their cause. 

I don't know if I'd let me son play with the adopted son of a gay couple or not.  That's an individual decision.  I have not had to make yet. 

I think the whole gay marriage thing is a distraction to the real issues.  Gov't is too big.  Taxes are too high.  We give illegal aliens too much money and services. and we keep electing the same sphincters that built the house of cards to begin with.

Small potatoes and a distraction.

Jabba   

[Chrisj CMA]

I have NO intent of demeaning anyones religious beliefs.  

I don't want churches to perform or honor gay marriages.  I just think they should be able to file a joint tax return, and have spousal survivorship rights.  The legal right to make end of life decisions.  Stuff like that.  That's as far as it goes.  

It doesn't matter what WE think.  They are gonna be queer no matter what.  I can't see the skin off my ass if we let them file a joint tax return, and make an end of life decision for each other.

That's really the extent to which I support their cause.  

I don't know if I'd let me son play with the adopted son of a gay couple or not.  That's an individual decision.  I have not had to make yet.  

I think the whole gay marriage thing is a distraction to the real issues.  Gov't is too big.  Taxes are too high.  We give illegal aliens too much money and services. and we keep electing the same sphincters that built the house of cards to begin with.

Small potatoes and a distraction.

Jabba    

Ya, its beyond my comprehension how a "Christian" preacher can in the name of a Holy God marry homosexuals.  Unlike Gmans out of the church wedding I think God most certainly honored that marriage, how in the world to these preachers think God is going to honor what is an abomination to him just because its IN a church.  Its just a piece of paper for the government yet they want to pretend God is blessing them

[Willow]

G-man and Comradblack,

I don't want to muddy the waters on your discussion, but the idea that a marriage has to be performed in a church by a minister of the church is a view that is almost unique to the Catholic (but not catholic) Church.  Most Christian denominations don't hold that view.

The concept of the church sanctioning a marriage is based on tradition and not any specific command of Scripture.  I'm not saying it's a bad thing.  A couple who chooses to have their wedding by a minister in a particular church is giving public testimony to their intent to make their union a part of and accountable to the church community.  Most of my children have chosen to become wedded in a public, Christian ceremony.  I'm glad they did.  A couple of my children have chosen to become married in a quiet, civil ceremony.  They are no less married.

As to Jabba's comment, no man is above question.  My worldview holds that the minister involved in a wedding ceremony represents the church and is not standing as God's infallible proxy.  It is certainly hoped that the local church will represent God to the congregation and to the community at large, but it is not always so.

The Scriptures tell us that God sends his rain upon the just and the unjust.  I guess depending on how much rain and when that may be a blessing or a curse.  There's no magic in having a particular ceremony to recognize a couple's commitment in marriage. 

Okay, you may now return to your previous diatribes.

[Paxton]

OK:
So God blesses everyone, including prostitutes and people who marry in prison.
God also loves gays but up to a point, especially if you think you have none
or Closeted ones are amongst your loved ones.

If you ever find out that someone in your family decided to become Gay / or Lesbian,
"pity the fool," married or not.

Since according to some Bibles, "Gayness" is an abomination, they're all going to hell
with Obama, who supports them and continues to indoctrinate his daughters
unto the gay life! What a snob!

"You can safely assume you've created God in your own image
when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do."
Anne Lamott

[ComradBlack]

I have NO intent of demeaning anyones religious beliefs. 

I don't want churches to perform or honor gay marriages.  I just think they should be able to file a joint tax return, and have spousal survivorship rights.  The legal right to make end of life decisions.  Stuff like that.  That's as far as it goes. 

It doesn't matter what WE think.  They are gonna be queer no matter what.  I can't see the skin off my ass if we let them file a joint tax return, and make an end of life decision for each other.

That's really the extent to which I support their cause. 

I don't know if I'd let me son play with the adopted son of a gay couple or not.  That's an individual decision.  I have not had to make yet. 

I think the whole gay marriage thing is a distraction to the real issues.  Gov't is too big.  Taxes are too high.  We give illegal aliens too much money and services. and we keep electing the same sphincters that built the house of cards to begin with.

Small potatoes and a distraction.

Jabba   

Ok ... I think were finding common ground because I'm in complete agreement with your entire post.

[ComradBlack]

OK:
So God blesses everyone, including prostitutes and people who marry in prison.
God also loves gays but up to a point, especially if you think you have none
or Closeted ones are amongst your loved ones.

If you ever find out that someone in your family decided to become Gay / or Lesbian,
"pity the fool," married or not.

Since according to some Bibles, "Gayness" is an abomination, they're all going to hell
with Obama, who supports them and continues to indoctrinate his daughters
unto the gay life! What a snob!

"You can safely assume you've created God in your own image
when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do."
Anne Lamott

You do realize that the word "abomination" is translated from no less than three Hebrew words   ... tow`ebah ... pigguwl ... sheqets ... and the context in which it is used must be taken into consideration.

[SANDMAN5]

God also loves gays but up to a point,

Could you post a reference to exactly where that point is?
My Bible says God loves everybody......but He may not love
what they're doing.

[ComradBlack]

G-man and Comradblack,

I don't want to muddy the waters on your discussion, but the idea that a marriage has to be performed in a church by a minister of the church is a view that is almost unique to the Catholic (but not catholic) Church.  Most Christian denominations don't hold that view.

The concept of the church sanctioning a marriage is based on tradition and not any specific command of Scripture.  I'm not saying it's a bad thing.  A couple who chooses to have their wedding by a minister in a particular church is giving public testimony to their intent to make their union a part of and accountable to the church community.  Most of my children have chosen to become wedded in a public, Christian ceremony.  I'm glad they did.  A couple of my children have chosen to become married in a quiet, civil ceremony.  They are no less married.

As to Jabba's comment, no man is above question.  My worldview holds that the minister involved in a wedding ceremony represents the church and is not standing as God's infallible proxy.  It is certainly hoped that the local church will represent God to the congregation and to the community at large, but it is not always so.

The Scriptures tell us that God sends his rain upon the just and the unjust.  I guess depending on how much rain and when that may be a blessing or a curse.  There's no magic in having a particular ceremony to recognize a couple's commitment in marriage. 

Okay, you may now return to your previous diatribes.

God also warns us to not make oaths in his name in vain.

Which is what Chrisitans do during a Judeo-Christian marraige ceremony .. regardless of denomination.

Matthew 23:20-22 (NLT)  
    When you swear 'by the altar,' you are swearing by it and by everything on it. [21] And when you swear 'by the Temple,' you are swearing by it and by God, who lives in it.
[22] And when you swear 'by heaven,' you are swearing by the throne of God and by God, who sits on the throne.

[The Anvil]

[ComradBlack]

God also loves gays but up to a point,

Could you post a reference to exactly where that point is?
My Bible says God loves everybody......but He may not love
what they're doing.

Ummm ... Psalm 5:5 (NLT)  
        Therefore, the proud will not be allowed to stand in your presence,
           for you hate all who do evil.

Very strong words directed at those that purposly do evil.


I think the onus is on you to find it in the Bible that says God loves everyone.

Gods Love and Grace is available to everyone ... but not all receive.

[Chrisj CMA]

God also loves gays but up to a point,

Could you post a reference to exactly where that point is?
My Bible says God loves everybody......but He may not love
what they're doing.

Exactly Sandman5.....Some so called Christians (the ones from Westboro Babtist) twist it to say that God hates homosexuals.  To God sin is sin.....you are either perfect (ya right) or you are a sinner....Jesus died for all of us while we were yet sinners.  God loves even the ones that reject him.....You can be a little bit a sinner or a lot bit a sinner, or you can Not do the sins you think are more important than than some others; dont make you any less of a sinner.......But God said enough about how he feels about the twisted lust humans are willing to justify to do whatever they feel they need to with their bodies to show me that he (God) isint showing up to homosexual weddings unless he first rewrites the first chapter of Romans.

[Willow]

CHALLENGE: To engage in constructive commentary keeping our dialogue within reasonable bounds of civility and respect for one another.
This, without sacrificing our differing values and our integrity.

Paxton, it's possible that you posted this earlier tongue-in-cheek, but I'm going to assume it was sincere.  If so, is the challenge only for others, or do you include yourself?  It seems you have a tendency to abandon the respectful presentation of your own views and burst into sarcasm laden ridicule o0f the beliefs of others.  Is the respect only called for when people's view at least in large part match your own?

Since according to some Bibles, "Gayness" is an abomination, they're all going to hell with Obama, who supports them and continues to indoctrinate his daughters
unto the gay life! What a snob!

It once was that you, Paxton, stated your position succinctly and everyone pretty much knew where you stood.  Quite honestly, you and I don't agree on much, including our tastes in motorcycles, but I found a certain level of reasonable respect in the way you communicated.

Lately, it seems you've take on a practice of sarcastically inserting President Obama into almost every post you make, most notably into threads which have nothing to do with politics or in which few or none have previously invoked the name.  I do realize why you adopted that tact.  I 'm sure you were irritated by a few others who tend to do the a similar thing in attacking the President.  Don't you find some desire within you, though, to rise above that style of distraction?

I would like to issue to you and others a reasonable challenge regarding the use of ridicule:

CHALLENGE: To engage in constructive commentary keeping our dialogue within reasonable bounds of civility and respect for one another.
This, without sacrificing our differing values and our integrity.

Professing themselves to be wise
they became fools ...
Paul, the Apostle
 (KJV translation)

   

[Clark]

CHALLENGE: To engage in constructive commentary keeping our dialogue within reasonable bounds of civility and respect for one another.
This, without sacrificing our differing values and our integrity.

Paxton, it's possible that you posted this earlier tongue-in-cheek, but I'm going to assume it was sincere.  If so, is the challenge only for others, or do you include yourself?  It seems you have a tendency to abandon the respectful presentation of your own views and burst into sarcasm laden ridicule o0f the beliefs of others.  Is the respect only called for when people's view at least in large part match your own?

Since according to some Bibles, "Gayness" is an abomination, they're all going to hell with Obama, who supports them and continues to indoctrinate his daughters
unto the gay life! What a snob!

It once was that you, Paxton, stated your position succinctly and everyone pretty much knew where you stood.  Quite honestly, you and I don't agree on much, including our tastes in motorcycles, but I found a certain level of reasonable respect in the way you communicated.

Lately, it seems you've take on a practice of sarcastically inserting President Obama into almost every post you make, most notably into threads which have nothing to do with politics or in which few or none have previously invoked the name.  I do realize why you adopted that tact.  I 'm sure you were irritated by a few others who tend to do the a similar thing in attacking the President.  Don't you find some desire within you, though, to rise above that style of distraction?

I would like to issue to you and others a reasonable challenge regarding the use of ridicule:

CHALLENGE: To engage in constructive commentary keeping our dialogue within reasonable bounds of civility and respect for one another.
This, without sacrificing our differing values and our integrity.

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWN

Professing themselves to be wise
they became fools ...
Paul, the Apostle
 (KJV translation)

   

[SANDMAN5]

I think the onus is on you to find it in the Bible that says God loves everyone.

I thought I posted this already....but it's not showing up! Sooooo,
how about John 3:16? Good enough? Don't try to mix the Old and
New Testaments. They are very different in some important places!!

[PAVALKER]

Illegal alien benefits/aid etc, and the costs to the taxpayers is a very significant issue as well... but this is the "Who Cares Who Marries Who?" thread, not the illegal alien thread.   Yep.... those temporary workers are filing tax returns and getting benefits or added tax refunds for which they did not earn or deserve (using excess dependents as an example).  The IRS is aware of it, and the news has reported it.... but our government fails to do a thing about it... but leave the loophole open so we can continue to pay.   But this isn't that illegal alien thread....

[Paxton]

Willow;
You are 'bout 90% correct. Good and close enough to almost hitting the nail on the head. But not quite.
Notwithstanding, ALL your points are well taken.

Sandman5;
I was been sarcastic in my last post and some others, as many members have. I keep attempting to expand on my understanding
of other folks' believes, hoping to make a point.
Yes there is sarcasm in my posts. Increasingly so these days. Is it working? Probably not.

I am trying a different angle in hopes to get through the often mindless dialogue. As others, I have engaged in sarcasm and satire too. ???

I think Willow's post sheds a lot of light on my not-so-cool approach, which rubs some folks the wrong way. I fully understand that.
I think that Willow does too.

As everyone knows by now, I am an Obama supporter and I fully support Gay marriage, not for religious reasons,
but because I believe that it is the right thing to do.
BTW, the wife DOES NOT support Gay Marriage AT ALL.

I could not count the times when certain folks have expressed their disagreements in less than dignified ways. Not an issue w/me.

But no matter what I might say, it will keep coming and it is all welcome.
Some I acknowledge and reply, others I ignore for my own reasons.

Yes, I have been abrasive and even insulting at times. Indeed, very recently so. Yet I have the fortitude to eat my words and,
at times to express my regrets to the recipient about my less than respectful behaviors; if I get a chance.

In hindsight Willow has intervened and has deleted one most-stupid and embarrassing post of mine, for which I am grateful.

So, I keep traveling back and forth to Rome. Stupidly or not, I have learned here that "when in Rome, do as the Romans do."
A sad commentary in this context.

Of course, there are many more reasonable and respectful people in this site than not.
In fact, even those who fiercely disagree with me, have been most helpful on Valkyrie-related matters.
And I am grateful.

In closing, yes, I believe that one can uphold his/her dignity w/o compromising one's values. But when confronted with poop,
I carry my own shovel.

"I've often mused over the idea that madness is actually a sane reaction to an insane world."
Stephanie Ericsson

[Karen]

Could we please reopen the last word thread? It was much more fun.

[donaldcc]

Could we please reopen the last word thread? It was much more fun.

I never imagined a simple link to a news story I read would morph into this.  
Sorry  

[Willow]

Could we please reopen the last word thread? It was much more fun.

Whatcha talkin' 'bout, Willis?    ???   

[B]

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. (John 3:17 NIV84)

If Christ didn't come to condemn, what gives me the right? Just Sayin.

[musclehead]

I have a feeling the Limbaugh isn't easy to live with. however, things may or may not work out in our personal lives.

I've been married to one gal for almost 26 years, decided that was how it was gonna be and with HARD work it has worked out thus far.

I don't judge how many times people have been married, my neighbor has been married 3 times, now he's found the 'one' at the young age of 76.    (we'll see )

[musclehead]

Could we please reopen the last word thread? It was much more fun.

NO! (heheheheHAHAHAHAHA,.... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....... hack, cough.... (like I have any say in the matter  )

[Paxton]

Karen;
I can only have the last word at home! Which is... "... Whatever you say, Babe. 

[The Anvil]

I've been married to one gal for almost 26 years, decided that was how it was gonna be and with HARD work it has worked out thus far.

I've been married for 14 years myself. Same woman for 17.

I don't judge how many times people have been married

Normally I don't either, but I make exceptions for people who speak of the institution as if they are defenders of it's sanctity when they crap all over it themselves by treating it as a casual encounter.

[Rams]

Gov't is too big.  Taxes are too high.  We give illegal aliens too much money and services. and we keep electing the same sphincters that built the house of cards to begin with.

Jabba   

This I agree with.  I also believe in riding the wind. 

[3fan4life]

At the heart of this debate is whether or not the government should officially sanction gay marriage.

I have long held the belief that it shouldn't, then it occurred to me to ask,

Why does the government have the right to sanction "any" marriage ?

AND

When did the government get into the marriage business anyway ?

The following partly answers the second question:

History of Marriage Licenses in America

George Washington was married without a marriage license.  So, how did we come to this place in America where marriage licenses are issued?

There was no requirement to obtain a marriage license in colonial America. When you read the laws of the colonies and then the states, you see only two requirements for marriage. First, you had to obtain your parents permission to marry, and second, you had to post public notice of the marriage 5-15 days before the ceremony.


Historically, all the states in America had laws outlawing the marriage of blacks and whites. In the mid-1800’s, certain states began allowing interracial marriages or miscegenation as long as those marrying received a license from the state. In other words they had to receive permission to do an act which without such permission would have been illegal.

Blacks Law Dictionary points to this historical fact when it defines "marriage license" as, "A license or permission granted by public authority to persons who intend to intermarry." "Intermarry" is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary as, "Miscegenation; mixed or interracial marriages."

Not long after these licenses were issued, some states began requiring all people who marry to obtain a marriage license. In 1923, the Federal Government established the Uniform Marriage and Marriage License Act (they later established the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act). By 1929, every state in the Union had adopted marriage license laws.

So, government got into the "marriage business" as a means to control interracial marriage. 

If you ask me that is NOT exactly the most honorable means of getting into the business.   

By being in the marriage business government gained more "Control" over its citizens.



The Ohio Bar association's official stance on government sponsored marriage is:

“When you repeat your marriage vows, you enter into a legal contract. There are three parties to that legal contract: 1) you; 2) your spouse; and 3) the state of Ohio. The state is a party to the contract because under its laws, you have certain obligations and responsibilities to each other, to any children you may have, and to Ohio.”

This guy has a pretty harsh take on marriage and government intrusion:

http://www.alimonyreform.org/content/articles/How%20Did%20Government%20Get%20Involved%20in%20Marriage.pdf

So, my view of government sanctioned gay marriage has changed.

I now believe that Christian Evangelicals leading the fight against Gay Marriage are fighting the wrong battle.

The battle that should be fought is one that DEMANDS the end of State sponsored marriage PERIOD.

If the government weren't in the business of sponsoring marriage in the first place then gay marriage would be a NON ISSUE.   


Maybe the governments real interest in allowing gay marriage is to obtain control over a segment of the population that they now have no control over.

Think about this... You can get married on an airplane, under water, on a mountain, in a park, in a church, in your home, on a train, in a tree, while skiing, in a boat, anywhere imaginable;


BUT you can only get a divorce IN A COURT OF LAW.