Posted on 12/04/2014 8:40:00 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
They don’t care. They want marriage destroyed anyway.
Why would they mind collateral damage?
It'll come in through Islam.
Muslims, despite their supposed rules, are the most homosexual group on Earth. Just ask anyone who has been to the Middle East or another Islamic area.
Why not Incestuous Marriage?
As long as two People Love each other and they have reached the age of consent, what the heck.
Once the Dam breaks there is no way to stop the flood.
The same arguments which have been made for homosexual marriage, can and will be made for polygamy and group marriage.
I think the author is right. Those who have pushed to change the definition of marriage cannot be intellectually honest and oppose changing the definition to include more than two people.
It is now a mainstream view among the judges who are imposing homosexual marriage that it is discriminatory to limit people to an opposite sex partner. Its not a stretch that judges will also decide that not allowing polygamy is also discriminatory.
I would.point out that the reason we have so many states allowing homosexual marriage nowadays is due to activists judges. I would take issue with how widely accepted homosexual marriage has become. Only a handful of states went through the political process to change the definition of marriage.
There’s a push to separate Sacramental Marriage from Civil Marriage. Is it time to get on board yet?
Are there homosexual marriage advocates on FR?
Your questioning reminds me how richly we as a nation deserve the flame death God heaped upon the Sodomites.
My millennial renters may give a clue to the millennial generation. One asked me for a copy of their rental agreement that both signed. They are making a cohabitation agreement and needed documents that they both signed.
Polygamy is a great beer.http://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/28908/1683/
You think that I wrote this piece?
There are towns (and societies, I think) which will be less tolerated than Sodom and Gomorrah —
From Mat 10:
5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, 6 but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 As you go, proclaim the good news, ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’[c] 8 Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers,[d] cast out demons. You received without payment; give without payment. 9 Take no gold, or silver, or copper in your belts, 10 no bag for your journey, or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff; for laborers deserve their food. 11 Whatever town or village you enter, find out who in it is worthy, and stay there until you leave. 12 As you enter the house, greet it. 13 If the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it; but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. 14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town. 15 Truly I tell you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.
No.
Your questioning reminds me how richly we as a nation deserve the flame death God heaped upon the Sodomites.
Yeah, talk about "unfairness." God owes Sodom an apology!
Regards,
Roger Olsen has his head up...er, in the sand. Those traditional arrangements aren't changing. Blanket statements like that are just inflammatory...as well as wrong.
There have ALWAYS been "alternative" marriage arrangements when people thought they could get away with it. Monogamy works the best because it's what God wanted and wants for us. He "built" us for it and it's good for the spouses and children.
Adultery has always been wrong, sinful and destructive, as least with sane people who have some feelings of love and loyalty.
There has always been prostitution too, but that doesn't make it good. Where it's legal you find that people aren't one iota happier, healthier or more content.
Trite but true: happiness comes from within, from God and from living a good life. Anything different is propaganda put out by miserably unhappy, jealous and/or dysfunctional people. Roger Olsen sounds like a poster boy for said propaganda.
.
.
So there. :o)
Marriage is a religious institution and under the first amendment, any attempt by any government agency to regulate, tax or define marriage is a violation of the constitutional right to the free exercise of any religion (however unpopular or bizarre it may seem) that permits it.
If you can find a church that will marry you, that's between you and (your) God.
Anything else is a business contract.
To me this is a silly argument, the people that support gay marriage will be fine with polygamy, and those whose first reaction is that it is different, will quickly come around to persuasion just as they came around to support gay marriage.
Gay marriage supporters are not suddenly going to get all shocked at polygamy.
Nonsense, Jefferson and Washington had legal marriages and the continental congress and following congresses were passing federal marriage benefits law in 1780, 1794, 1798, 1802, and so on.
The thing about any religion can follow it's own marriage practice is true, gays and polygamists could be married by that standard in 1790, 1850, or the 1950s, or today, it just wouldn't be a legal marriage.
Even Common Law marriage is either legal or illegal, if it is legal, then it is equal to any other marriage in the eyes of the law, even federal law, if it isn't legal, then to the law you are just two people living at the same address.
Yes, we have libertarians and rinos here, they would correct you about calling them “advocates” and just say things like “they don’t care one way or the other”, some hide behind the “state out of marriage”, or other have ways to avoid having to just say it out plain.
“There’s a push to separate Sacramental Marriage from Civil Marriage. Is it time to get on board yet?”
I think that is the fallback position and is a reasonable one should it be mandated that churches must not discriminate on the basis on sexual orientation. They may need to then create their own rules based on Church membership, being in good standing and not call it Sacramental bonding or whatever.
If people want or feel they then need to record a marriage with government institutions they will have to do it separately!
And Mormonism.
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.