Because its a sin and anyone who calls themselves a Christian is commanded in the Bible to have no fellowship with the works of darkness but rather reprove them.
Since the Dawn of Civilization marriage has been between a man and a Woman.
If you can marry a same sex person, why not your horse or the coffee table? What part of society does this build up? This is more about Sodom & Gomorrah and tearing down of the standards of our civilization.
Passing a law or a court order calling a same sex relationship a "marriage" will not change what it actually is. It is not marriage and never will be. The legal benefits of marriage are relatively minor, particularly for those who cannot have children. The social benefits of compulsory approval of gay relationships are almost certainly non-existent. The gay lobby will discover, even if they eventually win, that it's a hollow victory that will not change reality. Biology will still discriminate against them by preventing them from having children naturally. Scripture will still discriminate against them by stating that their unnatural relationship is unnatural. Their own tendencies will discriminate against them: I have had such couples as neighbors, co-workers, and relatives, and the percentage of those couples who stayed together "till death do us part" is zero. And those who are compelled by law to act as if they don't find homosexuality revolting? Even a far left liberal should be able to figure out how effectively that will win over photographers, bakers, wedding venue owners, and others compelled by force to serve the demands of the gay activists.
Conversely,
the primary motivating incentive for a leftist is to assuage sin-guilt by proving to themselves that they are a “good person”.
This is done primarily through advocacy, less frequently through works, but never do they acknowledge that they are inherently NOT a “good person” whose works and advocacy count for nothing in the eyes of the final Judge.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
The definition of the word is clear, and no ranting or screeching by homosexuals will change it. The word "marriage" means exactly what it has always meant.
Homosexual acts, with or without love, do not alter the definition of a word. Neither does political pressure.
Abortion
Both sides are asking the wrong question. The right questions is: why is the government involved in marriage, a religious ceremony, in the first place?
Situations change, the marriage will end like it never occurred. Drew Carey did this on his TV show a dozen years ago to keep his boss in the country, King of Queens did it so two roommates could earn a TV, and Adam Sandler and Kevin whatsisname did it in a movie for whatever reason. The only difference was that they pretended to be gay. Change the law to any two people, and they won't even bother with that.
Why a Good Person SHOULD vote Against Same-Sex “Marriage”
(More accurate...since GOOD is not relative.)
One problem with same sex marriage is that it normalizes a clearly deviant behavior. Being attracted to members of the same sex instead of the opposite sex is obviously a pretty severe mental disorder IMO. Normalizing this requires that homosexuality be treated as the equivalent of heterosexuality in schools, language, TV, etc. It therefore promotes this deviancy which does not produce children (something society has an interest in). I do not agree that the present marriage law is unfair to gays. If a gay man wants to marry a woman he has the same right as a straight man.
I like Prager a lot, but think that he is off on this “fairness” argument.
I know that he deems it “unfair” that a blind person cannot be an airline pilot, or that a tone-deaf individual cannot become an orchestra conductor. Unfair how? That’s just the way it is.
Marriage exists primarily to give individuals some sense of lineage, familial descent and ancestry, not to provide two men, two women or a man and his pet turtle some sort of satisfaction about themselves. Hopefully love will strengthen the former, but society has no legitimate interest in whether or not it will fortify the latter.
It has been said that the more tolerant society is of homosexuality, the more of it it gets. This certainly seems true wherein as American society began to loosen these strictures we heard, “Oh, no. We’d never push for the likes of marriage. We just want to be left alone and unpersecuted for our “choice”. Yet here we are, now to be chastised and even fired from employment if the “gay marriage” mantra is not endorsed and codified and expanded.
Yet expanded to what? as the so-called “progressive” agenda is never satisfied, and must take on more and more of society’s “wrongs” until as we’ve seen even in our lifetimes as in Greece, and parts of “egalitarian” western Europe, it comes crashing in on itself toward anarchy, or even worse, Islamism from which there is no dissent.
These “economic” failings might at first glance seem divorced from homosexuality, but they are related in the permissive sense of society that progressivism endorses.
I fear for my granddaughter and the America she will have to grow up in.
There is no such thing as “same sex marriage”, it is just two homosexuals trying to screw companies out of paying for employee medical insurance.
Prager is the textbook RINO.
He acquiesces to the cultural pressure to accept homosexual BEHAVIOR and merely draws the line at marriage. This is surrender, and the sodomites know it.
Not eating pork is unfair to pig farmers and the pork industry; but we don’t force pork down the throats of Jewish children in schools, nor encourage the schools to call their parents bigots for not eating pork.
The ads here in WA seem to run 20 to 1 against Referendum 74.
The title begs the conversed to be asked: Can a “good” person vote FOR same-sex “marriage.”
Given that they’re not deluded or coerced, I say an unqualified “no.”
fairness?
This is a twisting of thought, making no sense. How about the difference between evil and good?
In war we kill the enemy. But it is evil to kill another person ... one not attacking the person in self defense. What one person calls good, some will call evil. There is no compromise between good and evil.
The Holy Bible containing the Holy Writ is the standard, Almighty God gave to man to tell men/women the standard for living a good life, pleasing to God.
The fact there are atheists, does not make the Word of God any less Sovereign.
From the beginning the evil (Satan) deceived the woman and man.
The same thing is still happening and it is called good.
Jehovah God, Let us not be deceived LORD, let us sincerely repent. Forgive us our sins and lead us in the way to eternal live with Thee, in Jesus name amen.
We are to love our fellow man as Jesus has loved us.
We are to love the Lord God with all our heart, soul strength, and mind.
BTTT!
Opponents of same sex 'marriage' are ALSO unfair to men who want to marry their sisters - fathers who want to marry their daughters, men who want to marry their goats, women who want to marry their fathers, men who want to marry 20 women, women who want to marry 500 illegals and get a diamond ring from each of them...
The list is almost endless - those friggin conservative haters do NOT understand the 'luv' of a man for his horse...and pig and goat... or the guy who says ever since he was a young child he knew he wanted to be married to many many women... and have them all added to his company's health insurance plan.
Marriage bump...