It’s astounding to me that even people who have well-established church doctrine to use as cover, if they’re too fearful to use their own Biblical principles for their reason, still cave to the sodomite agenda out of fear. The Catholic Church does not sanction sodomite “marriage”, you would think that Rubio, as a Catholic in presumed good standing, would at least use centuries-old church doctrine as a cover if he’s too afraid to just stand on Biblical principle on his own.
...I’d have to talk it over with the wife.
Sure we’re opposed to that ‘openly’, in your face, sinful relationship and detest to homosexual oppression targeted against Christians.
But rhetorically speaking wouldn’t we have to be a close friend/relative to be invited to a gay wedding?
That changes everything.
imo the fact that this BS becomes a campaign issue is the EPIC FAIL of our current state of affairs.
I’m waiting for one candidate who has the guts to answer this simply as:
“There would be no ‘marriage’ to attend. There is no such thing as homosexual ‘marriage.’ “
I won’t hold my breath, but that would be the best answer to hear.
As the article correctly states, any “marriage” that takes place after a divorce is not a marriage in the true and traditional sense, anymore that a union between two people of the same gender/sex. Unfortunately for our society divorce and subsequent “remarriage,” pushed by the onslaught of No-Fault Divorce, paved the way for the eventual and further desecration of marriage. I realize that sometimes the marital relationship may seem untenable, but those who do get a divorce and then go on to get “married” to someone else (regardless of their gender) need to take a look in the mirror and realize that they too are part of the problem.
The correct terminology should be “homosexual fake marriage”.
It’s not gay. It isn’t real. And it certainly has nothing to do with the union of one man and one woman.
I’m still curious if Cruz would attend.
A lot of supporters said he answered that question, maybe they can tell us.
A couple I know dealt with this issue a couple of years back when her step sister was getting “married” to another lesbo. This couple is moderately liberal, so it was interesting to watch their deliberations: 1) No way they were taking their children around the perverts, 2) They felt bad that nobody from their family would be attending, 3) Felt some obligation to go, since they felt some happiness that the step sister’s life had become more settled, 4) Ultimately ended up not going because they didn’t want to participate in a pretend “wedding” between two women, 5) Sent a gift.
“Sorry, I can’t go. That sort of thing is damned by the God I serve, and if I go, I’ll be damned by God also.”
How absurd.
Does anyone who opposes homosexual "marriages" seriously believe that, if a state says it's OK, that two men or two women can actually marry each other?
Can a state define that water is no longer wet? Is it up to states whether or not fire burns, or whether or not water freezes at 32F?
If a friend or family member invited you to a crack party or ask you to go with them while they got an abortion....
I don’t like the question as it doesn’t go far enough. Would you go to a gay wedding with a male gorilla as best man and a female rhesus monkey as maid of honor, with a chimpanzee as the ring bearer? Well, would you? Would you? Would you? If not, are you a transspeciesophobe? Bigot! Bigot!