How does same-sex marriage affect religious freedom?

[Yax]

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: broon
Marriage is and has always been a religious institution. Religion should determine who can and can't get married. The state should not recognize marriage at all because of this. The state should only recognize civil unions and then the state can decide who can enter into a union.

Kiss my ass. Marriage should not be the sole domain of Mythologies and Cults!

there is a difference between marriage and unions....the main one being religion. if you thing all religions are myths and cults then get a union from the state, not a religious mariage. :roll:

I could care less if gay folks get unions from the state, but I'll be dasmned if they can get married in a Christian (or other religions that consider gayness a sin) setting, it simply isn't acceptable, niether are the so called gay christian churches.

this topic belongs in P&N, everytime it gets brought up.

You be damned?:roll: You have no say idiot. Also which Religion, Mythology or Cult will determine who can or cannot be Married? What if one Religion says it's ok and another says it isn't?

You religious fanatics should just mind your own fscking business and leave others alone.

some goes to anti-religious fanatics fscking around in religious business and leave us alone. if you want to find a religion that says gay "marriage"(instead of union) is ok fine, don't call it a marriage/union under christ(or other religions that consider it a sin) is my only problem. pack fudge all you want, its your business not mine, I don't force my religion on you or tell you not to do what you want to do as long it doesn't encroach on my rights. one of the facts about christians is that marriage is a sanctity between a man and woman, anything else can't be a christian marriage, it's simply a union between two people under the states authority (or other religion that does condone same sex unions).

edit: everyone has a say btw, it's something called the 1st amendment.

NO ONE's calling it a CHRISTIAN marriage. We're just saying marriage. Much more general than you think. There are other cultures where people get married too and not all of the people in those cultures are christians.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: axnff
It sounds as if government officials are legally bound to perform a marriage for anyone who asks. It would appear as though any discrimination on their part would result in dismissal. Therefore, they are legally bound to violate their own religious principles for the sake of upholding the law. Not an easy catch-22.

And this is a problem... because? How the hell are christian divorce lawyers getting by? Are you telling me I cannot find any jobs in our current society that a christian is doing that would conflict with the bible? Your own religious principles do not matter when it comes to upholding law.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong
some goes to anti-religious fanatics fscking around in religious business and leave us alone.

Sounds like a good Idea, you don't force your beliefs on us and tell us how to live and we won't do the same to you.

if you want to find a religion that says gay "marriage"(instead of union) is ok fine, don't call it a marriage/union under christ(or other religions that consider it a sin) is my only problem.

Hell if they want they can make their own religion and in the eyes of our Government it should l be just as legitimate as Christianity

pack fudge all you want,

You're projecting now

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong
some goes to anti-religious fanatics fscking around in religious business and leave us alone. if you want to find a religion that says gay "marriage"(instead of union) is ok fine, don't call it a marriage/union under christ(or other religions that consider it a sin) is my only problem. pack fudge all you want, its your business not mine, I don't force my religion on you or tell you not to do what you want to do as long it doesn't encroach on my rights. one of the facts about christians is that marriage is a sanctity between a man and woman, anything else can't be a christian marriage, it's simply a union between two people under the states authority (or other religion that does condone same sex unions).

edit: everyone has a say btw, it's something called the 1st amendment.

I love the homophobic reference. The reality is that religion is simply your weapon not your motive.

 

[BigToque]

Originally posted by: Alphathree33

Originally posted by: FoBoT
is polygamy legal in canada?

No, but interestingly enough that was the threat that opposition leader Stephen Harper made: if we make gay marriage legal, polygamy could be next.

I don't normally like 'slippery slope' arguments, but he does have a point. We are shifting from one absolute to another. The first absolute is "marriage is fine." The next one is "gay marriage is fine too." But in a completely relativistic society, ANY kind of marriage or union between any number and any types of individuals would be equally recognized.

I think Harper's point is that the line has to be drawn somewhere.

This gay marriage bill is the result of a powerful gay lobby, not some overall sense of moral relativism.

I don't think that polygamy will ever be seriously considered here (I'm not saying it wont). One of the things is that polygamy has been around for a long time and everytime people try to push for it, it has been turned down. It's only relatively recently that same-sex marriages have been pushed and it seems that a fair number of people support it (I don't have any stats but I'm sure it's more than the number that support polygamy)

 

[FlyLice]

Definition of marriage for the last 10,000 years: Union of one man and one woman. Gays are trying to change that definition, and the general population lay the smack down with state laws banning gay "marriage." Civil unions on the other hand, I think a little over half the country don't mind, however it is still debatable. The govt recognizes "marriages" because it is beneficial to society as a whole. 1 Man 1 Woman = kids, population grows, economy grows, society benefits, etc. However, legitimizing gay actions i.e. civil unions, does not benefit society as a whole: 1 man + 1 man = death, no more people.

Stop blaming the "Christians" for keeping the definition of marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman because it's not a "Christian" thing. I guess Jesus got it right when they said we'd be persecuted for our beliefs...

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: FlyLice
Definition of marriage for the last 10,000 years: Union of one man and one woman. Gays are trying to change that definition, and the general population lay the smack down with state laws banning gay "marriage." Civil unions on the other hand, I think a little over half the country don't mind, however it is still debatable. The govt recognizes "marriages" because it is beneficial to society as a whole. 1 Man 1 Woman = kids, population grows, economy grows, society benefits, etc. However, legitimizing gay actions i.e. civil unions, does not benefit society as a whole: 1 man + 1 man = death, no more people.

Stop blaming the "Christians" for keeping the definition of marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman because it's not a "Christian" thing. I guess Jesus got it right when they said we'd be persecuted for our beliefs...

Whose persecuting who again? And is your argument that America is underpopulated? I rest my case.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: FlyLice
Definition of marriage for the last 10,000 years: Union of one man and one woman. Gays are trying to change that definition, and the general population lay the smack down with state laws banning gay "marriage." Civil unions on the other hand, I think a little over half the country don't mind, however it is still debatable. The govt recognizes "marriages" because it is beneficial to society as a whole. 1 Man 1 Woman = kids, population grows, economy grows, society benefits, etc. However, legitimizing gay actions i.e. civil unions, does not benefit society as a whole: 1 man + 1 man = death, no more people.

Stop blaming the "Christians" for keeping the definition of marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman because it's not a "Christian" thing. I guess Jesus got it right when they said we'd be persecuted for our beliefs...

Actually it's not all Christians, just those who try to force their beliefs on others.

 

[lobadobadingdong]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong
some goes to anti-religious fanatics fscking around in religious business and leave us alone.

Sounds like a good Idea, you don't force your beliefs on us and tell us how to live and we won't do the same to you.

if you want to find a religion that says gay "marriage"(instead of union) is ok fine, don't call it a marriage/union under christ(or other religions that consider it a sin) is my only problem.

Hell if they want they can make their own religion and in the eyes of our Government it should l be just as legitimate as Christianity

pack fudge all you want,

You're projecting now

wo what's the problem then? you get what you want, you leave us alone, we leave you alone? and sorry about projecting my frustration, I get very pensive when my religious beliefs and rights are unfoundedly attacked. espesially when people start name calling on civil subjects. (this is why I have P&N blocked in my profile, and why this should go to P&N)

edit: for those not actuall reading, I don't care if gays get state unions, as long as it doesn't violate the rights of religious institutions (I.E. force cermonies that are against various religious doctrines)

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong
some goes to anti-religious fanatics fscking around in religious business and leave us alone.

Sounds like a good Idea, you don't force your beliefs on us and tell us how to live and we won't do the same to you.

if you want to find a religion that says gay "marriage"(instead of union) is ok fine, don't call it a marriage/union under christ(or other religions that consider it a sin) is my only problem.

Hell if they want they can make their own religion and in the eyes of our Government it should l be just as legitimate as Christianity

pack fudge all you want,

You're projecting now

wo what's the problem then? you get what you want, you leave us alone, we leave you alone? and sorry about projecting my frustration, I get very pensive when my religious beliefs and rights are unfoundedly attacked. espesially when people start name calling on civil subjects. (this is why I have P&N blocked in my profile, and why this should go to P&N)

Then don't say that Marriage is the sole domain of Religions!

 

[FlyLice]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: FlyLice
Definition of marriage for the last 10,000 years: Union of one man and one woman. Gays are trying to change that definition, and the general population lay the smack down with state laws banning gay "marriage." Civil unions on the other hand, I think a little over half the country don't mind, however it is still debatable. The govt recognizes "marriages" because it is beneficial to society as a whole. 1 Man 1 Woman = kids, population grows, economy grows, society benefits, etc. However, legitimizing gay actions i.e. civil unions, does not benefit society as a whole: 1 man + 1 man = death, no more people.

Stop blaming the "Christians" for keeping the definition of marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman because it's not a "Christian" thing. I guess Jesus got it right when they said we'd be persecuted for our beliefs...

Whose persecuting who again? And is your argument that America is underpopulated? I rest my case.

You've been blinded by the media, who blame the Christian right for preventing pro-gay "rights" legislature. Ask a Jew, a Muslim, a Shihk, a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Native American if he thinks human society should change the definition of marriage to mean union of two people, same sex included. Like I said, it's not a "Christian" thing, it's a human society issue. If you spoiled lefties were to demand such things outside this country, you would be laughed at and them stoned to death.

But because this country was based on "Christian" principles, we protect your rights and beliefs, no matter how stupid they may be. But when a minority group of people start shoving their beliefs to the rest of society, don't think society will just stay put and take it up the ass (no pun intended).

 

[n0cmonkey]

No one but gays should care. It doesn't ruin the concept of marriage any more than divorce.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: FlyLice

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: FlyLice
Definition of marriage for the last 10,000 years: Union of one man and one woman. Gays are trying to change that definition, and the general population lay the smack down with state laws banning gay "marriage." Civil unions on the other hand, I think a little over half the country don't mind, however it is still debatable. The govt recognizes "marriages" because it is beneficial to society as a whole. 1 Man 1 Woman = kids, population grows, economy grows, society benefits, etc. However, legitimizing gay actions i.e. civil unions, does not benefit society as a whole: 1 man + 1 man = death, no more people.

Stop blaming the "Christians" for keeping the definition of marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman because it's not a "Christian" thing. I guess Jesus got it right when they said we'd be persecuted for our beliefs...

Whose persecuting who again? And is your argument that America is underpopulated? I rest my case.

You've been blinded by the media, who blame the Christian right for preventing pro-gay "rights" legislature. Ask a Jew, a Muslim, a Shihk, a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Native American if he thinks human society should change the definition of marriage to mean union of two people, same sex included. Like I said, it's not a "Christian" thing, it's a human society issue. If you spoiled lefties were to demand such things outside this country, you would be laughed at and them stoned to death.

But because this country was based on "Christian" principles, we protect your rights and beliefs, no matter how stupid they may be. But when a minority group of people start shoving their beliefs to the rest of society, don't think society will just stay put and take it up the ass (no pun intended).

But it's ok for the Majority to shove their beliefs down the throats of the Minority?

 

[FlyLice]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: FlyLice

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: FlyLice
Definition of marriage for the last 10,000 years: Union of one man and one woman. Gays are trying to change that definition, and the general population lay the smack down with state laws banning gay "marriage." Civil unions on the other hand, I think a little over half the country don't mind, however it is still debatable. The govt recognizes "marriages" because it is beneficial to society as a whole. 1 Man 1 Woman = kids, population grows, economy grows, society benefits, etc. However, legitimizing gay actions i.e. civil unions, does not benefit society as a whole: 1 man + 1 man = death, no more people.

Stop blaming the "Christians" for keeping the definition of marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman because it's not a "Christian" thing. I guess Jesus got it right when they said we'd be persecuted for our beliefs...

Whose persecuting who again? And is your argument that America is underpopulated? I rest my case.

You've been blinded by the media, who blame the Christian right for preventing pro-gay "rights" legislature. Ask a Jew, a Muslim, a Shihk, a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Native American if he thinks human society should change the definition of marriage to mean union of two people, same sex included. Like I said, it's not a "Christian" thing, it's a human society issue. If you spoiled lefties were to demand such things outside this country, you would be laughed at and them stoned to death.

But because this country was based on "Christian" principles, we protect your rights and beliefs, no matter how stupid they may be. But when a minority group of people start shoving their beliefs to the rest of society, don't think society will just stay put and take it up the ass (no pun intended).

But it's ok for the Majority to shove their beliefs down the throats of the Minority?

How is keeping a 10,000 year old status quo shoving a belief down anyone's throat? This is the first time in a history of man that a group has suggested chaning the definition of marriage to included same sex individuals.

But this is America. When a minority want something, the majority tend to compromise. That's why the majority of Americans would OK civil unions. It's the whole make us legit and call it marriage thing that causes a reaction from the population.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: FlyLice

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: FlyLice

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: FlyLice
Definition of marriage for the last 10,000 years: Union of one man and one woman. Gays are trying to change that definition, and the general population lay the smack down with state laws banning gay "marriage." Civil unions on the other hand, I think a little over half the country don't mind, however it is still debatable. The govt recognizes "marriages" because it is beneficial to society as a whole. 1 Man 1 Woman = kids, population grows, economy grows, society benefits, etc. However, legitimizing gay actions i.e. civil unions, does not benefit society as a whole: 1 man + 1 man = death, no more people.

Stop blaming the "Christians" for keeping the definition of marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman because it's not a "Christian" thing. I guess Jesus got it right when they said we'd be persecuted for our beliefs...

Whose persecuting who again? And is your argument that America is underpopulated? I rest my case.

You've been blinded by the media, who blame the Christian right for preventing pro-gay "rights" legislature. Ask a Jew, a Muslim, a Shihk, a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Native American if he thinks human society should change the definition of marriage to mean union of two people, same sex included. Like I said, it's not a "Christian" thing, it's a human society issue. If you spoiled lefties were to demand such things outside this country, you would be laughed at and them stoned to death.

But because this country was based on "Christian" principles, we protect your rights and beliefs, no matter how stupid they may be. But when a minority group of people start shoving their beliefs to the rest of society, don't think society will just stay put and take it up the ass (no pun intended).

But it's ok for the Majority to shove their beliefs down the throats of the Minority?

How is keeping a 10,000 year old status quo shoving a belief down anyone's throat? This is the first time in a history of man that a group has suggested chaning the definition of marriage to included same sex individuals.

But this is America. When a minority want something, the majority tend to compromise. That's why the majority of Americans would OK civil unions. It's the whole make us legit and call it marriage thing that causes a reaction from the population.

Why should it even concern you?

 

[Phoenix86]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
But it's ok for the Majority to shove their beliefs down the throats of the Minority?

Funny, but isn't that kinda the definition of democracy? Majority gets it's way, minority gets it's say?

 

[Red Dawn]

Anyway back to the topic. Same Sex Marriages obviously has no effect on Religious Freedom.

 

[lobadobadingdong]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong
some goes to anti-religious fanatics fscking around in religious business and leave us alone.

Sounds like a good Idea, you don't force your beliefs on us and tell us how to live and we won't do the same to you.

if you want to find a religion that says gay "marriage"(instead of union) is ok fine, don't call it a marriage/union under christ(or other religions that consider it a sin) is my only problem.

Hell if they want they can make their own religion and in the eyes of our Government it should l be just as legitimate as Christianity

pack fudge all you want,

You're projecting now

wo what's the problem then? you get what you want, you leave us alone, we leave you alone? and sorry about projecting my frustration, I get very pensive when my religious beliefs and rights are unfoundedly attacked. espesially when people start name calling on civil subjects. (this is why I have P&N blocked in my profile, and why this should go to P&N)

Then don't say that Marriage is the sole domain of Religions!

since the official definition seems to have changed (I just looked it up online at websters dictionary, this definition is different that what my 10yr old dictionary has) call it marriage if you want, I suppose the definiation I grew up with needs to be changed to Christian Marriage (or "enter religion" Marriage) instead of simply marriage.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdongthere is a difference between marriage and unions....the main one being religion. if you thing all religions are myths and cults then get a union from the state, not a religious mariage. :roll:

I could care less if gay folks get unions from the state, but I'll be dasmned if they can get married in a Christian (or other religions that consider gayness a sin) setting, it simply isn't acceptable, niether are the so called gay christian churches.

this topic belongs in P&N, everytime it gets brought up.

"so called gay christian churches?"
That sounds mighty tolerant :roll:
Seems to me Jesus was all about loving everyone, and I thought that the primary basis for christianity was the belief that Jesus was the son of god, and died for our sins. Sounds like a valid christian church to me.
If there was only ONE path of christianity, your argument might hold water, but it seems to me that there's more than one christian church, because they disagree on certain things. Are they all not valid as well? Or do you know which branch of christianity is the right and true one?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
But it's ok for the Majority to shove their beliefs down the throats of the Minority?

Funny, but isn't that kinda the definition of democracy? Majority gets it's way, minority gets it's say?

It didn't work that way in the 2000 Presidential Elelction!

 

[FlyLice]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: FlyLice

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: FlyLice

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: FlyLice
Definition of marriage for the last 10,000 years: Union of one man and one woman. Gays are trying to change that definition, and the general population lay the smack down with state laws banning gay "marriage." Civil unions on the other hand, I think a little over half the country don't mind, however it is still debatable. The govt recognizes "marriages" because it is beneficial to society as a whole. 1 Man 1 Woman = kids, population grows, economy grows, society benefits, etc. However, legitimizing gay actions i.e. civil unions, does not benefit society as a whole: 1 man + 1 man = death, no more people.

Stop blaming the "Christians" for keeping the definition of marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman because it's not a "Christian" thing. I guess Jesus got it right when they said we'd be persecuted for our beliefs...

Whose persecuting who again? And is your argument that America is underpopulated? I rest my case.

You've been blinded by the media, who blame the Christian right for preventing pro-gay "rights" legislature. Ask a Jew, a Muslim, a Shihk, a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Native American if he thinks human society should change the definition of marriage to mean union of two people, same sex included. Like I said, it's not a "Christian" thing, it's a human society issue. If you spoiled lefties were to demand such things outside this country, you would be laughed at and them stoned to death.

But because this country was based on "Christian" principles, we protect your rights and beliefs, no matter how stupid they may be. But when a minority group of people start shoving their beliefs to the rest of society, don't think society will just stay put and take it up the ass (no pun intended).

But it's ok for the Majority to shove their beliefs down the throats of the Minority?

How is keeping a 10,000 year old status quo shoving a belief down anyone's throat? This is the first time in a history of man that a group has suggested chaning the definition of marriage to included same sex individuals.

But this is America. When a minority want something, the majority tend to compromise. That's why the majority of Americans would OK civil unions. It's the whole make us legit and call it marriage thing that causes a reaction from the population.

Why should it even concern you?

How would you feel if some rogue religion/jacked your ritual/customs and called it their own? Marriage is a scared institution for religious people. Don't you think if some f@gs started getting "married" and said hey look at me I'm the same as you, people would be like wtf bitch you're not the same DlAF.

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: FlyLice
How is keeping a 10,000 year old status quo shoving a belief down anyone's throat?

So let me get this straight. You are arguing that, right or wrong, we should preserve 10000 year old status quos, simply because we've been doing them for so long?

Thank God the Spanish obliterated the Mayans or we would be here arguing that we should continue to slaughter virgins on the vernal equinox just 'cause we always did before!

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: FlyLice

How would you feel if some rogue religion/jacked your ritual/customs and called it their own? Marriage is a scared institution for religious people. Don't you think if some f@gs started getting "married" and said hey look at me I'm the same as you, people would be like wtf bitch you're not the same DlAF.

LOL, that must have been how the Roman's felt when the Rogue Religion Christianity hijacked their rituals and customs and called it their own:laugh:

 

[lobadobadingdong]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdongthere is a difference between marriage and unions....the main one being religion. if you thing all religions are myths and cults then get a union from the state, not a religious mariage. :roll:

I could care less if gay folks get unions from the state, but I'll be dasmned if they can get married in a Christian (or other religions that consider gayness a sin) setting, it simply isn't acceptable, niether are the so called gay christian churches.

this topic belongs in P&N, everytime it gets brought up.

"so called gay christian churches?"
That sounds mighty tolerant :roll:
Seems to me Jesus was all about loving everyone, and I thought that the primary basis for christianity was the belief that Jesus was the son of god, and died for our sins. Sounds like a valid christian church to me.
If there was only ONE path of christianity, your argument might hold water, but it seems to me that there's more than one christian church, because they disagree on certain things. Are they all not valid as well? Or do you know which branch of christianity is the right and true one?

Jesus wan't all about loving everyone (and was certainly not tolerant), he was all about saving the sinners from a devils hell, you have to accept Jesus as your personal saviour, and ask forgiveness of your sins, (and do your best to sin no more) someone living a sin, and intending on continuing in that sin will not be saved. (I'm sure there are people more versed on scripture than me who can point out the details)...and there is only ONE path of Christianity (read the book of Acts if you don't believe me), although there are several doctrines.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: FlyLice

How would you feel if some rogue religion/jacked your ritual/customs and called it their own? Marriage is a scared institution for religious people. Don't you think if some f@gs started getting "married" and said hey look at me I'm the same as you, people would be like wtf bitch you're not the same DlAF.

LOL, that must have been how the Roman's felt when the Rogue Religion Christianity hijacked their rituals and customs and called it their own:laugh:

:laugh: