How does everyone feel on the ruling for same sex marriages in Massachusetts?

[mayor]

Originally Posted by bradedit

Should I have stuck to my vows with a man that was so abusive toward a child? I certainly didn't make the decision lightly, I made a vow and I broke it and I know it was a "good reason"! The other part was if you object to the sex life of gays or the love that they share?

Ah, thank you for clarifying.

At the very least, there should have been an arrest made and your husband should have had to pay for his crime. I can't begrudge you for ending that marriage one bit, though I do know of abusive situations where there is repentance, changed hearts and forgiveness. I'm not saying that would have have occurred in your marriage. I'm just saying that it does happen.

Re: part II. I don't object to gays as people at all. If they want to do abnormal sexual acts in the privacy of their bedrooms I could care less as long as my family is unaffected. However, I disagree with the healthiness and goodness of their choices. But it is their choice.

As for their love for each other, I have male friends that I "love" as well. I would never look at them sexually as I am a heterosexual in a healthy marriage relationship. But I care quite deeply for them. When I say, "love ya man", I mean it.

I have known more than a few people actively living the homosexual lifestyle and I have not found one that is truly at peace. The majority are in crisis situations. Understanding the origins of homosexual behavior (as well as other forms of adultery, and all sin for that matter) reveal the reason that most are troubled individuals just looking for love in all the wrong places.

What I object to is normalizing homosexuality and changing the definition of marriage. There may be a growing population of homosexuals (which does not surprise me as our society goes from corrupt and lost to corrupter and loster), but might does not make right and numbers are not an indicator of what is good.

I am one of those people that recognizes his own imperfections. I am not judging homosexuals. It is not my place. But I am in agreement with God over the act of homosexuality (as I agree with his take on murder, slander, lying, adultery, stealing, etc...). And I can say this admitting that I am guilty of more than one of the above.

Mayor

[CagedTroll]

Originally Posted by mayor

Oh, incidently, if you are battling this on the grounds that those who derive this type of conclusion are Biblical hypocrites... According to Scripture, we are all worthy of condemnation for this sin as well.
Mayor

Wasn't actually in battlemode on this one. But as long as you mention hypocrisy, my feelings on it are that more Christians should take to heart the Scripture you're referencing. Humility is a Christian value I've usually seen a lack of in people that don't break any of the other rules, and that strikes me as hypocritical moreso than a preacher smoking an occasional joint. And the one's with tons of humility are often overburdened by feelings of guilt, reinforced by the "holier-than-thou" sect.

Originally Posted by angusmcgee

And it's a legally binding contract. That's what makes it important. Discussing what we hold sacred, like the sanctity of marriage, is what this forum is all about. A strong marriage between a husband and his (FEMALE) wife is, I believe, a cornerstone of what defines what's good about our culture. And not only our culture, many across this entire planet..

Focusing on "legally binding contract" and "sacred". There's a case that can be made that they really aren't two separate things, but usually there's a distinct line there. Atheists sign and are obligated to uphold all sorts of "legally binding contracts. And they get "married", for no other reason than legality. The service can be done by judge, the captain of a ship, or an Elvis impersonator. It's not always such a sacred thing, but it's still called "marriage" and recognized, by law, in fifty states.

"In short, for all the joy and solemnity that normally attend a marriage, governing marriage is a licensing law." ---Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall

The court's..., "divorcing" itself from the religious aspect of what some people call marriage.

Originally Posted by monkee

I personally don't believe that marriage is a "right" so I don't see this as that kind of issue. I would have no problem with some kind of legal union for purposes of legal issues, medical issues, employee benefits, etc., but I wouldn't call it "marriage" because that's not what it is.

Okay, so the court stayed it's ruling for 180 days, during which time the state legislature is supposed to (but not compelled) to come up with a law that grants same-sex couples the same securities, protections, rights and privileges as heterosexuals. They can call it "Civil Union" or whatever they want. Similar to what they have in Vermont, but more extensive. (Apparently, Vermont's Civil Union law doesn't grant exactly the same rights as marriage even within the state.)

Originally Posted by monkee

I don't believe this is a constitutional issue, either.

Explain that to your congressmen (and President). He's not opposed to what some of them are trying to do, which is: making it a constitutional issue. And even if it's just legislated it's going to become a constitutional issue when someone challenges it in the Supreme Court.

[mayor]

Originally Posted by CagedTroll

Wasn't actually in battlemode on this one. But as long as you mention hypocrisy, my feelings on it are that more Christians should take to heart the Scripture you're referencing. Humility is a Christian value I've usually seen a lack of in people that don't break any of the other rules, and that strikes me as hypocritical moreso than a preacher smoking an occasional joint. And the one's with tons of humility are often overburdened by feelings of guilt, reinforced by the "holier-than-thou" sect.

Sadly, I must concur with you on this one. The problem with many of my Christian brothers and sisters is two-fold.

1) Many of them are Christian in name only. You can call a peach an apple all day long, but its nature will not change. And going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than going to McDonalds makes you a hamburger. So the first obstacle non-Christians must deal with is discerning who the real Christians are. A daunting task seeing that those within the religion are at odds over its definition! But, one that you must consider none-the-less should you choose to be fair to those you would seek to label. If you wish to pursue an accurate definition, we can tackle that in another thread.

2) Those who are Christians frequently attempt to generate humility in an of their own strength and will. The truth is that humility requires a constant, never-ending, ongoing submission to God through Jesus Christ. Whether humility or any other action or attitude we would label as virtuous, we must first recognize that we do not have the resources within us to bring about these attitude changes. They can only come by the very power of God.

So when you see a Christian (assumed to be genuine) with a holier-than-thou attitude, faking their humility, the odds are they are depending upon their own strength to display it. It won't work and will usually come off as phony.

And let me finish by saying that this "moment by moment" dependance on God for all things, including every word we speak and every attitude of the heart, is an INCREDIBLY difficult thing to do. We are used to at least acting self-sufficient. In fact, it is our very attempted independence from God that is the precise source of most of our ills.

The court's..., "divorcing" itself from the religious aspect of what some people call marriage.

The court can do whatever it please, but the fact remains that marriage between a man and woman is part of God's divine plan. In fact, it goes way beyond the obvious relationship between a man and a woman here on earth. It even goes beyond the obvious need for the species to multiply (as is not possible in a homosexual relationship). It is part of the great "mystery" that Paul talks about in the Epistles. That mystery is that the marriage relationship is a foreshadowing of the marriage supper of the Lamb that is to take place in the future. Christians are the "bride of Christ" and we shall one day be united with Him.

Then again, God has placed so many things on this earth which are merely road signs pointing to Himself. It's a shame more of us don't slow down to read the signs. They take us where we really want to go, whether we recognize it with our conscience minds or not.

Mayor

[sblme28]

Originally Posted by sunsheyen

I dont believe allowing gay marriage is in any way "chipping" away at traditional nuclear families. If someone is gay, they are not (more than likely) a parent in a "traditional,nuclear" family. This is regardless of whether this person is "married" or not. What business is it of mine if someone wants to declare a lifelong union with a loved and respected partner, gay or straight? What right do I (or any of us) have to disallow this union?

ARGH! Nuclear families my butt!

I agree with you.

There are more important issues here. Like having a child be loved and cared for...who cares if the parents are two moms or two dads...if they can support that child and love them, that's all that should matter.

There are so many examples of non-nuclear families that are MUCH better off that way then the child being w/ the father and mother.

[sblme28]

Ok...

Now for the rest of my comments.

First of all, I feel very strongly on this topic. I am a gay rights supporter. Mostly for the reason that my favorite uncle was gay, 2 of my other family members are gay, and numerous friends are gay. I've seen them beaten down, hidden, scared to live their lifes and I felt what was being done was wrong. I now stand up for my beliefs and theirs.

Yes, I am liberal. I guess I should be scared to post here, but I'm not.

My feelings on this are, two people in love should be able to "marry", share their life together, and be able to enjoy the same benefits and rights (health insurance, etc.) that hetero couples get. I guess it doesn't have to be called "marriage", but jeff made a good point...shouldn't it be able to be call "marriage" if it's separated from church?

As far as the break down of the nuclear family...give me a break. There's no such thing as a cookie cutter family anymore. In fact, thinking about that gives me goosebumps...reminds me of the movie Pleasantville. All "perfect" BORING families. Me, personally, I want to get married and have children, but for some people that isn't what they want nor is it what's best for them. Why can't everyone be happy...I think that's a basic right we all share.

Which brings me to my next point. The reference to Ted Bundy made by angus is NOT the same thing. He was killing innocent women. Being in a gay marriage isn't hurting anyone. It's gonna piss a ton of people off, but are you being killed by it? And before you even say it's ruining the nuclear family, read above. I think gay marriage are fine. Extra power to them if they want to adopt and giving a loving home to a needy child.

I believe the "rise" in homosexuality is due to the fact that these people are being given a voice. They don't have to hid who they are. They can live their lives and not be scared. I doubt there's a real rise, just more and more people are able to be themselves.

I guess what you are saying is that it's straight marriage or no marriage. Have you heard about people getting married and later realizing they are gay. Often these people want a family and to them it seems like the only way. Why break down a hetero marriage later on down the line when the person decideds they can't live a lie anymore? Why not allow homosexual marriages, let them have a family, be happy, have a secure loving home, etc.

Sorry for my rantings...just feel strongly about this. Hope they make some sense...

[angusmcgee]

see? sblime's post is exactly proving my point.

I heard on the news the other day where an adopted son with two "daddies" asked that they pray that he would get a mommy some day.

If a child could be proplerly cared for by two same-sex parents, why do they have to adopt, or (in women's case) go to a clinic to get a test-tube daddy? Why can't they just naturally have a child? Because it's just that. Not natural.

Don't think that I don't want every child to have a loving home to be raised in.. There's tons of traditional moms and dads that are in the system waiting to adopt. Make it easier for them, and tougher for the same-sexers.

[angusmcgee]

As far as the break down of the nuclear family...give me a break. There's no such thing as a cookie cutter family anymore.

It's been proven that a child needs both a mother (female) and a father (male). There are things that one can provide that the other just can't.

To deny this is to deny (and this is the main sticking point) the family that God intended for us to have way back in the Garden of Eden.

We've all heard the saying.

"God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve."

[bradedit]

So women and men who are not fertile should not get married and have children?

[Taxman]

Originally Posted by sblme28

Yes, I am liberal. I guess I should be scared to post here, but I'm not.

Just as an aside, I don't want anyone to feel like this! EVERYONE (and yes I was yelling ) is welcome here. If someone makes you feel otherwise, then PM Mayor or I!!!!

Ok, continue...

[angusmcgee]

Originally Posted by bradedit

So women and men who are not fertile should not get married and have children?

Of course not. Like I said, they can adopt. However, conceiving a child is different than raising a child.

Raising an adopted child in a normal, traditional family is perfectly fine. It's the emotional conenction that a mother has and that a father has towards their child that's in jeopardy in a same-sex relationship.

Fathers raise and treat their children differently than mothers.. Both are needed. That's my point. Two of one, or the other is unnatural and messes the child up.

[bradedit]

How many two-dad or two-mom children have you known that have been messed up. Now I do see plenty of two parent kids that are messed up, I just personally do not know of any so I assume you are familiar with a few to make that assesment.

[CagedTroll]

Originally Posted by angusmcgee

To deny this is to deny (and this is the main sticking point) the family that God intended for us to have way back in the Garden of Eden.

If this is the main sticking point, why do atheists get "married"? Why allow them to?

And how do human hermaphrodites fit into this?

Eventually this discussion gets dragged off into separation of Church and State, and a question of whether the happily married under God, according to the Golden Rule, be willing to de-legislate their marriages.

Should we just go there now?

You're talking about making things easier for one group and tougher for the other (in order to adopt). Would you follow through with that logic for insurance purposes? Actually, you are, since without a marriage license or "civil union" the survivor couldn't sue for wrongful death of his/her lifemate...

[bradedit]

sblme28

I am a liberal too, Your opinions are just as important as the conservatives.

[mayor]

Originally Posted by sblme28

I am a gay rights supporter. Mostly for the reason that my favorite uncle was gay, 2 of my other family members are gay, and numerous friends are gay. I've seen them beaten down, hidden, scared to live their lifes and I felt what was being done was wrong.

Abusing other people is ALWAYS wrong. The fact that they have had a hard time in our society is not a reason to support their choices. You can support the individual without supporting their belief system. I believe you may have the two mixed up.

Yes, I am liberal. I guess I should be scared to post here, but I'm not.

Nonsense! Post away!

As far as the break down of the nuclear family...give me a break. There's no such thing as a cookie cutter family anymore.

Hmmmm... I wonder why... {ponders...}

In fact, thinking about that gives me goosebumps...reminds me of the movie Pleasantville. All "perfect" BORING families.

This just in. Movies are not real life.

Why can't everyone be happy...I think that's a basic right we all share.

Actually, no. But our Constitution does give you the right to PURSUE happiness. No guarantee of happiness is allotted.

Being in a gay marriage isn't hurting anyone.

Actually, the mentality we are seeing here is a primer for propaganda. If you say something loud enough and repeatedly, people will begin to believe it and assimilate it into their own consciousness.

Perhaps a debunking of myths is in order.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

I don't agree with everything on the site, but there is much research to back up what they are saying.

I believe the "rise" in homosexuality is due to the fact that these people are being given a voice.

Or, could it be that our society is now TEACHING homosexuality as a valid lifestyle, encouraging our children to experiment with their sexuality. Could it be that there are those who want nothing more than to destroy the traditional family and are going about it by selling a false bill of goods to an all too-willing public?

I guess what you are saying is that it's straight marriage or no marriage. Have you heard about people getting married and later realizing they are gay.

Yup. I've heard of people having every kind of the problem under the sun.

Why not allow homosexual marriages, let them have a family, be happy, have a secure loving home, etc.

Because it is not loving to raise a child in a homosexual family. It is detrimental to that child's sense of self. Little boys and little girls by nature want and need a mommy and a daddy. (Now don't go off on a tangent about single parenting when there is no other choice... that's not what this is about).

Sorry for my rantings...just feel strongly about this. Hope they make some sense...

You are free to rant! That's why the boards are here!

Mayor

[sblme28]

no...dont' worry about it Taxman. I'm not a frequent poster to this forum but i am a reader. I just know that being liberal around here can be dangerous. Don't worry...I can take it...

bradeit...I agree...I guess it's not natural then either...

angus: "I heard on the news the other day where an adopted son with two "daddies" asked that they pray that he would get a mommy some day."

Not all kids in that situation feel the same way. I have a friend that was raised by 2 mom's...fyi she's straight...is a "normal" functioning human being who loves her moms never wished for a dad becuase her family was able to provide her with all she needed. she never wanted for anything.

there's 2 sides to every story...

angus: "It's been proven that a child needs both a mother (female) and a father (male). There are things that one can provide that the other just can't."

And for just as many times as that's been proven, I bet it's been disproven as well.

Angus: "To deny this is to deny (and this is the main sticking point) the family that God intended for us to have way back in the Garden of Eden."

Well, I'm not religious and I don't have firm beliefs in that. So, I may think a different way.

I also don't think that people have to live their life by "rules" that were formed over 2000 years ago. Times change...I'm sure god knows that.

Kinda OT...but...I have a friend who's writing a book. He discusses precisely this topic. Very interesting read. I'll recommend it once it's published.