Now that homosexuals can marry shouldn't polygamist have the same right?
@bmycomrade - my exact quote was, "Marriages of sorts exist in many cultures, but marriage as we know it in America is a Judeo-Christian sacrament and was never intended to unite non-believers..." That's absolutely true. Get over YOURself.
This was supposed to post at the end of that other thread. Glitch!
I actually see no reason why consenting adult polygamists can't get married
I don't think the gay marriage debate is over. If one believes in same sex marriage, then I do not see how they can logically impose limits on anyone who wants to marry.
I would argue fighting gay marriage is a losing battle besides 8% of the population is gay that is almost non significant. They are given more power by fighting than letting it go.
Kk, your estimate is way too high. Less than 5%.
Furthers my argument then less than 5% is insignificant.
Yes and no. I think government rights should e separated from the church.
Same sex marriage has not been legalized. Still illegal here and where you are. Polygamy is fine with me b
Im all for polygamy and what ever other marriage you want. I'm good with one wife two would be insanity.
No. If I'm called a bigot for this, I'd be surprised and disappointed. I reserve the word bigot for those who aggressively, and usually poorly, try to push their views on others while claiming the other person is being intolerant at the same time.
I was implying towards those who said people were bigots for opposing gay marriage. Now those people who said anyone opposing gay marriage are now bigots if they don't support the new agenda.
Gays shouldn't have gotten that "right." SCOTUS Five got it absolutely wrong.
I see your point gay marriage is against my principals too. However the government should be able to decide this. It is a matter of religion, individual rights, and whatever causes a person to get married.
Because that "right" really does a while lot to your life. You're getting too caught up in something that doesn't require your input.
Beach, it requires God's opinion and He speaks through people whom He saddles with this less-than-entirely-pleasant task. The earthly rewards are persecution and even death. But the reward is seeing lives turned to God's Truth, and eternal life
Maybe in the Stone Age, but this is the 21st century. Religious persecution was supposed to be over I though. You mean I gotta live through it, too? The law of the United States does not execute itself with religion.
Is not executed*
Maybe you should set aside four or five hours to Google "persecution of Christians." It's alive and well all around the world.
Yes, you're right. Thankfully my best friend is probably about as, if not more, Christian than you are. However, does that give you reason to persecute others here? Persecute too much and we might run the Christians out. One day...one day.
I don't have the power to persecute anyone - I'm disabled, legally blind, and almost 62, bowed down under multiple sequelae of diabetes. I'm just exercising my 1st amendment right to express an opinion free from gov't interference, just like you.
Are, or were, you married?
I've been happily married for 40 years - and I consider it more of a church sacrament than a gov't contract.
There is persecution of Christians in the world, but there is persecution of a lot of groups in a lot of places. It's not just Christianity that is victim, and sometimes its the aggressor. In this nation there is a lot of implicit Christian privilege
Congratulation, tlaney. Now why can't I have that? What's the difference except that I may like a man? You must concede that if God isn't my God that I needn't follow what his book says? No?
Beach, if you don't believe in God, you don't believe in marriage - you believe in civil unions. Marriages of sorts exist in many cultures, but marriage as we know it in America is a Judeo-Christian sacrament and was never intended to unite
non-believers, or even one believer and one non-believer. For you to have a church ceremony would probably be uncomfortable, because it would be a hypocritical act for an atheist, right? So what you need is a civil ceremony before a J.P. - so why
crusade for marriage when all you need is a civil union? Help me understand what you're really looking for in this issue, please.
*facepalm* Marriage is not just Christian. Get over yourself.
(Exasperated sigh) I never said that, and my response was part of a conversation with BeachSt, so go palm something else for a while.
"marriage as we know it in America is a Judeo-Christian sacrament"
By that reasoning, no one but Jews and Christians can get married. No Hindus, no Muslims, no Wicca, and definitely no atheists.
But marriages ARE a civil union in the eyes of the law. Like I've said before, the be "civil unioned" is to be a second class citizen. I see that you mean it for not only gays but also non believers. But what about non-believers that want to please..
...their partners or their families? Marriage began as a way to bind two people for procreation and property. It was slavery for the women. Marriage has been evolving for centuries to now being a binding of two in love.
If you say no you will now be called bigot the same way people for homosexual marriage called those opposed a bigot. I think government doesn't belong in marriage.
So pedophilic marriage should be allowed also?
See that goes under something different the governments job is to prevent harm. A simple consenting adult law takes care of that all though we are a little too up tight with statutory rape.