SnailyBoy Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 gay 'marriage' most certainly redefine's 'marriage'. Gay 'marriage' is an attempt by a minority to redefine something that did not originate in their house. Neither can there be such a thing as 'straight marriage'...there is only 'marriage'...the union of a man and a woman before God. Why would someone who calls themselves 'gay' in opposition to 'heterosexual' want to interfere in something that is clearly not for gays. What has a god got to do with it, I'm married and a god certainly wasn't on the invite list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 there is only 'marriage'...the union of a man and a woman before God. That's false. It's not true. End of that argument. And you cut and paste for us so nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 That's false. It's not true. End of that argument. If that is what Snailboy thinks, then its true for him. There is more to marriage than what you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 If that is what Snailboy thinks, then its true for him. There is more to marriage than what you want. A) It was JohnCocker, not Snailyboy B) His version of marriage is less than what Chris Sleeps (and most of us) wants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailyBoy Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 If that is what Snailboy thinks, then its true for him. There is more to marriage than what you want. I don't thing it was aimed at me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 gay 'marriage' most certainly redefine's 'marriage'. Gay 'marriage' is an attempt by a minority to redefine something that did not originate in their house. I like how you imply it may have originated in the Christian "house" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 B) His version of marriage is less than what Chris Sleeps (and most of us) wants So gay/lesbian marriage is about equality, but a large proportion of the populations opinion counts less than the rest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 So gay/lesbian marriage is about equality, but a large proportion of the populations opinion counts less than the rest? I don't know where you got that from What I said is that what JohnCocker wants (marriage for heterosexuals only) is less than what Chris Sleeps wants (marriage for heterosexuals and homosexuals). One is more inclusive than the other, it's simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 gay 'marriage' most certainly redefine's 'marriage'. Gay 'marriage' is an attempt by a minority to redefine something that did not originate in their house. Neither can there be such a thing as 'straight marriage'...there is only 'marriage'...the union of a man and a woman before God. Why would someone who calls themselves 'gay' in opposition to 'heterosexual' want to interfere in something that is clearly not for gays. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." · Romans 1:26, 27 For this reason God gave them over to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged the natural sexual relations for unnatural ones, 27 and likewise the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed in their passions for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. 28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what should not be done. 29 They are filled with every kind of unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, malice. They are rife with envy, murder, strife, deceit, hostility. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, contrivers of all sorts of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 senseless, covenant-breakers, heartless, ruthless. · I Timothy 1:10 sexually immoral people, practicing homosexuals, kidnappers, liars, perjurers – in fact, for any who live contrary to sound teaching. · Romans 1:26-27 - "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.":help::evil: You seem to be missing a rather large, and very obvious point. (You've also not answered my question, which didn't surprise me as it would put you in the rather awkward position of having to admit that marriage has never been a static thing, it's rules have always changed - still, an answer wouldn't go amiss) Marriage - even before the gay question, didn't have to have anything to do with God - in fact a few years ago when we were getting married there were ceremonies available (and I'm sure there still are) that actually forbade you from using religious language at all. So saying gays shouldn't marry because it forbids same sex relationships in the Bible is a non argument - because straight people don't have to get married before God - in fact marriage doesn't have to be before God. You're not even presenting a valid argument - and even if it were valid, and the Bible were your evidence, all the supporters of gay marriage would have to do is disprove the Bible as an authority - that would be easy enough anyway, but especially if you were claiming its authority from the Christian perspective. If you want to go down that road I will, but please don't start resorting to avoiding questions and calling me names and throwing insults like you usually do. So we can either look at marriage, as it exists, in which case your argument is blatantly wrong. Or we can go down the route of citing Biblical authority, ignoring all marriage/relationships outside of that which would lead us to disproving the Bible/Christian doctrine which would by default devalue all (from your perspective) marriage - including straight, religious ones. Or you could say 'You know what, I don't really have any evidence to support it - but I just don't like the idea of same sex marriage', in which case, from me at least you will get a 'fair enough - that's your opinion even though I disagree with it' and we can leave it at that. The choice is yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Interesting article here which summarises some of the complaints from the House of Lords on why gay marraige is a bad idea. Some of the reasons given are loopy http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/06/18-arguments-made-against-gay-marriage-house-lords Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.