Forums > Social Discussion > Immigration is the new Gay Marriage (US Politics)

Login/Join to Participate
Page: 123
NYC
NYC

NYC
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Member Since: 26th Aug 2001
Total posts: 9232
Posted:I'm sitting here listening to my president give a special address on immigration.

I'll start out by saying that the topic of illegal immigration is important. There are many excellent points on both sides of the arguement for being more and less strict with illegal immigration. There certainly are many groups of people on both sides of the arguement that are profoundly affected by this issue.

I am greatly concerned that this issue is PURPOSELY being blown out of proportion to distract from other important issues (the same way that I believe that gay marriage was put center stage in the 2004 election to distract from other issues and split the country 60/40.)

Gay marriage is an extremely important issue. But it was not more important than every other issue combined the way it was presented in the 2004 presidential elections.

Immigration is an extremely important issue. But it is not more important that every other issue combined the way the current administration is currently presenting it.

To me, it seems like a fairly transparent attempt to distract from Iraq, Iran, Katrina, Medicare, Energy Crisis, CIA vs. Civil Liberties, Terrorism, The Economy, International Relations, etc...

Wag the dog I guess....

[Sorry, I guess this ended up more 'ranty' than 'provocative.' Feel free to add, subtract, or, more likely, ignore.]


Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Delete Topic

Patriarch917
Patriarch917

I make my own people.
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Member Since: 2nd Oct 2005
Total posts: 607
Posted:Read carefully, I pulled out "90% of states are against it." Who was the BBC refering to? What were they against? Many who oppose gay marriage would object to a national constitutional ammendment banning it, for federalist reasons.

BTW, today I am going to the Supreme Court in my state to hear the ACLU argue to try to block a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. The legislature has passed it, and it is on track to go on the ballot to allow everyone in the state to vote on it. The ACLU is arguing to prevent it from being voted on by the people. I'll let you know how it turns out.


Delete

faith enfire
faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Member Since: 27th Jan 2006
Total posts: 3556
Posted:gays should not be married
marriage is a religious institution and should by decided by said institution.
i don't think civil unions can be denied though


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

Neon_Shaolin
Neon_Shaolin

hehe, 'Member' huhuh
Location: Behind you. With Jam
Member Since: 13th Jul 2005
Total posts: 6120
Posted:So heterosexual marriages in registry offices between athetists should not be allowed?

"I used to want to change the world, now I just wanna leave the room with a little dignity..." - Lotus Weinstock

Delete

faith enfire
faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Member Since: 27th Jan 2006
Total posts: 3556
Posted:no they shouldn't

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

Dr_Molly
Dr_Molly

Pooh-Bah
Location: Away from home
Member Since: 4th May 2004
Total posts: 2354
Posted:Wow faithinfire, that seems to be an extremely narrow world view.

How about all the people in the world who don't believe in your god but have their own religion? Are they 'allowed' to get married or is that a nono as well? Will any god do or is it just the monotheist one that counts? Does Jesus have to be involved too?


Delete

mcp
mcp

Flying Water Muppet
Location: Edin-borrow.
Member Since: 20th May 2003
Total posts: 5276
Posted:well any religion that has marriages should have marriages and then there should be a seperate process for a 'marriage' to become a recognised civil union.

I think it's fair to say that if a religion states that a 'marriage' is between a man and women and then people try and campaign for a 'marriage' between a man and tree shaped like an elephant, then they are trying to change the religion, not the law. The law should change to allow civil unions between human adults but not mess around with religion. Law + religion sucks. They should be seperate.

[ But that's only if you believe the letter of the religion and not the spirit. I mean, does anybody really take the bible literally? Especially the first half? That would be silly. Like believing L Ron Hubbards books are the literal truth... very silly indeed. biggrin ]

Gay can cause tsunami's now? Wicked!

"A president would be a fool to advocate any other position."

I'd rather have a foolish moral person in charge than a sensible person who ignores the what's right. But that's what makes me an naive idealist! Yay!


"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade

I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.

Delete

Dr_Molly
Dr_Molly

Pooh-Bah
Location: Away from home
Member Since: 4th May 2004
Total posts: 2354
Posted:That's all semantics. The definition of the word marriage is as a legal union as far as I know, not as a religious union). The fact that all sorts of religions think they have first dibs on the Institution of Marriage under god is neither here nor there in my opinion.

But the word seems to be hugely emotive for them. And by them I include my (Catholic) mother who came to the conclusion that "there's nothing wrong with two gay people being legally joined together as partners, but couldn't they call it something else... like a larriage, or a garriage!"

In my opinion it's rubbish. I don't think any of the gay marriage debate has to do with trying to convince a religion to change it's stand on anything. It is to do with legal equality. If marriage was just something between you and your god that would be one thing, but it isn't. It is a social institution if anything, with associated legal responsibilities and benefits (I'm thinking along the lines of taxes, inheritance etc. here).

The obvious comprimise that comes to my mind is to make religious marriages Not legally binding (as is the case if you are married under a religion that is not recognised by the state) and make everyone have a separate ceremony if they want to be married in the eyes of the law.


Delete

mcp
mcp

Flying Water Muppet
Location: Edin-borrow.
Member Since: 20th May 2003
Total posts: 5276
Posted:Yes, most gay marriage campaigns are supposedly for the legal benefits but really they want the social acceptance, which is entirely different and probably unlikely to come with the 'marriage' tag. It is after all a social institution. One with deep connections to many religions that I don't think you can gloss over as 'here or there'. Marriage is a religious act, with some bolt on financial benefits and legal stuff to deal with the financial benefits in my opinion.

the civil union has all the legal crap and financial benefits associated with a marriage without the marriage name doesn't it? Isn't that the point?

Or they should remake the word marriage into: Christian Marriage, and civil union as Marriage.

But I'm not a big word fan, so I can happily give away the word marriage. I don't want to be associated with a religious group like christianity particularly.


"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade

I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.

Delete

Doc Lightning
Doc Lightning

HOP Mad Doctor
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Member Since: 28th May 2001
Total posts: 13920
Posted:I think what Faithinfire is saying is that marriage should be a religious institution ONLY. That means that it has no legal meaning.

Civil unions, on the other hand (which might or might not accompany a marriage) would be available to all, regardless of sexuality.

In other words, if you want to get married, go to a mosque/church/synagogue/temple/whatever. But if you want it legally recognized, you need to get a civil union.


-Mike )'(
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella

"A buckuht 'n a hooze!" -Valura

Delete

Stone
Stream Entrant
Location: Melbourne
Member Since: 13th Jun 2001
Total posts: 2830
Posted:Good points NYC



Gay marriage ban fails to pass US Senate





With just five months before November legislative elections that are expected to be dominated by the war in Iraq, illegal immigration and soaring energy bills, Mr Bush has called for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as solely between a man and a woman.



A constitutional amendment seeking a national ban on gay marriage, strongly backed by US President George W Bush and conservative Christian groups, has failed to pass the US Senate.


If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh

Delete

Doc Lightning
Doc Lightning

HOP Mad Doctor
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Member Since: 28th May 2001
Total posts: 13920
Posted:I love watching the Cheneys against it.

-Mike )'(
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella

"A buckuht 'n a hooze!" -Valura

Delete

faith enfire
faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Member Since: 27th Jan 2006
Total posts: 3556
Posted:doc basically got the gist of it...
molly: I think my friends would find it very funny that I have a narrow view.
I am Catholic (not a good one but I try) and I am a bisexual. My spirituality and religion are more important than who I have sex with. I know I can't get married in my church to a woman, nor would I want to because in my eyes, it is not a Catholic Marriage.
I believe that most, if not all religions, have specifications on marriage.
Aethists should not have Christian marriages unless the partner is, because that is something that they accept in their partner. But why would two aethists want a Christian Marriage anyways. To make parents happy? Well, then, you aren't strong enough to be unionized smile if you can't stand up to mom and dad.
If you are certian that you want to be with your partner for the rest of your life, fight for a civil union, but leave my religious institution alone...
(Note: I didn't sleep last night, so I am unsure of the sense of this post


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

NYC
NYC

NYC
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Member Since: 26th Aug 2001
Total posts: 9232
Posted: Written by: faithinfire


My spirituality and religion are more important than who I have sex with.



If your religion is more important than why would you ever call yourself bisexual? Doesn't your religion prohibit homosexuality?
It sounds hypocritical, no?


Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Delete

faith enfire
faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Member Since: 27th Jan 2006
Total posts: 3556
Posted:sexuality is not a choice, who I have sex with is
My everlasting soul is so much more important than my sexual partners
I studied religions for a bit and settled on Catholicism as good for me. It makes sense and has structure
It is the practice of homosexuality that is a sin, as premarital sex between man and a woman is a sin.
I specifically said I am not a good Catholic. But I strive to be
It is something that I am at peace with.


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

NYC
NYC

NYC
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Member Since: 26th Aug 2001
Total posts: 9232
Posted:So... you're a bisexual who only practices when they sin?

And yet you say that your religion is more important than your sexuality. But you forsake your religion to indulge in your sexuality?

I'm not being critical. I'm just really confused. It would make more sense if you said you were in turmoil about it... but if you're at peace with it then I'm really confused.

I hope I'm not being offensive in my questions. hug


Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Delete

Dr_Molly
Dr_Molly

Pooh-Bah
Location: Away from home
Member Since: 4th May 2004
Total posts: 2354
Posted:No, NYC, she only sins if she practices smile

I guess I've never seen marriage as a religious act. The only part that seems religious at all to me is if you perform the ceremony in a place of worship and make your promises to god.

I am getting married next summer. I intend to make my promises to the person I am marrying and I do not even remotely feel that I need a higher power to give them more weight, make me keep them or to do any sanctifying.

Neon's original question was if atheists getting married in registry offices should be allowed, to which Faitinfire answered no. The following assumption that they would be wanting a Christian marriage is what I find baffling.

As an aside I do think that many who have no religious convictions choose to marry by a church because the laws in the UK make it a less restrictive process, they have some really nice architecture and god has all the best tunes wink


Delete

Neon_Shaolin
Neon_Shaolin

hehe, 'Member' huhuh
Location: Behind you. With Jam
Member Since: 13th Jul 2005
Total posts: 6120
Posted:Plus I'm sure the act of marriage is something that predates Christanity... Albiet all the cultures I've read about that practiced marriage do have strong religious convictions

Like the Ancient Eyptians, the Incas, the Myans, Romans, Ancient Greeks - which themselves accepted bisexuality (though I'm sure this line of arguement is undermimed by the fact they practiced it on boys as young as 9 as a rite of passage...)


"I used to want to change the world, now I just wanna leave the room with a little dignity..." - Lotus Weinstock

Delete

ZeroG
ZeroG

Friendly Fire Fiddler
Location: Munich
Member Since: 21st Dec 2005
Total posts: 103
Posted: Written by:

I am greatly concerned that this issue is PURPOSELY being blown out of proportion to distract from other important issues (the same way that I believe that gay marriage was put center stage in the 2004 election to distract from other issues and split the country 60/40.)



Wow, I couldnt have said it any better. Gay marriage is one of those topics that affect 0,1 % of the population but everyone has a emitional opinion on it, in a population thats 98 % heterosexual.

Now the same on illegal immigration, actually the lifeblood of the US economy, with people arriving in shape to work, working for 4 $/hour, no cost for school, hospital, kindergarden you name it, paying tax, buying washing machines and disappearing again into void ...

Like many, I still cannot grasp Bushs re-election on the back of media triggered emotional gay marriage debate, constant orange alert alarms
- to then silently go firing off 300 Billion $ of hardearned taxmoney into the desert, triggering global US hate, fuelling terrorism and tripling the oil price.

All that while Osama bin forgotten is laughing out loud and the White house going through a second Vietnam experience, remeber in 66 they were all gung ho, in 69 they went silent, in 72 they "localised" the war, in 75 last Chopper was out and Charlie had won ...


Delete

NYC
NYC

NYC
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Member Since: 26th Aug 2001
Total posts: 9232
Posted:Again, I don't want to minimize the affect of gay marriage and immigration. I'd hate to see folks quibble about what percent is affected by... etc..

Perhaps we could just agree that it is disproportional to the amount of attention being given to other topics.


Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Delete

faith enfire
faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Member Since: 27th Jan 2006
Total posts: 3556
Posted:It's nice that when one of you is having an issue interpreting, the other one gets it.
the semantics are difficult so from now on if we go back to the issue I shall try to say Catholic/Christian marriage.
I personally don't see how when God is not involved, how it is a marriage?
It's just a civil union

As for immigration, it's been boiling for awhile.
No one here forgot about Osama.
It is not a Vietnam because I hope no one would condemn a soldier, and no one is being drafted

The reason why no one wants to do the jobs Hispanics come to do is because the ones who live here were raised to believe jobs like that were below them. The Hispanics were looked down on, and they took certian jobs, and those jobs were looked down on because of the people working them. So we pretend they don't exist, just so long as our yards are looking nice and our washer is working and we have produce to go buy stacked nicely at the grocery store.
Maybe people are getting threatened because people like me are starting to appear, blending in to the societal fabric too well. Hispanics are no longer happy with the position society niched out. It was only a matter of time.
I don't want to irritate anyone, but it is almost like their civil rights movement


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

zamirii
zamirii

newbie
Location: South Florida, USA
Member Since: 2nd May 2006
Total posts: 44
Posted:there is a case about it here right now. The mother and daughter were here on TOURIST visas which last 6 months from guatamala and they had the daughter enrolled in a local school here where she was doing well (honor roll and jrotc) and when the visa would expire, they would go back for a short while and then come back for another 6 months. they'd been doing this for several years before they were caught and arrested for visa violations. the father on the other hand is here legally - he was granted political asylum. the mother and daughter are currently seeking political asylum.

personally i think they should be deported cause they did violate the terms of their visas by enrolling her in school here. but if they want to come back on the correct visa and enroll her in school i wouldn't mind at all. it's not the girls fault and she's smart and hardworking but her parents made a wrong choice.

Article from the Sun-Sentinel newspaper


Every Day I add another name to the list of people who piss me off

Delete

ZeroG
ZeroG

Friendly Fire Fiddler
Location: Munich
Member Since: 21st Dec 2005
Total posts: 103
Posted: Written by:

they did violate the terms of their visas by enrolling her in school here


Are you saying that a foreign minor in the USA legally on a 6 months tourist Visa should not go to school ? Cause I think any kid should go to school, if temporary, then temporary ...

 Written by:

Iraq is not a Vietnam because I hope no one would condemn a soldier, and no one is being drafted



That may be the inner USA view. What the world has been seeing is a barely justified invasion, a civil war and the US backed government probably on a loosing steak vs ambush terrorists - like Vietnam. This plays on UBLs hands (thats why he supported Bush in appearing on TV 2 days before the US election) and fuels fundamentalist terrorism ...

To note here that Iran is playing the same proven mechanism (issue purposely blown out of proportion): Instead of trying to creat jobs and fuelling the economy, the guy is stirring up the right for national nukes and defying big satan - and the masses seem to follow him ... unfortunatly and short-sightedly but they seem to do so it works for him too.


Delete

faith enfire
faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Member Since: 27th Jan 2006
Total posts: 3556
Posted:seeing red, lack of words to say

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

NYC
NYC

NYC
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Member Since: 26th Aug 2001
Total posts: 9232
Posted: Written by: faithinfire


I personally don't see how when God is not involved, how it is a marriage?




If folks don't know what a word means, look it up.

There is no requirement for God in the dictionary definition of Marriage. If you want to define it differently than the dictionary, you're on your own. But don't expect others to agree with it or even understand what you're saying.

Unless you're making up names for poi moves. Then it's totally appropriate to use the wrong name if it suits your needs. wink


Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Delete

faith enfire
faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Member Since: 27th Jan 2006
Total posts: 3556
Posted:I had already said that I would try and reference what I consider marriage as Christian marriage so why are you giving me a problem with it
Within the quote you used, I also said that it was a personal thing, if other people have a problem with it-then I go around defining my marriage as a Christian marriage
I had it defined. I had made a concession to the definition-so what's your problem


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

NYC
NYC

NYC
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Member Since: 26th Aug 2001
Total posts: 9232
Posted:I saw that in your above quote you put a question mark after your sentence so I thought it was a question.

 Written by: faithinfire


I personally don't see how when God is not involved, how it is a marriage?




But I see from your above post that you don't often put question marks after questions.

If you're putting question marks after your personal opinions and no question marks after your questions I can't imagine why you'd get frustrated when others get confused.

The same way you can't arbitrarily use punctuation, you can't change the definition of a "Non Christian Marriage" to a "Civil union" just because you disagree with the dictionary.

It's not only incorrect, it's bigoted.


Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Delete

faith enfire
faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Member Since: 27th Jan 2006
Total posts: 3556
Posted:yeah I'm bigoted because I can hold two ideas in my head that seem conflicting to you...the bisexual woman, who somehow manages to put God before her sex life. Everyone talks about being open minded until people start to profess their own beliefs that are in contrast.
Don't worry my conservative cooties won't get on you


1) they are called rhetorical questions, ever heard of them? Sometimes people use them to emphasize a point or to make other people think or just to be a b**** wink
2)I explained my opinion just as you explained yours. I defined what I saw as what. I did this because people were not understanding what I was saying.
3)I do not believe that it is a marriage if you go to the courthouse. Period. And I refuse to call it a marriage, unless a minister or priest performs the ceremony. If the religion allows for a same sex marriage and it is performed by said religions minister and they believe what the religion has to say, wonderful. My religion says it isn't a marriage. I suppose you could say I was bigoted against some ministers too. Internet ministers who answer a few questions, which is nice and sweet, leading to tender moments because they took the test or course or mailed in the money order to marry their friends, are not what I would consider bona fide ministers. So go ahead start ripping into me for that. I am close enough with my priests that I can have those same moments and be married to the institution I have pledged my support to.
4)I could call you names but...well, I suppose if I continue I would indirectly being calling you something so I will stop

You can pull out all the definitions you want because we can go back and forth. Some of these support yours, some mine, some both at the same time. Personally, I do not feel like have a definition war.
But since you started it


From your site:
A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage

From Encarta
1. legal relationship between spouses: a legally recognized relationship, established by a civil or religious ceremony, between two people who intend to live together as sexual and domestic partners
(Here my point of saying what type of marriage I mean becomes valid, because it is said to be either or)

From The Compact Oxford English Dictionary
noun 1 the formal union of a man and a woman, by which they become husband and wife
(note: not of a same sex union)
Or from the plain text version
Marriage
(n.) In bezique, penuchle, and similar games at cards, the combination of a king and queen of the same suit. If of the trump suit, it is called a royal marriage.
(v. t.) A feast made on the occasion of a marriage.
(v. t.) Any intimate or close union.
(v. t.) The act of marrying, or the state of being married; legal union of a man and a woman for life, as husband and wife; wedlock; matrimony.
(v. t.) The marriage vow or contract.

From Random House
the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc
the legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of a man and woman to live as husband and wife, including the accompanying social festivities
a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other in the manner of a husband and wife, without legal sanction
the formal declaration or contract by which act a man and a woman join in wedlock

Lastly From Websters
MAR'RIAGE, n. [L.mas, maris.] The act of uniting a man and woman for life; wedlock; the legal union of a man and woman for life. Marriage is a contract both civil and religious, by which the parties engage to live together in mutual affection and fidelity, till death shall separate them. Marriage was instituted by God himself for the purpose of preventing the promiscuous intercourse of the sexes, for promoting domestic felicity,and for securing the maintenance and education of children.
Marriage is honorable in all and the bed undefiled. Heb.13.
1. A feast made on the occasion of a marriage.
The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king, who made a marriage for his son. Matt.22.
2. In a scriptural sense, the union between Christ and his church by the covenant of grace. Rev.19.


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

Dr_Molly
Dr_Molly

Pooh-Bah
Location: Away from home
Member Since: 4th May 2004
Total posts: 2354
Posted: Written by: Faithinfire


I had already said that I would try and reference what I consider marriage as Christian marriage so why are you giving me a problem with it
Within the quote you used, I also said that it was a personal thing, if other people have a problem with it-then I go around defining my marriage as a Christian marriage
I had it defined. I had made a concession to the definition-so what's your problem


 Written by: Faithinfire


It's just a civil union



I don't claim to speak for NYC, but in my opinion That is the problem. If you personally prefer to wish the the word marriage only referred to Christian marriages that's your own business, but you seem to insist that certain marriages are "just" unions. It would appear that the various religious institutions don't have such a problem with civil marriage ceremonies as it's not a new phenomenon.

All of your definitions above include reference to both civil and religious ceremonies, so I don't know how you think they support your stance that only religions can perform marriages.

On a separate note, I'd love a link to Webster's dictionary where it defines marriage as "instituted by god himself", or is there a paragraph break missing there? smile

I think my main point of bafflement remains - how do you have room in your mind to embrace marriages as ceremonies performed by so many varied and conflicting religions, but reach such an impasse when it comes to those who just don't believe in any gods?


Delete

Patriarch917
Patriarch917

I make my own people.
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Member Since: 2nd Oct 2005
Total posts: 607
Posted:Wow, has this thread ever drifted...

I've heard the theory that marriage is neither a religious nor a political institution. It is a family institution.

In other words, just as you don't need a minister or a government certificate to create the relationship between you and your cousin, neither do you need those things to create a relationship between you and your spouse.

From this perspective, the church and state are merely putting their "stamp of approval" on an existing relationship, but are powerless to redefine that relationship. Since they didn't create it, they can't recreate it.

This is pertinant to the subject of immigration because... um... I think that if I marry a foreigner, they should get automatic citizenship because of the close family relationship.


Delete

faith enfire
faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Member Since: 27th Jan 2006
Total posts: 3556
Posted:cool thoughts pat, what is the process. I thought that is why foriegners married citizens, or is that the greencard thing?

Molly, I was just indicating that marriage definitions did include religion or spirituality in their definitions. I believe I included one or two that did not include the secular side of it all, but if I didn't I suppose shame on me.

Alright, I will say this again. I believe that marriage=Christian marriage, the courthouse stuff is different. So for people who do not believe in God, there is no reason for them to go through the Christian ceremony of marriage. If another religion or spiritual institution will marry them, go that route and leave my Christian sacrament alone.



(I do not have a computer at home, so if one of you comes up with a scathing remark that I do not answer right away, it is not because I am admitting defeat or pouting and ignoring. I am admitting lack of funds for the internet at home. I'm poor tongue)





as far as I know, that is an exerpt with nothing missing from Websters. otherwise I would use those fun ellipses things


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

Page: 123

Similar Topics

Using the keywords [immigration gay marriage politic*] we found the following similar topics.
1. Forums > Immigration is the new Gay Marriage (US Politics) [69 replies]
2. Forums > US Gay marriage questions [262 replies]
3. Forums > Gay marriage across the glode [8 replies]
4. Forums > Gay marriage [59 replies]
5. Forums > A thought on gay marriage [24 replies]

     Show more..