Let the Joyous news be spread: New Jersey votes yes on Gay civil union!

[Sunta 5]

I may not understand some of these views and ways of thinking

Carol, by "these views and ways of thinking" are you referring to the Bill for Religious Freedom?

[gadgetlady 4]

So do you think it's okay for gay people to live together, in a sexual relationship, as a committed couple? (Committed emotionally and physically to one another, to be more specific.)

I think it's their choice to do so. It is not my place to judge them.

[green 6]

Applying the Bible's teachings to homosexuals but not to divorce, nor to slavery nor to eating a ham & cheese sandwhich sounds like cherrypicking to me. There must be a separation between church and state. How people choose to conduct their personal spiritual lives is of course another matter and should lie between themselves and their God.

[paladin 0]

Our nation was founded on biblical principles. Like Carol said, our money says "IN GOD WE TRUST". Our national anthem says, "ONE NATION UNDER GOD". No matter how bad people want to try to disprove this fact, it doesn't change.

Leatha did a good job of summing it up....it all comes down to faith. I have faith that my beliefs are true. If it turns out that their not (which I believe with my whole heart they are true), I have lost nothing.

Why not let people believe what they want to believe? I believe homosexuality is wrong. I have many friends that live that lifestyle. My wife's hairdresser for 12+ yrs was gay. That still doesn't change my position. If you want to be gay, be gay. Just don't force your views on me and my family. By the same token, don't attack a person (I respect Carol for taking a stand against so many that don't agree) because they believe differently than you.

[Carlene 12]

Applying the Bible's teachings to homosexuals but not to divorce, nor to slavery nor to eating a ham & cheese sandwhich sounds like cherrypicking to me. There must be a separation between church and state. How people choose to conduct their personal spiritual lives is of course another matter and should lie between themselves and their God.

Exactly....if the reason homosexuals may not marry is because it's "against God's law", or "contrary to the Bible" then we MUST give the same weight to ALL religious beliefs. The Jewish prohibition against shellfish, the Muslim requirement that women veil themselves in public, the Catholic dogma that divorce/remarriage constitutes adultery. To do otherwise is blatant religious discrimination.

Same sex marriage is a victimless "crime". It does not harm anyone, in any way. It may offend you, but that doesn't mean we should legislate it. I am offended by so many things: Howard Stern; gangsta rap lyrics; hate groups; spam e-mails; hypocritical politicians and ministers; Rush Limbaugh (oops...is that redundant?); the young woman with a cigarette in her mouth and a baby on her hip...the list goes on and on. But none of those things are illegal...and they probably shouldn't be (much to my dismay). So it is with same sex marriage. Maybe you don't think it's a fair equation, but if I can live in a world with Howard Stern, surely you can stand to catch a glimpse every once in a while of two (married) gay men in the supermarket.

[gadgetlady 4]

Same sex marriage is a victimless "crime". It does not harm anyone, in any way. It may offend you, but that doesn't mean we should legislate it. I am offended by so many things: Howard Stern; gangsta rap lyrics; hate groups; spam e-mails; hypocritical politicians and ministers; Rush Limbaugh (oops...is that redundant?); the young woman with a cigarette in her mouth and a baby on her hip...the list goes on and on. But none of those things are illegal...and they probably shouldn't be (much to my dismay). So it is with same sex marriage. Maybe you don't think it's a fair equation, but if I can live in a world with Howard Stern, surely you can stand to catch a glimpse every once in a while of two (married) gay men in the supermarket.

Again, you're missing the point. Being against expanding the definition of marriage to include homosexual couples does not equate to legislating against homosexuality or not being able to stand to catch a glimpse of gay men in the supermarket! No one said it was acceptable or advisable to make homosexuality illegal!

Would you approve of allowing a brother and sister to marry? What about first cousins? How about lowering the age of consent (to marry) to 12 -- or 10? What about a marriage between two men and a woman? What about one man and 12 wives? What about that well-publicized story a month or so ago about a woman who "married" a dolphin?

The point is we all draw lines (as to what the legal definition of marriage should include) somewhere and you are arbitrarily objecting to the place where I draw my line based on your beliefs.

[carol134 0]

Whatever I believe right or wrong it will not keep me out of heaven because I won't practice it, or if I do I will be very sorry and immediately ask for His forgiveness.

Carlene: I myself am divorced and if it had been illegal I would of rather been in prison. It is not illegal to be gay or lesbian either. But it is a sin in the eyes of God to practice their sexual behavior.

Now on being illegal to get a divorce, of course not, nor does it say in the bible that it is not permissable. In other words divorce is recognized through such things as infidlity.

[Carlene 12]

Again, you're missing the point. Being against expanding the definition of marriage to include homosexual couples does not equate to legislating against homosexuality or not being able to stand to catch a glimpse of gay men in the supermarket! No one said it was acceptable or advisable to make homosexuality illegal!

Would you approve of allowing a brother and sister to marry? What about first cousins? How about lowering the age of consent (to marry) to 12 -- or 10? What about a marriage between two men and a woman? What about one man and 12 wives? What about that well-publicized story a month or so ago about a woman who "married" a dolphin?

The point is we all draw lines (as to what the legal definition of marriage should include) somewhere and you are arbitrarily objecting to the place where I draw my line based on your beliefs.

No, I haven't missed the point. Same sex marriage harms no one. Allowing a child age 10 or 12 to marry would not be in the best interest of the child and society needs laws in place to protect children. As for a brother and sister, a woman and a dolphin, or two men and one woman....I couldn't care less. In fact, allow me to make a huge "confession" here and now. I was married to a man for 25 years who had, at one time, been my stepbrother (his mother was married to my father). Our wedding was performed in the state of Louisiana because in the state of Texas, our marriage was considered incest. How stupid is that?

And homosexuality WAS illegal in a large part of the USA until very recently. It took the US Supreme Court to hit these people over the head and force them to let go of antiquated, discriminatory laws. Sounds a lot like the story of segregation, doesn't it?

According to the Associated Press, sodomy laws remained on the books in 13 states as of the middle of 2003. "Sodomy" was illegal for everyone -- gay and straight -- in Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah and Virginia. In addition, four contiguous states, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas, criminalized certain forms of private, consensual sexual behavior between persons of the same gender, but permitted them if performed by a man and woman.

During the first half of 2003, the U.S. Supreme court studied the constitutionality of sodomy legislation. In the Lawrence v. Texas case, they reviewed a Texas law. It criminalized certain sexual behavior by same-sex couples even though the same activities are quite legal if done by opposite-sex couples. In a ground-breaking decision, the Court decided on 2003-JUN-26 that adults are free to engage in private consensual sex without government oppression. They placed limits on the ability by governments to legislate sexual morality. The sodomy laws in Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas, were declared unconstitutional. Legal experts believe that the sodomy laws in the nine other states are now also null and void. Laws in a few states which criminalize fornication (sexual intercourse by unmarried persons) adultery, and other behaviors may also be overturned by this ruling.

[carol134 0]

(TOM: I got your Bush reference. And I laughed at your Ham n cheese. It was all a delightful post.)

Sorry Betsyjane thought TOM meant time of the month.

[Carlene 12]

Now on being illegal to get a divorce, of course not, nor does it say in the bible that it is not permissable. In other words divorce is recognized through such things as infidlity.

Matthew 19:9 (King James Version)

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

[carol134 0]

Except it to be for fornication.....

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

Again, you're missing the point. Being against expanding the definition of marriage to include homosexual couples does not equate to legislating against homosexuality or not being able to stand to catch a glimpse of gay men in the supermarket! No one said it was acceptable or advisable to make homosexuality illegal!

It is not necessary to expand the definition of marriage to include same gender marriage. If it was, the Republicans would not be pushing for a constitutional amendment to ban same-gender marriage.

Unless you think Republicans including BuSh are stupid, then you will have to realize that they know it is legal for same-gender couples to marry as per the 14th amendment to the US constitution.

They can not have it both ways. You don't pass constitutional amendments to outlaw something that is already outlawed.

What they call activist judges, others see as "judges who can read".

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

(TOM: I got your Bush reference. And I laughed at your Ham n cheese. It was all a delightful post.)

Sorry Betsyjane thought TOM meant time of the month.

Don't apologize to BetsyJane; apologize to me. :faint:

[carol134 0]

Okay so that's what it stands for on the lapband instruction page. How was I to know? lol

[HunnyBun 2]

Whatever I believe right or wrong it will not keep me out of heaven because I won't practice it, or if I do I will be very sorry and immediately ask for His forgiveness.

Carol,

What if the homos just be gay and ask God to forgive them? Wouldn't that solve the problem of all homos going to hell?