Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Wednesday, September 28, 2016

In the contentious debate surrounding gay marriage, a couple of conservative talking points stand out for their irrationality. One of those is the notion that allowing same-sex couples to marry would represent a gross usurpation of religious freedom.

Like the equally ridiculous idea that homosexual marriage would somehow undermine heterosexual marriage, the notion of infringing on religious liberties is a thicket of misunderstandings, historical distortions and outright lies. Now that President Obama has endorsed the principle of marriage as a civil right that should be available to all citizens, I fully expect that thicket to explode, spewing a cloud of nonsense over an argument already laden with foolishness.

Take the insistence by some conservative Christians that if same-sex marriage were broadly legal, the federal government would be in a position to force Southern Baptist ministers and Catholic priests to carry out such marriages. Campaigning against gay marriage in California in 2008, Tony Perkins, head of the ultraconservative Family Research Council, declared that if same-sex marriages were legalized, “Pastors and churches will be silenced from speaking publicly against homosexuality.”

Really, that’s too idiotic to merit a response — but I’m going there anyway. Has the federal government ever ordered the Vatican to marry a divorced couple whom it deemed unworthy of the sacrament? Has the government ever tried to force a Haredi rabbi to sanction a marriage between a member of his community and a non-Jew? Of course not. Such marriages would be readily and legally performed in a courthouse, but the First Amendment protects the right of religious institutions to perform only those rituals which they choose.

By the way, that same protection runs in the other direction, too. While conservative Christians — and, unfortunately, the news media, as well — tend to define “Christianity” as solely the province of conservative believers, there are many liberal ministers who have happily performed same-sex marriages in the handful of states that allow them.

  • eeldeer

    Unfortunately, making fun of the ignorance and misinformation spouted by many on the religious right wing is an unheard exercise. Their followers neither read very widely nor think very analytically.

    • Very true . . . many people are just not interested in other viewpoints. Sad.

      • SaneJane

        Their only interest in the viewpoints of others is making sure there are none that contradict their own. Others are not entitled to opinions.

  • ChristoD

    The premise that Christian people who are against gay marriage is that marriage MUST be hetersexual because the Bible says so. (I personally believe it is code for anti-gay prejudice, period and has nothing to do with marriage per se). For arguments sake, let us assume that the Apostles were convinced that homosexualality is morally wrong and is a sin because it was/is a CHOSEN sinful lifestyle and their position is stated thus in the Bible. What if their opinion is THEIR opinion and not Jesus’ ? If you accept these premises what if science proves, and I am relatively certain it will, that homosexuality is a genetic issue and not a chosen lifestyle (I will concede that in some cases it is chosen simply because of sexual abuse and other abnormalities) ? Will the Christian right and others who are opposed to gay marriage then relent and let this issue be thrown into the trash heap of history ? What a wonderful gift to the world that would be. In Marriage Encounter that my wife and I attended years ago, a Catholic Priest commented that ‘God doesn’t make junk’. While I somewhat question that, based on some serious evil people who appear to be genetically deficient, the premise, if we could accept it, is what I believe is WJWD. Quite simply he would ask us to accept our gay brothers and sisters for what they are, His children.

    • joyscarbo

      But ChristoD, where public policy and civil rights are concerned, it’s not an issue of religious belief. I don’t agree with some of your statements about homosexuality but I also understand that it’s your belief and I respect that. But this is denying people their civil rights. .
      Our Constitution and Delcaration of Independence commands equality and has charged our government with the responsibility to ensure the civil rights of all people, including homsexuals. Our president has bravely recognized this, and I say its about time!!
      Your right to freely believe whatever you want about homosexuals (or anyone else for that matter) is also a protected right. Note: I’m not disagreeing with you. I’m just saying that the right wing and republicans keep making this a religious issue and it’s not. Our country still recognizes (barely!) the separation of church and state. Churches are protected in their continuing to condemn homosexuality for as long as they wish. Even if same sex marriage becomes affirmed a civil right by the Supreme Court, it cannot and will not change anything in the church.

      • ChristoD

        We can debate what type of issue it is until the cows come home joyscarbo but the religious right has MADE it a religious issue and in politics, when it comes to the real world, it is mass voting blocks that make it that way. I am a strong believer in the separation of church and state but all too often religosity has won out by supporting or opposing legislation I’m sad to say.

        • joyscarbo

          I know…and I agree with you. It is VERY unfortunate that civil rights and biblical ideology rules the day. So many’s civil rights are at stake here and religious right won’t be affected in any way. What’s worse is that religion is now waist-high in politics. No one is trying to take away the religious right’s voice…but now that it’s being espouced by republicans and tea-party…well, where does one end and another begin? What is next on their agenda? It’s a slippery slope that our country may be going down if we let it.

    • Frendrick Smithson

      the problem is there are state federal workers that cannot separate the church from state, marriage licenses are not issued by “God” and when it comes to religious beliefs there are more than one, which is why no singular belief is to be held above another when it comes to justice and law…………

  • Kathy Genny

    I find one issue in the gay marrage fight most interesting, The gay community believes in their right to marry, and are very vocal about it. Yet if there is any disenting voice againt the Gay marrage, no matter how small, they lash out at it like pit bulls, and instantly hang a label on that person that they are gay bashing or worse. The Gay comuinity says over and over, and loudly, they have a right to speak, yet instanly damn the person who has a differing view. So,, Who is really the close minded people in this debate, Both side are guilty, but at least the no gay marrage comunity does not instatly label the gay marrage person when they speak their mind.

    • gendotte

      Do not base your argument on false equivalency. Defending yourself is in no way equivalent to that Topeka preacher that I will not give the satisfaction of seeing his name in print once more. Are you aware that the Catholic Church has liturgies for sanctifying the marriage of 2 men or 2 women? Do a little research. It is there.

    • You are DEFINITELY using a false equivalency. If you choose to attack – in any way – my rights, I am certainly correct in saying that you are. Tolerance does not mean allowing someone to bash me.
      Look at it this way: you believe in the right of heterosexual couples to marry. If there is one dissenting voice (or a whole bunch!), are you going to keep quiet and call it open-minded, or are you going to speak up for your right to marry?

      Nope, the kind of tolerance we are looking for is this – you take care of your marriage – religious, civil or otherwise – and I’ll take care of mine. If you try to take care of mine, too, I will call you a gay basher. It’s simply not your business, not up for discussion, not an infringement on YOUR marriage. If you bash me or my decision to marry, you are a basher.

      As soon as you find a gay person bashing heterosexual marriage, let me know. I’ll be the first to call him/her a ‘basher’.

      BTW – pitbull? Well, okay, but I feel angry at people who believe- and tell me so – that I do not have a right to marry. You can believe whatever you want! But please, don’t tell me so. It makes me angry. As a pitbull, I guess.

      Hey, Gendotte – good post. Can you give me a clue about where to find such liturgy? I’m an amateur collector of paradoxes and contradictions in the bible, and I’d love to expand my collection to include Catholic liturgy.

      • Kathy Genny

        You missed my point Alice,
        My point is simple, The Gay person is allowedd their point of view, and the Hetro Person is allowed their point of view, but the Gay person does NOT have the right to label and bad mouth the hetro person just because their opinion differs.

    • jagmcc

      The situation is not symmetrical. If gay and lesbian citizens were in the majority and were proposing to limit marriage to those of their orientation, I feel sure that the heterosexual community would cry out in rage and despair. Where civil rights are concerned, we should try to put ourselves in others’ shoes before judging them. (In case you wonder, I am an elderly heterosexual male.)

  • gendotte

    When you can get a binding divorce in a church, then come talk to me.

  • Marriage as a legally recognized status and religious matrimony and any wedding event itself are three different things — often performed simultaneously in our country, but three different things nevertheless. So it’s not just that marriage isn’t “just” a religious thing. Legal marriage — the civil right sought by social progressives for same-sex couples — isn’t a religious thing at all. And it’s time that anti-gay religious forces realized that.

    • DwaininAztec

      In the ’80s there was a brouhaha in Florida as corporations tried to force pastors who were performing religious marriages to also make them civil. Older couples were not marrying before the state in order to keep their retirements. The state and corporations that wanted to get out of paying the retirements lost.

  • In the definition of marriage,the sex of a person is not mentioned.Marriage is defined as a union between two people.It is a legal problem,therefore put the vote on the national ballot and let the people decide without, intimadation from outside influence,if same sex marriage should be allowed.By the way if anyone does not want to perform a wedding ceremony between two people of the same sex,nobody is going to force them to do it.Now let’s forget this baloney and get back to the business of running this country.Stop delaying the important stuff,I say to Congress go back to work.

  • hdges41

    Can’t disagree at all. The problen is simple; there are enough American’s who believe this issue is “all that important.” If more did, and stood up and said so, this injustice would be over quickly. No matter how many other issues are important in this election, none can compare to equal rights to all Americans. Put the other issues aside for further work, but vote for what is right and tell the GOP that this has to stop!

  • dardyl

    What would Jesus do? He would remind us of God’s opinion of homosexuality. God doesn’t make junk, but people make bad choices. God’s grace will save us from ourselves, but we have to follow His will. Marriage may be a civil right as well as a religious rite, but religious trumps civil. I would much rather be right religiously than civilly. And hdges41, the majority of people are against same sex marriage. People are speaking up and they aren’t for it. That is why we have this issue. People are speaking up. They just aren’t saying what you want to hear. Eternity is more important than equal rights. You just aren’t listening to the people. In life, what God says trumps everything else, or the next life may not be so pleasant. And by the way, Republicans aren’t the only ones who feel this way.

  • mynewusenm

    Until I see any degree of forcing people to be gay I will know that to even think that gay marriage is “a gross usurpation of religious freedom” is as UN-American as Hitler was. WOW. How much further can those bigots fall of the cliff?

  • hdges41

    Thanks you, Jane Johnson. dardyl, your argument doesn’t hold one once of credence for me; I don’t believe God exists. Try to convince me again without mentioning God, Jesus or the bible. If you can’t. then get out of this discussion. Also, dardyl, if I’m not mistaken the majority favor gay marriage or “civil union” (don’t see the differnce) than oppose them. Among young people those opposed are in a significant majority. Amazing isn’t it how the young can thinbk much more clearly about simple issue like “liberty and justice for all.” To all who support equal rights, DO NOT VOTE FOR THE GOP!

  • dardyl

    It isn’t an issue of forcing people to be gay. It is an issue of going against God. If it says in the Bible it is a sin, what can be plainer? Religious freedom allows people to believe any religious principle they have faith in. Forcing people to be gay is silly. No one can do that, but the majority of people believe it is not natural and is a sin. That does not mean go out and persecute gays, or hurt them, or bully them. That is violating civil rights, not to mention being inhumane. But the reality is that people believe what they believe and they are not bigots. This concerns eternity and religion or God should come first. If the country as a whole does not approve of same sex marriage, it has a right to not have it. Why should the majority back down? Everyone calls for the disapproving to back down, but why don’t the minority back down instead of keeping the issue alive? That idea is not even entertained! They should not be able to impose their will on the majority!

    • oldtack

      What makes your “God” and your religious text any more “Holy” than Allah and the Quran? By virtue of place of birth you are somewhere in the Christian faith? If you were born ot an Arab family in Iraq you would be Muslim, in India you would be a Hindu. In all scenarios you as a child was indoctrinated into the teachings of whatever group to which you belong through Sunday School and then sitting in a place avidly drinking in everything that comes from the mouth of a “Hireling” and that’s what a Pastor is – he is a man hired by the Church to tend the flock – that’s all. Both isms have their origins in the middle east and evolved out of Judiasm. and where did this religion originate? Have you ever seriously delved into this religion past the time of Abraham? Don’t give me “faith” give me facts. Now – before you rant and rave your Jerry Falwell type bilge and proclaim me a hell bound athiest I will tell you I am a Christian and have been – like you- for all my life. I know what the scriptures say concerning homosexuality but unlike your open hatred, I follow the teachings of Christ. Christ said “some say hate your enemies I say to you love your enemies and PRAY for them. With your evident vindictive hatred I say to you that you are an abomination in the sight of God. If your myopic brain can grasp it – there is a religious side of this matter and then there is the LEGAL side of which you seem totally ignorant. When Christ was on his way to Jerusalem the Pharasees trying to trap him asked about his position on the tax to Rome to which Christ replied “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars and unto God that which is Gods. You can rejoice and do whatever in your religion but keep it out of the Government. In retrospect make sure the Government stays out of your religion. From your rambling and raving you sound not one whit different thna a Radical Muslim whose aim is to destroy you. I don’t know which one will get there first but either they or your ilk are going to destroy this Nation. To which I pray “Heavely Father place your hand upon us and shelter us from the idiots of this Earth”.

      Have a good day!

      • dardyl

        You say I was indoctrinated as a child. The Bible says raise up a child in the way he should go and my family did that. You claim to be a Christian too. How were you brought to Christ? Most people are a sum of their upbringing, so what was your point? Talk about rambling! In answer to the points of your post: I do not hate homosexuals. I know and love more than one homosexual, but I am saying that TO ME, it is an abomination to God and He does not approve. It makes me sad that it is this way, but I don’t believe that God would hold them responsible for their behavior if it were genetic or an illness. For me, I feel the need to champion the Bible rather than man. I am not spewing hate or violence and I am not an idiot. I can express my beliefs like anyone else, but hatred is not an emotion I feel toward them and they are not my enemies. I may pray for them, but not because we are enemies. Of course I know the origins of the religion, who would not know the beginnings of their religion? We should not be legislating morals. They are between the person and God. You are right; the government has no place here. What next? Saying it is ok for people to take multiple partners. Where are their rights? Or saying it is ok for children to be taken in marriage? Where are the rights of a thirty year old and a fourteen year old? Where do you draw the line? It may sound stupid to us, but there are those out there who think it is natural to entertain these notions and many more. What about rendering these to Caesar? I pray for our nation too. As for being a Muslim, I am totally different than one of them. They would not even debate. They would just plant a bomb or cut the head off the offending person and proclaim Allah
        satisfied. I am not interested in being anything like them. When you
        pray, pray for wisdom and pray for YOUR enemies. If you can’t see the
        difference in me and Muslims, then you need to pray for our nation for
        sure, because the Christians are in abundance in America and they are
        strong against same sex marriage.

    • phantomoftheopera

      well, what about interracial marriage? i believe the bible was used to ‘prove’ it was wrong.

      also, what did jesus say about gays? give me a quote, from the gospels. what i read is that the 2nd greatest commandment was to love your neighbors and treat them as you wish to be treated. do you to be denied marriage because we don’t like something about you? also, there’s the parables of the wheat and weeds/sheep and goats. lesson there seems to be not to judge. and of course, there’ s the great one about the mote in another’s eye vs. the log in yours. interesting how you’ve managed to ignore those.

      finally–why does allowing gay marriage jeapardize your eternity? i think your judging is more likely to do that.

      • dardyl

        I did not say that gay marriage put my eternity at risk. I said if I embraced or condoned it, I felt it would be going against God here on earth. If I am against God here, then my eternity would be at risk. I need to please God and then please man. I am not judging the gays. I am only saying what it says in the Bible. I know and love several homosexual people, but to me the idea is repugnant to God and they are responsible for their behavior. By extension, if America embraces homosexuality, she is in jeopardy. I don’t hate them nor am I interested in persecuting them. It is the way I believe and I stated that I didn’t believe I was in the minority. I have a right to believe what I believe and express it. This is what debate is. Who were you judging when you wrote me?

        • phantomoftheopera

          I’m sorry I thought you were a Christian. Obviously not if you can ignore jesus’ words so easily. And when you say you know and love some gays how can that be if they are an abomination? Pretty contradictory. And if you say say it’s an abomination because of gods word I can say you are judging based on Jesus words.

          • dardyl

            I am a Christian. Jesus hated the things people did, but He loved them enough to extend salvation to them if they decided to take advantage of it. He loved all kinds of people, not just those who were ‘good’. He expects us to stand up for His word and fight for it on every front. To do that, we must be able to discerne or judge what is for His word and what is not. Judging is not always damning. It is discerneing many times to decide what should be done in His name or not. Making a decision is judging—should I or should I not? You judge on the pros and cons. You read the word and decide.

          • phantomoftheopera

            No indication he hated the acts of gays. It seems that you ignore much of what he said that conflicts with your beliefs

          • dardyl

            There is indication that He hated the acts of gays. He honored His Father’s will and beliefs and God said it was a taboo thing. Why is that so hard to see? God does not approve. It seems you ignore much that doesn’t agree with you.* You* give* me* one text that proves what you say, that actually okays that lifestyle, one that says homosexuals are okay in the sight of God. I can give you scriptures where it says it is not, but I have been asked to prove my point without anyone offering scripture to prove theirs.

          • phantomoftheopera

            Actually I mentioned several that would indicate Jesus would tell you to quit judging. You can’t seem to reconcile them with your view. Quote me something where Jesus says gays are immoral.

          • dardyl

            The Bible says: Romans 1: 24-32 especially v. 26; Leviticus 18: 19-25 especially v. 22, then Lev. 20: 13; Genesis 19: 1-11; Judges 19: 22-30. In every one of these scriptures homosexuality is condemned in no uncertain terms.

          • phantomoftheopera

            And still no words from Jesus about this supposed abomination. Yet lots of words about not judging. Violence against the temple money sellers. Harsh words for the so religious Pharisees and rich. It SHOULD make you think.

            Anyway

            Lokah samista sukino bhvantu. Om shanti shanti shanti

          • dardyl

            Okay, Your turn now. Give me words from the Bible that says homosexuality is ok.

          • phantomoftheopera

            Not exactly point. It doesn’t say divorce is ok. It still says lepers are untouchable. Do you wear your hair long? It says you should. My point is that your knickers are in a twist over something that really isn’t your business.

            And I notice you can’t reconcile your views with the words of Christ.

            So. You can win. In your mind. A closed mind is a wonderful thing to waste.

          • dardyl

            I see. I never said divorce was ok or that it was okay to touch lepers. And I notice you can’t reconcile your views with Christ’s words. You have been all over the place with your arguments (divorce, lepers, hair, etc.) and it is hard to follow your point. I see you sitting and chanting your peace for the world song and arguing for the sake of arguing. Anything that concerns my country is my business. It is every citizen’s business. In your mind you win, but I can at least find scripture that says homosexuality is wrong and you can’t produce any that approves. So we are at an impasse. OM

  • If the government bestows that opportunity on heterosexual citizens, it can hardly deny it to homosexual citizens.

    Sure it can. Marriage is a union of one qualified male and one qualified female. Neither two males nor two females qualify.

  • rustacus21

    I’m not real clear on the religious implications, since from Scripture, there’s a prohibition against homosexuality, but this is the real world & populated by real people, who have to answer in the afterlife for ‘this’ life. W/that said, the reality is pretty stark that the president has many strikes against him & I hope & pray this isn’t 1 more, by being drawn in2 a debate that could have punitive consequences in the election. As a demographic, gay voters, altho having acquired their ‘civil’ rites via Liberal/Progressive legislative support, have been all over the ideological map, supporting the favorite ideology of the day (i.e., their failure to fully support Kerry in ’04 & Gore in ’00). Renounced roundly by conservatives, they still have a facination w/their legislative tormentors. What I don’t agree w/however, is presenting the gay ‘lifestyle’ over the media, where impressionable children are drawn in2 a debate over ‘sexuality’ b4 they even have the chance to learn how to spell their name or learn the value & virtues being an educated, contributing member of larger society 1st & 4most. Consequently, we must be mindful that being gay is as much a ‘choice’ as a ‘birth’ inheritance, unlike being ‘born’ Latino, Woman, Black, a dwarf or Asian – all of whom are still discriminated against yet 2day on a regular basis. As an example, I imagine we can look 4 reaction & (potential) fallout over how this debate impacts the president, as the election season goes 4ward, in gauging yet another test in the nations capacity to embrace diversity & xtend Liberties to another formerly ‘outcast’ member of American society…

  • dardyl

    If you don’t believe in God then you get out of the discussion. He has the biggest influence over the people who say ‘no’ than any other factor. The majority of people DO NOT approve or more states and the feds would already have the issue passed. You can’t blame the Republicans entirely because the Dems ruled both houses for three years and it didn’t get done. Evidently the Republicans aren’t the only ones who are interested in denying equal rights. You say among young people those opposed are in a significant majority. You don’t make any sense. You know yourself that your opinions change as you go through life, but your core beliefs usually remain close to the same. Young people may be more conservative than you think. We all go through the stage where we feel enlightened, but when it comes to contradicting the Bible (I know, no such thing as God) people think twice. dardyl

    • oldtack

      dardyl

      You are hopeless.

      • dardyl

        oldtack, You are immovable, but at least you didn’t call me an abomination again. A person can’t just leave his beliefs and values out of what he does. They are interwoven in and out of the fabric of his existence. I was only explaining why I felt like I did and how intrensic my beliefs are. I know there are more out there who feel as I do than not. That is why there is no law of the land to support same sex marriage. I don’t hate them and would never bash them or anything like that. I just believe it is wrong and I can’t support it. Anyway, that’s about it.

    • oldtack

      In your reply to me you stated you knew the origin of your Religion. Then tell me the origin and don’t quote the Garden of Eden. Give me the basic origin of the Jewish Faith from which your faith evolves. From some of your comments I think we are of the same Protestant group because I have heard that same dogma all of my life. I worship the “Great I AM” or Jehovah God as some prefer but I believe I AM is totally in charge and can handle all of these things without me postulating as a Jehosaphat. I find homosexuality totally at odds with my concepts and my beliefs. But I love them as a fellow being and I should pray for them. I do not condemn them either in their lifestyle. That is not in my power to do so. You seemed repulsed in my comparision of you and RADICAl Muslims and you readily “condemned them as an enemy. They call us “Godless Heathen ” because we do not worship Allah. We call them “Godless Heathen” because they do not worship God. I am a Christian, not by birth and indoctrination but by choice. I have Muslim friends and they worship their diety the same as I worship mine. The same for my Hndu friends and my Budhist friends. I pray for them to see the true light and I feel sure they pray for me also. BUT we coexist and leave those matters to our dieties. The danger part is when any religious sect or group becomes Radical such as we see in both the Christian and Muslim faiths. As a radical you as a group have become modern day Jehosaphats and are carrying out your interpretation of Gods will here on earth. God is in Control – not you. Let God handle these problems or – do you think the Holy One is incapable of handling this without your help? Homosexuality as a practice is abominable to many Religions and individuals and this is OK as long as one does not resort to violence. However, homosexuality as discussed today is a LEGAL matter and must be handled in the Government and Courts.. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars and unto GOD that which is GODS.

      • dardyl

        Abraham and Sarah could not have children, so Abraham and Hagar,(the servent) had a son Ishmael. Then Sarah had Issac. Then Abraham kicked out Hagar and her baby. These are the beginnings of my religion. Abraham was the father of Israel and the difference between the Jews and Christians is that Christians believe Jesus has come and the Jews are still waiting for Him. God is in charge, but He made us creatures of choice and we have to choose between right and wrong to earn God’s approval. He is always in charge and willing to back us if we are worthy, but we have to do our part. He was in charge at Jericho, but Joshua had to march and blow the trumpets to prove that he was willing to do God’s will. After he did, THEN the walls came down. God was in charge when Moses freed the people, but they had to smear the lamb’s blood on the door post. They had to do their part and stand up for God. I don’t believe we can just twiddle our thumbs and expect God to do it all. When we are confronted with issues we should voice God’s will. I’m not advocating violence or denying rights, but the issue is will we or won’t we and I’m saying no. Others are saying yes and I can express my opinion as well as they. It says to have no false Gods and we have to be judgemental in the sense of discerning enough to weigh situations and see which side we should stand with God. Judging can mean two things—it can be damning or it can mean discerning–weighing. We are judging all time when we are deciding. Anyway, that is how I believe.

        • oldtack

          Very good. You rose to the challenge. I don’t necessarily agree on all aspects of your discourse but – that is another area rather than this Forum. From your word usage and definition I am about 95% convinced you are a follower of the same Protestant Orgnaization (Church) in which I was reared. According to my family I “digressed” into another Protestant “Church” therefore in some areas my Scriptural interpretations differ from yours. I guess that is why we have so many diverse “branches” in the Protestan Movement.

          Have a Good Day – even though I don’t agree with you on some things.

  • hdges41

    Thanks, dardyl, for your latest response. Are you by any chance a member of that lovely group of devote Christians that find God telling them to picket military funerals? You sound like you might be. Let’s try this thought: I would bet that at least 95% of Americans would like to see that group banned from any funeral. Yet the courts have clearly said no; the Constitution guarantees their right to free speech. So here the will of the majority is over ruled by the rule of law. So even if a vast majority were against gay marriage (which is not the case, no matter what you say) the rule of law should apply, right? Now again please tell me why gays should not have the right to marriage without using God, Jesus or Bible in your answer. You didn’t do that the last time. Oh, and you cannot answer “just because it is wrong or not natural.” No other question, what gives one group the right to say another group should be denied basic freedom? I somehow thought we had settled that question when women got the right to vote, if not before. Any other group of “deviates” you would like to persecute?

  • dardyl

    You have me in the wrong group. I detest those people myself. Those people have to stay at least 1000 feet away from the funeral and the families to express their beliefs. It happened here one time and I thought they were outrageous. My answer is based on the Bible, Jesus, and God because I am a devout (not devote) Christian. I’m saying many of those who object to the issue, are more concerned about pleasing God for eternity than pleasing man for a short time here on earth. It says if you deny Me then I will deny you. Those who believe don’t want to chance being denied. I can’t leave religion out because it is my foundation for my belief. I see your point of view and I sympathize, but I am afraid for my soul should I contradict the Bible, or how I understand it. YOU are in that group that refuses to try to see someone else’s point of view, even if you don’t agree. That is what is wrong with our country. Those are the people I would like to persecute! I still say the majority is against gay marriage or the laws would be in place.

  • I support “Gay Marriage” becsause I belleve that we should not condemn a person with a birth defect. Why not have the concept of “Domestic Union” apply to all marriages; providing the rights of marriage to all couples regardless of sexual orientation.

  • I support “Gay Marriage” becsause I belleve that we should not condemn a person with a birth defect. Why not have the concept of “Domestic Union” apply to all marriages; providing the rights of marriage to all couples regardless of sexual orientation. Then Marriage can be a speritual thing; a religious thing for each pearson acording to their belif as they understand God. This would make the union of couples goverened in sink with our constitunial rule of “seperation of Church and State”.

  • It is time… We started in 1776 and we must continue to corect all supresed Human Rights.

    I support “Gay Marriage” becsause I belleve that we should not condemn a person with a birth defect. Why not have the concept of “Domestic Union” apply to all marriages; providing the rights of marriage to all couples regardless of sexual orientation.

    Then Marriage can be a speritual thing; a religious thing for each pearson acording to their belif as they understand God. This would make the union of couples goverened in sink with our constitunial rule of “seperation of chirch and state”.

  • Homosexuality is evil period. I do not care if the pope or and Obama endorse it. By they way, they all are not Born again. I mean they are true followers of Jesus Christ.

    • oldtack

      You sound just like a radical Muslim – no different. Through your indoctrination you are convinced your group and only your group possesses “Absolute truth” and and failure to observe and obey your interpretation of absoulte truth condemns one straight to Hell.
      Go back and read what you wrote. Keep you cconvoluted beliefs in your “Church” and out of my Government.

  • All this talk about defending marriage, and there’s no mention about divorce and adultery. If I recall, the Bible says something like this: “What God has put together, let no man put asunder,” and “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.” These, to me, are more important than whether or not the couple is same sex or not.

  • “Defense of marriage” should be as the Bible has it: THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOR’S WIFE (adultery), and WHAT GOD HAS PUT TOGETHER, LET NO MAN SET ASUNDER (divorce). All this talk against same-sex couples is a bunch of crap.

  • hdges41

    dardyl, thank you. You are now making much more sense and believe it or not, I now agree with you. That is except for one simple thing, your religious doctine, no matter how deeply felt, has no role in the laws of this nation. That’s essentially what those of us in favor of equality under the law firmly stand for. You are a person worthy of respect for your faith; but why not people of other beliefs have the same freedom that you have? That’s all; go foward in peace.

  • Frendrick Smithson

    Bill Clinton is one reason gay people cannot get married, he signed the Defense Of Marriage Act. He also deregulated the financial industry. Why liberals do things the way they do is beyond me, I was pleased Barack Obama noted Bill Clinton did both of those things. I would not trust him for shyte. He cheats his wife, lied to the country-and uses liberals for votes while doing some seriously back handed actions. His actions as of late are too little too late and I sincerely doubt he has any other motive but to dissuade people from thinking he is their enemy.