Gay Marriage?

[bytor2112]

These "legal agreements" are a private matter and are available now. They are trying to make an "in your face" point by wanting the government to sanction these type of marriages. Once Uncle Sam has put his Seal of approval on it then they will be able to attack institutions of religion for not recognizing their marriages as legit. Our faith will not be excluded from this. Then their is no way to stop them from infiltrating text books and classroom curriculum.

[Hemidakota]

Rickg, I for one could careless what the media thinks but what GOD's stated.

[skalenfehl]

God's purpose is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. This occurs through the Atonement and by our obedience to His commandments. He has His hands outstretched to us the whole day long and wants us to reach out to Him. We are His children, His family. He wants to reclaim us. But if we do not want to then we will not count ourselves as part of His family.

Matt. 12: 46-50

46 ¶ While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.

47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.

48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?

49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

If God tells me to vote one way or another, you bet that is how I am going to vote. God's laws are higher than man's laws and sooner or later we will all be reminded of it, perhaps the hard way. Those who are still undecided and sitting on the fence, remember what Christ said about those people who are lukewarm.

Rev. 3: 16

16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

Don't mistake me for a bigot. I'm not. I have friends and associates who are gay and I think they are great people. God just happens to forbid homosexuality. Therefore I will not support it. I don't live in California but if I did, I would side with the church.

Josh. 24: 15

15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

[Kirajo]

Sooo Im' pretty positive that if The Prophet asks you to do something...probably ought to put all your little " logic " and stupid "personally, i believe..." crap behind.

Proverbs 3:5-6 :)

[Hemidakota]

Well put....man, I need to remember that one for a few academic friends.

[WANDERER]

I'm with Monson on this one.

[bytor2112]

Must be something in the water in California.......er and Massachusetts and Vermont...... We should have voted for a constitutional amendment, instead we are going to get hijacked by a few judges in some lefty states. But I am just a right wing religious whacko and obviously full of hate and very mean.

[captain_nephi]

I agree with you, bytor2112--previous post, not the one above.

If God could, he could simply will the world to not allow same-sex marriages, and it would be done. But that is not how he operates. He is relying on his saints to do some of the heavy lifting. And we do that, in this case, by using our brains and the knowledge of PR, marketings, sales, politics, business, etc., etc., etc., to get the job done. And if we do our very best, He will bless our endeavors to further his cause.

I say all this, because understanding why we need to oppose same-sex marriage is as important/more important than to blindly say we should. It's not just the use of the word, it is, as bytor2112 stated, the beachhead that will allow secular ideology to invade our communities, regardless of where your live and what you believe in.

This fight is not just about same-sex marriage. It is about the invasion of secular beliefs that would kill God off all together. I have read the conversations that suggest religion is antiquated and that science is the new creed.

God is not dead.

We all need to be prepared to be valiant, for larger fights are coming I fear.

[Hemidakota]

That is the church that Nephi may had seen in his vision..."Alas Babylon!"

[bytor2112]

Captain Nephi, I agree 100%. This is a major front of the war against religion and morality. Secularism is the religion of the left. Interestingly enough, I believe that Bruce R McConkie stated that evolution is the Secular religion.... along time ago. I am happy that the Church is making a stand and are calling on us to do so as well. This is part of a much broader agenda. Homosexuality has existed and will continue to exist. But is no longer looked down upon by anyone other that us religious folk. Gay characters are on every show on TV.... so I hear. It is all so open and once they leap this last hurdle........they will be very emboldened and this agenda as well as the rest of the secular agenda will stride boldly into as much of the sacred and educational as possible.

So, lets heed a Prophets call....

[MichaelPAGuy]

If it is a polite reminder to tell you to vote against same-sex marriage, in my opinion that is the church getting involved in politics. Why is it the church can't let 2 people who love each other be together? What about straight marriages that last for a short time. Example, Brittany Spears 1st marriage? That lasted a few days. Isn't that a threat against marriage, since the church does not believe in divorce.

[Kirajo]

A lot of things, we Saints don't have control over. ie; murder, violence, pre marital sex...we can do our best to teach against it, but rarely do we have the opportunity to prevent it. In this case, letting same-sex marriages become legal would be like us watching a great opportunity to HELP these individuals from making a mistake. We aren't preventing this because we hate them or don't love homosexuals. We care about them and are trying to help them from going too far with something that is abomination in the eyes of God.

[bytor2112]

PA- Your missing the point. Two people who "love" each other can have a ceremony and call it marriage and have any kind of legal arrangement that they choose. What they are asking for is government sanctioning of marriage. They currently have the same rights that I as a heterosexual man have. They can marry someone of the opposite sex and that is recognized as marriage by the government and dare I say- God. They are asking for a new definition of marriage. Why can't I marry more than one woman, if I love each of them or why can't a woman marry more that one man, hmm? Or why shouldn't we be able to marry a sibling if we love them. After all we shouldn't judge and maybe they would really love each other? Endless possibilities and again they are able to have a ceremony and call it marriage and have legal arrangements. That is a private matter and between them, their family and friends and their personal believe in God. But changing the laws open the doors to the above mentioned scenarios and more intrusion into the religious, educational and cultural realm. Haven't children been exposed to enough immorality already without allowing further immoral intrusion by secularists with an agenda. As far as Britney Spears.... that's just another example of the erosion of values and how marriage is not viewed as a sacred institution by many today.

[Islander]

We had a thread on this issue that ran for 2 weeks and something like 30 pages. It should be posted around somewhere for the interested to read. This is a very contentious issue that elicits a lot of energy so I suggest we do not regurgitate it again and move on. The Church has a position on the issue based on revelation from God. Some agree, some don't and unless something extraordinary happens, nobody is going to change their mind. The exchange herein becomes rather unproductive.

We should move on to more productive, spiritually minded and edifying subjects. Just my suggestion.

[DigitalShadow]

Another thread about this?

Mormons believe it is wrong and immoral for homosexual people to be together, and as a private organization they are free to ban whatever ceremonies they want or excommunicate homosexual members as they please. The problem is that calling homosexuality immoral is an opinion and a religious one at that. Enforcing a religious opinion on the rest of the public is where I have a problem.

Oh, you don't think that's a problem? Let's say I worship a different God and had a decent following. Let's say my God says people of different hair colors should not marry because it is an immoral abomination. Should I then be able to pass laws demanding everyone adhere to my version of morality?

In summary, what two consenting adults do is not your problem, and as long as it doesn't harm you personally, it really isn't any of your business.

[Kirajo]

"The problem is that calling homosexuality immoral is an opinion and a religious one at that. Enforcing a religious opinion on the rest of the public is where I have a problem."

Perhaps those that are both heterosexual and homosexual are in fact in favor of same-sex marriage because of THEIR religious beliefs...what now?

[DigitalShadow]

"The problem is that calling homosexuality immoral is an opinion and a religious one at that. Enforcing a religious opinion on the rest of the public is where I have a problem."

Perhaps those that are both heterosexual and homosexual are in fact in favor of same-sex marriage because of THEIR religious beliefs...what now?

I don't have a problem with allowing an activity that doesn't harm anyone based on religious beliefs (for example, taking sacrament). I do have a problem with preventing an activity that doesn't harm anyone based on religious beliefs that they do not share (for example, gay marriage). There is a huge difference there.

Edited June 30, 2008 by DigitalShadow
grammar

[Shade]

EVERYONE has a religion. it comprises all those things we hold dear and/or sacred. it's how we live our lives. it's what drives us to wake up each morning and face another new day, hopeful of better things to come. please go ahead and look up any comprehensive definition or description of precisely what religion is for yourself.

some of our religions stem from or are connected to churches: groups of people who share the same or similar beliefs and follow prescribed instructions on how to live their lives

please don't pretend that members of a church have any less right to stand up for and fight for what they believe than do members of the local democratic party, or the local gay club

each member of any ofthese groups has the absolute God-given right to fight for their rights

do SSA's, either singularly or collectively, have the right to fight for legalisation of what they believe to be their right? hell, yeah. so why do Mormons not have the right to oppose what they believe to be a curse, either singularly or collectively?

Edited June 30, 2008 by Shade

[bytor2112]

Religious viewpoints aside...... they have the right to marry anyone they choose, just as I do, as long as they are of the opposite sex. They are asking for a new right, one which I don't have either. Again they can have a ceremony call it marriage and have legal agreements for the parties involved and call each other spouse, husband, wife, dear, honey or whatever. We just don't need to have the government sanctioning and changing the definition of marriage and inviting a myriad of other problems. There argument is hollow. They can have a ceremony, invite friends, receive gifts, send invitations, place an announcement in the paper,have bridesmaids and groomsmen, whatever makes them happy. They can choose to leave all of their worldly possesions to their partner and leave medical and end of life decisions up to their partners. They do not need Uncle Sam to say it's okay.

As for morality, this is a site comprising mostly people of a common mindset who share the same religious affiliation. People make moral judgments all of the time, right and wrong. And, Digital Shadow, it harms us all. As I have stated above and in other comments, two consenting adults may do whatever they wish, but it does cause harm, it is all connected and it will not stop with this issue. Morality and religion, not just LDS beliefs tend to walk hand in hand. The real issue is that six judges shouldn't get to reinvent marriage for the rest of Americans. It causes so much harm that I could right for days about it. Anthony Scalia has written a good deal on the legal ramifications. Harmful yes. Morally and otherwise.

Let them do as they wish and live as they wish..... and they already can. They don't need the governments intervention to live their chosen lifestyle. As far as it being an abomination... that is between them and God.

Edited June 30, 2008 by bytor2112

[DigitalShadow]

EVERYONE has a religion. it comprises all those things we hold dear and/or sacred. it's how we live our lives. it's what drives us to wake up each morning and face another new day, hopeful of better things to come. please go ahead and look up any comprehensive definition or description of precisely what religion is for yourself.

some of our religions stem from or are connected to churches: groups of people who share the same or similar beliefs and follow prescribed instructions on how to live their lives

please don't pretend that members of a church have any less right to stand up for and fight for what they believe than do members of the local democratic party, or the local gay club

each member of any ofthese groups has the absolute God-given right to fight for their rights

do SSA's, either singularly or collectively, have the right to fight for legalisation of what they believe to be their right? hell, yeah. so why do Mormons not have the right to oppose what they believe to be a curse, either singularly or collectively?

Any group can fight for whatever cause they want. I'm simply saying that in order for the government to take action and prohibit something (which affects everyone, not just people of your faith), there has to be more reason than "because my God said so." So far, I've seen no other reason for the banning of gay marriage.

[DigitalShadow]

Religious viewpoints aside...... they have the right to marry anyone they choose, just as I do, as long as they are of the opposite sex. They are asking for a new right, one which I don't have either. Again they can have a ceremony call it marriage and have legal agreements for the parties involved and call each other spouse, husband, wife, dear, honey or whatever. We just don't need to have the government sanctioning and changing the definition of marriage and inviting a myriad of other problems. There argument is hollow. They can have a ceremony, invite friends, receive gifts, send invitations, place an announcement in the paper,have bridesmaids and groomsmen, whatever makes them happy. They can choose to leave all of their worldly possesions to their partner and leave medical and end of life decisions up to their partners. They do not need Uncle Sam to say it's okay.

As for morality, this is a site comprising mostly people of a common mindset who share the same religious affiliation. People make moral judgments all of the time, right and wrong. And, Digital Shadow, it harms us all. As I have stated above and in other comments, two consenting adults may do whatever they wish, but it does cause harm, it is all connected and it will not stop with this issue. Morality and religion, not just LDS beliefs tend to walk hand in hand. The real issue is that six judges shouldn't get to reinvent marriage for the rest of Americans. It causes so much harm that I could right for days about it. Anthony Scalia has written a good deal on the legal ramifications. Harmful yes. Morally and otherwise.

Let them do as they wish and live as they wish..... and they already can. They don't need the governments intervention to live their chosen lifestyle. As far as it being an abomination... that is between them and God.

I'd be curious to see what "harm" allowing gay marriage would cause. It's not as if your average couple would have been married to someone of the same sex if it were legal. In fact it wouldn't change much at all other than granting a legal status to some couples who are for all intents and purposes already "married."

Sources please.

[bytor2112]

Huh? I have listed multiple reasons that have nothing to do with religion. There are lots of reasons that have nothing to do with religion or because "God said so".

[Shade]

Any group can fight for whatever cause they want. I'm simply saying that in order for the government to take action and prohibit something (which affects everyone, not just people of your faith), there has to be more reason than "because my God said so." So far, I've seen no other reason for the banning of gay marriage.

it's by far the best reason on earth to object to this legislation

what you DO NOT BELIEVE holds just as much weight and is just as important as what I DO BELIEVE

[DigitalShadow]

Huh? I have listed multiple reasons that have nothing to do with religion. There are lots of reasons that have nothing to do with religion or because "God said so".

You made vague references to "legal ramifications" (every peice of legislature has legal ramifications, should we stop making laws?) and Scalia writing about possible harm, but I still don't see any substance to your reasons that have nothing to do with religion.

[Islander]

Another thread about this?

Mormons believe it is wrong and immoral for homosexual people to be together, and as a private organization they are free to ban whatever ceremonies they want or excommunicate homosexual members as they please. The problem is that calling homosexuality immoral is an opinion and a religious one at that. Enforcing a religious opinion on the rest of the public is where I have a problem.

Oh, you don't think that's a problem? Let's say I worship a different God and had a decent following. Let's say my God says people of different hair colors should not marry because it is an immoral abomination. Should I then be able to pass laws demanding everyone adhere to my version of morality?

In summary, what two consenting adults do is not your problem, and as long as it doesn't harm you personally, it really isn't any of your business.

Again, you should go back and read the thread that tried to tackle this issue a few weeks ago.

This is a moral issue not a political issue. THEY made it a political issue by involving the courts. What people choose to do in private should not be anyone's concern. but in the case in point they are using the courts to legalize it and force me to accept it, thus the problem I have with it. We are entitled, according to the constitution, to have a moral position on an issue.

Your rights end where mine begin. If you, by using the government, can infringe in MY rights you bet I am going to object. You advocate a secular position with no real historical or social fundamental, I claim the right to align myself with God on this issue. I see no reason why not to hold on to my value system since you insist on forcing yours on me. You fail to see the constitutional issue at hand so I suggest you go and read on it. Your analogy about hair color is infantile and lacking substance. Behavior is a choice.

Edited June 30, 2008 by Islander