Kawazu Posted August 22, 2009 Report Share Posted August 22, 2009 I would feel the same if that meant for EVERYONE.Just to be fair.All couples seeking State granted privileges would apply for the government/couple's relationship contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cofchristcousin Posted August 22, 2009 Report Share Posted August 22, 2009 But we are NOT expected to have concerns about your chosen lifestyle? You went on a some short length about families and children needing access to the same rights and finished with something akin to "at least do it for the children." What about the none "legal" children of a man's additional wives? We should legalize polygamy for their children. Right?I know you are somewhat blinded by your personal ties to the homosexual cause and thus do not see how hypocritical you sound, so I will give you a pass. Thanks for the pass, I am just lost at how much is read into my posts that I haven't said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desirexnoel Posted August 22, 2009 Report Share Posted August 22, 2009 All couples seeking State granted privileges would apply for the government/couple's relationship contract.Nothing spells love like "contract". It just makes my heart flutter. I am going to hang with my little sister! Bye bye guyz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cofchristcousin Posted August 22, 2009 Report Share Posted August 22, 2009 All couples seeking State granted privileges would apply for the government/couple's relationship contract.I agree, but there is no serious bandwagon getting this going. Civil Marriage is already available in 6 states, canada, and a few others countries. By the time people are willing to accept this as an alternative to civil marriage equality it will all be over. imo. Civil Marriage = Civil Unions. Why is it not easier to just realize that the word marriage is a legal contract and also a separate and distinct religious sacrament. One need not taint the other just because it uses the same word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HEthePrimate Posted August 22, 2009 Report Share Posted August 22, 2009 That was already talked about. They wanted to just call it a contract..."I love you so let's sign a contract" XDWell, whatever. Marriage isn't just a religious institution anymore. Any heterosexual without a religion can enter into it, and homosexuals should be allowed to enter into it too.Sorry, there are so many pages of this it's hard to keep track! But I agree with you. It's just a matter of semantics. Homosexuals should be allowed to marry. Opponents keep saying it "threatens" traditional marriage, but when I ask them how, they never have a coherent answer. If a gay couple gets married, it doesn't hurt me or a straight couple's marriage in any way.Peace,HEP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted August 22, 2009 Report Share Posted August 22, 2009 Sorry, there are so many pages of this it's hard to keep track! But I agree with you. It's just a matter of semantics. Homosexuals should be allowed to marry. Opponents keep saying it "threatens" traditional marriage, but when I ask them how, they never have a coherent answer. If a gay couple gets married, it doesn't hurt me or a straight couple's marriage in any way.Peace,HEPElder Bednar disagrees.YouTube - Mormon Apostle David Bednar Discusses Proposition 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kawazu Posted August 22, 2009 Report Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) I agree, but there is no serious bandwagon getting this going. Civil Marriage is already available in 6 states, canada, and a few others countries. By the time people are willing to accept this as an alternative to civil marriage equality it will all be over. imo. Civil Marriage = Civil Unions. Why is it not easier to just realize that the word marriage is a legal contract and also a separate and distinct religious sacrament. One need not taint the other just because it uses the same word.Hello,The word, "marriage" pulls very strongly at the emotional and theological core of many religious people. Regarding Prop. 8, many religious folks felt called to defend marriage as a Holy Ceremony. The idea of marriage as a government contract simply does not occur. (It is not emphasized within religious communities, typically.) Separating the two functions clarifies the subject. As it stands, the dialogue between worried people of faith and frustrated gay marriage advocates goes along the lines of:PERSON 1: Gay people should just get civil unions.PERSON 2: Civil unions are not legally equivalent to marriage in many States. Marriage is better.PERSON 1: Marriage is a religious institution.PERSON 2: Not entirely.PERSON 1: It says so in the Qur’an. [insert your own religious text or sermon.] Pragmatically, I suppose the marriage question could be dealt with by making civil unions synonymous by law with marriages. It does distinctly bother me, though, that most people of faith do not see marriage licensing as a phenomenal affront to their Holy Ceremony. I could not imagine having to obtain a, "baptism license" before being conferred upon with the Gift of the Holy Ghost.Thank you for your time and consideration.Sincerely,Kawazu Edited August 22, 2009 by Kawazu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kawazu Posted August 22, 2009 Report Share Posted August 22, 2009 Nothing spells love like "contract". It just makes my heart flutter. I am going to hang with my little sister! Bye bye guyz.You can have your contract for the tax break and your wedding for the love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HEthePrimate Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 Elder Bednar disagrees.YouTube - Mormon Apostle David Bednar Discusses Proposition 8That's nice. It's great to live in America, where we have the freedom to disagree!Peace,HEP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 · Hidden Hidden That's nice. It's great to live in America, where we have the freedom to disagree!Peace,HEPIt's always easier to follow the natural man instinct than to believe what the Lord is telling us through HIS servants. Link to comment
bytor2112 Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 But I agree with you. It's just a matter of semantics. Homosexuals should be allowed to marry. So, I am guessing you are cool with polygamy as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 But gender is not just "male or female". Some people are both, and some people are neither. If gender is "divine" (it comes from God) and is an important part of our identity, then why would God create people who do not fall in either the male or female category?Please help me understand. I welcome everyone's insights on this issue.While external organs may be confused, genetics can still determine whether a person is actually male or female. God allows for natural deformities to occur in life. Some are born with a third arm/leg, conjoined twins, etc. But God still knows their identity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desirexnoel Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 Sorry, there are so many pages of this it's hard to keep track! But I agree with you. It's just a matter of semantics. Homosexuals should be allowed to marry. Opponents keep saying it "threatens" traditional marriage, but when I ask them how, they never have a coherent answer. If a gay couple gets married, it doesn't hurt me or a straight couple's marriage in any way.Peace,HEPI like you. You are now my friend!Whether you want to be or not! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxel Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 (edited) That's nice. It's great to live in America, where we have the freedom to disagree!Peace,HEPMind enlightening us as to what points, exactly, you disagree with in the clip? Especially from 2:12 onward?I particularly like Bednar's phrase "the tyranny of tolerance" to describe unilateral tolerance- tolerance for only certain forms of expression and being. When I see this man- this duly appointed apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ- speak, I can almost feel the wisdom enlightening my soul. His words are based on the reality of life: how things really are, how they really have been, and how they really will be. We can boil much of what Elder Bednar says down to Moroni 7:16-17. Edited August 23, 2009 by Maxel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 (edited) Maxel, I have felt the same way when he spoke at our building or at Stake Conference, or at leadership training meetings when he was our Stake President. He seems to always know a great deal about the topic being discussed, especially if it's a moral or religious issue. You can't listen to him for very long, even in a casual setting, and not know he's special. When I saw this clip it brought back so many memories of youth firesides he tought that I sat in as a leader. I would watch the youth sit in awe and actually understand the priciples he taught, even though he taught difficult principles. That can only be done if the instructor is worthy of the Holy Ghost as a constant companion. When he was called to be an Apostle I was so NOT surprised. If I ever found myself disagreeing with anything he says I would have to seriously ponder my own position. I'm not saying he's perfect, none of us are. He is special, though. Edited August 23, 2009 by Justice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted August 24, 2009 Report Share Posted August 24, 2009 HeThePrimate,And I do believe that marriage outside of the tradition is harmful to society and religion. God has a standard for mankind's happiness. We can accept it, or reject it. The idea to supplant the heavenly mandated form is just another effort on Satan's part.Several studies have been done regarding homosexuality. Most show that the choice to become homosexual was greatly influenced by experiences in their youth with a man. Studies show that girls were often abused by a man in their early years, feel anger towards men, and feel safe and comfortable around other women in a lesbian relationship. Boys who are molested by men often feel that this is the proper way to be accepted by men, and will adapt accordingly. Greg Louganis, Olympic diver, had just such an event with his coach, who was a "father" figure for him.IOW, much of homosexual desire comes from emotional/sexual abuse. Its foundation is unhealthy. For us to somehow declare it to be "normal" and allow such to be left untreated shows that our society has major issues of its own. Do we leave alcoholics and drug addicts untreated, and say it is just a normal lifestyle choice?To allow official sanctioning of relationships that are based upon incest/rape/molestation does endanger our society. Why are homosexuals so disposed towards melancholy and suicide? Because they carry the torment of being abused in their heads, rather than receiving treatment and true healing.And it continues from generation to generation. Those who are sexually abused as children have a very big tendency to abuse children when they become adults. Satan wants people to be victims, so he can control them. He wants us to accept victimization as the norm, so he can rule and reign with horror on earth. This is no different than saying that the society in Somalia or Sudan is normal, with the constant killing, warring, and using small children as slaves or soldiers as just part of normal society.Here is a very good article by Dr Dean Byrd of BYU regarding the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttribe Posted August 24, 2009 Report Share Posted August 24, 2009 Howdy,Marriage ceased to be a religious ordinance when it was hijacked by the government institution called a, "marriage license". Now, insofar as the State is concerned, marriage is a contract between the government and the couple.Regards,KawazuTherein lies the problem, IMO, the duality of meaning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttribe Posted August 24, 2009 Report Share Posted August 24, 2009 Why is it not easier to just realize that the word marriage is a legal contract and also a separate and distinct religious sacrament. One need not taint the other just because it uses the same word.Unfortunately, that's not how the law works and words do matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.