Pastors forced to perform same-sex marriages

[Fionn mac Cumh]

Originally Posted by Luke

Thank you but as has been mentioned there is no way to prove that Jefferson had interracial relations. Weather he did or not has no bearing on the topic being discussed. There is no comparison between interracial marriage and homosexual unions. Unless you are saying that interacial marriage is the equivilant of homosexual unions.

No I a not saying that. I am saying that the govt has no right to regulate what two adults do in their love lives. Key word being adults. Thats all. If they can regulate that, what else can they regulate? Can they make us all practice a certain religion?

[Luke]

Originally Posted by Fionn mac Cumh

No I a not saying that. I am saying that the govt has no right to regulate what two adults do in their love lives. Key word being adults. Thats all. If they can regulate that, what else can they regulate? Can they make us all practice a certain religion?

Who said anything about regulateing I just dont want the definition of marriage to be redefined.

[Fionn mac Cumh]

Originally Posted by Luke

Who said anything about regulateing I just dont want the definition of marriage to be redefined.

Its regulating. You said you want a law against homosexuality. I didnt assume you wanted just marriage outlawed. Its also discrimination if we say straight people can wed and gays cant.. Marriage is a religious thing anyways. Would the word civil union make you upset? Civil unions and attached benefits for all couples. Is that ok?

[Luke]

Originally Posted by Fionn mac Cumh

Its regulating. You said you want a law against homosexuality. I didnt assume you wanted just marriage outlawed. Its also discrimination if we say straight people can wed and gays cant.. Marriage is a religious thing anyways. Would the word civil union make you upset? Civil unions and attached benefits for all couples. Is that ok?

What to people do inside the privacy of their home is their business. I do like Russia's law of keeping it private. I think that anyone should be able to get married and that there should no exceptions given to anyone. It should be the same standard for all. One person of the opposite sex. This shows no favoritism to anyone and everyone has the same opportunity to get married.

[Fionn mac Cumh]

Originally Posted by Luke

What to people do inside the privacy of their home is their business. I do like Russia's law of keeping it private. I think that anyone should be able to get married and that there should no exceptions given to anyone. It should be the same standard for all. One person of the opposite sex. This shows no favoritism to anyone and everyone has the same opportunity to get married.

Thats a contradiction isnt it?

[TGBTG]

Originally Posted by Luke

You do understand that there were laws in america against homosexual behavior not all that long ago? These are the laws to which i refrered.

So you want this type of laws re-instated?

http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_laws

Sodomy was a criminal offense at common law and was forbidden by the laws of the original 13 States when they ratified the Bill of Rights. In 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, all but 5 of the 37 States in the Union had criminal sodomy laws. Until 1961, all 50 States outlawed sodomy, with about half in 2003 continuing to provide criminal penalties for sodomy performed in private and between consenting adults.[16]

Miller[17] reports that the penalty for homosexuality in several states was death — including New York, Vermont, Connecticut, and South Carolina.[18] Thomas Jefferson advocated “dismemberment” (castration) as the penalty for homosexuality in his home state of Virginia, and even authored a bill to that effect, reducing the penalty from death.[19][20]

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Fionn mac Cumh

Its regulating. You said you want a law against homosexuality. I didnt assume you wanted just marriage outlawed. Its also discrimination if we say straight people can wed and gays cant.. Marriage is a religious thing anyways. Would the word civil union make you upset? Civil unions and attached benefits for all couples. Is that ok?

It's also discrimination if we say kids cant wed but adults can... I think its good to discriminate on certain grounds.

[Fionn mac Cumh]

Originally Posted by jfrog

It's also discrimination if we say kids cant wed but adults can... I think its good to discriminate on certain grounds.

Stop with this. I am saying two ADULTS

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Fionn mac Cumh

Stop with this. I am saying two ADULTS

Yet the principle stands. There are valid grounds to discriminate on. Perhaps gender is a valid grounds as well.

[Fionn mac Cumh]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Yet the principle stands. There are valid grounds to discriminate on. Perhaps gender is a valid grounds as well.

Well I dont see why there is any non religious grounds to. Huge difference between a pedophile and a homo.