More Than Semantics

[Jermyn Davidson]

Our President's announcement to endorse gay marriage does not shock me. The Democrat Party is the party of inclusionism, while the Republican party is unable to shake their identity as the party of exclusionism. However, I find our President's personal endorsement of this wickedness to be personally detestable and sad.

He is the President of the United States of America and we have fellow citizens of all faiths, creeds, no faith, and a variety of lifestyles living in this great nation as neighbors. I am not against the notion of "civil unions" for gay couples. It is only fitting that a country that epitomizes fairness and equality provide legal protections for her citizens who have not forfeited their right to the pursuit of happiness.

America was founded by Christians, but America has never been a theocracy and by the Grace of GOD, we will never be a theocracy. Still, the term "marriage" in America has always been sacrosanct. For most people, the term "marriage" has always indicated a loving and committed relationship between a man and a woman-- in the sight of and to be honored by GOD. There has always been a certain sanctity to the term "marriage" for Christians and even for most non-Christian Americans.

For an individual to endorse or promote the notion of "gay marriage" is considered a blasphemy of the original intent and purpose of marriage in the first place!

While it is the role of government to ensure that all Americans have their rights protected, it is the role of Christians to be separated from this world and it's sinful way of thinking. As long as I am a Christian, I will never agree that "gay marriage" is either good or right.

Government sanctioned "civil unions" for homosexuals is completely understandable, and necessary-- given how our country has evolved. Our President's personal endorsement of "gay marriage" is an attack to my Christian sensibilities that I will not attempt to explain away.


President Obama, I think you have been a good President, but I am unable to support you any further.

[Cindy]

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

...Government sanctioned "civil unions" for homosexuals is completely understandable, and necessary-- given how our country has evolved. Our President's personal endorsement of "gay marriage" is an attack to my Christian sensibilities that I will not attempt to explain away.

This sums up how I feel as well. I don't really take issue with civil unions, but I feel that Obama's support isn't really about supporting personal liberty; it's about supporting homosexuality and the total gay agenda. And even then, it's disingenuous--he's simply going for the gay vote however he can. Where was he with this endorsement when he first took office? Odd that he waits until election year to start pandering....

[bbyrd009]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

...I find our President's personal endorsement of this wickedness to be personally detestable and sad...

So how's that "sep of church and state" workin' out for ya?
Noting any hypocrisy there yet?

"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion means."
Mahatma Gandhi

I wish I could impress upon you how dangerous your fear
of a "Theocracy" is, and just what "Iron Scepter" means
in relation to this.

At the least, you might see that those precious
"Constitutional Rights" you imagine you still have,
have all been abrogated now. Would you like some
Scrip...uh, Law for that?

I agree with you on most things, btw;
including the essence of your first post here.

[canam]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Our President's announcement to endorse gay marriage does not shock me. The Democrat Party is the party of inclusionism, while the Republican party is unable to shake their identity as the party of exclusionism. However, I find our President's personal endorsement of this wickedness to be personally detestable and sad.

He is the President of the United States of America and we have fellow citizens of all faiths, creeds, no faith, and a variety of lifestyles living in this great nation as neighbors. I am not against the notion of "civil unions" for gay couples. It is only fitting that a country that epitomizes fairness and equality provide legal protections for her citizens who have not forfeited their right to the pursuit of happiness.

America was founded by Christians, but America has never been a theocracy and by the Grace of GOD, we will never be a theocracy. Still, the term "marriage" in America has always been sacrosanct. For most people, the term "marriage" has always indicated a loving and committed relationship between a man and a woman-- in the sight of and to be honored by GOD. There has always been a certain sanctity to the term "marriage" for Christians and even for most non-Christian Americans.

For an individual to endorse or promote the notion of "gay marriage" is considered a blasphemy of the original intent and purpose of marriage in the first place!

While it is the role of government to ensure that all Americans have their rights protected, it is the role of Christians to be separated from this world and it's sinful way of thinking. As long as I am a Christian, I will never agree that "gay marriage" is either good or right.

Government sanctioned "civil unions" for homosexuals is completely understandable, and necessary-- given how our country has evolved. Our President's personal endorsement of "gay marriage" is an attack to my Christian sensibilities that I will not attempt to explain away.


President Obama, I think you have been a good President, but I am unable to support you any further.

unable to support ? wow ! kudos !

[aegsm76]

jd - I have been personally incredibly disappointed in BHO. At the beginning of his term, I believed that he had an opportunity to be a highly effective President and with a few master moves to be re-elected.
If he had adopted the Clinton strategy and moved to the right, following the elections of 2010, he would have been unbeatable.
However, he seems to be intent on moving the country closer to European Socialism, which has shown to be a failure.
This latest move seems to either be brought about by desperation or extreme arrogance.

[canam]

extreme arrogamce ,narsicism and leftist idealogue personified

[deacon blues]

I agree with the civil unions and fair treatment for all Americans including homosexuals. But to change the meaning of marriage is not only anti-Biblical, it undermines the foundation of family, the most important building block of our nation.

You are right, its no surprise he supports it. Its surprising he'd go public before an election. I think its going to cost him more than one vote.

Curious JD, what about GOP makes you think it isn't inclusive?

[Truthseeker]

Civil unions is nothing but marriage repackaged. Its like calling a tv a monitor.

[bbyrd009]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

Civil unions is nothing but marriage repackaged. Its like calling a tv a monitor.

Do you envision a better way to apply grace to the situation?