Not for me to judge...
2006-11-18 00:48:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ladeebug71 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Against the laws of nature >if it was intended that same sex to be together we would have both sex organs like worms that we could mutiply
Against the word of god - in romans states that in the last days that men lust would turn away from woman unto men (short ver)
Marriage - defined as a union between a man and a woman
If the USA permits this what is next >
What happens to all the laws writtern about this throw them out the window
when a nation permits a small band of people to change the laws to suit them then are we in the last days of this great nation / read about the rise and fall of the Roman empire it is no differnt then what is happening now /remember why this country was found /it wasnt so gays could dictate to the straights , so tired of hearing about gays rights when we have other issues here to deal with /what about are rights we the straights /married seem to have no rights at all > so when you out there think being gay is ok maybe (I know this will sound like 1950 but stay in closet , and when is it our month I see Oct was gay month /
2006-11-18 01:21:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by rev frank 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not against gay marriages.Don't think anyone else should be either. With all the hate and ugliness in this world we should see marriage between two people has a blessing not at problem. I doesn't matter if it is between 2 of the opposite sex or 2 of the same they are loving each and I will take love over hate any day.
2006-11-18 12:51:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why be against two people whose lives are happy? Those against it are afraid of their own sexuality and that they might be gay. Homosexuality is not mentioned in the bible new or old version. Anyone telling you so is a liar. People will forever be afraid of what they don't understand and what they are not exposed to. Interacial marriage used to be illegal and even today it is a bit risque in some circles. There isn't one logical reason why gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry. All the reasons are given by religious zealots exploiting people's ignorance for their own gain. What was the name of that imbecil who spoke out against the gay community but was having a homosexual liason? Then his idiotic flock believed his B.S. and prayed for his misguided soul. What do you think a lot of theses so called religious leaders do behind closed doors?
2006-11-18 00:56:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Your #1 fan 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Elton John recently said "From my point of view, I would ban religion completely. Organized religion doesn't seem to work. It turns people into really hateful lemmings and it's not really compassionate."
Based upon this, I see that the Homosexual agenda is more than attempting to allow two consenting adults live in peace, but it has broader implications. This is Satan's frontal attack!
World history supports the claims that all great civilizations came tumbling down during periods of rampant perversion, and unrelenting selfish pleasure seeking.
Although I personally have no quarrel with individuals who want to bugger around on their own free time, to make sweeping changes to society in the name of justice and equality is just asking the nation(s) to turn a blind eye to history. Then all hell's gonna break loose.
2006-11-18 01:20:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by nitr0bike 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Marriage insures the security of the living partner upon the death of the other.
Can't blame people for wanting what other people earn in the course of a relationship to be their right also.
We've socially evolved to where we do not feel we have the right to judge another person's lifestyle.
Politically, laws need to be in place to protect an individual from financial devastation when they lose a partner. Otherwise, the state pays: read: it's going to come out of your paycheck.
2006-11-18 01:05:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by Sunbaby 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
A) Because according to my cosmology, homosexuality is immoral (unhealthy for both individual and society).
B) The logic by which marriage is redefined to include homosexuality, actually transforms marriage into a variable that must accept any consensual relationship as "marriage."
C) There are other ways to extend basic rights to gay couples without redefining heterosexual marriage.
-Aztec276
2006-11-18 00:51:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
It should be called something else other than marriage,like gay union,or gay shacking-up or gay togetherness or gay friendship or gays realations, or gay couple, or whatever else.Marriage should be trademarked to hetrosexual couples. That's like Burger King coming out with a new burger and calling it a Big Mac.
2006-11-18 01:07:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
marriage is a religious ceremony between a man and a woman. I don't think it is right for two people of the same sex to make a mockery out of a religious ceremony. Besides that its wrong and a sin. Sure its cute for the fruits and nuts to pretend there married. In the majority of people and in the eyes of god it does not exist!
2006-11-18 00:56:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by The Truth 2.0 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Marriage is between a male and female, one thing I always though of, if 2 people got married of the same sex, which one is the woman, and takes the other ones last name.
2006-11-18 01:14:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by kayef57 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Marriage is to be the union of a man and a woman. It says so in the Bible. If we allow gay marriage ( I'm fine with civil unions) then what's to stop a father from marrying his daughter or polygamy?I just think that we have to stop it somewhere.
2006-11-18 00:51:08
·
answer #11
·
answered by vanhammer 7
·
1⤊
1⤋