Devil's Advocate?
2007-03-27 06:39:15 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I dunno.....some good ones. Enjoy.....choose wisely...NOW VOTE!
2007-03-27 20:36:30 · update #1
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHHHA OH GOD HAHAA thats SERIOUSLY funny. >.> Star ness. Hehehe well some people actually love each other and love being married. So yeah that wouldn't work out so much hahaha but that is really funny.
2007-03-27 06:41:23 · answer #1 · answered by xxx 5 · 4⤊ 3⤋
relatively it particularly is particularly undemanding. maximum folk don't comprehend that "marriage" is relatively to absolutely separate movements. First, it particularly is a civil ceremony. The "civil contract of marriage" includes acquiring a "marriage enable" and having a civil ceremony performed. it particularly is frequently finished via ANY state approve decent, (see your states standards) The "civil contract of marriage" can provide each and all the civil "rights, privileges and frequently happening jobs" of a state regarded becoming a member of of two human beings to form a family contributors unit. 2nd, is the "religious ceremony of marriage". it particularly is the place the couple, in the event that they SO choose for, placed as much as the dogma, doctrines and ideology of the religious employer to which they belong. In doing so, this voluntary action, binds them in the previous their congregation to public assertion of submission. there isn't any criminal recognition of the "religious ceremony of marriage" while it includes civil rights of any style, different than it particularly is easily the Constitutional suitable to their religious ideals. while the movements of marriage are totally understood, and maximum folk decrease than 40 do comprehend this, then while observing the term "gay marriage" you will relatively say that there isn't any such ingredient as "gay marriage". purely placed ALL state regarded marriage can not have religiously imposed over tones interior it. and that's what the whole commotion is all approximately. The meant possession of the assumption of marriage being a spiritual no longer a civil ceremony.
2016-10-20 01:39:47 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not only am i against gay marriage(i support the gays)
Im against straight marriage.
To me there;s really no point in marriage.
if you think that marriage is a requirement for having kids, thats stupid. No one has the right to tell you when to have sex.
you can have sex anytime you want and noone is going to stop you.
a man and a woman love each other enough, so whats the point of getting married
2007-03-27 07:13:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that the ban on gay marriage is wrong. We as a society are so judgmental. It's messed up. Why can't we just live our lives, love each other, treat everyone the way we want to be treated and leave God to do the judging. It's what he says to do in the bible. Jesus preached love. I don't remember him once saying in the bible that he hated someone. I mean he even loved Judas. It's not our place and a lot of "Christians" would be right to remember that.
2007-03-27 06:44:18 · answer #4 · answered by Jamie B 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
so what if it causes a commotion people cant help it that there gay,its not there fault no matter how hard they try to be straight.You can't blame them.And besieds,marriage is a big part of people's lives but its not the only big thing either just dont say that all people r different and no one is the same! its the truth
2007-03-27 06:43:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Actually, it's a viable solution to the problem. Make "marriage" merely a religious institution, and make the government only give civil unions. That way, the people who say "marriage is instituted by God!" can make it only a heterosexual thing if they want (and the liberal churches can continue marrying same-sex couples), and the government can treat everyone equally--civil union contracts for everyone!
2007-03-27 06:44:27 · answer #6 · answered by N 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
No - just outlaw it to those that are infertile and make it law that anyone married would have to produce a child within 1 year of the date of marriage, or the marriage is null and void. That way, marriage stays what it was intended for - procreation only...
2007-03-27 06:43:44 · answer #7 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
well people have been used to just male to female marriage for centuries, until now, and change is always unsettling, and confusion can cause anger. But people are getting more and more open as time goes on, so things are only looking up!! i went to a gay marriage on sunday and it was fab!
2007-03-27 06:44:44 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
That doesn't really make sense. A better alternative would be to criminalize divorce, since we're so concerned with preserving the "sanctity of marriage."
P.S. YES, this is a joke. I like the "civil unions for everybody" idea, with "marriage" being purely a religious institution, so that each church can decide for itself if it wants to discriminate against gay people on "religious" grounds.
2007-03-27 06:43:04 · answer #9 · answered by jonjon418 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
ppl would still live together and act married. Having a big marrage and singing papers are really only a technicality. Some ppl these days dont really like being commited so they just live together and even have children without actually getting married.
Ppl can also get married in secret u know.....not that hard.
2007-03-27 06:44:16 · answer #10 · answered by Eryn v 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bingo! Give that man a cookie. That is exactly why Christians are against gay marriage. They know God is not going to sanctify a gay marriage because God said it is an abomination. Christians know gays only want to destroy what God has joined together.
Matthew 19:6
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
2007-03-27 06:51:51 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋