Crimmson and clover.... To start with the terms Christian and politican rarely go together. Most politicans would say they were aliens if they thought it would get them votes. The truth is by saying they support such actions is on their part an act of desperation, they don't believe they can win on their past actions or lack of. In their mind offending Christians will be offset by homosexual support. they figure wrong. They may claim to be christian but we all know better, their actions speak louder than their lying lips. These canidates, what have they done for you, or anybody. I am sick of those who constantly run for office, while in office. For those who claim to be one way, while acting another. For those who want to be elected because of what someone else did or didn't do. How about getting elected on their actions or lack of, you know why they don't? because they don't do anything but tell you they will do something different without telling what that is
If other than man and woman want to join, then do so but find your own way quit copying us. It is not santified by a church so keep it out of the church. It's not a marriage so don't call it one, make up your own name, your own cerimony and your own place to have it. It seems since between all of you ,you can't come up with these simple answers so therefore one thinks you just want to attact religous cerimony rather than have a legal union, If not you would have figured a way to co-exist.To those canidates let me say there is no spin on the bible, it is as it is, try reading it sometime.
2007-07-24 05:07:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by sir wayne 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I do believe the candidates where implying that marriage is a religious matter. But I am saddened by the celebration of same sex relationships. Many people think that God forbids things because He can without any rhyme or reason. Nothing can be further from the truth. He created human beings and He knows what conditions will cause us to flourish as a race of beings. If God says gay and lesbian intimacy is a problem that's just like saying there is a time bomb in your shoe please remove it. Even when traditional marriages are bad it usually effect their children in an adverse way. This movement will prevail if that's what people want. But my worry is this. While all those people are celebrating the chickens will start coming home to roost. In other words there is going to be a serious backlash in humanity that will make even these folk say, 'What have we done!?' The saying will come true, 'They strained at a gnat and they reaped the whirlwind'.
2007-07-24 05:02:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
No it is not right. And they will probably use a newer version of some scripture to scantify the gay marriages.
Not only Christianity but other religions do not allow same sex marriage.
I have come to this conclusion that it (homosexuality) is sort of abnormal mental change, which needs rectification. In all
scriptures there is mention of those who indulged in such practices, along with their destruction. It is definetely the path of Lucifer.
ps..
It seems that we have lots of these junk homos on Q&A, judjing by the negative points they give to the right answers.
2007-07-24 05:02:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by bakhan 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
How does "Marriage should be left up to the Clergy."
Become "Satan have the right to enter the church and spin the scripture any way"
Man, talk about blinkered and only hearing what you want to hear.
They are saying that civilly gay couples are being discriminated against. This IS against the constitution which says that there can be no discrimination based on the sex of a person.
However, if no clergyman wants to marry them in a church then they are out of luck on that front.
Try to remember that we do have separation of church and state here.
2007-07-24 04:45:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by Simon T 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
They are not saying the churches should grant the sacrament of marriage to anyone they do not want to. What they are saying is that marriage is a church matter and civil unions are a state matter and the line should be drawn there. I fully agree. As a gay man that has been in a monogamous relationship with the same partner for more than 15 years I can tell you this. Neither one of us wants to be married. Neither one of us belong to or follow any church and we recognize that marriage is of the church. We do, however, demand equal rights under the law. As it stands now the civil recognition of marriage is dictated by the churches and is a clear violation of the establishment clause. I say do away with state recognition of "marriage", let the churches go ahead and have their sacrament and let the state deal with everyone on equal footing within civil unions.
2007-07-24 04:38:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Murazor 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
You answered it yourself with "so-called Christians." That's a no-brainer even before last night's debate. They do not have a clue about the ways of the Lord otherwise they would not be on the Democratic party that opposes anything God is for and they are for what Scripture is clearly against. Jesus said repeatedly throughout Scripture " If you love me, you will obey my commandments." No Reublican or Democrat will have any chance of entering heaven without a life that is centered on the foundation of God's Word. Our days on earth are progressing swiftly to the end as Jesus prepares to split open those eastern skies, so Satan is working overtime to corrupt God's Word and destroy as many souls as possible, but we are not ignorant of his devices. Cling to God's Word, fill your mind with it because Satan can't endure much of Scripture as we see in Matthew 4:1-11.
2007-07-24 04:51:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by HeVn Bd 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
You are assuming that ones needs religion to consummate a marriage and that is just untrue. When I was married it had nothing to do with religion as I am Agnostic. You seem to think that your beliefs trump others rights to do things. You also seem to think that all christians think alike if that were true there wouldn't be some many different denominations. My Father was a minister and he had no problem with marrying gays together. Some just take that bible way to literally. I just reread your post and at the end you seem to equate gays with satan boy are you screwed up but unfortunately you sound like most xians on here.
2007-07-24 04:35:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by discombobulated 5
·
4⤊
1⤋
I heard Edwards wife talking about this. She and her husband disagree on this issue. It's just a lot of malarkey and double speak if you ask me, they are trying to say what they think everyone wants to hear, to get themselves elected, and it doesn't make any sense at all.
"allow it by law" makes the gay rights people happy
"but let the Church decide whether or not to sanctify it" makes the Christians happy.
or so they think.
2007-07-24 09:28:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by Sweet n Sour 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I always encourage people to question, but would you consider that your question truly involves interpretation of those words from the bible? We all do not interpret meanings of words in the same way which, unfortunately, leads to conflict or confusion. You may not get the answer you are looking for without asking the person who spoke...yet, continue your quest for understanding, but be open to others interpretations.
2007-07-24 05:11:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by butterflimoon 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Did you REALLY miss what they were saying?
Not all clergy is Christian. A Wiccan Clergymember would probably have no problems with consecrating such a wedding, nor likely would a Buddhist or Asatruar.
They were saying that the issue of marriage is both legal and religious, and while the law should allow it, the religions should choose, FOR THEMSELVES, if they want to bless such unions or not.
No one, *EVER*, has talked of forcing Christian churches who oppose gay marriage to perform and bless them.
Well... except conspiracist evangelicals who try to scare other evangelicals with this lie.
2007-07-24 04:34:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋