Ancient Egypt was sometimes led by religious leaders who went to war with other nations. During the time of Greek mythology, the Greeks occasionally united by their religion went to war with enemy nations. And this is just two of many examples of religious wars.

I really love when someone brings religion in a forum and when asked about that religion we are infringing on their religious believes..Is there something wrong there? I shared my believes and when I asked about theirs you are infringing on their rights?????????????????????????? They just skip over the questions. They then say we do not understand. Dam answer the questions and we might!!!!!!

I don't understand annulments. I especially don't understand it when they were married for some time. Either you've been married or you haven't.

It's the church trying to alter reality. That's what it does best.

See they bring religon into it and then skip over the questions. If they want us to "understand" you think they would answer then. Winx what is the deal about paying the church for the anualmente. Gio said something about it. I believe in the same bible and the same god so I just dont understand the reluctance to answer the questions. Do you not swear on the bible to have , hold ect ect till death does us part.

To the OP – nothing about God, although the major opposition, is opposed only because of religions belief. But how did that happen?

TO EVERYONE:

I would ask for your consideration of the following information; “basic” civil rights are being denied to a large portion of society. ‘Civil Rights,’ many of which are restrictively bound to the contract of marriage. An audit of these laws, requested by the U.S. Supreme Court, a couple years ago, indicated approximately 1,100 legal benefits are inextricably tied to the contract of marriage, and the depth of research could only approximate, as there are countless minor issues that could not all be linked.

What is marriage? Marriage means two things;

1. To the religious sector marriage is a traditional ceremony in which two people are bound together in the sight of God.

2. In the legal code, both Federal and State, marriage is a contract. Like any contract the marriage contract requires the signatures of both parties and witnesses to the legal signing of the contract. The contract, basically, is a declaration, of both parties, to the government, of their mutual change in status. Along with this change in status, the couple is agreeing to accept all the laws that govern within the contract, which includes all laws currently in effect, and any changes or new laws enacted by a governing agent.

The agreement; the contract, is between two consenting adults, of sound mind, and the government.

How did a religious traditional ceremony become so enmeshed in our laws? To understand this, first imagine the early colonies of the future United States. Struggling to determine what laws should be followed, and who would preside over those laws.

Certain traditions were more easily accepted because they were common to so many. In the early history of this country, even into the 1900’s women and children were considered property.

While women and female children were no more than property, sons were the inheritors and overseers of all the assets a man left behind. But what if there were no sons? Well, what did England do? That was easy, property and assets then fell to the deceased males’ father, unless deceased, then to the eldest brother and so on and so on.

This was tradition, and so it was added into the laws of inheritance and forever bound to the act of marriage. From that point on, any time and any way a law could be tied to the contract of marriage, it was just easier to do so.

This how so many laws have been connected to the contract of marriage – it was just an easier way to adapt new laws.

It’s obvious that those who are denied the right to enter into a marriage contract are being denied the same civil rights that all laws falling under that contract are inclusive of.

THAT IS JUST A BEGINNING. Keep in mind that the governments of this country openly adhere to and allow discrimination by exclusion. Now consider how the public views this blatant act of discrimination! Homosexuals are not equal to heterosexuals; it says so by the very laws that govern our society.

If they are not of equal status in over 1,100 Federal laws, then why should they be equal in other laws?

Marriage discrimination is the capstone of laws, which allows discrimination in many other forms, not tied to the contract of marriage.

Gays cannot adopt, gays can loose their home, their job just for being gay – just being suspected of being gay. Gays can not openly participate in defending their country. Gays are banned from many clubs and many public places. Teachers are still unable to come out of their closets in the majority of schools and school systems. Until the 1970’s Federal employees were protected, for reporting gay activities or gay suspicions of other Federal employees, and those who were reported were fired without any hearing or reason other than gay suspicians – BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

So why wouldn’t it be ok for all the states, cities, counties and towns to act accordingly? Discriminations in court trials have been abundantly plain, and just as in rape cases, gays are ‘preconceived’ to be at fault.

The list goes on and on. It’s plain to see that by ending marriage “contract” discrimination at the FEDERAL level, would declare to the citizenry that all other discrimination would be illegal.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court refuses to call up any issues about the marriage contract, so gays are forced to fight this battle state by state.

There is an ulterior motive in doing state by state challenges of the marriage contract, however.

In Article IV – The States
Section 1 - Each State to Honor all others
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

Basically, if one state allows the marriage contract to be entered into by same-sex couples, then when that couple moves or as they travel, they are, by public record within their home state a contractually married couple even in a state that would not allow such a union.

The states have clearly stated they will not adhere to this policy of other states. This is not a new battle – it was fought many times as mixed race couples attempted to retain their married status across state lines.

The Civil Rights Act declared this action illegal. So if enough states allow same-sex unions, the U.S. Supreme Court will not be able to ignore the unconstitutionality of discriminating states.

So now you know why Gays look at the marriage contract so intently; it is the best way to legitimize thier equality under Federal law. All States that would continue to allow job, housing, adoption and so on could be sued just as individuals could be sued for putting bigotry into action, and states attorneys who would not prosecute such actions would be likewise held accountable to Federal law.

The divorce rate is over %60 percent. It must not be all that sacred. That's hard to take in especially if you swear to god to love, honor and obey till death does us part.

Of course you don’t hate gays, you simply refuse to give them the human rights heterosexuals claim for themselves. You refuse this equality as a punishment for a sin; a sin, you have been told, is proclaimed in the Bible.

Have you also been told that divorce is also proclaimed by the same book as being a sin? Yet you would not strip a divorced couple of their equality? What punishment would then impose on divorced people who refuse to STOP the sin they continue to commit every day they do not reconcile?




In this “belief” you have clearly been proven wrong. Why then, would you think any other believe you hold is more valid than the ones you still cling to, that are obviously in error?




You continue to make contradictory statements. We cannot comprehend the entity that is God, therefore, how can you know what attributes are properties of the Ultimate being? Furthermore, as far as conduct is concerned, there have been many wars, inclusive of mass murder, directed by the same God that would disallow murder? Yet you say we must act in accordance with what God wants. How do you determine what God wants when you cannot comprehend the entity?



Another contrary statement; you “believe” you know what God wants yet you don’t know how we can know this because we cannot know the entity of god. You further believe the Bible to be complete and unchanging, yet you would consider the ongoing sin of divorce minor, compared to being homosexual. How do you justify your judgment and you punishment of homosexuals with your lack of judgment and punishment of divorcees?



Yet you continue to ‘stone’ those you do not hate, while there are those who sin and are revered.

Can anyone else understand this? I don’t Can it be explained logically, please?



Don’t you think there was a lesson in that scripture? That it is NOT YOUR PLACE to judge the sin NOR IS IT YOUR PLACE to punish the sin. In your belief, is it not God that has both those rights? Yet you would punish one sin over another with the chains of oppression? Would your God not judge that harshly?

If you deny a person the right to change, are you any less sinless than the person that you judged to be a sinner? But if you actively put ALL SINNERS on an equal status with you, and they continue to sin, are you not blameless? Why, then, would you risk your own salvation by not extending what Jesus had extended to the woman; equality among the sinners.

Since I missed so much, I would like to continue this tomorrow when i have time to respond..thanks for the good conversations though.. and by the way, gays do not want equity, they have that already in civil unions, gays want acceptance..something they will never get, for those that believe the bible, acceptance is condoning it, compromise and that is something that a Christian cannot do. You have equal rights, you have equal protection under the law...you can never legislate acceptance.. I don't belong to the Catholic chruch, so I don't believe in annulments, the catholic church puts itself on the same pedistal as the Word of God, something the bible says cannot be of God.

By law in the State of Florida you can only get an annulment if you have been married less than 1 yr!!! Remember how long our friend was married and he said he had to pay the church to get it!!!!!

I'm gay and I can tell you right now....I could care less if a christian accepts me. If they can't that's their loss. My family and friends (some of them very religious) accept me as I am.

Yes it is about equality, whether you want to admit it or not. I don't want special treatment, I want to be treated as a person and a citizen of the usa not as a second class citizen.

I have covered Civil Unions before...they are a farce. States can accept civil unions but the partners do not get the same rights as a married couple...look it up sometime.

Under a civil union the partners will only get the benefits that the state will allow while married people get all the benefits.

as I have said before and will yet again....abolish all marriage then this won't be an issue.

Please don't say that Christians cannot do that. Please say that's the way that you feel.

I'm a Christian and I accept gay people. I know other Christians that accept them too.

I find it sad to see a gay couple that have been together for years and they can't make the decisions for each other that heterosexual people can make about their loved ones in the hospital.

Annulments - I don't understand how a church can say someone wasn't married when they were.

Temp,

I have a friend that had to pay money to annul a marriage in the Catholic church. I don't understand it.

Ok let me start from the top, Red, and I will try to write this clearly and simply because you and the others seem to make assertions that are incorrect. Now try to keep the issues separate here please.

1. You stated that I refuse to give them equal rights...Last time I checked, only the congress can pass a law giving you the same rights as me and others.. I stated my belief, and also said that if a law is passed giving you the right to marry, that it wouldn't affect the church. Most pastors and churches do not support gay marriage..so unless this law forced the church to marry gay people, this law is directed at gay people and those that support it. I see no condridictory statement or anything that was said stating that I wanted to deny you equal rights..instead you twisted what I said...and assumed that I was a gay basher, and wanted to deny your rights...My God teaches me to love everyone, even those that don't adere or follow my belief..and so I can love the sinners that we all are, and still disagree with them..pretty simple huh? Oh, and only God has the ability to punish anyone, so as stated before, I leave that part to Him to decided.

2.The Bible does not say that divorce is a sin, it says that if you divorce for the wrong reason, and marry or have sex with other people, you are living in adultry, and yes God says that adultry is a sin.. I am not sure why you keep asking what punishment I would give them, as I stated many times, only God decides those things..would I treat them any different then I treat gay people?? No, I would love them still the same..will there be punishment because of their sin, how should I know, only they know if they repented of their sin and only God knows their heart..and that is why you have difficulty in your assertions, you cannot know the condition of my heart, so you assume things that are not true.

3. My belief that all men are created equal and our constitution protects all equally is not proven wrong, isn't that what it clearly states?? Because politicians have not passed laws is because you have not held them accountable and have voted into office men and women that do not share your belief..who's fault is that..mine?? I think not. You said something about the supreme court..if they determine that something is in conflict with the constitution, then congress has to either pass a law changing the law or get a constitutional amendment to change the constitution..that is they way it works in America..so who is to blame..

4.I did not say that I knew all the attributes of God, but if you read the bible, you would see that it states some of the attributes of God, but like many others, some just want to look at God as a loving God, that you can do anything and he will love you and everything will be ok..you clearly haven't read the bible. While God is a god of love, forgiveness, kindness and alot of other good qualities, he is also a jealous God, a God of Wrath, a Just God...i believe if you read it you will see these attributes written there.

5. You seem to be hung up on these premise that divorce is a sin..show me in the bible where it is?? Like I said another untrue statement that I never made. I stated that I do not support divorce, but understand that there are circumstances in the bible that divorce is allowed..if you want to argue about that, take it up with God, I didn't say it. My bible also states that sin is sin, none bigger then the other, all the same, and the wage of sin is death..now let me clarify death as in the bible, because I know that you will twist that to mean that I think all sinners should be killed... Death is the bible refers to two kinds.. the physical death and the second death as a spiritual death. The first being when your body dies as we all do, the second being when your soul is cast out from God, never to be with God again..this is the second and infinite death..something you might want to avoid..

6. You say that I continue to "stone" gay people...how have I done that??? Wasn't this thread something to do about gay marriage?? Isn't the purpose of this thread to get people's opinion and discuss them with each other?? or is it just to state your belief that it should be allowed and is ok?? Again your inclusive message is inclusive only to those that support you and believe like you do huh...but exclude everyone that does not think like you...wow, now that is equal and fair..and I don't know who you revere..I don't know who you are talking about??

7.Yes you are right about one thing, there was a lession in this parable, not to judge anyone.. What is your interpretation of judgement?? In the bible, it is to "Pass sentance" on someone..that means that you determine the punishment for their sin..I'm not sure where you got that I am passing judgement on them..Did I say..Because you are gay, you are going to Hell?? Did I pass that judgement onto you?? I think not, I stated that God is the judge and he alone can pass that judgement on anyone..my gosh, did you even read what I have stated??? If I said that someone came in my house and stole all my money, and I called them a thief..am I judging them for that action??? or am I pointing out that the one who did it was a thief?? Now if I said that the thief was going to hell because he stole from me, THEN I would be passing sentance on him, and JUDGING him..I know this is simple, but you seem to have difficulty understanding the simplist of things..

Sin is the only chain of oppression that hampers us, and God clearly gives us the Key to unchain ourselves from it..Jesus, if you chose to remain chained, that is your decision.. I do not oppress anyone.

8.Yes we are all sinner including me, I never stated anything contrary to that. Jesus did offer her freedom...freedom from her sin..He said, now go and Sin no more!..Freedom from the weight or chains of sin...and yes, that is an offer that is extended to all, including you and me. You see God is a just God, and he will treat everyone equally..if you repent of your sin, you will be equally forgiven, if you don't repent, you will equally condemned..pretty simple again.

Winx, loving gay people is the right thing to do, but to say that God is for gay marriage, then you are not reading the bible... I accept them for who they are, I do not treat them any different from anyone of my friends, but if the bible says that we cannot encourage sin, then we cannot overlook sin either..does it mean that we walk around pointing out sinners..as we all are..no, but the question wasn't who in here are sinners..it had to do with supporting gay marriage..something the bible doesn't do.

If the world wants to pass laws allowing gay marriage, then they can, if they want to pass laws allowing 3 men to marry one man, or woman or one man have mulitiple wives, then they can..and I guess we can't leave out animals..they are people too to some people..why rule out marriage to animals??..yuck!! Just so you dont' believe that I support any of those, I don't, but if you are pushing for equallity, why stop at gay people??

The catholic church says that the word of the church, and pope, are equal to the scripture..if they say it, it is as if God said it...if you believe that, then you are subject to it..I do not believe that any church is equal with God, and no man either.. The only time that annulments are important is if you want to get married in a Catholic church, then it is their rule..so you would have to follow it.. A legal divorce is what our laws require, so that is your only stipulation to getting married again..legally, other wise it is just a piece of paper.

Now I know Red you will find fault in what I beleive, you have to, because if you accept what I am saying as truth, it points our the falseness of your own ideology, so I understand your motives and ideology..but if you truly believe in equal rights, and an equal voice for all under this constitiution we live under here in America, you will accept my right to believe what I do, and not exclude me and discrimminate against me for doing it..the same as I believe that you have the right to express your ideas and will not discriminate against you for doing it either and do not think less of you for it..but I doubt that you will be consistant with your own statements of equallity.

i was going to read the post but i sopped after this line



wrong the constitution provides equal rights

only congress can pass a law (with a signature from executive in charge)

and when said law is unconstitutional the supreme court is supposed to strike it down when it reaches them (i personally feel it should not need to go threw the system first it should be done on the lack of merit)

so i quit reading it cause obviously it is inaccurate

Only congress can enact laws, the supreme court determines if it is in line with the constitution, I see no inaccuracy in that. And I was basing my statement on what seems to be the idea that we are all not given equal protection under the constitution,,as I stated before, I believe that we all have equal protections and rights under the constitution, and yes it is the constitution that gives us those rights.

Cash for forgiveness!!!! You can comitt a sin as long as you pay???? Does that sound like a sacared vow?

You are right Tempt..I do not believe that they do this kind of thing, but like I said, if you want to get married through their church, it is their dance and you have to dance to their tune.

Aja wasting your time. People think they are holier, have the right to judge others and want to control others. Lets switch that and see how they feel. Its so dam funny!!! Iread the same bible and worship the same god but Im sure they thinl Im going to hell. If thats right Ill make sure to save them a spot!!

So I guess you are the wise..all knowing and only you are right about things?? I have not advocated controling you or anyone else and if you read my statements if you were intelliectually honest, you would agree...The question on this thread was should gay marriage be legal, while I said that if a law was passed giving gay people the right to marry that they feel they don't have now, then by all means go to it, but I do not beleive in it...that is my opinion..I am sorry you can't handle it..