Civil Unions a Precursor to Gay Marriage

[Catsmeow]

I found this particular excerpt interesting at the end of a liberal based article:

By Bill Ainsworth

UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

January 14, 2005

(Excerpt)

Geoffrey Kors, executive director of Equality California, a gay rights organization, disagreed and said the state legislators who supported same-sex marriage did well in November.

He doesn't believe any Democrat in California risks losing his seat over a same-sex marriage vote.

In addition, he said the move toward same-sex marriage has helped advance the cause of equality for gays and lesbians.

"Very quickly," Kors said, "the conservative position has become civil unions."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Ainsworth: bill.ainsworth@uniontrib.com

If you know anything about the principal of conquest, there's a theory that if you push your advesary 2 steps forward and they retaliate and push you backward by one step, you've still gained ground by one step.

This is how the battle is slowly won. They double their ambitions, assuming they'll lose all they fight for but confident they will end up with some "progress" towards their agenda.

First "civil unions," then "gay marriage". People revolted at the thought of gay unions but the gay activists took it to another level......"gay marriage".

The natural response was an even greater outcry of the public, including Democrat centrists as well as conservatives.

So, where do we end up? Compromise: we'll settle for "civil unions". This is a victory for gay activists ultimately. It's all a matter of time before the grand compromise: gay marriage.

[Arthur Durnan]

Why not stand firm in favor of male-female holy matrimony in order to be well-pleasing to Jesus Christ (Matthew 19), debunk all use of "gay" re homosexuality as there's nothing "gay" about it, plus underscore the fact that after the oxymoron of "homosexual marriage" comes polygamy, euthanasia and, hold onto your chapeau, incest! And why not if the only determining factor is "love" on both parts?

Christians, Stand Tall in the Battle Against Sin & Iniquity!

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[Catsmeow]

[RustyAngeL]

This is how the enemy starts out. With the little things. Fist it's gay rights, whatever that may be. Then it's civil unions then marriage, then it will be legal for them to adopt children. Where do we draw the line? We as christians need to stand up and make our voice be heard. It's not always easy to take the side that God would take. Sometimes were not well received but it's always the right thing to do. And really, who's opinion do we care about? The worlds or God's?

Edited January 17, 2005 by Rustyangel

[dwinkjr]

I am sure this post is not going to be favorable to most of you, so I apologize up front if you donot agree with me.

Our government is not to be biased, onesided, or held to any religious beliefs. Gay couples should be provided with the same rights as straight couples when it comes to taxes and regulations.

I have absolutely no problem with the gov't creating some type of Civil Union for Gay couples. BUT Gay MARRIAGE cannot ever be allowed. You cannot take something Holy such as marriage and use it to justify Sin. Marriage is a representation of the Relationship of Christ to his Church, furthermore I think any "marriages" preformed outside a church should simply be considered legal civil unions, the JP should not have any authority to issue a marriage under God. If this one change was made you would never have a problem with Gay marriage as no REAL pastor would marry to people of the same sex.

God Bless,

Dave