Mass. Court: Gay Civil Unions Not Enough

[IslandRose]

sigh....:down: . My heart is breaking for my country....

Mass. Court: Gay Civil Unions Not Enough

[Snowdoove]

Island Rose~

Homosexuality (males) is clearly and strongly prohibited by Leviticus 18:22 reads, "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, that is an Abomination."

Serousness of the offense is Death. Leviticus 20:13.

Turning their backs to the Bible, means Death.

Snowdoove

[kjvtrue]

I totally agree with the both of you

[Guest LadyC]

Island Rose~

Homosexuality (males) is clearly and strongly prohibited by Leviticus 18:22 reads, "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, that is an Abomination."

Serousness of the offense is Death. Leviticus 20:13.

Turning their backs to the Bible, means Death.

Snowdoove

the Bible does not limit homosexuality to males. Leviticus is written in a manner that it directs the language toward men, but it does apply equally to women also. this is made very clear in the new testament.

"For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due."

[Guest tygra]

Do you think this law will pass? I personally consider homosexuality sinful but I also don't think the state needs to define morality for everyone. While I would pray for those who are attempting this type of marriage or who are trapped in a lifestyle that might be hurting them, I don't think it's up to the government to legislate behavior in this way. As long as it's between sane and consenting adults there doesn't seem to be legal reasons to deny it.

[Guest LadyC]

Do you think this law will pass? I personally consider homosexuality sinful but I also don't think the state needs to define morality for everyone. While I would pray for those who are attempting this type of marriage or who are trapped in a lifestyle that might be hurting them, I don't think it's up to the government to legislate behavior in this way. As long as it's between sane and consenting adults there doesn't seem to be legal reasons to deny it.

laws regarding marriage between siblings.

laws regarding murder.

laws regarding rape.

laws regarding sexual assault on minors.

laws regarding robbery.

laws regarding public intoxication.

laws regarding public indecency.

almost every law in existence is an example of legislating morality on either a state or federal level.

i don't know if the law will pass or not. if it does, i believe it could, and SHOULD, be repealed on the federal level. judges have no right to write law from the bench. that is a matter for the legislature. the gay rights movement is demanding rights that they have never had, regardless that the constitution wasn't clear enough. this is pushing the envelope, it is going against the will of the majority of people (including the average homosexual), and defies the orgional intent of the constitution.

[Guest tygra]

Murder and rape are not only wrong in Christian eyes. There is a majority view against it, and it involves the taking of life of an unconsenting individual, which homosexuality does not. Everything else you mentioned is agreed upon by Christians, atheists, Buddhists, Wiccans, etc - it is not the legal system enforcing religious morality. There has been no evidence shown that homosexuality causes harm, but everything else you listed does harm someone. Drug use hurts someone physically. Theft hurts someone financially. Murder takes a life. Rape hurts in many ways...but homosexuality does not hurt participants if steps are taken to prevent std's and physical risk. If a "crime" is victimless, why is it illegal?

In addition, just because something has always been that way doesn't make it right. For a long time the United States and many other countries throughout history have owned slaves. Freedom was denied these people, and it was not questioned by many because it was the norm to own slaves. However, just slavery has always existed doesn't make it right. Look at the 60's civil rights movement, when African-Americans were fighting for the right to vote, when discrimination was rampid. Many European-Americans considered it just and right that African-Americans had lesser rights, after all Africans had never voted in this country and had never been able to own property, work for equal wages, etc. However that didn't make it right. We changed those laws and the majority is now ashamed of that past discrimination. I believe it will be that way with homosexuality. I do believe it to be a sin, but maybe I would have considered interracial marriage a sin had I been born sooner. Irregardless, I do think it's sinful to God but I also don't think that I need to stop people from exercizing their free will in a matter which is harmless. It is between the individual and God, and there are no victims. Therefore I just don't see the logic in opposing gay marriage.

[Guest LadyC]

whether or not they are agreed upon by the majority doesn't negate that they are laws governing morality. furthermore, the vast majority of american citizens oppose gay marriage, including most mainstream homosexuals.

homosexuality is not a victimless crime. despite the hype that suggests otherwise, aids is still a deadly disease that targets primarily homosexuals.

but more serious than the threat of physical death through AIDS, is the psychological and spiritual damage done to others, particularly children.

for the record, interracial marriages are no comparison to homosexual marriages. interracial marriage rights were restored in the 60's, not granted.

this country was founded on judeo-christian principals. the further our society strays from those principals, the further our society degenerates. isn't that enough reason for keeping the principals intact?

oh, and "safe sex" doesn't prevent std's. read ronald's comment on another thread about examining condoms under microscopes.

[Guest LadyC]

slavery, by the way, was a departure from the Biblical view of slavery. Biblically, a slave was to be treated very well, and their freedom restored after every 7 years of service on the year of jubilee. the slave had the option of remaining a servant to their master or leaving. many opted to stay. they weren't page wages, but they were well provided for.

slavery in this country was abolished, as well it should have been, because the God-given rights of slaves had been revoked.

[Guest LadyC]

Right now AIDS is affecting more black, heterosexuals than anyone. Regardless of genders or relationships the only way to prevent any disease is to simply keep it in your britches....

that is the media hype, it is not based on the studies by the.... oh i forget, i think it was the CDC.

however, aids is rapidly spreading to the heterosexual community. aside from IV drug abuse, i firmly believe that this is a direct result of the bi-sexual trend, and rampant sexual sinfulness (adultry, promiscuity, etc.)

i challenge anyone to provide authoritative, documented evidence that this is not the case.