Neopatriarch Posted February 6, 2008 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 167 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/18/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 6, 2008 You say you are for a limited government, and I believe you. But government sanctions marriages. Government gives tax breaks to families. Insurance companies give breaks to married people. You may not like it, but if you are married you owe the good graces of the government big time because you pay less in taxes than a single person. So, as I said to Butero, we are stuck with a horrible system that is unfair to everybody and civil unions could even the playing field in terms of economics. Please understand, I am not some liberal here. Again, as I wrote earlier, what makes a marriage is not a piece of paper but a relationship condoned in G-d's eyes. I agree with Butero as well. The tax system needs to be revamped. I seriously doubt it falls within the proper function of government to subsidize (or penalize) marriage through taxes. Marriage is good and I want to promote it, but the purpose of taxes is to raise revenue for the government. If the chief purpose of civil unions is to gain the marriage subsidy, then I would have to disagree with civil unions just on the grounds that the marriage subsidy is wrong. -Neopatriarch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smalcald Posted February 7, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 32 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,258 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 42 Days Won: 3 Joined: 06/16/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/22/1960 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Well let Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeCajunboy Posted February 9, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 113 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,430 Content Per Day: 0.23 Reputation: 33 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/24/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 06/28/1952 Share Posted February 9, 2008 Hello list, The thread on homosexual friends has sparked me to ask what everyone thinks about civil unions. I think most Christians will recognize that same-sex marriage and homosexuality are morally wrong. This much is a no-brainer. But what about civil unions? Some friends of mine have said they would be willing to get civil unions just for economic reasons, forget about homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Are civil unions okay? Also, although we recognize that homosexuality is immoral, should there be a law against it since some people here say we are no longer under the law? Are far as I can tell, there is no civil legislation against homosexuality in the NT. In the OT we have Lev 18:22, but, if we are no longer under the law, the state would have no obligation to enforce it. So why not civil unions? -Neopatriarch Blessings Neo, Please , lets not split straws here! Acknowledging civil unions would be bypassing God's conscenting of marriage, and remember , HE also said , "Between one woman and one man." Among so very many other commands God stated and restated about homosexuality......like, HE condemns, immoral sex, impure sex, fornication, adultery. Does that just about answer your extended question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeCajunboy Posted February 9, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 113 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,430 Content Per Day: 0.23 Reputation: 33 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/24/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 06/28/1952 Share Posted February 9, 2008 Hello list, The thread on homosexual friends has sparked me to ask what everyone thinks about civil unions. I think most Christians will recognize that same-sex marriage and homosexuality are morally wrong. This much is a no-brainer. But what about civil unions? Some friends of mine have said they would be willing to get civil unions just for economic reasons, forget about homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Are civil unions okay? Also, although we recognize that homosexuality is immoral, should there be a law against it since some people here say we are no longer under the law? Are far as I can tell, there is no civil legislation against homosexuality in the NT. In the OT we have Lev 18:22, but, if we are no longer under the law, the state would have no obligation to enforce it. So why not civil unions? -Neopatriarch Blessings Neo, Please , lets not split straws here! Acknowledging civil unions would be bypassing God's conscenting of marriage, and remember , HE also said , "Between one woman and one man." Among so very many other commands God stated and restated about homosexuality......like, HE condemns, immoral sex, impure sex, fornication, adultery. Does that just about answer your extended question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick-Parker Posted February 9, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 200 Topics Per Day: 0.23 Content Count: 4,269 Content Per Day: 4.96 Reputation: 1,855 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/17/2021 Status: Offline Birthday: 06/03/1955 Share Posted February 9, 2008 Neo, you said some people here say we are no longer under the law? That is not true. We are still under the law. We will not be judged by the law. Only the lost will be judged by it. 2 Corinthians 3:12-16 "Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: And not as Moses, who put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly see the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remains the same veil not taken away in the reading of the old covenant; which veil is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their hearts. Nevertheless when one shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away."(KJV2K(NT)) Sorry to go off topic, but it needed to be clarified. Back to topic....... Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Von Davidicus Posted February 10, 2008 Share Posted February 10, 2008 I agree there should be no civil unions. Indeed, in the good old days, homosexuals were stoned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing Posted February 10, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 400 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 1,903 Content Per Day: 0.31 Reputation: 15 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/20/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/19/1942 Share Posted February 10, 2008 I am opposed to civil unions, or any government action that legitimizes the homosexual lifestyle. I am also for reinstatement of sodomy laws. The only reason they are not able to be inforced today is because of dictators in black robes on the Supreme Court that claimed it was unconstitutional, in a divided decision. In addition, though some may claim that the law was done away with, I am not one of them. Jesus told us that he didn't come to do away with the law, but to fulfil it. Within the Christian church world, there are differen't opinions concerning this matter. One problem I have with civil unions, in addition to the fact that I don't believe homosexuality should be endorsed or legitimized by the government, is that it is limited to only gay couples. If we are going to allow homosexuals to enter into civil unions, then why not polygamists? I can find more in scripture to support a man having multiple wives than I can any allowance for gay unions. Why not a union between a man and an animal? While this is obviously perverse to most, some people are into beastiality, and who are we to descriminate? Why not heterosexual couples who don't wish to enter into marriage, but only want the benefits? Civil unions as well as marriage licenses for homosexuals is a bad idea all around, and the only reason it has gained the traction it has is run away activist judges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts