The Marriage Debate: How far????
Find a Conversation
The Marriage Debate: How far????
| Mon, 10-06-2008 - 3:34pm |
In CA, we are about to vote on a constitutional amendment on whether marriage should be defined as between a man and woman.

Pages
>>Where is that line, if not in the sacred? And if you're going to start defining the sacred, per the government, then I think the lines we're crossing aren't really appropriate anymore.<<
why would your faith (which I assume does not marry same sex couples) get to define "sacred" and my faith (which does marry same sex couples) does not get to define sacred.
By wishing one religions view of same sex marriage to translate into the legal view of same sex marriage you've already intertwined church and state.
By allowing same sex marriage to be legal, but allowing each and every church to make its own choice about who IT considers able to enter into the sacred right of marriage we preserve the relgious freedom of EVERYONE, not just folks who think like you do.
~Well, what's the difference?
I am sure the mormons wish the government would butt out and stop telling them their religious views on marridge are wrong too.
I just want to make sure you realize that that is the FLDS which is not condoned by the regular LDS or Mormon church.
Same-sex, opposite sex, polygamy, polyandry, line marriages, all should be perfectly legal.
--------------------------------
I do agree with you on this one!!
LOL i don't even know what some of those are!!
Bea
"I am sure the mormons wish the government would butt out and stop telling them their religious views on marridge are wrong too.
I just want to make sure you realize that that is the FLDS which is not condoned by the regular LDS or Mormon church."
As I was reading along, I was hoping someone would point this out.
Good Lord!
Yeah, my thoughts exactly.
Now, if we are getting all technical, "polygamy" refers not to just one man, several women, but to the reverse as well.
Pages