msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
Topic:
OOPS!
QUOTE: QUOTE: I thought you were indignant for even being on this site Rawwr. Have a change of heart? Or were you just saying things you didn't mean? Thought you were gonno go...cause you were disgusted and insulted... I guess you must have just been kidding about how pissedoff and disgusted you were with this site. Next time...try actually meaning what you say if you hope for a shred of respect. You have mistaken me for someone else obviously. I have been on this site since it started as "just say hi". Changed my profile in 09, took a year sabbatical between times, never once said anything about leaving. Might want to know your subject better in the future.... That's if you were addressing me of course I think he posted to Rawrr,,,,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: why should they have to be 'married behind closed doors' while you enjoy marriage behind nothing. As for 'culture' how bout freedom and justice for all, not just for heterosexuals. I was better off having come from a broken heterosexual home, and so was my son, btw. 
And the best argument in favor of same-sex marriage might just be the fact that there is NO compelling evidence or legitimate case against it...Civil unions grant "certain" state rights to married couples, they do nothing to protect them at the federal level...Fact is, marriage creates a "group" ...This action or circumstance absolutely makes the issue of gay marriage in America political and legal as it relates to rights and privileges, not religious or cultural as it relates to morality and ethics... Also, pro or con, stating reasons and opinions based on personal views about the sanctity of marriage, certain sexual acts, morality, or religious views DOES NOT define a person....Naming or labeling people who express their thoughts on such an important issue has no place in the argument and is only counterproductive to finding solutions... 'compelling' is a subjective call much like incest has 'physical' increased risks that cause peopel to object to legalizing ineestuous marriage homosexual activity, SPECIFICALLY, msm also has those increased risks ,,,but LGBT manages to keep that pretty much under wraps and quiet,,,, ..so brothers and sisters maight stil be sleeping with each other, but citizens in THIS culture, both religious and non religious would probablly oppose the government stepping in and giving them LICENSE and PRIVILIGE for that choice ,,it is no different with homosexual activity,,,although people love to try to discard it by just pointing the finger at religion,, STD's are not exclusive to gay men and women..Prevalence in gay men is not a reason to deny same-sex marriage...In fact, it could help to decrease occurance.... This incest flag you keep waving has no merit either...Talk about apples to oranges..... Seriously. And denying gay people the ability to marry is not going to stop them from having sex. I'm not sure why people seem to believe that. GOOD GRIEF 
the point is not about stopping people from having sex OF COURSE Thats not gonna happen the point is not to make any and all sex COMMON And NATURAL and NORMAL within the culture,,, which putting a government stamp on it would DO.... legally, schools would HAVE to teach about it, taxpayers would have to SUPPORT it, even religious organizations would be FORCED To accept and validate it sex is a CHOICE, there is no need or reason to validate the homosexuals CHOICE to lie with each other, anymore than there would be to validate adult siblings CHOICE to lie with each other if we are gonna say that any gender can marry, why not say any relation whatsoever regardless of biology and then why not say that we should have as many spouses as 'consent' to be our partner? ,,where do we end before the already struggling institution of marriage becomes a complete pointless jokes just costing society more and more money and children more and more stability,,,, which, btw, IS not apples to oranges if all that matters is that people are 'consenting adults'.... I remember when parents had a chit fit about sex ed too... 
"Churches" have knowingly accepted gays into their congregations for years!...They even ask them to tithe! 
Same sex marriage had little (if anything) to do with creating the "struggling institution of marriage" (whatever that is)...Straight couples "screwed" it up all by themselves..... And the rest of it we've already covered and covered and covered....... and we have covered all of it over and over, never changes,, those who define people by preference above gender and those who see people as people with males and females,,, What about those of us who do not consider sexual orientation a preference?... than hopefully those will support the 'rights' of pedophiles, beastie(or whatever they are called), and those oriented to be attracted to family members,,, sexual behavior is a choice, however its chalked up, and its not a choice government should bbe promoting or encouraging (legalizing) or discouraging (criminalizeing) except when it involves continuing the species,,,,and providing the most ideal and solid foundation for future children to be brought up in,,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
to those who are for same sex marriage, do you feel the consentual incest marriage should be legalized as well?
If you feel differently about both, why? |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: why should they have to be 'married behind closed doors' while you enjoy marriage behind nothing. As for 'culture' how bout freedom and justice for all, not just for heterosexuals. I was better off having come from a broken heterosexual home, and so was my son, btw.
And the best argument in favor of same-sex marriage might just be the fact that there is NO compelling evidence or legitimate case against it...Civil unions grant "certain" state rights to married couples, they do nothing to protect them at the federal level...Fact is, marriage creates a "group" ...This action or circumstance absolutely makes the issue of gay marriage in America political and legal as it relates to rights and privileges, not religious or cultural as it relates to morality and ethics... Also, pro or con, stating reasons and opinions based on personal views about the sanctity of marriage, certain sexual acts, morality, or religious views DOES NOT define a person....Naming or labeling people who express their thoughts on such an important issue has no place in the argument and is only counterproductive to finding solutions... 'compelling' is a subjective call much like incest has 'physical' increased risks that cause peopel to object to legalizing ineestuous marriage homosexual activity, SPECIFICALLY, msm also has those increased risks ,,,but LGBT manages to keep that pretty much under wraps and quiet,,,, ..so brothers and sisters maight stil be sleeping with each other, but citizens in THIS culture, both religious and non religious would probablly oppose the government stepping in and giving them LICENSE and PRIVILIGE for that choice ,,it is no different with homosexual activity,,,although people love to try to discard it by just pointing the finger at religion,, STD's are not exclusive to gay men and women..Prevalence in gay men is not a reason to deny same-sex marriage...In fact, it could help to decrease occurance.... This incest flag you keep waving has no merit either...Talk about apples to oranges..... Seriously. And denying gay people the ability to marry is not going to stop them from having sex. I'm not sure why people seem to believe that. GOOD GRIEF
the point is not about stopping people from having sex OF COURSE Thats not gonna happen the point is not to make any and all sex COMMON And NATURAL and NORMAL within the culture,,, which putting a government stamp on it would DO.... legally, schools would HAVE to teach about it, taxpayers would have to SUPPORT it, even religious organizations would be FORCED To accept and validate it sex is a CHOICE, there is no need or reason to validate the homosexuals CHOICE to lie with each other, anymore than there would be to validate adult siblings CHOICE to lie with each other if we are gonna say that any gender can marry, why not say any relation whatsoever regardless of biology and then why not say that we should have as many spouses as 'consent' to be our partner? ,,where do we end before the already struggling institution of marriage becomes a complete pointless jokes just costing society more and more money and children more and more stability,,,, which, btw, IS not apples to oranges if all that matters is that people are 'consenting adults'.... I remember when parents had a chit fit about sex ed too...
"Churches" have knowingly accepted gays into their congregations for years!...They even ask them to tithe!
Same sex marriage had little (if anything) to do with creating the "struggling institution of marriage" (whatever that is)...Straight couples "screwed" it up all by themselves..... And the rest of it we've already covered and covered and covered....... nowhere did I post that we shouldnt accept PEOPLE, that is different from accepting behaviors same sex marriage will have plenty to contribute to the 'struggling institution of marriage' by promoting the idea that the only important criteria are age and consent,,,, and we have covered all of it over and over, never changes,, those who define people by preference above gender and those who see people as people with males and females,,, and future lives developing from a mother AND father,,,,and the significance of that bond and commitment to the children it can produce,,and the society
Edited by msharmony on Sat 05/18/13 02:08 PM
|
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: well lets think about why they want to marry in the first place...its because they want to same rights as other married couples...they want their partners to be able to get the same benefits as others if and when one dies...why shouldn't they have the same rights as the rest of us?? perhaps if we relented on that the the push for same sex marriage would not be such a big thing right now...as far as children are concerned i honestly do not believe it makes a child bad or good or straight or gay. It is how they are raised. Children just want to be loved and protected...we live in a time where it really doesn't matter if its two men two women a man and a woman or just one parent alone. I feel the same about when people feel homosexuals should not adopt. I have yet to see proof where this hurts children. I have been working with children for over twelve years and I have seen all manners of children. In the end, they want someone to want them love them protect them...i have even watch children of various ages be raised in a home with a same sex couple from the time two of them were infants until their current age of 9 and 10. They have other siblings as well we were taken in by the couple when they were 5 7 and 13, now they are 15, 17, and 23. If were living in different times maybe I would feel differently about it, but we are not. We live in a world where there are a variety of people, cultures, and beliefs. Many of us who claim to believe in God and follow his ways are breaking one of his laws by casting judgement to begin with. The world is changing...we cannot stop it. I like to believe in the end it will be a positive change but I also know there is a possibility that people will allow their hate for change to interfere. By no means am I saying that anyone's opinion is wrong, thats the great thing about our country is our ability to speak our opinion. This one just happens to be mine. I guess my opinion would change if I actually worked with children who's lives have been destroyed by all this. Anyway I'm hopeful for the future that some day this will be one of those arguments that will be laid to rest because its getting old. Granted it could take many years for that to happen but its like I said...I'm hopeful because without hope there would be nothing. Have fab day everyone! 
the bible never says not to cast judgment, we are given brains so we can judge right from wron,, it is not judging a PERSON to judge their action or behavior,, right and wrong are right and wrong regardless of the PERSON doing it as is healthy and unhealthy, its not a judgement of a person I have two close relatives living this lifestyle, they are two very wonderful people whom I love, but that doesnt mean I have to be brainwashed into accepting msm as normal, healthy or ok,,,, or that I want society to be endoctrinated into that belief by force of law... I have another who lived it the first forty years of their life before transitioning into a heterosexual lifestyle,,,,, doesnt matter, its gonna happen, we will continue to pretend that a sexual preference is as biological and definitive and unalterable as gender,,, and we are gonna pay, one way or the other
Edited by msharmony on Sat 05/18/13 02:02 PM
|
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: Well, I don't 'condone' it in any way shape or fashion. I believe the SCOTUS will make a ruling that offers all citizens marriage, regardless if they are deviant or not. I won't celebrate. Nor will I tell them what to do, even though they are pushing their behavior into the normal sphere when it is not. I think it will be a time soon when we are the minority and heterosexuality will be the irregular lifestyle choice,,,,heaven help us when that happens,,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: why should they have to be 'married behind closed doors' while you enjoy marriage behind nothing. As for 'culture' how bout freedom and justice for all, not just for heterosexuals. I was better off having come from a broken heterosexual home, and so was my son, btw.
And the best argument in favor of same-sex marriage might just be the fact that there is NO compelling evidence or legitimate case against it...Civil unions grant "certain" state rights to married couples, they do nothing to protect them at the federal level...Fact is, marriage creates a "group" ...This action or circumstance absolutely makes the issue of gay marriage in America political and legal as it relates to rights and privileges, not religious or cultural as it relates to morality and ethics... Also, pro or con, stating reasons and opinions based on personal views about the sanctity of marriage, certain sexual acts, morality, or religious views DOES NOT define a person....Naming or labeling people who express their thoughts on such an important issue has no place in the argument and is only counterproductive to finding solutions... 'compelling' is a subjective call much like incest has 'physical' increased risks that cause peopel to object to legalizing ineestuous marriage homosexual activity, SPECIFICALLY, msm also has those increased risks ,,,but LGBT manages to keep that pretty much under wraps and quiet,,,, ..so brothers and sisters maight stil be sleeping with each other, but citizens in THIS culture, both religious and non religious would probablly oppose the government stepping in and giving them LICENSE and PRIVILIGE for that choice ,,it is no different with homosexual activity,,,although people love to try to discard it by just pointing the finger at religion,, STD's are not exclusive to gay men and women..Prevalence in gay men is not a reason to deny same-sex marriage...In fact, it could help to decrease occurance.... This incest flag you keep waving has no merit either...Talk about apples to oranges..... Seriously. And denying gay people the ability to marry is not going to stop them from having sex. I'm not sure why people seem to believe that. GOOD GRIEF
the point is not about stopping people from having sex OF COURSE Thats not gonna happen the point is not to make any and all sex COMMON And NATURAL and NORMAL within the culture,,, which putting a government stamp on it would DO.... legally, schools would HAVE to teach about it, taxpayers would have to SUPPORT it, even religious organizations would be FORCED To accept and validate it sex is a CHOICE, there is no need or reason to validate the homosexuals CHOICE to lie with each other, anymore than there would be to validate adult siblings CHOICE to lie with each other if we are gonna say that any gender can marry, why not say any relation whatsoever regardless of biology and then why not say that we should have as many spouses as 'consent' to be our partner? ,,where do we end before the already struggling institution of marriage becomes a complete pointless jokes just costing society more and more money and children more and more stability,,,, which, btw, IS not apples to oranges if all that matters is that people are 'consenting adults'.... |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: Is written....the real muslem must to believe in the bible, cos the islam has a root in the christianity. So why the muslemist ( muslem-terrorist ) kill christians? May the op explain why muslemist kill 8 yr old childs around the world? why do christians kill their children,,,? people are sometimes misguided, sometimes confused, and sometimes outright hypocrites claiming to be something without understanding what it means, or having a musinderstanding of what it means, or just being hypocrites who understand but have a 'live and let live' way of life where what counts is what THEY want and believe in the moment,,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: Problemtulation,prepare 4 God's judgement!!! and more confused and broken homes for children,,,, There are many, many broken homes and confused children of straight parents. hence the word 'more' Sorry, but that's a bs reason not to allow same sex marriages. Especially when they can adopt children who are in need of a home. yes, the kids are no reason for us to consider,, they never really are when our immediate desires are the issue,,,, Have you seen how children are affected by same sex parents?? and are you against the marriage part of it or homosexuality all together?? yes, I have seen children affected by same sex parents, I have seen children affected by not feeling the conection with the people who created them,, PERIOD whether its same sex, single parent, or adopted I am against the marriage part of it AND I feel homosexual SEX (which is different than the blatant labeling of people by their sexual feelings or preferences),,,is deviant and should not be encouraged or sanctioned or mandated in any way,,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: QUOTE: why should they have to be 'married behind closed doors' while you enjoy marriage behind nothing. As for 'culture' how bout freedom and justice for all, not just for heterosexuals. I was better off having come from a broken heterosexual home, and so was my son, btw.
And the best argument in favor of same-sex marriage might just be the fact that there is NO compelling evidence or legitimate case against it...Civil unions grant "certain" state rights to married couples, they do nothing to protect them at the federal level...Fact is, marriage creates a "group" ...This action or circumstance absolutely makes the issue of gay marriage in America political and legal as it relates to rights and privileges, not religious or cultural as it relates to morality and ethics... Also, pro or con, stating reasons and opinions based on personal views about the sanctity of marriage, certain sexual acts, morality, or religious views DOES NOT define a person....Naming or labeling people who express their thoughts on such an important issue has no place in the argument and is only counterproductive to finding solutions... 'compelling' is a subjective call much like incest has 'physical' increased risks that cause peopel to object to legalizing ineestuous marriage homosexual activity, SPECIFICALLY, msm also has those increased risks ,,,but LGBT manages to keep that pretty much under wraps and quiet,,,, ..so brothers and sisters maight stil be sleeping with each other, but citizens in THIS culture, both religious and non religious would probablly oppose the government stepping in and giving them LICENSE and PRIVILIGE for that choice ,,it is no different with homosexual activity,,,although people love to try to discard it by just pointing the finger at religion,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: Heck,if that keeps up,it soon will be all 57 States! 
I have no doubt it will. Much like the womens movement changed the working woman from an option to a mandate , coupled with the sexual revolution which took away stigma from people who slept around we will once again give in to the flesh and its desires,, REFUSING To ever aknowledge or be honest about the potential long term damage that happens to the family thanx to removing stigma from 'consentual' sex, we have a whole lot more unwanted children roaming around from parents who 'consented' but never committed or loved each other,,, and we have alot more two parent homes where the parents are raising children with the THINGS They earn from both working ,,society will never admit how far these 'freedoms' went in breaking up the family foundation,, and this will be no different so,, now, when from a young age children have in their head that homosexual behavior is EQUAL to heterosexual behavior, that stigma wont be in their head and more of them will follow that path at the first inkling that they MAY be feeling something for the same sex and, we will have many many more children being raised with either no mother or no father,, which are both statistically making lives harder for children psychologically and economically ,,but as long as we have this imaginary 'right' to be married,, and this 'requirement' to have a paying job and this 'right' to bed anyone else who is consenting,,, ,,,,we are on the right track,, right?
we all already have the right to love and commit to whom we want that is a 'right',, but we dont have a 'right' to diectate who has to give us a license and who doesnt, who has to VALIDATE our preference,, governbment should have stayed out of it and let homosexuals continue their behavior and their lifestyles just like heterosexuals do,,,,,but this is a fight to force a cultural change to accept and remove stigma from homosexual sex,,,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: why should they have to be 'married behind closed doors' while you enjoy marriage behind nothing. As for 'culture' how bout freedom and justice for all, not just for heterosexuals. I was better off having come from a broken heterosexual home, and so was my son, btw. marriage has nothing to do with 'freedom and justice' heterosexuality is a preference, its not a person its like pedophile, certain 'freedoms' they dont have , they arent able to be licensed teachers,, although they are allowed to continue prefering kids,,, so long as they dont cross the line of touching them homosexuals can do everything heterosexuals can do,, marry a woman if they are male and marry a man if they are a woman what they want is a special consideration for their present 'preference',,,,,which IS able to change as I know several people for whom it has gender does not,,(without extensive cost to fake) |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
opposites MIGHT attract
nowadays, I think alcohol and sex attract,,,,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: QUOTE: Because Young Spiffy D and Sarah Baker can have kids together whereas Adam and Steve cannot. So, you're against marriages where the couples are not procreating? Do you believe a couple must try to have children if they're going to marry? Im against people cutting off their limb,,,does this mean that those who are BORN Without limbs are the same as those who make the choice to cut it off? apples and oranges there are plenty of instances where people dont PLAN to procreate, nor believe they can and yet,, they do anyway there is no guarantee that people will or will not have kids as long as they are heteroseuxlly involved,,, the point is to encourage the family foundation that starts with the heterosexual union,, it doesnt require that people will start a family just that they have a heterosexual union
Edited by msharmony on Fri 05/17/13 10:39 PM
|
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: omg how is the united states so far behind?? us brits have had same sex legalised marriages for years now.nothing wrong with them.why the big hoohaa?i don't get it.good grief.gay people are allowed love and marriage just like anyone is.its no sin!!! As you can see from this thread, some in the us are still very homophobic, so they don't even want gay people to have sex, much less marry. I am personally not scared of anything, thus no phobia but just as I dont 'want' brothers and sisters lying down together, I dont 'want' men lying with men and women lying with women HOWEVER that is irrelevant due to people having control over their own bodies and decisions, including who they bed,, I HAVE NO SAY IN THAT AND IT IS HAPPENING AND WILL HAPPEN what I dont want is government to step in and , in effect, sanction the behaviors anymore than I would want them to make it a crime I accept fully that people can sleep with whomever they choose I dont accept a culture where children will be raised to see heterosexuality as just an 'option', and homosexuality and incest as equally healthy and natural options,,,, adults do what they want, but dont implement it into the culture as a 'protected' and therefore promoted behavior,,, so you want adults to be free to do what they want, but at the same time want it to be ok to effectively ostracize them if they go against YOUR personal morality........you can't have it both ways here. Pick a side. I havent suggested they be ostracized either ostracizing would be making their behavior illegal,,,which I also oppose Not necessarily true, for example people who work in porn movies do it legally at least in certain areas, but they are still treated as 2nd class citizens simply because of their career choices. It's the same thing for gay people. You may not wanna make their behavior illegal, but supporting unnecessary judgment on them isn't much better. so what? they are allowed to have sex with whom they want...some people dont approve of their career choice,,,,who has lived that has had everyone agree with everything they do? that is nothing to do with the point I made |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: Eventually all will realize that it isn't their concern to mandate who loves who as long as age and mental consent is considered. If they want to marry or have a civil union they should be able to do either or both if they want. Civil Union was legalized last Year in Illinois and there was a huge celebration down town called "Pride Fest". This celebration is going to be going on this Saturday May 19 again this year. Activist groups are protesting against legalizing same-sex marriage in this state. If couples of same sex already have Civil Union legalized, then they don't need a marriage license. IMO What criteria do you use to decide who needs a marriage license and who doesn't? that is up to the culture some cultures allow multiple wives some cultures allow marriage between releatives the culture will dictate the criteria til recently, ours was pretty simple 1. heterosexual (to encourage commitement between potential parents, as statistics show the negative impact when children have broken homes) 2. Non related (to encourage the family structure , whereas children dont have uncle dads and aunty moms) the criteria are there to enforce the STRONGEST IDEAL foundation for families,,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: Very cute little princess Ms Harmony ! I say if two people are in love than that is their business ! Without prejudice ... Besides who am i to judge anyone else ? PEACE ! 
sweet kik I say love is seperate from sex Im not opposed to people loving either but I do find sexual behaviors like adultery, incest, and homosexual sex to be abnormal and deviant,,,, You're not going to be able to police that, though. If you deny gay people the right to marry, you're not going to be able to stop them from having sex. What I want to know is why so many people worry about who others are having sex with. If gay sex bothers you, why think about it so much? Live your life and stop worrying about who else may be having the kind of sex you feel the need to stop. You're not going to be able to stop it. I dont want to police it , I also dont want government to SANCTION it,,,, forcing gayness into the mainstream worries me because of my children and future childern and the society we are developing by making the behavior something other than unordinary I dont CARE if they want to have sex, I do CARE if they want to force society into legitimizing it,,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
Topic:
CAN A CHRISTIAN GO TO HELL?
QUOTE: We are told in John 3:16,that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have Eternal Life.Does it mean that there's an eternal security for christians to make heaven irrespective of the kind of life they live? I think the passage is a partial explanation,,,,believing does not merely imply a thought process 'I believe jesus died on the cross for my sin, so let me go over here and commit this murder and I am already forgiven,,,,'....kind of thing I think believing in him includes the active process of following our fathers guidance,,,,,,as he did and as he also instructed us to do in ADDITION to believing in him I think that is implied in the passage about some who say 'lord, lord' will not get into heaven, because even though they claim to know the lord,, he hasnt known them just saying it, or thinking it, isnt enough, working at living it is also required,,
Edited by msharmony on Fri 05/17/13 06:25 AM
|
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: good grief come into the 21st century.normal cannot be defined.if 2 people of same sex fall in love,how is that wrong?love doesn't know colour or sexes.it just is.you sound like the old Victorian tempest mob from uk.no offence but at the end of the day live and let live,. we all have views,we all are entitled to live.look around how many hetro relationships are full of vitriol, beatings, murder, divorce, abuse.loads.dont sweep it under the carpet.we are all human and the basic human need is to be loved and wanted.i hate those who bring religion into arguments.religion has nothing to do with who you love.at the end of the day lets be real-jesus wore a long dress and hung around with only guys,.what does that say?
that is one of societies issues, confusing wants with needs we need LOVE, nooone is debating love we dont have to have sex, we want to have sex love knows no boundaries, bue sex sure should,,,,,,because of its potential long term affect socially sex between anyone who is 'in love' has given us all types of stds, all types of unwanted children, struggling single parent homes, etc,, once it comes to sexual behavior,, as our sexual behaviors go, so go our families and communities,,,, |
|
msharmony
Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 32563 |
QUOTE: QUOTE: QUOTE: Eventually all will realize that it isn't their concern to mandate who loves who as long as age and mental consent is considered. If they want to marry or have a civil union they should be able to do either or both if they want. most already realize they cant 'mandate' who anyone 'loves' nor do most want to the issue is who one beds and IM sure 'everyone' wont condone homosexual behavior anymore thaneveryone will condone incest but most will buy into the 'all that matters is consent' nonsense,,, I am pro same same-sex marriage between two consenting adults because I buy into the following definitions of equality, liberty, due process, and civil rights... Definition of LIBERTY 1: the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice Definition of EQUALITY 1: the quality or state of being equal Definition of DUE PROCESS n. An established course for judicial proceedings or other governmental activities designed to safeguard the legal rights of the individual. Definition of CIVIL RIGHTS The nonpolitical rights of a citizen; especially the rights of personal liberty guaranteed to United States citizens by the 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution and by acts of Congress when the government is involved, where licensing is involved, where being sanctioned is involved liberty has nothing to do with it liberty doesnt mean we are able to be a licensed doctor just because we are a citizen it doesnt mean we can be a licensed teacher just because we are a citizen it still means we can give treatment to people WITHOUT the license so long as both are consenting it still means we can teach people without a license as long as both are consenting similarly, it doesnt mean our relationship has to be licensed by government although it means we are still free to have relationship as long as both are consenting ...marriage is not a guaranteed privilege anymore than any other process involving licensing is,,, at least it wasnt before the LGBT agenda went into effect and gaines such political and financial power,,,,
Edited by msharmony on Fri 05/17/13 06:14 AM
|