The Forum > Article Comments > Dismantling a homosexual marriage myth > Comments
Dismantling a homosexual marriage myth : Comments
By Bill Muehlenberg, published 25/11/2010The attempt to radically redefine the very essence of marriage is not a minor word change.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Page 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- ...
- 20
- 21
- 22
-
- All
Posted by talisman, Saturday, 27 November 2010 1:27:56 PM
| |
There is a great deal of insecurity and bitterness, being shown by the religous right on this issue.
Is it because you are fustrated that you cannot control and dictate to people, that life should only be lived as you demand. Posted by Kipp, Saturday, 27 November 2010 2:55:16 PM
| |
To me it is the theft of the word marriage, can't they pick another word for their union. That is the sticking point.
Leave marriage for man and woman, not man and man. That is disgusting. I can handle the thought of 2 females, but not 2 males. Posted by 579, Saturday, 27 November 2010 3:21:49 PM
| |
Discrimination is forgotten in this discussion
How can we justify the exclusion of a group of people from something like marriage, when marriage is so important in today's society Marriage is part of our popular culture, our personal family history and is a wonderful celebration of love. But also an internationally understood and recognised legal status that protects and secures lovers and best friends as family members which society clearly endorses and holds as a serious act of legal protection. Why would we exclude people from this? I can't understand your arguments and feel discrimination is a deep and dirty state of being. Get real everyone! Wake up to yourself!! Posted by Ramond, Saturday, 27 November 2010 4:45:18 PM
| |
You know, I haven't seen any comments from you gay activists which argues a case against the article - not ONE. It's all been personal attacks on the author with "vicious Bill" this, "hateful Bill" that, or it's been the usual SSM diatribe (attributing the very evils you are committing such as viciousness, hate, warmongering etc, to us) - you want to ignore the fact that these comments FROM THE MOUTHS OF YOUR OWN GAY CAMP (pun not intended) are exactly what the LGBT crowd are trying to do. You have no love for each other, hence your inability to stay monogamous in the first place and the very short length of gay relationships, and secondly for the next generation that you're so willing to sacrifice as pawns in your weird social experiment irregardless of the affect to their lives, and certainly not for society which needs the stability of traditional marriage.
It's not us Christians who are imposing things upon the gay community. Marriage has always been about man + woman (and most definitely about children). It's the homo community that is trying to enforce their belief system upon us. We Christians will fight to protect your freedoms as much as our own - the freedom to do what you like behind closed doors as long as it's legal. We aren't imposing our will upon you. BUT Keep your hands off marriage. And keep your hands off our children. Posted by gpenglase, Saturday, 27 November 2010 5:19:31 PM
| |
You have just discovered what we old-timers take for granted at OLO.
"Progressives" in general and homosexual activists in particular cannot support their arguments with rationale because their stances on these issues are insupportable. This is why they are forced to attack. They turn it around by calling their opponents bigots, racists or, in this case, homophobes. Nobody wants to be thought of as a bigot, racist or (whatever)phobe so most people back down. This has proven an effective strategy for these people so that it is their first, and often last, line of "argument". Some of us won't back down because we recognise the strategy and we consider the issues too important. So we wear the attempts at opprobria in the knowledge that they have no meaning, given their source. The psychopath is discussed here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/the-pro-abortion-movement-and-the-psychopathic-mentality in the abortion context but the concept is readily transferrable to the same-sex "marriage" context. Posted by Proxy, Saturday, 27 November 2010 5:43:29 PM
|
religious beliefs on everybody else?
Most people who get married don't do so in a church, nor do
they have a Christian ceremony.
I would agree that churches have the right to not marry gay
couples if that contravenes their religious rules,
but what gives them the right to force those rules on everybody else?
I'm not gay but for the life of me I can't see how a couple of gay people getting married could hurt anybody else.