The conservative case for gay marriage

[LumRaiderFan]

​I consider myself conservative and a Republican and I agree.  As far as gay marriage, if they want to get married let them.  I don't have an objection to it.  As far as what God thinks about that, that is up to HIM, it is not our place to pass judgement in HIS name.  The more happy people, the better IMO. (gay or straight). Everyone seems to be pretty miserable lately for the wrong reasons.

​I tell you whose loving this new ruling...divorce lawyers. 

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

​I tell you whose loving this new ruling...divorce lawyers. 

​$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[LumRaiderFan]

​$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

​lol...yes sir.

[AggiesAreWe]

Pretty simple to me. I will always be against lawmakers who change laws that go against the word of God.

What one does personally in their lives and how they live their lives is between them and God. But no need to be changing any laws to accommodate . That is where I have a problem.

[baddog]

Pretty simple to me. I will always be against lawmakers who change laws that go against the word of God.

What one does personally in their lives and how they live their lives is between them and God. But no need to be changing any laws to accommodate . That is where I have a problem.

My problem with the approval of gay marriage is that it is a victory for them and that is not where it will stop. They are already in your face with their gayness ( I saw plenty of it in Houston this past weekend) and they will want it in your living rooms. Oops, it already is. I am heterosexual and I don't feel the need to parade about it. I know, I have not been oppressed, but I am now, so when do I parade?

[PAMFAM10]

Not saying its good or bad but the world is changing Is homosexuality being forced upon us or is it Just the new reality. It seems like everyone is hopping out the closet. At least now you know what's what nowadays.

 

[smitty]

I just heard that two Justices, Kagen and Ginsberg, has in the past officiated gay weddings.  Ginsberg did 4 of them.  This SHOULD have been cause for them to recuse themselves from the gay marriage vote based on a conflict of interest.   But, they did not!  Thoughts?

Edited July 1, 2015 by smitty

[bullets13]

​This is about Palin being called a hypocrite when her views have never changed on this...I simply pointed out true hypocrites on gay marriage.

By the way, Ron Paul, to answer your question

Wait, are you saying Palin isn't a hypocrite? 

[bullets13]

 

​This is about Palin being called a hypocrite when her views have never changed on this...I simply pointed out true hypocrites on gay marriage.

By the way, Ron Paul, to answer your question

Wait, are you saying Palin isn't.  She judges one group publicly for their sexual sin, but doesn't have anything to say about her daughter committing a different sexual sin (again).  You're right, she's not a hypocrite, she's a beacon of light for Christ.

[bullets13]

I just heard that two Justices, Kagen and Ginsberg, has in the past officiated gay weddings.  Ginsberg did 4 of them.  This SHOULD have been cause for them to recuse themselves from the gay marriage vote based on a conflict of interest.   But, they did not!  Thoughts?

Nah.  Every judge has a conflict of interest on every ruling.  It's called their personal beliefs.  And they (both conservative and liberal) use their personal beliefs and affiliations to dictate their rulings nearly every time.

[bullets13]

My problem with the approval of gay marriage is that it is a victory for them and that is not where it will stop. They are already in your face with their gayness ( I saw plenty of it in Houston this past weekend) and they will want it in your living rooms. Oops, it already is. I am heterosexual and I don't feel the need to parade about it. I know, I have not been oppressed, but I am now, so when do I parade

Heterosexual sinful sex is the same.  Movies, television, commercials, etc. people making out in the streets, sex in public places.  It's not like this is exclusive to, or even close to more common, in homosexuality.  

[bullets13]

Pretty simple to me. I will always be against lawmakers who change laws that go against the word of God.

What one does personally in their lives and how they live their lives is between them and God. But no need to be changing any laws to accommodate . That is where I have a problem.

A reasonable post.  I would counter this by saying that I have a problem with any law that keeps someone from living their life how they want that is based on lawmakers' religious beliefs.  

Edited July 1, 2015 by bullets13

[LumRaiderFan]

Wait, are you saying Palin isn't a hypocrite? 

​I'm saying she hasn't been a hypocrite on gay marriage...she has not conveniently "evolved" like some have.

Maybe she should have publicly chastised her grown daughter, would that make you feel any different about her...doubtful.

I'm also saying you call her a hypocrite on gay marriage while ignoring the much more blatant hypocrisy from Obama and Clinton on the same subject.

[AggiesAreWe]

A reasonable post.  I would counter this by saying that I have a problem with any law that keeps someone from living their life how they want that is based on lawmakers' religious beliefs.  

​Any law?? So you are against laws that keep thieves living the lives that they want because it is based on "thou shall not steal"?

[stevenash]

A reasonable post.  I would counter this by saying that I have a problem with any law that keeps someone from living their life how they want that is based on lawmakers' religious beliefs.

​WOuld this mean you will support a marriage between 3 people when it comes about?

[bullets13]

​Any law?? So you are against laws that keep thieves living the lives that they want because it is based on "thou shall not steal

Our laws are not based on the 10 commandments, although a couple of them line up.   

[bullets13]

​WOuld this mean you will support a marriage between 3 people when it comes about?

No.  People are born gay.  They are not born polygamists.  

[LumRaiderFan]

No.  People are born gay.  They are not born polygamists.  

​That's your opinion anyway.

 

[LumRaiderFan]

Our laws are not based on the 10 commandments, although a couple of them line up.   

​

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Opening statement of the document:

This study is not intended as a proposed public policy recommendation, but simply a demonstration that America’s historical record contains evidence that the Ten Commandments had an influence on America’s founders, leaders and system of government.

Read and decide for yourself...lots of direct quotes from letters in the document.

[bullets13]

​That's your opinion anyway.

 

I base my opinion on personal conversations with a couple of dozen homosexuals.  It's always interesting to see what conservatives base their opinions on for this issue.

[stevenash]

No.  People are born gay.  They are not born polygamists.

​If people are born gay, would that mean that Bruce Jenner was born a woman?

[bullets13]

​

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Opening statement of the document:

This study is not intended as a proposed public policy recommendation, but simply a demonstration that America’s historical record contains evidence that the Ten Commandments had an influence on America’s founders, leaders and system of government.

Read and decide for yourself...lots of direct quotes from letters in the document.

You'll have to forgive me for not reading the 119 page document you provided.  Of the Ten Commandments, only 3 of them have laws that line up with them, and those are laws that are enforced universally around the world, whether the country is a Christian country or not.

[bullets13]

​If people are born gay, would that mean that Bruce Jenner was born a woman?

I can't claim to be overly educated on that subject.  While I have taken the time to discuss homosexuality with several gay people, I have not personally known any transgenders, and have not had conversations with them.

[IT'S IN THE BONE]

I have a question for you guys...what does this mean to you and how does it apply to our current discussion?

Matthew 22:21 Jesus said "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's." Romans 13:1 "Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God.

[LumRaiderFan]

I have a question for you guys...what does this mean to you and how does it apply to our current discussion?

Matthew 22:21 Jesus said "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's." Romans 13:1 "Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God.

​God makes it very clear to be submissive to authority but we (Christians) are never to put man's law above God's law.

The story of Daniel makes this very clear as well as Jesus challenging the authority of the Pharisees who were the spiritual "leaders" of that time.

Should he have just shut his mouth and not "judged" their behavior...No.

Does anyone believe God would approve of abortion, or the fact that our gov approves and funds it...No.

We are to submit to authority, but not if it is in contrast to God's word.

There are funds that a gov must have to operate (Caesar's)...but it was never intended to be spent on some of the things we are spending them on.