Federal Court Upholds SSM Ban

[Guard Dad]

A victory for opponents of Same-Sex Marriage and those who oppose federal control of marriage.

However, it now looks likely that the issue will go to the SCOTUS



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/06/federal-appeals-court-upholds-gay-marriage-bans/

 

[Blazing Saddles]

Good

 

[Guard Dad]

Good

Maybe. If the Supremes overturn it, SSM is legal everywhere.

 

[ShoeDiva]

Good

Maybe. If the Supremes overturn it, SSM is legal everywhere.

Wouldn't that be interesting? ;D Though I think at the some of the comments I have read (not here) a few might actually have a heart attack if that happens. Not funny, but goodness some people would have so much better lives if they did not worry about Mike and Luke or Mary and Liz getting married. :huh :dunno

 

[Guard Dad]

Good

Maybe. If the Supremes overturn it, SSM is legal everywhere.

Wouldn't that be interesting? ;D Though I think at the some of the comments I have read (not here) a few might actually have a heart attack if that happens. Not funny, but goodness some people would have so much better lives if they did not worry about Mike and Luke or Mary and Liz getting married. ??? :dunno

The issue of SSM aside; do you want the federal government in charge of marriage?

 

[ShoeDiva]

Good

Maybe. If the Supremes overturn it, SSM is legal everywhere.

Wouldn't that be interesting? ;D Though I think at the some of the comments I have read (not here) a few might actually have a heart attack if that happens. Not funny, but goodness some people would have so much better lives if they did not worry about Mike and Luke or Mary and Liz getting married. ??? :dunno

The issue of SSM aside; do you want the federal government in charge of marriage?

Not really, they can't be in charge of anything without it being messed up.

 

[Guard Dad]

Good

Maybe. If the Supremes overturn it, SSM is legal everywhere.

Wouldn't that be interesting? ;D Though I think at the some of the comments I have read (not here) a few might actually have a heart attack if that happens. Not funny, but goodness some people would have so much better lives if they did not worry about Mike and Luke or Mary and Liz getting married. ??? :dunno

The issue of SSM aside; do you want the federal government in charge of marriage?

Not really, they can't be in charge of anything without it being messed up.

Pretty much

 

[lotstodo]

Heard a joke last night. What about all the gay playa's out there who have been stringing along their significant others. "I'd like to marry you, but you know, the government." Those folks will be screwed.

 

[Blazing Saddles]

If they say gays can marry, then as I've always said, polygamy should be legal. They'll have to include mom's and dad's wanting to marry their kids along with gramps hooking up with grandies.

 

[ShoeDiva]

If they say gays can marry, then as I've always said, polygamy should be legal. They'll have to include mom's and dad's wanting to marry their kids along with gramps hooking up with grandies.

Any man that wants more than one wife should go ahead and marry them all. I have no issue with that, to each their own, as long as they are all consenting adults. I am pretty sure in Biblical times more than one woman was around. As for adults and kids that is a weak argument. Kids do not marry, adult men and women do.

 

[mei lan]

If they say gays can marry, then as I've always said, polygamy should be legal. They'll have to include mom's and dad's wanting to marry their kids along with gramps hooking up with grandies.

Any man that wants more than one wife should go ahead and marry them all. I have no issue with that, to each their own, as long as they are all consenting adults. I am pretty sure in Biblical times more than one woman was around. As for adults and kids that is a weak argument. Kids do not marry, adult men and women do.

I could not agree more...consenting adults is the key phrase. I think the government should allow civil unions of any adults who want to be civil unionized and then churches could marry whom they wish. That's how it's done in Europe.

 

[ShoeDiva]

If they say gays can marry, then as I've always said, polygamy should be legal. They'll have to include mom's and dad's wanting to marry their kids along with gramps hooking up with grandies.

Any man that wants more than one wife should go ahead and marry them all. I have no issue with that, to each their own, as long as they are all consenting adults. I am pretty sure in Biblical times more than one woman was around. As for adults and kids that is a weak argument. Kids do not marry, adult men and women do.

I could not agree more...consenting adults is the key phrase. I think the government should allow civil unions of any adults who want to be civil unionized and then churches could marry whom they wish. That's how it's done in Europe.

:agreed :thumbsup

 

[mei lan]

And for the record, as a moral issue, I do not believe in homosexuality or gay marriage as being part of God's best plan. Just like I don't believe heterosexuals living together outside of marriage or being married and divorced multiple times to be God's best plan. I just don't see where it is the part of government to be involved in such matters.

 

[deewee]

And for the record, as a moral issue, I do not believe in homosexuality or gay marriage as being part of God's best plan. Just like I don't believe heterosexuals living together outside of marriage or being married and divorced multiple times to be God's best plan. I just don't see where it is the part of government to be involved in such matters.

Gay marriage is not only not God's first plan, it isn't any of His plan. If God doesn't recognize the union, why bother? It won't be blessed by Him, it won't join two females, or two males, together as one. They may make a commitment to one another, before mankind, but God's eyes will be turned away. Their promises to one another will be in vain. So, try as they might to convince the Christian world that their union is equal, it is not, and never will be.

(Not picking at your post, just responding and more thoughts poured in while doing so.)

 

[mei lan]

And for the record, as a moral issue, I do not believe in homosexuality or gay marriage as being part of God's best plan. Just like I don't believe heterosexuals living together outside of marriage or being married and divorced multiple times to be God's best plan. I just don't see where it is the part of government to be involved in such matters.

Gay marriage is not only not God's first plan, it isn't any of His plan. If God doesn't recognize the union, why bother? It won't be blessed by Him, it won't join two females, or two males, together as one. They may make a commitment to one another, before mankind, but God's eyes will be turned away. Their promises to one another will be in vain. So, try as they might to convince the Christian world that their union is equal, it is not, and never will be.

(Not picking at your post, just responding and more thoughts poured in while doing so.)

Oh, pick away - you know I don't mind. We agree theologically, but government should not be in the business of deciding whose marriage should and should not be sanctioned, IMHO. As long as the people being joined are CONSENTING ADULTS, I don't care who or what they are. That's why I say government should only be in the business of civil unions (which defines the contractual/legal process) and only churches should be in the business of marrying people.

According to our theology, atheists married in the Unitarian Church would no more be married than two gay people. Yet that is legal. I say, make it all black and white, and then churches can decide based on their belief system whom they will marry and whom they will not. Christians say, oh but kids will see two gays married or whatever. So? They see heterosexuals* having sex outside of marriage, and living together outside of marriage, and having extramarital affairs, and being divorced and married multiple times. I think that has done FAR MORE damage to the institution of marriage** than anything gays could do. It is my humble opinion that if Christians who are so up in arms about gay marriage would be as up in arms about heterosexual shenanigans in today's culture, and lived like they say they believe, then a lot of this mess would straighten itself right out.

* This also applies at the same rate to heterosexuals who say they are Christians. Gallup conducts a poll virtually every year as to the lifestyles of people in the church vs. people who aren't...the lifestyles are perennially the same within the margin of error. I may start another thread about this.

** I say "damage to the institution of marriage" while laughing at myself...marriage is like freedom or any number of other fundamentals of a civilized society. People can use it, allow/disallow it, observe it however they wish, but it does not change what it is.

 

[ShoeDiva]

And for the record, as a moral issue, I do not believe in homosexuality or gay marriage as being part of God's best plan. Just like I don't believe heterosexuals living together outside of marriage or being married and divorced multiple times to be God's best plan. I just don't see where it is the part of government to be involved in such matters.

Gay marriage is not only not God's first plan, it isn't any of His plan. If God doesn't recognize the union, why bother? It won't be blessed by Him, it won't join two females, or two males, together as one. They may make a commitment to one another, before mankind, but God's eyes will be turned away. Their promises to one another will be in vain. So, try as they might to convince the Christian world that their union is equal, it is not, and never will be.

(Not picking at your post, just responding and more thoughts poured in while doing so.)

Oh, pick away - you know I don't mind. We agree theologically, but government should not be in the business of deciding whose marriage should and should not be sanctioned, IMHO. As long as the people being joined are CONSENTING ADULTS, I don't care who or what they are. That's why I say government should only be in the business of civil unions (which defines the contractual/legal process) and only churches should be in the business of marrying people.

According to our theology, atheists married in the Unitarian Church would no more be married than two gay people. Yet that is legal. I say, make it all black and white, and then churches can decide based on their belief system whom they will marry and whom they will not. Christians say, oh but kids will see two gays married or whatever. So? They see heterosexuals* having sex outside of marriage, and living together outside of marriage, and having extramarital affairs, and being divorced and married multiple times. I think that has done FAR MORE damage to the institution of marriage** than anything gays could do. It is my humble opinion that if Christians who are so up in arms about gay marriage would be as up in arms about heterosexual shenanigans in today's culture, and lived like they say they believe, then a lot of this mess would straighten itself right out.

* This also applies at the same rate to heterosexuals who say they are Christians. Gallup conducts a poll virtually every year as to the lifestyles of people in the church vs. people who aren't...the lifestyles are perennially the same within the margin of error. I may start another thread about this.

** I say "damage to the institution of marriage" while laughing at myself...marriage is like freedom or any number of other fundamentals of a civilized society. People can use it, allow/disallow it, observe it however they wish, but it does not change what it is.

You really are very smart. I love people that can look at a whole issue and not just from one side of it.

 

[deewee]

We, as a country, have been on a slippery slope that has been becoming steeper by the year. Giving in to licentious behavior is what is causing God to turn his face from us. Do we want His blessing on our nation? I do. For that reason, alone, I have to stand on His principles regarding these matters. He has blessed us immeasurably in this country. We, Christians, have a freedom that many in this world do not have. If we continue to give way to standards that are not of God, we will face more and more of those religious freedoms being taken away from us. This is a spiritual battle, at its core, and anyone who believes otherwise is deceiving themselves.

 

[deewee]

And for the record, as a moral issue, I do not believe in homosexuality or gay marriage as being part of God's best plan. Just like I don't believe heterosexuals living together outside of marriage or being married and divorced multiple times to be God's best plan. I just don't see where it is the part of government to be involved in such matters.

Gay marriage is not only not God's first plan, it isn't any of His plan. If God doesn't recognize the union, why bother? It won't be blessed by Him, it won't join two females, or two males, together as one. They may make a commitment to one another, before mankind, but God's eyes will be turned away. Their promises to one another will be in vain. So, try as they might to convince the Christian world that their union is equal, it is not, and never will be.

(Not picking at your post, just responding and more thoughts poured in while doing so.)

Oh, pick away - you know I don't mind. We agree theologically, but government should not be in the business of deciding whose marriage should and should not be sanctioned, IMHO. As long as the people being joined are CONSENTING ADULTS, I don't care who or what they are. That's why I say government should only be in the business of civil unions (which defines the contractual/legal process) and only churches should be in the business of marrying people.

According to our theology, atheists married in the Unitarian Church would no more be married than two gay people. Yet that is legal. I say, make it all black and white, and then churches can decide based on their belief system whom they will marry and whom they will not. Christians say, oh but kids will see two gays married or whatever. So? They see heterosexuals* having sex outside of marriage, and living together outside of marriage, and having extramarital affairs, and being divorced and married multiple times. I think that has done FAR MORE damage to the institution of marriage** than anything gays could do. It is my humble opinion that if Christians who are so up in arms about gay marriage would be as up in arms about heterosexual shenanigans in today's culture, and lived like they say they believe, then a lot of this mess would straighten itself right out.

* This also applies at the same rate to heterosexuals who say they are Christians. Gallup conducts a poll virtually every year as to the lifestyles of people in the church vs. people who aren't...the lifestyles are perennially the same within the margin of error. I may start another thread about this.

** I say "damage to the institution of marriage" while laughing at myself...marriage is like freedom or any number of other fundamentals of a civilized society. People can use it, allow/disallow it, observe it however they wish, but it does not change what it is.

You really are very smart. I love people that can look at a whole issue and not just from one side of it.

She IS very smart, and I love the panda. :love

Just because someone doesn't agree on an issue, does not mean they haven't looked at it from all angles. It simply means that though they stand by the principles that guide them.

 

[Blazing Saddles]

If they say gays can marry, then as I've always said, polygamy should be legal. They'll have to include mom's and dad's wanting to marry their kids along with gramps hooking up with grandies.

Any man that wants more than one wife should go ahead and marry them all. I have no issue with that, to each their own, as long as they are all consenting adults. I am pretty sure in Biblical times more than one woman was around. As for adults and kids that is a weak argument. Kids do not marry, adult men and women do.

If you sit and ponder the situation, kids grow up to be adults. Once they reach 16 in some states, they can marry. Heck it was 14 in Alabama not too long ago. So yes, my argument is VERY valid and now you are enlightened.

 

[ShoeDiva]

And for the record, as a moral issue, I do not believe in homosexuality or gay marriage as being part of God's best plan. Just like I don't believe heterosexuals living together outside of marriage or being married and divorced multiple times to be God's best plan. I just don't see where it is the part of government to be involved in such matters.

Gay marriage is not only not God's first plan, it isn't any of His plan. If God doesn't recognize the union, why bother? It won't be blessed by Him, it won't join two females, or two males, together as one. They may make a commitment to one another, before mankind, but God's eyes will be turned away. Their promises to one another will be in vain. So, try as they might to convince the Christian world that their union is equal, it is not, and never will be.

(Not picking at your post, just responding and more thoughts poured in while doing so.)

Oh, pick away - you know I don't mind. We agree theologically, but government should not be in the business of deciding whose marriage should and should not be sanctioned, IMHO. As long as the people being joined are CONSENTING ADULTS, I don't care who or what they are. That's why I say government should only be in the business of civil unions (which defines the contractual/legal process) and only churches should be in the business of marrying people.

According to our theology, atheists married in the Unitarian Church would no more be married than two gay people. Yet that is legal. I say, make it all black and white, and then churches can decide based on their belief system whom they will marry and whom they will not. Christians say, oh but kids will see two gays married or whatever. So? They see heterosexuals* having sex outside of marriage, and living together outside of marriage, and having extramarital affairs, and being divorced and married multiple times. I think that has done FAR MORE damage to the institution of marriage** than anything gays could do. It is my humble opinion that if Christians who are so up in arms about gay marriage would be as up in arms about heterosexual shenanigans in today's culture, and lived like they say they believe, then a lot of this mess would straighten itself right out.

* This also applies at the same rate to heterosexuals who say they are Christians. Gallup conducts a poll virtually every year as to the lifestyles of people in the church vs. people who aren't...the lifestyles are perennially the same within the margin of error. I may start another thread about this.

** I say "damage to the institution of marriage" while laughing at myself...marriage is like freedom or any number of other fundamentals of a civilized society. People can use it, allow/disallow it, observe it however they wish, but it does not change what it is.

You really are very smart. I love people that can look at a whole issue and not just from one side of it.

She IS very smart, and I love the panda. :love

Just because someone doesn't agree on an issue, does not mean they haven't looked at it from all angles. It simply means that though they stand by the principles that guide them.

Again, my opinion is that I :love her smarts because she looks at all angles and even with her convictions can make a valid argument from all sides. I did not state others have not looked at it from other angles. Many have, they just dismiss the other angles because it does not fit into their lifestyle. I am not saying that is bad. We all have our own opinions and they are all valid, whether I agree with those opinions or not.