Did you sign it?

If you did, did you do so at a church? I ask because our parish had a good turnout by non-Catholics to sign the petition.

Did you sign it?

No.

Did you sign it?

If you did, did you do so at a church? I ask because our parish had a good turnout by non-Catholics to sign the petition.

Yes and Yes.

Did you sign it?

If you did, did you do so at a church? I ask because our parish had a good turnout by non-Catholics to sign the petition.

No, what other people do that does not affect me is none of my business.

Did you sign it?

If you did, did you do so at a church? I ask because our parish had a good turnout by non-Catholics to sign the petition.

Yes, yes.

A pack of wolves and 1 sheep voting on what's for dinner.

Fun times.

A pack of wolves and 1 sheep voting on what's for dinner.

Fun times.

Sorry, sometimes I do not get your witticisms!

Expain please.

Sorry, sometimes I do not get your witticisms!

Expain please.

It's not that complicated. 4 wolves and 1 sheep. Let's put it to a vote and see which one is dinner. Hmmmm.... The strong majority rules. It doesn't matter that it's the sheep's life. All that matters is that it was put to a vote and the majority won... without any thought as to whether or not it SHOULD be put to a vote.

It's not that complicated. 4 wolves and 1 sheep. Let's put it to a vote and see which one is dinner. Hmmmm.... The strong majority rules. It doesn't matter that it's the sheep's life. All that matters is that it was put to a vote and the majority won... without any thought as to whether or not it SHOULD be put to a vote.

Why should it not be put to a vote?
We live in a democracy and Maryland law states that any law passed by the legislature can be put up for referendum if enough signatures are gathered. Then voted on.

This is not the first time that this has happened and most of them have been against my beliefs and politics. So if it passes the people have spoken. If it doesn't, I won't like it, but the people have spoken.

Odds are against it as it has been passed by 32 states in a row, because its more like 90 wolves, 10 sheep.

We live in a democracy

No we do not. We live in a representative republic.

No we do not. We live in a representative republic.

The question "What form of government do we have?" was asked in my daughter's 7th grade social studies class. Some of the kids didn't answer at all, most answered a democracy, my daughter was the only one to respond, "A constitutional republic!" :proudmom:

No we do not. We live in a representative republic.

Nationally, Yes

Each state has their own Constitution.

We are discussing state laws, not National law.

Why should it not be put to a vote?
We live in a democracy and Maryland law states that any law passed by the legislature can be put up for referendum if enough signatures are gathered. Then voted on.

This is not the first time that this has happened and most of them have been against my beliefs and politics. So if it passes the people have spoken. If it doesn't, I won't like it, but the people have spoken.

Odds are against it as it has been passed by 32 states in a row, because its more like 90 wolves, 10 sheep.

You obviously didn't get the metaphor. When you're the sheep, you will.

Nationally, Yes

Each state has their own Constitution.

We are discussing state laws, not National law.

And states do not have district representatives?

Regardless, the citizens of Maryland will vote in favor of same-sex marriage so it doesn't really matter. I'm in favor of letting the people speak via referendum, although they speak fairly loudly every year when they vote in their district representatives.

On second thought, I didn't get to vote when they banned smoking in restaurants and bars, so screw the gays AND their haters. Where were you punks when I needed you?

Nationally, Yes

Each state has their own Constitution.

We are discussing state laws, not National law.

And Maryland is not a democracy. It is a republican form of government in that we elect representatives.

In a true democracy, every citizen has the right to propose law and every citizen votes on every law. Not too efficient and certainly breaks down rapidly.

Wrong forum, but too many laws squash freedom.

Things like this will continue to pass unless our lawmakers are converted to Christ. The most important thing we can do is pray for their conversion and continue to proclaim the gospel.

On second thought, I didn't get to vote when they banned smoking in restaurants and bars, so screw the gays AND their haters. Where were you punks when I needed you?

Good point but... until I can walk by a smoker and not break out in hives and need an inhaler, I will always vote for a smoking ban.

Good point but... until I can walk by a smoker and not break out in hives and need an inhaler, I will always vote for a smoking ban.

Why do you break out in hives?

Why do you break out in hives?

I don't know. I'm extremely sensitive to chemicals, odors, fragrances, etc. Might be the fibromyalgia. It's annoying though. Also gives me headaches. My skin breaks out and flushes even if a student opens a bottle of scented hand sanitizer for 3 seconds in my classroom.

Wirelessly posted

Things like this will continue to pass unless our lawmakers are converted to Christ. The most important thing we can do is pray for their conversion and continue to proclaim the gospel.

Jesus would have married gays. :shrug:

Wirelessly posted



Jesus would have married gays. :shrug:

Although He was at a wedding feast, I don't recall in the bible that He actually married anybody. Maybe He would approve of everyone, gay or not, just living together. :wink:

No, what other people do that does not affect me is none of my business.

And that is exactly why you should have signed it.
if the government just passes it, people will never accept it.
However, if it is voted on and it passes by the peoples votes, there is not much that can be said, the majority speaks, and it is what it is. Little argument to be had.
And as we have been told by those that want gay marriage, the majority DO want it, or at least do not want to prohibit it.

A win by vote is going to be the best thing that could happen.

You should have signed to have it added for vote.

I signed, and I sent in close to 100 signatures along with mine. (legal signatures, Im not democrat)

Wirelessly posted



Jesus would have married gays. :shrug:

I dont think the Bible backs that claim up.

But, Jesus would not have condemned them either.

Did you sign it?

If you did, did you do so at a church? I ask because our parish had a good turnout by non-Catholics to sign the petition.

Yes....i signed it numeorus times! Some behaviors are just not equal!

Although He was at a wedding feast, I don't recall in the bible that He actually married anybody. Maybe He would approve of everyone, gay or not, just living together. :wink:

What are you talking about????

What are you talking about????

I was making a joke in response to thatguy's comment. The point was, Jesus didn't officiate at a wedding, not even a straight one, so therefore if we're going to go all biblical about it maybe people should forgo marriage all together.

Wirelessly posted

What are you talking about????

I was making a joke in response to thatguy's comment. The point was, Jesus didn't officiate at a wedding, not even a straight one, so therefore if we're going to go all biblical about it maybe people should forgo marriage all together.

Foodie has a hard time keepIng up, but I am all with you, marriages for none!!!!

Foodie has a hard time keepIng up, but I am all with you, marriages for none!!!!

Well, doesn't that get you off the hook.

Wirelessly posted

Foodie has a hard time keepIng up, but I am all with you, marriages for none!!!!

Well, doesn't that get you off the hook.

Not really, according to the church my marriage is forever.

And that is exactly why you should have signed it.
if the government just passes it, people will never accept it.
However, if it is voted on and it passes by the peoples votes, there is not much that can be said, the majority speaks, and it is what it is. Little argument to be had.
And as we have been told by those that want gay marriage, the majority DO want it, or at least do not want to prohibit it.

A win by vote is going to be the best thing that could happen.

You should have signed to have it added for vote.

I signed, and I sent in close to 100 signatures along with mine. (legal signatures, Im not democrat)
Vote or no vote, exactly the same number will accept the idea or won't. Take you personally, if it's voted on and passed will it change your opinion?

Not really, according to the church my marriage is forever.

Nope, you said marriage is for none. That just means you now don't have to worry about living up to any sort of standard in those regards.

Vote or no vote, exactly the same number will accept the idea or won't. Take you personally, if it's voted on and passed will it change your opinion?

Nope, but I wouldn't be able to run around with the claim that the governor slipped in in against the peoples will now would I?

Wirelessly posted

Not really, according to the church my marriage is forever.

Nope, you said marriage is for none. That just means you now don't have to worry about living up to any sort of standard in those regards.

Jokes, I see you don't get them :shrug:

As for standards, marriage didn't dictate or Change any of my standards with regard to my relationship. I don't need the state or the church to tell me how to act, maybe you do, but I don't.

Nope, you said marriage is for none. That just means you now don't have to worry about living up to any sort of standard in those regards.
So we're supposed to spend several hundreds of thousands of dollars just so you have one less thing to complain about. If it would have solved the whole issue once and for all, that might make it worth it, but in this case it won't even make anyone stop to take a breath before the next round of "God says it's evil and now we have to take it to court to have our rights restored"

So we're supposed to spend several hundreds of thousands of dollars just so you have one less thing to complain about. If it would have solved the whole issue once and for all, that might make it worth it, but in this case it won't even make anyone stop to take a breath before the next round of "God says it's evil and now we have to take it to court to have our rights restored"

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this. Before I go too far into this, exactly what do think I think about this issue?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this. Before I go too far into this, exactly what do think I think about this issue?

I was replying to BCP and somehow it got attached to your post, I'm sure I did something wrong to cause it. Hopefully it makes more sense if you read it as;

Nope, but I wouldn't be able to run around with the claim that the governor slipped in in against the peoples will now would I?

So we're supposed to spend several hundreds of thousands of dollars just so you have one less thing to complain about. If it would have solved the whole issue once and for all, that might make it worth it, but in this case it won't even make anyone stop to take a breath before the next round of "God says it's evil and now we have to take it to court to have our rights restored"

sorry for the confusion.

10 Reasons to ban gay marriage:

1. Being gay is not natural. REAL Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way haning out with a tall person will make you tall.
3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even choose to marry their pets, you know, because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage certificate.
4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and has not changed at all. Women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed. The sanctity of Brittany Spears' 55 hour marriage would be destroyed!
6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanges aren't full yet, and the world needs more kids.
7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since obviously straight couples only raise straight children.
8. Gay marriage isn't supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.
9. Children can never succeed without a male and female role model at home. That's why we, as a society, expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of a society. We could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.


I think that about covers all the talking points....

Yes....i signed it numeorus times! Some behaviors are just not equal!

Interesting.

10 Reasons to ban gay marriage:

1. Being gay is not natural. REAL Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way haning out with a tall person will make you tall.
3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even choose to marry their pets, you know, because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage certificate.
4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and has not changed at all. Women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed. The sanctity of Brittany Spears' 55 hour marriage would be destroyed!
6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanges aren't full yet, and the world needs more kids.
7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since obviously straight couples only raise straight children.
8. Gay marriage isn't supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.
9. Children can never succeed without a male and female role model at home. That's why we, as a society, expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of a society. We could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.


I think that about covers all the talking points....


Nature NATURALLY created male and female. It’s easy to conclude that, by this nature, humans were intended to mate by male and female.

The one fact we do know is all gay people came from heterosexual biological parents and all heterosexual people came from heterosexual biological parents.

http://www.thespoof.com/news/magazine/woman_sues_state_of_florida_wants_to_marry_her_dog_7419.htm :shrug:

Who said this?

The commitment in marriage is meaningless today. Promises (like ‘until death do us part’) mean nothing. According to the 2008 census over 40% of marriages failed. This should disturb everyone. Sadly, it doesn’t. We live in a blame others, no responsibilities, no accountability, easy-out society.

Are you saying straight marriage aren’t valid? You know… it is a biological FACT that a child can only be conceived between a human male and female?

You already covered this in #2.

The most followed religions today (Christianity, Islam, Jewish), by-and-large, don’t support gay marriage. I don’t get that anyone is asserting it is completely rejected in any faith.

Who said this?

Legalizing gay marriage WILL change the dynamics of this country. As to whether it’s negative or positive is yet to be seen. Either way this country will survive it.

This country has grown, changed, and thrived on individual liberties. Our constitution demands it, and we should live by it. I don’t think our government should be in the business of promoting or forbidding (through law) anything that doesn’t do harm to others. Some believe gay couples that adopt children does harm to the child. I don’t think we have enough proof of this. If we get in the practice of using our religion to institute laws that forbid a person’s choices, then I believe we’re doomed. I don’t see a person’s choice in interpersonal relationships any different than my choice in which religion I choose to follow. I don’t believe any Christian would take the position of forbidding anyone from following Islam. Christians should step aside while people make their choices knowing God's consequences; not man's. From that standpoint, should there really be any limits to our liberties?

Yes....i signed it numeorus times! Some behaviors are just not equal!

This really worries me. Which ‘behaviors’ aren’t equal? How do you come to this conclusion? Who gets to decide? To what extent are you willing to go to delegitimize or even forbid these ‘behaviors’?

Same-sex marriage opponents have twice the needed signatures - baltimoresun.com (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-same-sex-signatures-submitted-20120529,0,5986836.story)

I've got to be honest, 113,000 signatures is not that impressive. They've been working on this petition drive for two or three months, I'm actually surprised something as controversial as this didn't result in more than that. i figured they'd get enough signatures because the benchmark they had to meet was not high at all, not even 1% of the total population had to sign this.

However, there are 3,530,007 registered voters in Maryland. I figured this petition would net at least 500,000 signatures given the time, effort and money put in to this.

Nature NATURALLY created male and female. It’s easy to conclude that, by this nature, humans were intended to mate by male and female.

The one fact we do know is all gay people came from heterosexual biological parents and all heterosexual people came from heterosexual biological parents.

http://www.thespoof.com/news/magazine/woman_sues_state_of_florida_wants_to_marry_her_dog_7419.htm :shrug:

Who said this?

The commitment in marriage is meaningless today. Promises (like ‘until death do us part’) mean nothing. According to the 2008 census over 40% of marriages failed. This should disturb everyone. Sadly, it doesn’t. We live in a blame others, no responsibilities, no accountability, easy-out society.

Are you saying straight marriage aren’t valid? You know… it is a biological FACT that a child can only be conceived between a human male and female?

You already covered this in #2.

The most followed religions today (Christianity, Islam, Jewish), by-and-large, don’t support gay marriage. I don’t get that anyone is asserting it is completely rejected in any faith.

Who said this?

Legalizing gay marriage WILL change the dynamics of this country. As to whether it’s negative or positive is yet to be seen. Either way this country will survive it.

This country has grown, changed, and thrived on individual liberties. Our constitution demands it, and we should live by it. I don’t think our government should be in the business of promoting or forbidding (through law) anything that doesn’t do harm to others. Some believe gay couples that adopt children does harm to the child. I don’t think we have enough proof of this. If we get in the practice of using our religion to institute laws that forbid a person’s choices, then I believe we’re doomed. I don’t see a person’s choice in interpersonal relationships any different than my choice in which religion I choose to follow. I don’t believe any Christian would take the position of forbidding anyone from following Islam. Christians should step aside while people make their choices knowing God's consequences; not man's. From that standpoint, should there really be any limits to our liberties?

I should have added :sarcasm: at the end....I would consider myself a libertarian, so all this is fine with me. Along with legalizing all drugs, and prostitution.

:coffee:

Nature NATURALLY created male and female. It’s easy to conclude that, by this nature, humans were intended to mate by male and female.

The one fact we do know is all gay people came from heterosexual biological parents and all heterosexual people came from heterosexual biological parents.

http://www.thespoof.com/news/magazine/woman_sues_state_of_florida_wants_to_marry_her_dog_7419.htm :shrug:

Who said this?

The commitment in marriage is meaningless today. Promises (like ‘until death do us part’) mean nothing. According to the 2008 census over 40% of marriages failed. This should disturb everyone. Sadly, it doesn’t. We live in a blame others, no responsibilities, no accountability, easy-out society.

Are you saying straight marriage aren’t valid? You know… it is a biological FACT that a child can only be conceived between a human male and female?

You already covered this in #2.

The most followed religions today (Christianity, Islam, Jewish), by-and-large, don’t support gay marriage. I don’t get that anyone is asserting it is completely rejected in any faith.

Who said this?

Legalizing gay marriage WILL change the dynamics of this country. As to whether it’s negative or positive is yet to be seen. Either way this country will survive it.

This country has grown, changed, and thrived on individual liberties. Our constitution demands it, and we should live by it. I don’t think our government should be in the business of promoting or forbidding (through law) anything that doesn’t do harm to others. Some believe gay couples that adopt children does harm to the child. I don’t think we have enough proof of this. If we get in the practice of using our religion to institute laws that forbid a person’s choices, then I believe we’re doomed. I don’t see a person’s choice in interpersonal relationships any different than my choice in which religion I choose to follow. I don’t believe any Christian would take the position of forbidding anyone from following Islam. Christians should step aside while people make their choices knowing God's consequences; not man's. From that standpoint, should there really be any limits to our liberties?

What side are you taking exactly? You realize the list is a joke, right?

I should have added :sarcasm: at the end....I would consider myself a libertarian, so all this is fine with me. Along with legalizing all drugs, and prostitution.

:coffee:

I completely got that it was sarcasm. :buddies:

I completely got that it was sarcasm. :buddies:

They really need to work on relaying tones, and emotions over the interwebz

:buddies:

What side are you taking exactly? You realize the list is a joke, right?

I am on the side of individual liberties and RESPONSIBILITY. It’s my desire that people recognize this world (whether you believe there is a God or not) have certain natural truths that you can’t escape no matter how much you try. One of those truths is that nature created male and female in humans for a reason. But I also recognize humans do things that may run contrary to this; for reason I don’t claim to understand. I don’t look at anyone with any sort of contempt or rejection. I just want people to try to recognize the possible consequence of their actions and take personal responsibility for their choices.

It is NEVER my desire to tell people how to live their lives. It's far more against my principles to have government dictate these terms than for folks to do things that are (what I consider to be) against nature.

They really need to work on relaying tones, and emotions over the interwebz

:buddies:

I think I've read enough of your stuff to mostly get where you're coming from.

I am on the side of individual liberties and RESPONSIBILITY. It’s my desire that people recognize this world (whether you believe there is a God or not) have certain natural truths that you can’t escape no matter how much you try. One of those truths is that nature created male and female in humans for a reason. But I also recognize humans do things that may run contrary to this; for reason I don’t claim to understand. I don’t look at anyone with any sort of contempt or rejection. I just want people to try to recognize the possible consequence of their actions and take personal responsibility for their choices.

It is NEVER my desire to tell people how to live their lives. It's far more against my principles to have government dictate these terms than for folks to do things that are (what I consider to be) against nature.

Sounds like you're in the perfect position then to be able argue for and against both sides! Very clever!

Sounds like you're in the perfect position then to be able argue for and against both sides! Very clever!

Let’s put it a different way. This thread was posted in the religion section; so I’ll give the ‘religion’ answer – WWJD.

In John 8 a woman was caught committing adultery, she was going to be stoned to death. The Pharisees asked Jesus what to do. He said “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her”. When no one could justify stoning her they went away. Then Jesus told the woman since no one condemned her to go and stop sinning.

The point is, we can hate the sin but still love the sinner. I believe in God’s eyes homosexuality is a sin; a sin that God will deal with, not me. Not only did Jesus stop the stoning, but he also showed the example of how we are to treat those that sin. Not with contempt or a desire to inflict judgment. Gays are no less than me just because they have a lifestyle that is different than mine. I am just as much a sinner, and commit sin (different sins) no less. So who am I to hold anyone in judgment?

I need to be more concerned with trying to get my life right rather than try to deal with others. So, I don’t have the best of both worlds. I argue against what I consider to be sin and for a person’s choice to be whatever they want to be as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else, and for all of us to face the consequences of our sins in front of God, not man.