Would you support a Constitutional Ammendment to protect marriage?

I guarantee that if the founding fathers would have been faced with this stuff, they would have definitely put in the constitution that marriage is between a man and a woman ONLY. It was just so unheard of back then that they didn't even think about it. But I'm sure they're rolling around in their graves right now.

BTW, Separation of church and state was made for the purpose of protecting the church, not the state. It was because of religious persecution. And I believe that our government was founded on Christian beliefs. Look at our money. It says "In God We Trust" (which I'm sure will be taken off eventually as more people bitch and twist the laws). Just like the pledge of allegiance. "One Nation Under God" has been in it since the 1950s, I believe. And no one bitched about it until now when separation of church and state has been around far far longer. I'm just saying that you can't say our government wasn't founded on Christian principles. Why do you think God has blessed this country so much? And also, I'm not trying to be ugly here, but you sound a little ungreatful. Why don't you go to Iraq and see how wonderful you think America is? Although it has its flaws, it's still a great place to live. And if you're looking for a government that you will be 100% satisfied with who will cater to your every desire, you're never going to find it. And in a lot of countries, they wouldn't even allow you to vote, and speaking out against the laws/government would be punishable by death.
One more thing, Bush isn't changing the constitution, just adding more things to it. And I think that's perfectly okay because as times change, more laws may need to be enforced.
Anyway, there's my 2 cents.

 

Although I am against gay marriage, you made a very good point!

 

Yeah, and just think, the next thing you know people will be marrying their animals. Maybe even child molesters could marry children, if they could get the child to say they liked it. Wouldn't it be great? Yeah, this is just the first step, and I'm sure some day it could turn into this. That's why we have to stop it at it's roots. Because marriage has always been defined as a man and a woman until now. Now homosexuals are trying to say, "how can you define marriage as a man and a woman?" Next thing you know it'll be people into beastiality, molesting children, and even necrophelia screaming descrimination because they are born with these urges, just like homosexuals. Wow, imagine that, marrying a corpse. And then not going to jail if you kill your spouse because hell, it's the way you are. I've heard of child molesters actually believing that kids like it, so this isn't that far out ya know. I know this will piss a lot of people off, but I'm just protesting.

 

I was elated to see the "marriage amendment" die in the senate. I'll give special mention to Republican Senator John Sununu from New Hampshire, who voted against this bill and is probably not known for supporting a socially progressive agenda.

Why the government at any level in this country-not just federal-is trying to impose its social agenda upon the rest of the populace is subverting the constitution. Anyone who disagrees with me, I advise you to go look at the 4th, 9th and 14th amendments. In doing so, understand that some rights while not overtly stated are implicit and thereby present nonetheless. The decision to engage in consentual behavior between or amongst capable individuals should be left up to the individuals in question and not be left for the government(s) to decide. Government has no business recognizing social unions of any kind. I've said this before elsewhere that these decisions are to be made between/among the individuals in question and the entity with which they made the agreement(church, court ,temple, etc.).

For the United States, which is supposed to be the freest nation in the world to impose some of the most repressive laws regarding matters of what I'll call social unions as well as other forms of sexual conduct is despicable. I praise the Supreme Court last year for overturning the Texas "sodomy" laws last year.

Many "cultural conservatives" claim that we need these laws to prevent "deviancy." What they don't understand is that this activity will go on nonetheless and they shouldn't use the government to use as their 'bully' anymore than the leftists they rail against use it to promote their agendas. These people claim that the US a christian nation. While many of these people had faith, they understood that such beliefs were personal. Let's not also forget that at least four of the founding fathers; Jefferson, Adams, Franklin and Thomas Payne; were diests or members of a faith that even at that time was considered questionably Christian;Unitarianism.

 

no i would not

 

Now, where does it say in the Bible that they can't? The reason I ask this rather specious question is because your arguement against homosexuals is scripture-based. Additionally, I know you know some parts in the scriptures that are "Thou shalt not"s that no one pays attention to because they... ???... have no relevance any more? Do you just pick and choose the Shalt Nots that you want to enforce? For example: Exodus 35:2
"On six days work may be done, but the seventh day shall be sacred to you as the sabbath of complete rest to the LORD. Anyone who does work on that day shall be put to death."

Yo, we have a lot of smiting to do, ya think?

And we come to this: Leviticus 11:7 and 8
"and the pig, which does indeed have hoofs and is cloven-footed, but does not chew the cud and is therefore unclean for you.
8Their flesh you shall not eat, and their dead bodies you shall not touch; they are unclean for you."

Guess the NFL gets a double smite, huh?

I think I might have found a new way to make money: Exodus 21:7
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go free as male slaves do."

What do you think I should charge for her services?

But in all seriousness, the verse that I feel should be foremost in the minds of all is from John 8:7
"So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."


BTW, you don't eat pork, do you?

 

Moonjava,
I guess you think that we should still have slaves too? Black people shouldn't be allowed to marry white people either. And well hell women shouldn't vote should they?

I'm not saying that the Constitution should never be changed, I'm saying that simply because this president believes (because of his religion) that gay people should not get married does not mean he has the right to put that into the Constitution on whim. My point that you seem to have missed is that he is not doing things that the people want, and he is not thinking them through completely. He just wakes up and says, I believe this is wrong, therefore, it will be wrong for everyone. That is not how this country was supposed to be run, sweetheart, and if you don't believe that I suggest you grow up and live in the real world, experience some injustice and for crying out loud, read a book on history that your pretty boy teachers aren't paid to make you believe.

It isn't about gay marriage, it is about this president drastically changing this country by dividing it and taking away rights (or not allowing the rights to be established) of people. Don't you get it. We are all people, gay, straight, black, green, polka dotted. And the last time I checked love was still love. Preach that at your church?

Not to mention the original post was talking about divorce. I don't want it written into the Constitution that people cannot get divorced. What the hell does that have to do with the Constitution and how the country functions.

 

HAHAHA.....ever heard of the consept of applying for a marriage license???

I had to show ID and I had to be of legal age to consent to marriage.

Children are not of legal age(we could have a big argument over that in some states)(and countries)
And so far I have never heard of an animal being able to produce legal ID or sign their name...

Ridiculous argument.
______

Will it enhance the sanctity of marriage as we know it if this is denied to "gay" couples??
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.....they will suffer the trials and tribulations that "straight" couples do.
Will it hurt YOUR marriage if they marry????Not if you don't concern yourself with something that is really not your beeswax....
Could it actually be a good thing?????
I'm all for comitted relationships....too many people don't take this too serious anymore.
Gay Marriage???...gosh people have been complaining for years that gays(all inclusive)are promiscuous, and don't have committed relationships, now they want to deny them that...make up your minds.


I would NEVER deny 2 consenting adults the rights afforded them under the constitution of these United States...NO matter what MY religious beliefs are,nope I flat out REFUSE to shove my take on things down anothers throat...and deny them my freedoms.

Religion is a personnal thing...no matter what some of them say about the other ones being wrong....if you want to deny this in a religious vein then don't allow these marriages in your church or snub the married gays and don't talk to them and ignore them...but don't deny them the rights afforded to others.

Be ashame if one day the goverment decided that your religion was the wrong kind and tried to add an ammendment denying you the freedom to express it...think it can't happen??????

We're all people in the same boat here and struggling along trying to figure it all out...there is no cut and dry..only personnal truths.

teepi

 

moon, again, I have to come back and say... you claim this country was founded on Christian prinicples, but it is my right is it not, to practice any religion that I want? The people here who know me know that I'm agnostic and for the most part practice my own religion. You might consider the principles Christian, but if you study all religions, they all basically have the same founding principles and guidelines they just go about them differently. Marriage which is a religious institution, has absolutely no place in the government. And the government has absolutely no right to dictate whom we can and cannot fall in love with. As I stated before, if we let them go this far, they will eventually be choosing our mates for us, then they will be making it illegal to love, etc.

And of course again, I'm told to go to Iraq. Here is an idea, why don't you go ahead and back up your thoughts with some hard proof, instead of telling people to leave. Or here, you go to Iraq, and take Bush with you, because obviously you are the ones who are not happy here.

And I have never stated or even once thought that in any way shape or form that I'm ever going to live in a country that I agree with 100%. But I don't run around and change laws forcing my opinion on people either. You have a lot of growing up to do little girl, I wouldn't want the government to stifle that.

 

Good point Lildeadbear I was typing when you posted.
I've been to churches that preached love then denied "certain" people the right to join......cracked me up...then made me very sad.

To the opposed.....
Jesus, it is said stopped the stoning of a whore...what would YOU do?????

 

You can guarantee this? What do you have a time machine or something?

The fact of the matter is, as time passes, there are going to be issues that 200 year old men just can't account for anymore.

The federal gov't is getting too big, our founding fathers intended to leave most governing power up to the states. They would not put anything like that into the constitution, becuase if they wanted to they would have. Fact of the matter is, they didn't. The Bill of Rights is a document to protect our rights, not restrict them. Gay marriage doesn't take away the rights of anyone.

 

Not long ago people thought that black human being could not marry a white human being. People argued about it. Hopefully these human beings who also FEEL LOVE and CHOOSE to spend the rest of their life with the same sex will be given the same honor.

WTF are people thinking when they do not allow same sex marriage. Perhaps it is not your religious ideal, but what about those gays and lesbians who DESERVE equality in their country. Is it fair that they are seen as lesser, and do not have the honor of marriage. Marriage is not only a Christian celebration. Im tired of religions being so self centered and not taking the consideration to realize other peoples beliefs, and lifestyles.

America is not home of the free and brave.

 

I find it interesting that there are lots of people who love America because of "all the freedom we have," but then are against an important segment of the population having the freedom to marry the person they love. Go figure.

 

I would NOT support such an amendment.

 

Oh well now, there it is, isn't it, boiled down to its essence.

~bows to beachbum7, may he always find shade and water~

 

If you will read further into the Bible, you will see that when Jesus came to earth and sacrificed his life for us, we were put under grace. HE DIED for OUR SINS. Therefore, we're not under the whole "eye for an eye/murder those who sin" law anymore. Of course, these things are still sin, but they can be cleansed if you as for forgiveness. I noticed that all of your examples were in the OLD TESTAMENT which was before we were under grace. Except for John 8:7, which is a perfect example of what I am trying to get at. Jesus said he who is without sin, cast the 1st stone. In the old testament, they would have murdered her. But in the new testament, Jesus told her, "Go, and sin no more" and she was not murdered.That just proves my point... things changed from the old testament to the new testament.

 

Although not perfect, it is more so than most countries.
And when I hear people say these things, it just makes me want to say, "Leave if you hate it so much." No one is holding a gun to your head. Go on a quest and find a perfect government.

 

As American's we have a right to try to change the things in our gov't we don't like. How much of a democratic society do we have if the people that don't like paticular things are told to leave instead of trying to make a change.

Our gov't is supposed to be a representation of the will of the people. In fact, i consider it very anti-american to tell fellow american's to leave rather than practice their allowed freedoms to make the changes they would like to see.

Our early residents fought for the right to control their own gov't....to have a democratic republic. If you don't like it...why don't you leave???

 

Ahhhhh. So now we don't have to worry any more about silly little things like the Ten Commandments. Best not try to sell that story down at a certain court house in Montgomery Alabama.

But enough of this. We are off topic.


Or are we