In 2015, the landmark Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges legalized same-sex marriage across the United States. Though gay marriage was legal by law or statute in 36 states and Washington D.C., 14 states prohibited same-sex unions. But in a single ruling, same-sex couples won the right to freely marry those that they love.
Many believed that to be the end of the fight: The LGBTQ+ community won. But two years ago, the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade sent shockwaves through the nation, and suddenly the security of same-sex marriage felt very much in question.
With President-elect Trump taking office in a few months, and a rightwing control of both chambers of Congress… is same-sex marriage on the chopping block?
The Culture War
It’s no secret that LGBTQ+ issues are on the forefront of the culture war. From book bans to pronoun showdowns to beer boycotts to outrage any time there’s a same-sex kiss on television, the gay community is constantly under fire legally and culturally.
And although LGBTQ+ acceptance in America is higher than in decades past, the backlash against the community also seems louder than ever, amplified by a massive conservative media ecosystem.
That’s why many say that Obergefell isn’t safe - especially in the wake of Roe’s reversal.
When Roe was overturned a few years ago, Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas issued a joint statement in which they said Obergefell had “ruinous consequences for religious liberty," and in the majority opinion for overturning Roe, Justice Thomas wrote that “in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.”
There’s clearly an appetite in Washington by some to overturn Obergefell. And one Christian activist group believes they can make it happen.
Guess Who's Back
For a decade, one woman has been at the center of the gay marriage debate: Kim Davis. Davis is a former Rowan County, Kentucky county clerk who made national headlines in 2014 when she refused to issue a marriage license to same-sex couples. Davis then received a court order to issue marriage licenses to LGBTQ+ couples, but defiantly refused, citing her religious beliefs. She was ultimately thrown in jail for contempt of court, becoming a martyr for religious freedom for one side and a symbol of bigotry to the other.
Now one group, the Christian legal activist group Liberty Counsel, is using her case as a springboard to overturn Obergefell.
The Religious Push to Overturn Obergefell
Earlier this year, Liberty Counsel filed a brief to overturn a 2023 jury verdict ordering Davis to pay $100,000 to a gay couple she denied a marriage license to. Their goal is to get the case before the Supreme Court, where they think they can find five votes amongst the Court’s six conservative justices to render the initial judgment against Davis a “mistake” and overturn same-sex marriage on the grounds that it’s “neither carefully described nor deeply rooted in the nation’s history.”
“Kim Davis deserves justice in this case since she was entitled to a religious accommodation from issuing marriage licenses under her name and authority,” argues Liberty Counsel founder Matt Staver. “This case has the potential to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges and extend the same religious freedom protections beyond Kentucky to the entire nation.”
So what happens if the Supreme Court overturns gay marriage? At least 25 states have statutory bans on gay marriage on the books which would go into effect immediately.
In an instant, same-sex marriage would be illegal in half the country.
What do you think? These are uncertain times for the LGBTQ+ community, and their right to marry - once widely considered settled law even by opponents - suddenly seems up in the air.
What Can We Do?
So what can we do about it? We understand that many of you feel helpless, but at the Universal Life Church, we've found comfort in this community. We've noticed an influx in new ordinations in recent weeks, many of whom have confirmed to us it is with the express intent of standing by marriage equality and performing same-sex weddings for couples in need ahead of any potential future bans.
We can't predict the future - particularly in these uncertain times - but we do know that we will fight any attempts to reverse marriage equality, and we will always stand firm for the rights of everyone to legally marry the one that they love.
184 comments
-
Mary E Benoit
There have always been a small number of gay people. They can have sex without children, I sin to many. You can hate and discriminate but they can no more change their sex and desire than you can. We have ruined too many good lives forcing them to even think their basic being was wrong, and worse illegal.
-
Reverend Paula Copp
As a member of the LGBTQIA community, I not only fear for gay marriage, but I also fear for gay rights in general!
-
Rev. Mike Eggleston
Gay rights are human rights. Denying human rights to members of the LGBTQ community (or any subset of society) is the thin end of the wedge.
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
In a free society, either everyone is free, or there is no free society, of course this is uncertain in today's political environment.
-
-
Daniel Gray
Name me one, just one right that has been taken from the LGBTQ community. bet you cant.
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
Here we go again with the 'name me one' game. If you can post a comment with your computer, and you are truly interested in the truth, and not just for the sake of argument, on any subject under the sun, investigate it yourself and don't depend on anyone else to educate you, as we've seen throughout this election, you will not believe the answer anyway. Read, Research, Remember.
-
Daniel Gray
So you are admitting that you cant name one right that women have had taken from them
-
-
Keith Ramsey
Gray, you don't pay attention if you don't know that answer.
If you are really interested, you can search for the answer by using search engines such as Google or Bing, even Duck, Duck, Go. There are numerous instances on different search engines where the Conservative and Religious rights have attempted and in some cases have taken rights away from those in same-sex marriages.
The Right to marry was taken away from them until SCOTUS said that it was wrong to deny them that right.-
Daniel Gray
I have and all of them say the exact same thing, NO rights have been denied no matter what your OPINION says
-
Keith Ramsey
That isn't accurate. Keep looking. Yes, rights have been denied.
Maybe you should look up laws...
-
Daniel Gray
I have and yet again no rights have been denied. If you are so sure then you should be able to tell us what they were instead of repeating the same old lie.
-
-
-
-
Dan Anderson
Mr. Gray - Prior to the allowance of equal rights for homosexuals to become married legally, one spouse could not even be in an ICU with their other spouse 'because the visiting person is not family.'
In the 1960s, gay men and women in New York City could not be served alcohol in public due to liquor laws that considered the gathering of homosexuals to be “disorderly.
The American Psychiatric Association listed homosexuality as a form of mental disorder in 1952. The DSM V corrected this error as the claim earlier on had to empirical evidence for any such condition.
The following year, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed an executive order that banned gay people—or, more specifically, people guilty of “sexual perversion”—from federal jobs. This ban would remain in effect for some 20 years.
There are many more conditions that homosexual people had to put up with prior to the issue of equal rights for homosexuals.
-
Daniel Gray
That was then, this is now we are talking about
-
-
Reverend Paula Copp
Oh, gray, there you go again…hahahahaha
-
Daniel Gray
what, proving you wrong as usual?
-
-
Amber Fry
They are still denied marriage and adoption rights pretty darn regularly. Some are even denied housing in some places right here in the states. It wasn't all that long ago that awful Kim Davis woman was denying a marriage license to a gay couple you know. It's why she got into so much trouble, for forcing her religion into her job decisions even when it was against the law. Quite a number have had to sue to get what the standard straight couple usually doesn't even get questioned about. Now the yare talking about it being scrubbed from the laws again? Honestly.... you don't pay much attention to what's going on in the real world, do you...
-
Daniel Gray
in what county or state Amber your attempt to make a blanket statement of your opinion does not cut it
-
Keith Ramsey
Texas has prevented Same-Sex couples from adopting... there are others, but again, all you have to do is search the internet to find it yourself.
Yes we can give you examples, but you won't believe anything that is said against your belief.
-
Daniel Gray
Oh really? My sister Deb lives in Brownsville and two houses down from a homosexual couple and just attended a party for the twins that they just adopted. My sister Barb works with an inter-racial lesbian couple in a local hospital in Dallas-Ft Worth and she has seen pictures from the adoption of a teen boy to this couple.
You really should not listen to the crap you are getting your information from and actually do your homework before posting.
-
-
-
-
Dan Anderson
Mr. Gray - to date (2024), naturalized U.S. citizens whose biological children are born abroad may be unable to obtain U.S. citizenship for their children even if their spouse is also a U.S. citizen. This may disproportionately affect same-sex couples, given that typically only one spouse is biologically related to the child.
Thirty-one U.S. state constitutional amendments banning legal recognition of same-sex unions have been adopted. Of these, ten make only same-sex marriage unconstitutional; sixteen make both same-sex marriage and civil unions unconstitutional; two make same-sex marriage, civil unions, and other contracts unconstitutional; and one is unique. Hawaii's amendment is unique in that it does not make same-sex marriage unconstitutional; rather, it allows the state to limit marriage to opposite-sex couples. Virginia's amendment prevents the state from recognizing private contracts that "approximate" marriage.
-
-
-
Matthew Mastrogiovanni
Don't like gay marriage, then don't do it. Otherwise, as my mother said, mind your own business.
-
Brien
So, like it or not, the bottom line is simple. The organized zealots hate more than the LGB community loves. It is a simple numbers game. You have to be more than them, and judging by the recent election you are not. 50%, (even more), of this country decided they would rather be ruled by a convicted felon than anyone else. Everything that happens from this point forward is all of our faults. So my friends, buckle up. It is a very bumpy ride from here.
-
oy_gevalt
Well stated. Thank you.
-
-
Donald J Rothschild Jr
When Justice Thomas issued his “manifesto” on what rights should be relooked at he conveniently left out one that would affect him, Loving vs Virginia, which granted interracial marriage. So Justice Thomas if you want to gut the rights of others, let’s start with your marriage to Ginny. See how that feels you bigoted, uneducated, self righteous, self serving waste of matter.
-
Matthew W Meister
Unfortunately, Justice Thomas has never considered how things affect other people. If you read his opinions, he totally lacks empathy. He sees the world around him as an extension of himself. He doesn't see the similarities in Loving vs Virginia and Obergefell because he is black and wants to be married to a white person, but he is not gay and wanting to be married to someone of his gender. He was never qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice and never should have been appointed, and DEFINITELY never should have been confirmed.
-
Amber Fry
Which is really funny because the Project outlines interracial marriage as being on the chopping block as well. It's funny someone so eyeballs deep into two of those possibilities thinks he'd be immune just because he currently happens to be a justice. Good luck with that 'Justice' Thomas.....
-
William Petrizzi
But I had no idea that the leopard would eat my face
Justice Clarence Thomas (probably)
-
-
-
Dan Anderson
In an act of equality, if they do ban Gay marriage, then heterosexual marriage should also be banned.
Such terrified little rodents feeling uncomfortable with two people of the same gender who actually love each other. What a sad thing. I guess this could be much like the U.S. south with all of the segregation going on in the 60s and previously. There are still people who see a couple with mixed 'skin color' and cringe at the sight.
-
Robin Anne Hannon
It's a snowball straight out of Hades. As Donald pointed out, it's the tip of a bigoted snowball. Interracial marriages could be outlawed, and any children denied basic rights. If we go down this road who is next? Will it be Jews that would be outlawed, or back to Jim Crow? What about denying women basic rights to work, and or not allowing them to have property? It would be a reversal into the dark ages to say the least. What if they decide to start putting gay people in prison for who they are, or deny them jobs, don't think that could happen? Look at how far we've slidden. What would Jesus do?
-
Donald J Rothschild Jr
Can you say “The Handmaid’s Tale”. That is EXACTLY what today’s far right lunatics want. They say that history repeats itself. Well it’s time for America to wake the f up. What you are seeing today happened in a little country called Germany in the 1930s.
-
James Riggle-Johnson
Employment discrimination continues to happen today. It takes a lot to prove someone didn’t hire you or fired you because you’re gay. I'm pretty sure they'll outlaw gay sex again. The love to call us deviants.
-
Reverend Paula Copp
I agree with you, James, but I will not go quietly back into the closet! We must resist or we’ll end up back in the Middle Ages…
-
James Riggle-Johnson
Absolutely!
-
-
-
Amber Fry
Have you not read their project yet? You sould. We all should have the moment it was published. You can get it free online still, all 900+ pages.
-
Matthew W Meister
I have never really liked slippery slope arguments. It is those arguments that keep us from having some kind of sane gun control laws. If we do anything at all to restrict gun ownership even to underage or mentally ill people, we are accused of "coming for our guns". In this case, restricting marriage to only same sex couples is an abomination of freedom and equal rights by itself. We don't need to look ahead to what might happen in the future to know this would be wrong.
-
-
Nicholas J Page
It's the 21st century marriage should be for everyone not just the heterosexuals.If gays love each other and want to commit to each other then why not.Everybody needs to be equal and treated the same otherwise it counts as discrimination against the gay community.
-
Robin Anne Hannon
First of all, could we please stop with the name calling and vicious remarks? Secondly, if you deny rights to one group, they will be taken from all groups. Women no longer have control of their own bodies. Once that door is open, rights will be challenged on every level. Not just gays and women, but anyone of a different religion than Christianity. This is not love, it's abuse of power in my opinion. Plus, it may go further. Anyone who is a mixed marriage (black and white, Chinese and Black, etc) may be disenfranchised. Open the floodgates and you will end up with a flood. It's that simple.
-
Marie Hampton
I was raised Catholic and prejudice was ingrained as to being gay is an abomination. My parents divorced, terrible people! My Father, one brother, several cousins, couple aunties Mom's side ALL gay. Another black mark upon my heart, mind and soul... I was so conflicted, my life spun out of control so read several different Bibles and found Jesus saying, "The most important commandments are to LOVE your Lord with heart, mind and soul. To love your neighbor as yourself." The most important, beautiful, unselfish and expected by God way, is to love, Love, LOVE! It's very hard to do, as you read these derisive comments. I remember being you. I found hating these very people that were my family! I believed that I was right to do so. Then, I learned that love was more important. Firstly love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul. That love is your armor! My neighbors turned out to be everyone of every kind. I can choose or discern to forgive 490 times a day (7x70) as the word teaches. I can love my broken family as not a one, including myself, who is without sin. If we continue down the hateful road, we will crash and burn. If we choose to love our Lord first and foremost, it's so easy to forgive because we are forgiven! I'm no longer trapped in judging, in fact we're told as we judge so will we be judged, it's against God's love and forgiveness. I forgive all of the cruelty, judgemental commentary and bigotry here because that's my living example. I love my family, whether they know or not, whether they sin or not, whether they judge or not, etc because God's love is so much more important than my previous beliefs. His letter to us teaches me to do what may go against my upbringing, teaching and previously childish ways, for I've put them away. Accordingly I strive to love even the lowliest of us along with the loftiest of us. Finally: There ain't a one of us fit to throw a stone at another child of God. Even if Lucifer shows up, I'm leaving that judgment to God above. I said a lot of I's because sometimes it's only me to stick up for even those who've closed their minds to excepting we are all creatures of God. From dust to dust... To be apart from the body is to be present with the Lord. So my question to you all, do you have the right to be so cruel to your fellow (wo)man? Love and peace to you all. Minister Mimi
-
Matthew W Meister
I appreciate your comment here. I especially appreciate the reminder that we need to love the lowliest and the loftiest. Those that I find the hardest to love are those who consider themselves the loftiest, but that is where I must open my heart and love them despite the flaws I see and the superiority they feel. Thanks.
-
-
Keith David Harry
Two people love, respect and cherish each other. Does it matter that they are the same sex? Does it matter what they do in the privacy of their own homes? I think not.
-
John P Maher
HEAR YE, HEAR YE, HEAR YE I WILL ALSO ECHO THAT, ALL FOR ONE and ONE FOR ALL !!!
-
Wayne Charles Paul
Talk about hypocrisy. They are against marriage equality, but have no problem with the serial adulterer who has regained the White House. These pseudo-christian right-wing religionists evilgelican (the correct way to pronounce the name of that cult) do not care what Jesus had to say about divorce. USA = Under Satans Authority!
-
Danielle Elizabeth Ostach
Personally I see Adultery as grounds for divorce and social shaming against reputation but should not be a legal issue. The country is more than enough issues and problems without clogging up the courts with who is in whose bed. Same for Marriage, under law it is contract for inheritance, custody of children, tax filing and similiar. As such it should not discriminate by sex because any two people should be able to enter the same legal contract under the law.
-
-
Dent L. Sweem
"Marriage" is a Biblical "Union" between a Man and a Woman ONLY! New and Old Testaments makes this very plain and clear! Now if some want a "Union" between the same sex, go for it if that's your thing. BUT YOU CAN'T REALISTICALLY CALL IT A LEGITIMATE "MARRIAGE"! Period!
-
KJ Palmer
There are religious/spiritual beliefs older than biblical beliefs that had unions/marriages. What does is matter if a union is called a union or a marriage or some other thing? And why is it that in the eyes of most people who think "marriage" should be off the table for anyone other than straight folks, any other union type shouldn't offer the same legal protections such as insurance and federal recognition? By the way, marriage is a legal institution, marriage certificates issued solely by a church aren't valid to make a marriage legal, a license from the state is required for a marriage to be deemed legally binding.
-
Patricia Ann Gross
"Marriage" is a horrific breach of the division of church and state. A "legal" marriage carries with it legal components such as name changes, property rights, powers of attorney can be implied where they cannot with other family members, and the list goes on. There are also implications in the tax codes. Ministers are granted in most states a license (often by the reverend [or other religious] title or pastor JD alone) to marry couples and once filed with the state, the marriage becomes a legal contract that can only be disolved through divorce. The minister or other religious leader does this with no legal background or certifications required. Therefore, the wording matters. Before gay marriage was legal, couples had to formally adopt their children and legally grant power of attorney to the partner and incur thousands of dollars of legal fees for wills, especially in states where inheritance/probate laws were hard to get around to provide for "non-family" members. These legal documents often fell short of the rights that would have been automatic with a marriage certificate.
-
Pamela Vonbacho Ploof
Amen.
-
-
oy_gevalt
YES I CAN! PERIOD! I'M MARRIED. I don't care if you don't like it. Mind your own business. Don't approve of same-sex marriage? Don't marry someone of the same-sex. Problem solved!
-
Reverend Paula Copp
Dent, your judgement of other people’s affairs makes you less credible as a minister. Unless god died and had you take over, your opinion is just that. YOUR OPINION! I can call my marriage to my wife a marriage because it is, and your opinion matters to me about as much as astrophysics. Here’s an idea… mind your own business! Problem solved.
-
Daniel Gray
just like everything you post here is YOUR opinion. There fixed it for ya.
-
Reverend Paula Copp
Oh, gray, you have such an attitude! Did your mommy not give you enough attention? Was your daddy mean to you? If you can’t say anything positive, do us a huge favor and stay silent.
-
Lion on the Beach
So, what rights have been taken away from your community? You still have never answered the question.
-
Keith Ramsey
As I answered elsewhere.
If you cared for that answer, you would do some research to find that out. But since you are asking without looking it up. We know you don't care.
Until the SCOTUS ruling came through Conservatives had taken the right to marriage to the one they love away from them. There are still 14 states that have those laws on the book in the hope that the SCOTUS ruling will be overturned.
If you care to know what rights have been taken away, then look it up. Any internet search engine will give you results.
-
Daniel Gray
No you have not as I asked you the same question and you gave me nothing to back up your claims
-
-
James Riggle-Johnson
Lion, do you know how recently it became illegal for us to be fired, or denied rental property because of what we are? We’ve only been able to marry since 2015 and ONLY because of a SCOTUS decision that will probably be overturned soon. Once that happens there are states in the USA where gay sex is still illegal. We can be arrested for doing something in the privacy of our own home.
-
-
Daniel Gray
Dont know Paula, I have not spoken to your mommy
-
-
-
-
Donald J Rothschild Jr
Marriage is a legally binding CONTRACT that has absolutely NOTHING to do with religion. You do not need a religion to marry. Religion hijacked marriage to add more control over people and to line the church coffers with more money.
-
Dan Anderson
Why couldn't society call it a legitimate marriage? Are the conditions that only people who can procreate to get marriage and all others shunned? I guess this means senior citizens can't be married. A sterile male or a female with a tilted uterus should never get married, either. They can't create children.
-
Elizabeth Jane Erbe Wilcox
And after having a hysterectomy is divorce automatically granted?
-
-
Illya King
This is a terrible point because it implies that all people must adhere to Christianity. Some of the principles of Christianity are not taught. There are non-canon books like the Apocalypse of Peter that shaped Christianity views of the divine, but is ignored by Western believers. Peter certainly though every believer was going to heaven. It was Paul to wrote down the rules all of the sudden, which is why Peter and Paul split up in Acts.
The Bible has been edited to reflect the political beliefs of the church. It is not a perfect unbiased document. Some of the creation myth is shared in other Mediterranean and Middle Eastern religions. Therefore the positions The Bible takes cannot be counted as fact-based.
-
Keith Ramsey
Mr Dent,
You are incorrect. You are defining a BIBLICAL UNION, but marriage has existed far longer than the Bible. You can argue that as much as you want, you will still be incorrect. You are attempting to force your beliefs onto others.
It will still be called marriage.
-
Amber Fry
Um, no, it's a legal union blessed or not by whatever religion the couple might belong to, if they belong to one. People get married outside of religion all the time.
-
Daniel Gray
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) defined marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman. DOMA was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996. However, the Supreme Court ruled that DOMA was unconstitutional in 2013 in the case United States v. Windsor. In 2015, the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges required all states to license and recognize same-gender marriages. Full Stop.
-
-
Ari Joseph Bertine
Marriage was not invented in Mesopotamia. Other cultures have had marriages for just as long or longer than Christianity has even existed. The Christian Bible does not get to define marriage for everyone in a country made for religious freedom and diversity.
-
Maximillian Martin
You're the perfect example of my belief about people who are against it. You only have 2 reasons. Either a book of fiction over 2000 years old, edited countless times, supposedly tells you that or some man at some time in your life married the man you wanted for yourself and now you're mad. I'm more inclined to believe the second one.
-
Patricia Ann Gross
Please give me the chapter and verse where it says one man and one woman.... I'm waiting.
-
Daniel Gray
read above you
-
Patricia Ann Gross
Daniel, I was not talking about the US legal definition, but the Biblical definition of marriage. Dent claims it is spelled out in plain language in both Old and New Testaments. I've read The Bible several times and don't recall ever seeing any such definition.
-
Daniel Gray
Ok then he was correct. Leviticus 18:22 "One shall not lay with a man as a woman nor a woman as a man"
Or Genesis 2:24, which says, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh
I think you might have missed these two.
-
Patricia Ann Gross
Marriage is not mentioned in either verse, and there is suspicion of translation/contextual errors in Leviticus. I presume, every man that had multiple wives and concubines after the Genesis verses (including Moses, Jacob, Abraham, David, among others) were not clinging to the "biblical definition" by clinging to the cultural norms of the time.
Husbands and wives are mentioned several times throughout The Bible, but "marriage" not so often. The story of Mary and Joseph only states that Mary was "promised" to Joseph which has been translated to "betrothed" or "engaged." This was the culture/custom of the time, i.e., the wife was promised/sold/contracted to the husband through a business arrangement to provide heirs. The only marriage mentioned in The Bible I am aware of is the Wedding at Cana that was the start of Jesus' ministry.
As civilization evolved and the need for procreation to inhabit the planet is more of a danger to the ecosystem than a benefit to the human race, customs became outdated, the need for polygamy was negated by a nearly equal number of men and women on the planet, so customs changed to marriage by mutual attraction rather than a business arrangement between fathers. Unfortunately, the scriptures were canonized sometime in the 4th century C.E., and we are now trying to shoehorn those customs into something appropriate for the way that society has evolved. It doesn't work. The alternative is going back to arranged polygamous marriages. Anybody on this page ready for that to be the "customary marriage?" Do you still believe that the biblical definition of marriage is how we need to define it in the world in the 21st century?
-
Michael Hunt
Neither of those appear to be a definition of marriage. Insinuation maybe but not a definition.
-
-
-
-
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
Marriage is a legal, binding contract between two consenting adults. It is not a religious contract. You can have a religious ceremony, if you like, and ask God to bless your union, or not.
-
-
James Mounts
As a single member of the toxic sex I have no dog in this hunt, but I do have a suggestion. Since those who wish to be married must get the approval of the government anyway, why not let the marriage license serve as a certificate of union, giving two people all the rights and benefits of marriage. and let churches own the religious ceremony called marriage. That way the couple can be legally joined in the eyes of the government and society. Then, if they wish to, and can find a clergyman willing to, perform the religious ceremony, they can. If they don't wish to, they would still be legally a couple. I suspect even without a religious ceremony they would still be welcome by Jesus.
-
Reverend Paula Copp
The last time this country had “separate but equal” in our school systems, separate but equal was anything but. It’s a very slippery slope, but maybe if we all live and let live things will get better.
-
James Mounts
Maybe I did not make myself clear. The purpose of my idea was to get everyone in the same group. Everyone would be legally joined, period. If, after that some wish to also be religiously joined could do so, but that act would add nothing legally.
-
-
Keith Ramsey
Marriage is not a religious ceremony.
Marriage has been around far longer than the Bible.-
Thomas P. Davis
Not that I necessarily care for the use of the word religious (since the bible gives it a different meaning "Jas 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.") But God did ordain it. Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply,
-
Reverend Paula Copp
I didn’t hear anything about them marrying in those verses…
-
Thomas P. Davis
In the world that I was raised in, if you have a wife your married. "Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." " Gen_38:8 And Judah said unto Onan, go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother." On a side note, this verse scares people as well. "1Co 6:16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh."
-
Reverend Paula Copp
Marriage is a legal ceremony. It can be religious, but it’s a legal contract. That’s why we have to have the married couple agree to marry one another in front of witnesses, and why we say, “by the power vested in me by the state of **, and the Universal Life Church, I now pronounce you spouses.”
-
Thomas P. Davis
Yes, man has butted in like he does in so many other places and says you must pay some money up front to call it legal. But then you have those that just live together and after so many years decide to break up and sue each other and that couple marriage is deemed legal, and they fight over the assets. Then you have what God calls marriage, Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." No justice of the peace or love boat captain there. No need to pay the government any money. So just as Paul says the FIRST person you share your flesh with ...1Co 6:16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh." Is your mate for life. Anything else is called adultery.
-
-
-
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
I have read the story of Adam and Eve many times, as have many others worldwide, and I always wondered one thing, maybe you can explain it to me. 'In his own image', does this mean that God looks like an Australopithecus, Neanderthal, or Cro-Magnon? Was this pre or post bipedal? Exactly what species of early man was it?
-
Thomas P. Davis
I guess the answer would first depend on whether you believe in evolution or creation. But if you believe in creation than the answer is most evident. In my short existence here on earth. I have heard many times a son or daughter referred to as the splitting image of their parent. So, Adam and Eve fall into that category, they had the same character traits of their heavenly father. Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Gal 5:23 Meekness, temperance: On a side note, since I do not know how you believe, there are those that believe in Theistic evolution. God created the pond scum, and we evolved from that. Most of those people also believe in the second coming and that God will raise the righteous from the grave in their new bodies. My question to them is if he could not speak and create Adam in one day back then, will we need to wait another million years to get our reward? They never have answer. By the way, Adam and Eve lost that image after sinning.
-
Anisahoni
It actually states, "Let Us make man in Our image." The Anunnaki created homo sapiens sapiens.
-
Thomas P. Davis
Anisahoni... yes, they were in God's image before they sinned, that is also why they could walk and talk face to face with God. But after they sinned, they lost that image. That is why they noticed they were naked and hid themselves and lied to their Father after that too. After that children were born in the image of their earthly father. Gen 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
-
-
-
-
-
Matthew W Meister
While your solution seems very simple on the surface, it is just that - SIMPLE. Do you have any idea how many laws would have to be revisted, re-crafted, adjusted, to make this simple solution work? Every state statute that refers to marriage would have to be re-worded. All tax forms would have to be changed. This country has always recognized the word marriage in the law and has functioned that way for nearly 250 years. As soon as we go to these separate definitions, Reverend Copp is right. We would create separate and definitely NOT equal rights for those different couples.
-
-
Aileen Grayce
When leaving your comment, please:
Be respectful and constructive Criticize ideas, not people Avoid profanity, insults, and derogatory comments I am amazed at the vitriol in the above comments regarding marriage/union. This is the first time I have commented and may be the last time. Love is the question and Love is the answer.
-
Tom Herman
Conservatives or anyone for that matter, who would try to stop someone from loving who they want to love and prevent them from a legal ability to marry that person is simply one step closer to invoking civil war. Those who lack tolerance will never learn.
-
Steven Ferrell
The fear mongering of the left is amazing.
As for r marriage, it is up to individual states as it should be. I personally feel the gay lifestyle is sin, my state allows gay marriage, so that is the law here. I will respect the law.-
Joseph Grieco
You are allowed to have that opinion. Just be aware that is why we now have numerous states that jumped on the bandwagon when Roe was overturned to come up with the most ridiculous anti-abortion laws that completely omit medical knowledge in their wordage. The attack on Obergefell will also result in those same states making marriage between folks with the same chromosonal makeup illegal. Of course, Justice Thomas will bend over backwards to protect Loving v. Virginia because he has a vested interest in that one! So, you need to ask yourself if and when that gauntlent is thrown down, will you be one of those who accept the challenge or will you be on the sidelines?
-
Keith Ramsey
It isn't fear mongering. That is where you went wrong.
It is something you don't agree with so you are wearing blinders to see that you maybe wrong. No it shouldn't be up to the state, the state should have no say in the marriage of one person to another.
What if, the government said you were not allowed to go see an R rated move anymore? What if, the government said you were not allowed to go to the grocery store on Sundays, because it should be the day of rest?
I'm not too far off on this...growing up, had a neighbor that the parents said anything that was rate R was a sinful move. We had another member of the community that objected on religious principles on the school showing a Rated PG movie to the students. Been to many years to remember which movie it was. But the school ended up not being allowed to watch it.
-
-
Danielle Elizabeth Ostach
Actually, the court order of her issue the license and fine for contempt of court probably should be overturned and once it is done, the appeal would not go higher.
It should have been as follows: 1) asked to issue license, she refused 2) ordered by superior to do so, she then refuses 3) she is fired for failing carry out duties of her job properly. Matter settled.
By making it a court case, they opened door for issues. Most employment is at will and employees can be fired for failing to perform job tasks which is this was issue marriage license to any couple that applies that fit the laws. If she had elected position then process to recall, impeach or remove her from office could be done instead of simple firing but court order and contempt of court is iffy in precedent and I could easily see it overturned.
Of course once overturned, she no longer has grounds for appeal and case can't get up to supreme court.
-
James Riggle-Johnson
Same-sex marriage has been legal for 9 years in this country and society has still not fallen apart. If Obergefell is overturned, it will be illegal in 25 states. Some of those states' Attorney Generals are also threatening to enforce the sodomy laws that still exist in their states. So, what then? Will they begin rounding us up in our homes?
Marriage is just a word used to describe a contract between two people. That contract gives the couple certain rights that protect them. This has nothing to do with religion. No one is trying to force a church to perform a marriage ceremony. The far right likes to scream liberals are trying to divide us when it’s they who are doing the dividing. They love to separate a small group of people to demoralize. They love to blame them for all the problems in the world. Then they find ways to take away their rights to be treated equally.
Let’s simply stop acting as though the LGBTQ community are evil deviants. Let’s stop pretending there is a problem when none exists.
-
Donald G Magel
I continue to be amazed by the number of "self described straights" that seem to be frightened by the possibility that if Gays have equal rights they could turn "straights" gay. Fact: You cannot catch gay, really it is not contagious. You have to be born gay. Perhaps this the hidden fear that some people carry; "Maybe I was?"
-
Rev, Dr Edward Taylor
I am a gay man myself and their is nothing wrong with gay couples getting married. When it comes to the Bible, it does not condemn Homosexuality in fact the word Homosexuality was not added to the Bible until 1946. They had no concept of what it is back in the ancient times. Their has been scholars and openly gay pastors who came out with books and articles to show evidence that the Bible does not condemn Homosexuality, for example the Sodom and Gomorrah story was just about rape, it had nothing to do with Homosexuality. A Christian theologian in the 11th century who's name was Peter Damien is /he one who made that up.
-
Daniel Gray
Bottom line is simple. The woman in the story offered to let one of her workers get the marriage license, but the SSC refused and demanded she do it even though the SCOTUS has said repeatedly NO state or local government has the right to demand you violate your 1st Amendment religious rights and CANNOT terminate or discipline you for refusing to do so. So yea this is going to be a very easy one for the SCOTUS to decide.
-
Reverend Paula Copp
Which just leads me to wonder, gray, if you are as crooked as the court…
-
Rev. BH
Yeah, the worst, most biased and bought SCOTUS ever.
-
Daniel Gray
Awww whats wrong paula, mad because the facts and the law call you out for this idiotic claim? If so then you are going to get a whole lot more angry as the courts follow what the law says, not what you want it to say
-
-
Trent Gordin
Actually Daniel, you're wrong. In 2015, Kim Davis prohibited ANYONE in her office from giving the same sex couple a marriage license. One of her clerks had to defy her and issue the license, which she got furious about. That's why she was sued. Literally all she had to do was ask her clerks if anyone was willing to cater to the gay couple, but her hatred of the gays got the best of her.
-
Amber Fry
Yes, she certainly did. It's why she got into so much trouble.
-
Daniel Gray
Actually she didnt, dont know where you got that fake info from. She asked her superiors if she was ORDERED to do this as it was against her 1st Amendment religious beliefs, and she was told at that time she could pass it on to another worker in her office. Even the workers in her office said the same thing that they could do this but she would not. So now I guess you are calling the workers in her office wrong because you say so?
-
-
Keith Ramsey
Mr Grey,
No, she was preventing ANYONE in her office from giving out those licenses. The rest of your post is accurate though. It should be a slam dunk. She had no right to deny others that right. She was in the wrong and needed to be brought up short.
-
Daniel Gray
Actually wrong as usual. She stated this on camera and under oath and even was backed up by workers in her office that if they wanted to give out the marriage certificate that they could but she would not. So are you now saying that the people in her office and herself and the court records are all wrong just because YOU say so?
-
-
Matthew W Meister
Mr. Grey, IF the story was the way you have changed it, she would not be in the predicament that she is in. While I am sure you heard that from a source you trust, it is not the actual facts of the case. She had a right to personally act on her beliefs, but she took it too far when she said no one else in her office could issue the license. Not that this will change your mind. I have read far too many of your posts to think you could read anything that would do that.
-
Daniel Gray
Really? guess then you missed the part where she won her case.
-
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
It will be an easy one for them to decide because they are a bunch of religiously delusional dimwits. The huge reason that any of them are still alive is that they haven’t found themselves in a situation where I am required to make any sort of active effort, say a shake of the head, in order to prevent their demise.
-
Daniel Gray
you mean like you?
-
Michael Hunt
No, like you, Daniel!
-
-
-
-
Mrknowitall
Lets pray to Almighty God that this Demonic thing stops !
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
Better still let's all pray to Almighty God and ask for forgiveness, compassion for our brothers and sisters and help each other in times of need and support, just like the words of the Christ instructs us to do. And to help us forget our prejudices and hatred against anyone who is different from ourselves. Teach us love, and that would be in Christs name, Amen.
-
-
Jimmy Moon
Don't worry people. You won't lose any of your rights as long as Satan is in charge of this world. BUT, when JESUS comes back, you will lose that right. HE will take care of business. So, until then, sin as hard as you can. Hell is coming sooner than you think. Better yet, REPENT of your sins now and accept JESUS CHRIST as your SAVIOR.
-
Reverend Paula Copp
Hahahahaha! It’s sad that you think everyone has to worship your god. It’s not going to work, but it’s cute that you’re trying.
-
Jimmy Moon
One day, EVERY KNEE WILL BOW AND EVERY TONGUE WILL CONFESS THAT JESUS IS LORD.
-
Rev. BH
They've been saying that for centuries, Jimmy. Ain't holding my breath.
-
-
-
Maximillian Martin
Spoken just like a typical psychotic hypocrite!!! And I bet you have absolutely NO idea what Satan actually is!!!!
-
Jimmy Moon
No need to call names. I know exactly who Satan is. And in the end He does lose. Choose wisely who you will serve.
-
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
Would that be the Classic Jesus Christ, or the one that the GOP created? I'm more of the Classic persuasion.
-
Jimmy Moon
One day you will believe.
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
I believe now, just not as you do. I believe in a loving GOD, not a vengeful, vindictive one.
-
-
-
-
Teresa Freeman
Why don't we end the war if pagan Sunday as our Sabbath , that's why there's confusion , we are going on the devil's day , first day of creation and not the Sabbath , the seventh day of Rest as a lead on to millineum, we are on a six thousand year probation , and so far the majority are led astray , so when we as Christians can really unify and worship on the day God Honored , and tell folks the real master plan of God , who are we as a confused state of multiple religions , to tell anyone they are sinni.ng , God is Love
-
Kathryn Darcy Smith
LOVE LOVE LOVE MY PRESIDENT TRUMP! AND I AM TRANS, AND I AM ECUMENICAL IN MY RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHIES. LOVE MY PRESIDENT TRUMP! THIS ARTICLE AMONGST OTHERS, IS LIBERAL LEFT-WING FEAR-MONGERING
-
Reverend Paula Copp
What has that have to do with the article?
-
Jimmy Moon
President Trump is EVERYONE'S PRESIDENT. No matter which way you swing.
-
Lionheart
If one is a US citizen you are quite right, Sir James.
🦁❤️
-
-
Michael Hunt
Have fun when you're outlawed from being around schools and receiving gender affirming care. Trump's presidency wants to restrict LGBTQ rights, including your own.
-
-
Hank Stanco
The Supreme Court already ruled in favor of same-sex marriage. And any attempt to prohibit same-sex marriage through legislation will be ruled unconstitutional by the same Supreme Court.
The LGBTQA+ community is worried for nothing.
-
Michael Hunt
The Supreme Court had already ruled in favor of abortion access and now that has been overturned. What's stopping the court from overturning same-sex marriage as well? Some justices on the court have even written opinions indicating they want to overturn same-sex marriage rights and Project 2025 specifically states that is their intent.
-
-
Steven Alan Corben
We are the United States. Each state in the union should be able to decide on such matters. The federal government is already too encompassing.
-
James Riggle-Johnson
So, let’s go back to when segregation was legal in some states, and people of different races could not marry. Is that the type of power you want the states to have again?
-
-
Ari Joseph Bertine
That last part is interesting. It would be very nice to find comfort in this community. That's not something I can imagine given what I've seen so far in this comment section on any given day, but it would be nice.
-
Hank Stanco
You did isn’t answer his question. What right or rights have been lost by the LGBTQ community?
-
Steven Bagenstose
When was he guilty of adultery ??? Or do I see TDS coming out ??? Thou shalt not bear false witness
-
Michael Hunt
I mean we all know he had an affair with a porn star while he was married...
-
Jimmy Moon
Were you there to witness this act?
-
Rev. BH
Nice try, Jimmy. When were you witness to the virgin birth?
-
-
-
-
Kevin Hudson
If you would please respect my conservative beliefs I do not have to agree with other opinions. I live by the law of Moses . Thank you very much. Be kind always.
-
Lionheart
There is still no demonstrable evidence that Moses ever existed, and even any God for that matter. 🤷
Does anyone really need to have someone tell them not to murder, cheat, or steal? It’s a very shallow person that needs to be told that for them to act on it.
🦁❤️
-
Kar'el Kevin Dulaney
Interesting; the law of Moses is BASed on the WORD of GOD, who commanded that marriage should be ONLY between a man and a woman. Not two or more same sex individuals, and NOT with any animals. Those that disobey these commands were not to be allowed to live, but were to be KILLED, and their blood would be on their own heads. These perversions are a part of why Jeshua caused the GREAT FLOOD. It was also why Sodom (sodomy) and Gomorrah were destroyed by Jeshua. So, if GOD decreed that these perverts were not to be tolerated, but put to death, How are you following "the Law of Moses"? Sure the Federal court decided (5-4)to condone this abberation,ignoring the manbdate that God declared. This decision in NOT written in granite, so therefore, like Rowe/Wade CAN be and SHOULD be evacuated. The States too are under God's authority, so they too will be held accountable for allowing this pervfersion to continue. The same line of authority should be extolled on all the illeagles that have invaded our country. When Jeshua told Moses and Aaron to move into Israel, HE commanded that they wipe out all that were living there. Thus because they didn't obey God's command we now have the continuation of conflicts in the Holy (Jeshua's) Land. Kenneth King; I hope you like the taste of burning SULFUR, for that's what you'll have FOREVER if you don''t acknowledge Jeshua's authority in your life. (Revelation 14:10-11).........
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
You do not deserve a reply, but I'll say this, you need to drop the hate and bigotry if you're going to persuade anyone about anything spiritual. Your message is not realistic.
-
-
-
Sara Bernardi
Hello, I'm nervous to express. Don't get mad. Here's an idea to contemplate. Give the word. Marriage. It's Luke some are not asking ones to change Themselves or their ways When I we pray wish We don't interrupt others praying On Sunday or any day We can offer, respect To those, asking It doesn't take away Anything from you or yours This is not against the indigos or game changers Peace in the lands Is possible
-
Robert P Hardy
Nothing happened during his first term. No one on his side has mentioned anything about it . I believe that its would be hard the bring a case against it that would not be dismissed before it got anywhere close to the supreme court .
-
Mark Stephen Edwards
Hetero-peeps don't like the sound of GAY MARRIAGE. Gay activists want the label Gay Marriage because the phrase likens it to normal straight matrimony, Do Gays get engaged, and copy the marriage traditions of hetero-marriages? I do not know. Gays can develop their own traditions. Instead of Gay marriage call it: partnership union, trust, gay trust, palsywalsy union, conjugate, (conjugated, conjugation.) Gays are deserving of their own identity.
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
So far I haven't heard of any gay married couple practicing the most common of all the hetero marriage practices. Divorce. Did you know that close to 50% of all hetero marriages end in divorce within 5 years? Now if memory serves, divorce is a sin, according to the Bible. I think Christ said that death should be the only reason for ending a marriage. "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
-
-
-
Kenneth Kling
I doubt that the incoming administration has the time or care to overturn same sex marriage. Besides, we like the tax revenue that you provide. Go forth and sin your ass off .......... nobody really cares.
-
James Riggle-Johnson
Do you really think that’s true… that nobody cares about it? Then explain why people are trying to get Obergefell overturned. Someone, the far-right, born-again, evangelical crowd certainly cares. Those judges placed on the Supreme Court want to stop same-sex marriage in the same way they wanted to end abortion.
-
-
Rev Morse
I'm surprised by this site, not citing that it is a sin, like gluttons on Thanksgiving.
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
Just go by what Christ said about homosexuality. Absolutely nothing. He did teach us to love our neighbors as ourselves, honor the foreigner in our country, feed the needy, take care of our elderly, and not to judge others, as that is how you will be judged. The Old Testament teaches us to hate, kill sassy kids, kill people who masturbate, how to own slaves, to not trim our beards or hair, not wear clothes of mixed fabrics, kill witches and psychics, kill any woman who is not a virgin when she's getting married, at her father's house no less, no work on Sundays, and condemning LGBTQ folks for trying to make a life with what they've been handed.
-
-
Rudolph M Garza
Mormons and Muslims can’t have more than one wife as the case may have been for Mormons and still exist in Muslim countries. For America to be “free” it is time to make allowances for cultures, religions, or individuals to decide what makes them happy. After all, the pursuit of happiness I thought was an American creed for ALL Americans not just Christians or those opposed to one couple or another. It would be nice if “freedom” existed just as the 2nd tenet of ULC exist for the ministers ULC (and from the comments here and there many ministers seem to forget that).
Tolerance, respect and compromise that leads to resolution that all Americans can be satisfied with. All that matters is that no one impose their values on others who have as much right to be who they are as any other group. After all, your “rights” end where the other person’s rights begin!
-
ServantOfJudgement
Marriage is an engineering term. It's a scientific term. It's a practical term. It means that two separate and different components combine into a new singular component for a designed purpose. Each remaining unique while together forming something new that can't exist without each the other.
Man can not marry man. Woman can not marry woman. Only many and woman can marry, that is all. Nothing else can be said.
Let men be with men for tax credits, let women be with woman for insurance coverage and let this be with that for legal license or whatever pleases you.
Two women cannot build what a man and woman can. Two men cannot build what a man and woman can. No fruit can be found but by man and women. No fruit of the mind can be known but by the two, each unique and each paired for by destiny.
-
Victor Wayne Sweatman
Then please explain why the divorce rate is so high in hetero marriages? Almost 50% of them divorce within 5 years, compared to the divorce rate of a gay married couple, I think I have heard of one, only one. Divorce is a sin as per Jesus Christ. 'Judge not lest ye be judged likewise.'
-
This issue should not be tried again. It's a move of pure hate, wanting to impose one religious doctrine upon many different faiths. If the want to have gay marriage overturned it must also include straight marriage. You cannot deny one person's right for love and not ALL.
It's not denying "Love" or perversion, it's simply stating fact. A Marriage is between a Man and a Woman. Want a legal Union? Make it legal as a Union but you simply can't call it a legitimate "Marriage"! All you have to do is each give power of attorney to each other and that's totally legitimate.
Mr. Sweem, where did you get the the authority or right to make that decision for everyone else? And do not quote or mention your Bible since Anyone who has read with a thinking, open mind knows it is true that it is inaccurate and flawed because it is a manmade product. /@/ The book was commissioned by. Onstantine. They picked and chose what the wanted to include or not and then kept editing that. So any proof you think to snow me with that is from the flawed book does not count and another source must be mentioned if anything is at all.. There is no perversion in any version of same sex marriage. . The only sqqqqqqanctioned perversion just got voted back in to the whituhouse. Q
And besides all that, "Biblical marriage" was polygamous, a contract between fathers of the "couple" selling the daughter to the husband. Biblical marriage also included multiple mistresses (concubines). Husbands generally had a "favorite wife," and sometimes the favorite was a concubine. The sole purpose of "Biblical marriage" was procreation and inheritance/lineage, so nobody here can tell me this is a place they want to return.
The Old Testament teaches us a lot about life with enthralling stories. This testament and it's law was meant for Judean believers, not Christians. The writer made a strong point in reminding us of the wives, concubines and different marriage traditions of the Judeans and other religions and cultures long ago. Polygamy is still practiced by some religions.
But the practice of marriage for procreation and inheritance (many times arranged, even in Christian cultures) was practiced well into the 18th and 19th centuries. It wasn't until the 20th century that a woman had any identity or rights outside those of being the wife of a man. Marriage, where love is the overriding factor, is a concept that has only been practiced in the last century or so.
Please don't confuse what God ordained (marriage between one man and one woman for life) with the history of what sin has done to it in the bible. The bible is clear as to what God wanted and what mankind has perverted.
Thomas - Why, if the Bible states that marriage is ONLY between ONE man and ONE woman (which it does not say, by the way) that so many of the Biblical characters were polygamist in nature?
It might also make more sense if you actually read the Bible with a background of the culture's historicity and culture. The Book of Leviticus, for example, was a guide to condemn anything the Canaanites happen to do. Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, as a simple issue, was about condemnation of the Canaanite religious practices of using male temple prostitutes in their religious ceremonies. It had zero to do with two people of the same gender who love each other.
Dan, just because the bible says that men are carnal and cannot control those instincts, does not mean that it condones it. It talks about the good and the bad in us. if as you say that marriage is not only between one man and one woman, (only that combination can fulfil God's request and replenish the earth.) then we can throw out the commandment on adultery and polygamy would be ok.
Mr. Davis - Is not the earth already overpopulated enough?
If the Bible states a way of being, why would it condemn it and yet set up rules for what it does not condone? Slavery is another issue that is Biblical stating how to care for your slaves as well as where you can get your slaves, yet some claim that slavery is bad and condemned by God? Why does the Bible not just state "Thou shalt not own another person" and let it go at that? Some will say that this thinking is that it was okay then but not now. Does that not mean that God can change his/her/it mind? If not, then why are there no time limits on each particular issue that may have an expiration date?
Dan, I will try to answer in the order that you asked. The world is far from being overpopulated. I remember a charity years ago when the population was at 6 billion. They stated that if you drew a circle on the earth with a radius of 26 miles, the whole planet of people could fit in it. I needed to find my math books to verify that statement. The green earth people said this planet was only big enough for 750 million. The Georgia Guide stones said 500 million. George Soros said several billion. There is NO food shortage. In the USA alone if the people that eat meat quit and the land that grew the food for the cows was used for humans, the food generated would be enough for the entire planet. If the Government quit paying our farmers not to grow food, we would have enough. We had a church member that made his millions on rest homes. He would come in every spring after the farmers around him would show the checks they received from the government for not planting. He was upset because he worked hard for his money, and they just had theirs handed to them. Or the other farmers paid to dump their milk on the ground etc. there are all kinds of groups trying to depopulate the planet. Not sure on your question on bible sates a way of being. Yes, slavery is bad, but in some cases, it was permitted to alleviate the problems that people had with no income. They were supposed to treat them humanely. And release them after 7 years unless the wanted to stay. Even in USA I have watch programs on TV where some of the slaves that had good masters, were singing praises for being here. Only issues that I can think of having an expiration date are the ceremonial laws and the time prophecies in the bible.
Mr. Davis - To answer me responses in order is appreciated so I shall do the same.
The issue of population being able to fit all of humanity into a radius of 26 miles is if they were all standing and not living in a normal area. Not all land is liveable (Death Valley, the Sahara, Antarctica and the Arctic regions to name just a few makes it far more unlikely to populate.
I agree that the government subsidizes farmers to NOT grow crops is strange and frustrating. The major reason for this, however, is to keep the prices of the crops so that the farmers can make a reasonable price for their products.
If there is enough foodstuffs to feed everyone, why is it that in Somalia for example, people continue to starve? Part of the reason is that the food sent to them is not edible for them. The variety of foods needed depends on the culture.
Another issue of having that many more people is that of population pollution. The earth can only keep up with an amount of pollutants before it loses control and no longer be able to purify the land, the air, and the water.
Regarding slavery, you said it was permitted to allegviate the problems that people had with no income. Yes, indentured servitude was one issue, but what about all of the people who came from those conquered in battles? They became nothing more than property, able to be passed down to your children and grandchildren. Also, does not the Bible say that if they beat a slave, as long as he or she can get up again within a day or two, that this was permissible? Is beating of any slave moral in your ethical realm?
Yes, there were SOME slave owners who were good to their 'property', but the overwhelming number were not.
What time prophecies are you thinking about from the Bible? I am curious.
What ceremonial laws were limited in time. If they were put into the holy writings, does that not go against the teaching the Bible and God are the same, before, during, and forever?
Dan, "The issue of population being able to fit all of humanity into a radius of 26 miles is if they were all standing and not living in a normal area." actually when I calculated it, i had the people 3'x6' and they were laying down. But that is beside the point. Yes, I know that there is unlivable land, yes, I k know that governments steal the food for their own us. I became a vegan in 1995 and could not understand why a vegetable burger vs a hamburger was so expensive. Well in reality it is not. The real cost for hamburger back then was 99 dollars per pound. But the government helped the poor farmer out. Maybe the farmers should look into investing in things that have a greater return. ...."Part of the reason is that the food sent to them is not edible for them" not sure what you are referring to here. I do know that we drop pallets by planes, without parachutes and when the hit the ground, they break apart and mix with the dust of the land. I agree with you on the pollution aspect but us humans are slobs. And industry doesn't help out when they produce everything with planned obsolescence, so our lawns are stacked a mile high with garbage every week I did not say that I agreed with slavery. I was responding to what the bible teaches on the subject. Jesus said the greatest commandant was to treat one another as Jesus would treat us. What time prophecies are you thinking about from the Bible? Referring to the coming of Jesus, Dan 2 and the statue of the king, Dan 9, 8, The book of Revelation and so on, ceremonial laws were the feasts that were implemented because of sin and pointed to the cross. Once Jesus died, they were no longer necessary because He fulfilled them.
Giving one another power of attorney over one another doesn't grant things such as tax credits when federal taxes are filed, because people joined together under a union aren't recognized federally as spouses. They can't claim one another on benefits through work for insurance purposes, or SSI, or any number of other things. If the thing that everyone is so averse to in this scenario is the use of a single word, and want gay "marriage" to be called something else, then all these other items and legal rights need to be extended and addressed to include people who are in civil unions or any other type of union, so that everyone is granted the same benefits and protections regardless of what their specific chosen union is referred to as.
This is the Merriam-Webster definition of Marriage- 1 a : the state of being united as spouses in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law b: the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3: an intimate or close union
I understand that the concept of biological male/women marriage is hardboiled in an European influenced culture. Homosexual relationships have been used as convenient scapegoats since forever. Consider, perhaps, you are confusing religion based "marriage" to reality based "marriage." Procreation is not the same as having an intimate or close union with someone. Sex is not intimacy. Its a component of intimacy but not the be all end all. I would propose any marriage between two people who are not emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually intimate is not a true marriage. It is a civil union. And civil unions were created by elderly people needing legal assistance in their infirmity.
Absolutely!!
That same-sex marriage offends you is not, in my opinion, a justification for denying a group of people equal civil rights. AND YES, WE CAN "SIMPLY CALL IT A LEGITIMATE MARRIAGE", BECAUSE IT IS, your opinion be damned.
To Oy gevalt: Darn it, how do you sincerely feel?
To quote Stephen Fry:
It’s now very common to hear people say, “I’m rather offended by that”. As if that gives them certain rights. It’s actually nothing more than a whine. “I find that offensive”. It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. “I am offended by that.” Well, so f***ing what?
Where did you come up with this definition?
Marriage has existed far longer than the Christian religion.
It would still be called a marriage, even if you do not like it.
You should not have the right to force your beliefs onto others, yet that is what you are doing here.
How is same sex marriage hurting you? Oh, it isn’t? Nobody is pushing anything on you, or trying to force our beliefs onto others. Just live and let live and mind your own business.
What, live and let live! I never thought of that and neither had the Vikings, Maori, people, Chinese and Imperialistic U.S. regimes.
Mr. Edwards, you have completely ignored the question. How is gay marriage hurting you? Oh, right… it isn’t! In case you missed it the first time, mind your own business.
It is not hurting me, but from the data collected, there is more violence and abuse in those marriages to each other.
Thomas - Citation for you claims of increasesd violence. I would be most interested to see how you determined that.
Keith and Dan, please don't accuse me of claiming anything, I am just sharing data, please don't say this data is correct or not, I cannot prove it any more than you can prove yours. I did not determine anything. it was from a program that I watched many years ago. If I kept the data from everything so I could play tit for tat, I would have no room to live. You should see my house as is. But I just did a quick search and came up with this on the first hit. Facts and Statistics on Partner Abuse in Other Populations Partner Abuse in Ethnic Minority and LGBT Populations LGBT populations: Higher overall rates compared to heterosexual populations
Really, where is this data at?
Paula, that is my question to all those that oppose it, how is it hurting you?
This is eerily similar to, until the 1960s, interracial marriage was illegal 'because of religious reasons.'
To those who happen to be homophobic, are you offended by the television commercials that happen to show two people of the same gender celebrating Christmas or a birthday party?
They probably are.
Until as late as 1967, a marriage was between two white people, or two black people. There were no mixed marriages, it was illegal. Churches were against it, bigots were against, and the government was against it. Now it's legal and mostly accepted, except by those who still hold on to hate. Are we going to end mixed marriages as well? Wonder what Clarance Thomas thinks about that. Interracial marriage has been legal throughout the United States since at least the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court (Warren Court) decision Loving v. Virginia (1967) that held that anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional via the 14th Amendment adopted in 1868.[1][2] Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote in the court opinion that "the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State."[1] Interracial marriages have been formally protected by federal statute through the Respect for Marriage Act since 2022. If you don't believe in same sex marriage, don't marry a person of the same sex. If you think it's perverted, and a mortal sin, step back and leave it to GOD, it's not for you to decide, it's not your business. Marriage is a joining of two, love doesn't know any differences.
There is so much historical evidence that your statements are wrong that it is not worth anymore of my time to "prove" this to you. The fact that you have access to the internet indicates you have already chosen to not look up the history of what we now call "Marriage". I shall not bother to mention that non-religious marriage has existed for at least 4,000 years.. and probably before that.. it just wasn't written down prior to that. You are what you are. Good luck. Take care. Be safe.
Marriage should be legal between any two humans. A couple of people have married animals so I would definitely exclude them. Why should any functioning member of society be denied the right to marry? Looking back on the origins of biblical verse that may say otherwise, does not take into account that some of those women getting married may not have been women at all. With the full body robes they wore back then they could only rely on voice and face to determine who was what. At best it is just an ancient opinion that many have since agreed with.