I understand that completely. There are churches out there that gladly accept LGBT into their church and religion and will host the ceremony great that there is.
Yeah. To each his own. And if they're a good person, they'll make it to heaven. Love thy neighbor and pray for all, in my opinion.
Did you not read? I said "I see how this would contradict my morals." Like Magic said, inbreeding can cause problems with whoever the family reproduces.
I've been lurking and I think I'll come back for a sec. To answer your obviously rhetorical question, no. Heck no. I am Christian and I'm opposed to LGBT marriages. Imagine if we were in this position, forcing funeral home managers to extensively read from scripture. The world wouldn't stand for it. No non-Christians would. But these people can do it and gain support. But, hey. This is Murica, right?
That doesnt answer the limit that you said there is. How does love have a limit? and if it does then why should people who cannot reproduce (causes genetic issues or cannot because they are gay) be allowed to marry?
In my opinion inbreeding is wrong, I justified myself with my morals, like a Christian who is against LGBT. I respect their decision to not agree, but because I say there is a limit and shouldn't be allowed, like them, I cannot justify myself with that, like them?
Saudi Arabia is trying to enforce its fundamentalist Islam throughout the Midddle East. They support isis quietly. The united states of america is trying to enforce fundamentalist Christianity throughout the western world. In the western world outside of america for example in western Europe no one cares if gays marry. It's already legal in most countries . America tries to promote itself as the land of the free when it has the highest percentage of bigots and Christian fundamentalists in the world. Quite sad really. Queue abuse from a lot hypocritical holier than tho back ward imbeciles who will judge judge judge. Supposedly god is the only judge so shut it lol. Have a nice day I'm gone bigots won't read replies lol
Hey, its another taxable demographic. If anything it (marriage equality) benefits more people than it doesn't.
If a streight woman and man who are infertile want to marry, there's no problem with it even though they can't produce, so your first argument is invalid. If two people are gay and related, then they would not be allowed to marry, just the same as if they were streight and related, so your second argument is invalid as well.
I thought we had reached a compromise - some persons have every right to believe in their hearts that certain behaviors are sins in their religion, and in return, as a group, we will stop supporting laws that discriminate against gay people or deny them their equal rights. It seems perfectly fair and reasonable. Religious beliefs are respected, as well as equal rights.
Yes, it is intolerant. I'm not going to lie and say I'm not intolerant, or that I'm not biased. Im intolerant of ignorance, and you are ignorant.
lol! Those churches are delusional. The phony pastors in those churches should learn more about Christianity. A real gay Christian would not get married but be celibate. Great that there is
Gay people should be allowed to marry as long as they don't show pda in public, influence Kids to be gay instead of letting them pick what sexual orientation they,want instead
No, because there is no logic behind the Christian agenda other than "Because this 3,000 year old Jewish book says so".
You don't 'chose' your sexual orientation, you are born with it. It is a genetic mutation in the brain which occurs during the pregnancy (so not even a homosexual sperm donor could make a child homosexual, nor can a homosexual mother). As far as I can tell, straight people try a lot harder to influence kids to be straight than homosexuals try to make them homosexual