LT-
SP:
You know that the standard rejoiner to:Should be:
Right?
I'm aware
by Carmel 81 Replies latest jw friends
LT-
SP:
You know that the standard rejoiner to:Should be:
Right?
I'm aware
NO !!!
BB:
NO!
I guess that reply should have been expected from a "left-hander"!
jwbot:
We are now a holy different-sex practicing couple!
It's good to see that you are keeping everything holy.
Little Toe: Maybe we should get a cross over the bed (below the mirrors)? hehe
Why interrupt a perfectly good view?
Thinking about it, would that class as coitus interruptus??
LOL
Ahhmmm...confused. I HAD a "same sex" marriage for 25 years, I got remarried and now have a different sex marriage.
Much better !
What's all the fuss ?
Lady Lee said:
Actually YES I think any two consenting adults who are committed to each other should have the legal right to decide what happens to their loved one in cases of health emergencies. They should have the right to support and care if the relationship is dissolved. They should be able to legally claim possession of the family home is one partner dies. They should be able to have a person they know loves them make decisions for them if they cannot make those decisions themselves. They pay taxes like everyone else. They should be able to claim it back when needed.
My opinion is that "marriage" as we know it today is more often a legal matter rather than a religious matter. And I see no reason why 2 committed adults shouldn't have the legal protections and benefits that marriage allows regardless of the gender of the participants. To get a divorce one doesn't go to the church where you were married. You go to the courts - to dissolve a legal contract.
I'm with you completely on this one Lady Lee! I wouldn't change a word you said!
And part of my reasoning on this revolves around the fact that we have all seen so very much abuse within traditional marriages/families and people around the world suffer terribly from these abuses, often for life! So who's to say that "gay" marriage or "gay" family life should be considered "unnatural"?? Love and commitment and trueness within a relationship is "normal" and all the perversions of these that I have personally seen in heterosexual marriages shows that heterosexuality is not necessarily better than homosexuality.
And who is to say that every marriage union is required to have the potential for procreating? There are many, many childless couples among heterosexual couples. And there are many, many children in need of adoption into loving homes.
NO. And neither does God.
Susan
I think that the idea of State-sanctioned marriage is a farcical notion at best. The government should serve the people - not dispense rights out to people like some kind of king. A marriage is not a piece of paper, it is a decision that the people involved make every day, sometimes several times a day - to stay together and be a family no matter what.
The state has no place in it. Ergo, politically speaking, same sex marriage should be rcognized like any other contract two or more people enter in to.
As for God, well, if he moves two people to spend the rest of their lives together, who are we to say, no you have mismatched genitalia, you must not be hearing the Spirit properly...
CZAR
NO. And neither does God.
"It is only the savage, whether of the African bush or of the American gospel tent, who pretends to know the will and intent of God exactly and completely. " - H. L. Mencken