4000 years of history wiped out by five SCOTUS Judges

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Chester, I admire and respect the fact that you stick to your guns on this issue.

And God strike me dead for ever saying this, but it is a small progress that we are making in equality.

If only we could treat the unborn with the same level of equality, then I think we could really call it progress.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Yes, so advanced in their capital punishment that you listed, clearly not a dark time in history at all.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Prove to me it was made by God.

Jesus said so. But I can't expect you to believe Jesus now can I?

Mr 10:1 ¶ And he arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts of Judaea by the farther side of Jordan: and the people resort unto him again; and, as he was wont, he taught them again.
2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.
3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.
5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
10 And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

And Paul said this and you will notice one man and one woman in the language:
1Co 7:1 ¶ Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.
4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
6 But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.
7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.
9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
10 ¶ And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

a reply to: ChesterJohn

How does it make you feel to know for a fact that all of those nations were wrong and that marriage can be between people of the same gender?

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Sorry dude that is not proof at all. It is faith and opinion.
The Bible is not proof.

No one even noticed or replied to the fact that God GAVE men and women OVER TO Homosexuality as found in Romans 1.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

the US allows it and protect it when no other nation outside of modern times (the 20th century) ever declared that marriage can be between two people of the same sex.

In 1807 Britain passed the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act which outlawed the British Atlantic slave trade.

At least 4000 years of history wiped out by Britain. Britain was obviously too liberal, bad for them.

a reply to: boymonkey74

just as I thought.

Jesus was a good man a man worth following yet you wouldn't consider his words relevant.

a reply to: danielsil18

marriage and slavery are two different things unless you consider marriage slavery or ownership?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Marriage it would seem has been between one man and one woman as indicated by the Code of Law established by Hammurabi.

No nations but the current ones has ever legalized marriage between the same sex.

so 4000 plus years of historical tradition is over thrown by five liberal SCOTUS judges without regard to the historical tradition.

I'm pretty sure it's legal in Canada. Oh, Spain and Argentina too.

a reply to: michaelbrux

I would trust thousands of years of historical fact over the ruling of five liberal God hating minds today.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: danielsil18

Marriage being between one man and one woman has nothing to do with slavery.

Unless you believe marriage is a form of slavery?

You didn't get my point.

In this country, we don't don't follow "tradition" because if we did, then slavery would be legal.

If you think same-sex marriage is wrong just because it was "tradition" then, using the same protocol, slavery shouldn't have been abolished.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: windword

we never said anything about homo phobic nor denied homosexuality existed. We are establishing the fact that history shows that Marriage has been from ancient times between one man and one woman as shown in the gender based words that were interpreted.

Only homophobic societies would deny a homosexual couple all the same rights as hetero couples.

Besides, history show that marriage has been between a man and several women, including concubines and slaves, that there were tribes where women had more that one husband in ancient Europe and in Celtic communities, there were communes where there was "free love" and everyone was "married" to everyone and parented all children, the Spartans had legions of men dedicated to each other and only each, lesbian communities like the Isle of Lesbos, in India Rome and Greece, orgies were celebrated during holy feasts, etc., etc., etc.,

You're idea of historical marriage being one man and one women is wrong and absurd.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: danielsil18

marriage and slavery are two different things unless you consider marriage slavery or ownership?

Funny you should say that considering your topic.

Can you explain how the women in the laws you presented would not be slaves? I read in a couple places on how they could be purchased.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Dude, I have said it time and again before modern times that is the 20th century. 4000 years of historical proof of marriage being between one man and one woman.

God gives men over to homosexuality so I would expect people today to participate and accept it because Romans 1 says they approve of it and of those who practice it.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Thing is which were his words and not other peoples? who wrote the stuff down.
Sure he said a load of good stuff but we don't know he even existed.
You ask for proof but to expect others to just accept your old book as the truth?.
Laws need to change in times with the world If we stay in the past we will stagnate and die, western civilization has done the right and moral thing to do, most people agree.
Nevermind many of us know it is good and can only make it better for all.

a reply to: grimpachi

we Christians don't look as women that way but Islam does as a matter of fact the laws of Hammurabi were indeed plagiarized by the quran and the hadiths

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: danielsil18

marriage and slavery are two different things unless you consider marriage slavery or ownership?

You are not getting my point.

If we are to say that same-sex marriage is wrong because history says that marriage was always between a man and a woman then abolishing slavery was also wrong because history says that there was always slavery.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
I would trust thousands of years of historical fact over the ruling of five liberal God hating minds today.

So, it's about religion, then... Not about the law at all... Hammurabi was just an excuse to being God into it... Ugh! I should have known.

And they also believed that earth is flat. Should we just go back or rather grow up?