Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Minnesota Becomes the Twelfth State to Sanction Same-Sex Marriage

page: 8
12
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 04:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by mindlessbrainpower89
POST REMOVED BY STAFF


So... metaphorically speaking the men are.... married to..... a male God.

Seriously? Metaphor or not, this is your story, not mine. The concept remains - the men are spiritually joined in a union with a male God.

This is but one aspect of a human marriage. We just have physical, and emotional aspects on top of that.
edit on Fri Jun 21 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Right now?

That doesnt strike you as a little Jim Crow-ish?

Like saying we cant just free the slaves. We need to ease into it with generations of segregation.

The "right now" thing comes off as very socially conservative and even foolish considering both of you concede that even eventually the point will be moot.

So why help society retard its own development? Is it a fear of the "unknown" or just a love for government involvement?
edit on 21-6-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 07:09 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 07:18 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 07:19 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 07:27 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by mindlessbrainpower89
 


Put this in your mindless religous pipe and smoke it



Some religious liberals believe that David and Jonathan had a consensual homosexual relationship - in many ways, a prototype of many of today's gay partnerships. 7 Some important verses which describe their relationship are:
1 Samuel 18:1
"...Jonathan became one in spirit with David and he loved him as himself." (NIV)

"...the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" (KJV)

Most translations use the term "soul" rather than "spirit" to describe the bond. They speak of an "immediate bond of love", their souls being "in unison," their souls being "knit" etc. Genesis 2:7, as written in the original Hebrew, describes how God blew the spirit into the body of Adam that God had formed from earth, so that Adam became a living soul. This means that "soul", in the ancient Israelite times, represents a combination of body and spirit. Thus the two men appear to have loved each other both physically and emotionally.


1 Samuel 18:2
"From that day, Saul kept David with him and did not let him return to his father's house." (NIV)

David left his parent's home and moved to Saul's where he would be with Jonathan. This is a strong indication that the relationship was extremely close. It echoes the passage marriage passage in Genesis 2:24: "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."


1 Samuel 18:3-4
"And Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. Jonathan took off the robe he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his tunic, and even his sword, his bow and his belt." (NIV)

Since people in those days did not wear underwear, Jonathan stripped himself naked in front of David. That would be considered extremely unusual behavior (then and now) unless their relationship was sexual in nature.




www.religioustolerance.org...
edit on Fri Jun 21 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: snippped quote IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 07:53 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 07:57 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:00 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by mindlessbrainpower89
 


It's all scriptural and it is not misquoted.

So, yes. This is the bible that you believe in we are talking here.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 



Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
What you really mean is Minnesota is the 12 state to legalize sodomy between same sex couples.


Actually, the Supreme Court repealed ALL sodomy laws in 2003. Source It's not illegal at all.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 



Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
Tell you guys what - I'll accept you can get married in any state - so long as you sign a contract with the state to Not commit sodomy. They can monitor your bedroom habits and if you are found to commit sodomy, they can arrest you and throw the book at you - now - do you want love or sick sodomy? Your choice - but i suppose you wont be happy with that. oh well.


A: Sodomy is ANY sexual act that is not penile/vaginal intercourse (including oral sex)
B: You want the government in your bedroom?
C: I'll accept your views when you sign a contract with the state that you won't have oral sex. The government can monitor your bathroom/bedroom and shower habits, take mouth swabs of you and your mate, and if you are found to have oral sex, to jail you go! Sound like a deal?

D: Who cares if YOU accept gay people or gay marriage? I know I don't.
E: What people do in their lives is NONE of your business.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 



Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Right now?

That doesnt strike you as a little Jim Crow-ish?


Really? Can you say hyperbole? If state-sanctioned marriage was something being forced on people, then you might have a point. A weak one, at best, however. No one is forcing couples to petition the state for a marriage license. It's something they FREELY choose to do (well, straight people are free to choose it). Your Jim Crow analogy is so weak, it's meaningless.



The "right now" thing comes off as very socially conservative and even foolish considering both of you concede that even eventually the point will be moot.


Our society is naturally moving away from conventional marriage. People's mindsets are changing. This is how societal change happens. If you want to force it, contact your representatives. Don't preach at me and try to insult me with your Jim Crow references.



So why help society retard its own development? Is it a fear of the "unknown" or just a love for government involvement?


How am I helping society retard it's development?

And I am neither afraid of the unknown, nor do I have a love of government involvement.

Are you hoping to insult me into agreeing with you?


What would a person do to get government out of marriage?



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:46 AM
link   
Wow, I bet that baker in Colorado wishes he lived in Minnesota.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:51 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Really? Can you say hyperbole? If state-sanctioned marriage was something being forced on people, then you might have a point. A weak one, at best, however. No one is forcing couples to petition the state for a marriage license. It's something they FREELY choose to do (well, straight people are free to choose it). Your Jim Crow analogy is so weak, it's meaningless.


It's only meaningless if you believe once same sex marriage is lumped into the governments domain that'll be the end of it. The no other lifestyles or groups would seek out this status.

Otherwise it's very much like the constant fight of segregation. Little bits here and there with groups fighting both ends all the way for years and years and years.




Our society is naturally moving away from conventional marriage. People's mindsets are changing. This is how societal change happens. If you want to force it, contact your representatives. Don't preach at me and try to insult me with your Jim Crow references.


Removing government licensing and sanctioning of marriage doesnt do anything to change the mindset of the population. No one is being forced to change their view on what marriage is or is not. It simply frees the term from artificial bondage.




How am I helping society retard it's development?


By focusing your energy on incremental shifts. Shifts in the wrong direction I might add. Shifts that will make it more difficult to arrive at the liberation of marriage in the end. Dont you see how asking government to sanction more is working the cause of liberty for everyone backwards?


What would a person do to get government out of marriage?


Right now? Not ask the government for permission. Perform whatever ritual you see fit. Get a family lawyer and set up a trust or living will.

Hell, for the social rights people always bring up like visitation for instance just stick a ring on your finger and say youre the spouse. Nobody is going to ask to see your marriage certificate.

The one place you might get called on it is on your tax return. Tax return. See how that keeps popping up?

Its only an issue at all because of government and revenue.

Supporting marriage equality this route just supports government and revenue. Not equality.

Think of Democrats stealing liberty for equality and Republicans stealing liberty for security. They're always stealing liberty under the guise of something rosey and pretty.

Approaching marriage equality in this way is just stealing more liberty. At best the equality gained is fractional as many, many more people will remain unequal and disenfranchised.

I have to conclude that those who take this route either dont really want equality, want more government, or are just too conservative to see the obvious truth right in front of their faces.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Closed for staff review.

ATTENTION!!!!



This thread is being reopened....and this is the topic:

Minnesota Becomes the Twelfth State to Sanction Same-Sex Marriage




Members are reminded:
Contacting Staff: Alerts, Suggestions, Complaints

Also, those who cannot conduct themselves in a civil manner, and post on topic...will continue to have posts removed with the real possibility of temporary Posting Bans.


The END of Hate Speech, subtle or otherwise, on ATS

You are responsible for your own posts.

We expect civility and decorum within all topics.

--Off Topic, One Liners and General Back Scratching Posts--



edit on Fri Jun 21 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 10:22 AM
link   
There's another sheriff in town now too and confirms this:


Also, those who cannot conduct themselves in a civil manner, and post on topic...will continue to have posts removed with the real possibility of temporary Posting Bans.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Thanks, officers.

----------------------------------

I have to admit, I don't understand why public opinion on gay marriage matters... Would they do a poll and ask: "Do you think black people should be permitted to share drinking fountains with white people"? And then change the laws accordingly? I mean, either we have equal treatment under the law, or we don't. Does the public's opinion really matter?

Minnesotans Split on Same Sex Marriage



A poll by the Star Tribune published Thursday found 46 percent of those surveyed support the law change that will allow marriage between same-sex couples beginning on Aug. 1. Forty-four percent are opposed and 10 percent are undecided


I really don't understand why people think they have an interest in other people getting married. It's a question I've had that never gets satisfactorily answered.

You might as well ask:
"Do you think Joe should be allowed to own a dog"?
"Do you think Bill and Mary should be permitted to have a child"?
"Do you think white people should have access to food stamps"?

These polls that ask the public if they think other people should have the same rights that we all have seem ridiculous to me.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Right now? Not ask the government for permission. Perform whatever ritual you see fit. Get a family lawyer and set up a trust or living will.



People do that all the time.

Anyone can choose to do that.

Denying the CHOICE of Legal Government Marriage is the problem.





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join