rescuelife wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

Frinjc wrote:
Regarding the "slippery slope" argument: marriage between people of opposite sex is not leading to polygamy, so why is marriage between people of the same sex supposed to lead to this? Stability promotes monogamy regardless of sexual orientation. There is a simple reason actually why people are not to keen of polygamous arrangement: jealousy!

Regarding your "let's get the right and benefits" linked to civil union, and religion linked to marriage. Churches don't own the word marriage, plenty of people get married at city hall. The word marriage is the only recognized across cultures and countries, your proposal has been considered before and is impracticable.

Catholic churches will not be not forced to perform gay marriage ritual. Catholic hospitals that offer services and also benefit from State aid will not be able to discriminate against the people they take in, and they will still be able to decide if they want to provide abortion service or not. If they do, they have to offer it to everyone. There is nothing "gay" or "slippery" about this. I think you projected quite a bit incorrectly on my previous message.

Nonsense, and you know it. Why do the 'progressives' fight for at will abortion for 13 year olds without parental control because they fear the 'slippery slope' against abortion 'rights', but ignore the desires of those with religious beliefs from defending against the same 'slippery slope', such as those who support traditional marriage from refusing to host gay marriages, for example, at their catering halls? Having it both ways is intellectually dishonest, of course.

one fundamental difference is that your christian beliefs should have absolutely zero say in public policy. sure, if you or a private institution want to make decisions based on the church's policies, that's fine, but why should the public at large be influenced at all by some religious doctrine they weren't raised on and don't follow?

should we all follow zoroastrian principles because there are some zoroastrians in NJ?

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

Frinjc wrote:
Regarding the "slippery slope" argument: marriage between people of opposite sex is not leading to polygamy, so why is marriage between people of the same sex supposed to lead to this? Stability promotes monogamy regardless of sexual orientation. There is a simple reason actually why people are not to keen of polygamous arrangement: jealousy!

Regarding your "let's get the right and benefits" linked to civil union, and religion linked to marriage. Churches don't own the word marriage, plenty of people get married at city hall. The word marriage is the only recognized across cultures and countries, your proposal has been considered before and is impracticable.

Catholic churches will not be not forced to perform gay marriage ritual. Catholic hospitals that offer services and also benefit from State aid will not be able to discriminate against the people they take in, and they will still be able to decide if they want to provide abortion service or not. If they do, they have to offer it to everyone. There is nothing "gay" or "slippery" about this. I think you projected quite a bit incorrectly on my previous message.

Nonsense, and you know it. Why do the 'progressives' fight for at will abortion for 13 year olds without parental control because they fear the 'slippery slope' against abortion 'rights', but ignore the desires of those with religious beliefs from defending against the same 'slippery slope', such as those who support traditional marriage from refusing to host gay marriages, for example, at their catering halls? Having it both ways is intellectually dishonest, of course.

Frinjc wrote:
Regarding the "slippery slope" argument: marriage between people of opposite sex is not leading to polygamy, so why is marriage between people of the same sex supposed to lead to this? Stability promotes monogamy regardless of sexual orientation. There is a simple reason actually why people are not to keen of polygamous arrangement: jealousy!

Regarding your "let's get the right and benefits" linked to civil union, and religion linked to marriage. Churches don't own the word marriage, plenty of people get married at city hall. The word marriage is the only recognized across cultures and countries, your proposal has been considered before and is impracticable.

Catholic churches will not be not forced to perform gay marriage ritual. Catholic hospitals that offer services and also benefit from State aid will not be able to discriminate against the people they take in, and they will still be able to decide if they want to provide abortion service or not. If they do, they have to offer it to everyone. There is nothing "gay" or "slippery" about this. I think you projected quite a bit incorrectly on my previous message.

Frinjc wrote:
@monroe: no I am not saying biggot or homophobe. I am just saying unaware (or ignorant if you prefer). This forum is about reality check. Some people here are rehashing their high school stereotypes as in defending their social status there - sounds familiar? Well they are being called onto that with actual comparison points. They are also being called upon their hypocritical religious revolving cloath by the US Constitution. Hopefully they will end up realizing that people have similar expectations in life which translate into similar behavior, something a 4 years old would have no issue picking up. Well, that's what the supreme court here found out today. In the end there is no real rational to deny equal treatment to gay couples. If Yvonne wants to offer gratis religiously sanctionned weeding cakes to couples of her choosing she can, the moment she sells them she can not discriminate.

Frinjc wrote:
To Yvonne: you got to be kidding right? I know at least 2 couples were it was the issue for staying together or not, for getting married or not. How many gays couples do you really know? Are you still in that adolescent mindset of "guilty by association", trying to separate yourself by any cost of a caricature of gay people your learnt in high school? Please do entertain us more.

Yvonne wrote:
Before I married my husband, we talked about our future children and who they might look like, I guess that is one conversation same sex couple will not have.

rescuelife wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

rescuelife wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
No surprise that our closeted Senator elect and JC mayor are out in front of this-why they aren't out in public is the question.

Booker I don't know, but this is very very funny if you actually knew Mayor Fulop in any personal capacity whatsoever.

I guess you're saying that he's openly gay to those around him, but hasn't come out to the voting public??

No, but I'm sure the homophobes and bitter losers who ran against him will continue this rumor until they find a new person better than them to obsess over.

Yvonne wrote:
Before I married my husband, we talked about our future children and who they might look like, I guess that is one conversation same sex couple will not have.

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

rescuelife wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
No surprise that our closeted Senator elect and JC mayor are out in front of this-why they aren't out in public is the question.

Booker I don't know, but this is very very funny if you actually knew Mayor Fulop in any personal capacity whatsoever.

I guess you're saying that he's openly gay to those around him, but hasn't come out to the voting public??

Yvonne wrote:
Before I married my husband, we talked about our future children and who they might look like, I guess that is one conversation same sex couple will not have.

Yvonne wrote:
Before I married my husband, we talked about our future children and who they might look like, I guess that is one conversation same sex couple will not have.

Yvonne wrote:
Before I married my husband, we talked about our future children and who they might look like, I guess that is one conversation same sex couple will not have.

Yvonne wrote:
I do not agree, government will be telling me how to practice my religion. Ten years from now plural marriages might be in fashion. I cannot call myself a practicing Catholic, then take the money from a same sex couple. I am endangering my beliefs and my immoral soul. I will not run away from my faith, besides there are evidence of harassment from past lawsuits. a Methodist organization was sued in Ocean Grove, NJ when they denied a lesbian couple the use of their pavilion for a same-sex civil union. The Methodist organization lost and the state of New Jersey revoked the tax exemption for the pavilion, which will cost them around $20,000 a year;
?Catholic Charities in Massachusetts refused to place children with same-sex couples as required by law. Catholic Charities was accused of discrimination and pulled out of the adoption business in 2006;
?San Francisco dropped its $3.5 million in social services contracts with the Salvation Army because it refused to recognize same-sex partnership;
?A Christian gynecologist in Vista, Calif., refused to give his patient in vitro fertilization treatment because she is in a lesbian relationship. The doctor said it violated his religious beliefs and referred his patient to his partner, but the women sued. One justice suggested the doctor take up a different business
The Hobby Lobby case will settle the practice of religion. This is the real reason the Pilgrims came to the New World, the right to practice their faith without government telling them what to believe. I shouldn't be hit with lawsuits in the USA for practicing my religion, this law will open up more lawsuits.

Yvonne wrote:
I want everyone the right to practice my religion

rescuelife wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
No surprise that our closeted Senator elect and JC mayor are out in front of this-why they aren't out in public is the question.

Booker I don't know, but this is very very funny if you actually knew Mayor Fulop in any personal capacity whatsoever.

Monroe wrote:
No surprise that our closeted Senator elect and JC mayor are out in front of this-why they aren't out in public is the question.