Christie vetos same sex marrige bill

#26
#26
VOLatile said:
Volly, look around you, if God didn't design homosexuality then He wouldn't have made other species exhibit homosexual tendencies. Two men or women love each other, then let them marry. Stop legislating morality.
Click to expand...

You and I have a different opinion of "marriage".
 
#27
#27
vollygirl said:
If you want to give breaks to people co-habitating in the same household (like carpooling), that's one thing. Roommates, life partners, siblings, whatever the arrangement may be. But marriage is an institution between a man and a woman. Period.
Click to expand...

volly, a lot of the time the argument does come down to semantics. But marriage is a legally defined term that carries with it literally thousands of rights and responsibilities.

Nobody wants to force any religious groups to recognize marriage, but I think most people out there don't like the fact that straight married couples get all those rights and responsibilities, while same sex couples can't. Aside from it being a double standard on the part of the government, many also see it as an adoption of state policy based on religious beliefs, which is also a deal-breaker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#28
#28
vollygirl said:
I didn't decide the government should adopt one of God's unions to rule by. And that kind of "freedom" has nothing to do with God.
Click to expand...

Marriage is strictly a Christian concept, or the government's idea of marriage is based on a Christian definition? Knees to me... As far as I know, all religions sanction some sort of marriage. The United States Constitution does not sanction a specific religion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#29
#29
If you can get the same legal protections from a civil union, then why the need to have the state recognize you as married? Frankly, I feel no need for the state to sanctify my marriage.
 
#30
#30
utvolpj said:
so God put people on this earth with the intent of them being discriminated against for being who they are? Should the govt be endorsing a religion's views of marriage?
Click to expand...

Read that outloud and see if it still makes sense to you. Really? lol
 
#31
#31
milohimself said:
volly, a lot of the time the argument does come down to semantics. But marriage is a legally defined term that carries with it literally thousands of rights and responsibilities.

Nobody wants to force any religious groups to recognize marriage, but I think most people out there don't like the fact that straight married couples get all those rights and responsibilities, while same sex couples can't. Aside from it being a double standard on the part of the government, many also see it as an adoption of state policy based on religious beliefs, which is also a deal-breaker.
Click to expand...

This!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#32
#32
allvol123 said:
If you can get the same legal protections from a civil union, then why the need to have the state recognize you as married? Frankly, I feel no need for the state to sanctify my marriage.
Click to expand...

Hell is freezing over right now, because I agree with you. :)
 
#33
#33
vollygirl said:
Read that outloud and see if it still makes sense to you. Really? lol
Click to expand...

sorry I don't understand the humor. You say he defined marriage but yet he put people on this earth that were never going to be able to take advantage of that. Do you think that's something God would do?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#36
#36
utvolpj said:
sorry I don't understand the humor. You say he defined marriage but yet he put people on this earth that were never going to be able to take advantage of that. Do you think that's something God would do?
Click to expand...

Take "advantage" of that?

He designed a marriage between a man and a woman. Period. You can do it or not, totally up to you. What is the big deal? He doesn't force anyone to do anything.
 
#38
#38
VOLatile said:
I'm okay with it also, but as long as they're involved then it MUST be equal across the board.
Click to expand...

It is equal. If you don't let 2 men on the east side of the state marry and then you let 2 men on the west side of the state marry, then it is unequal.
 
#41
#41
utvolpj said:
sorry I don't understand the humor. You say he defined marriage but yet he put people on this earth that were never going to be able to take advantage of that. Do you think that's something God would do?
Click to expand...

Where does it say in the Bible that God brought gay people into this world? I'm sure you know the interpretation better than that.

Changing the topic, Christie has previously stated his support for civil unions and fully believes that legally recognized gay couples should receive the same benefits as married couples. Call me old fashioned, but I don't understand why needing the official government recognition of marriage is that big of a deal.
 
#42
#42
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Changing the topic, Christie has previously stated his support for civil unions and fully believes that legally recognized gay couples should receive the same benefits as married couples. Call me old fashioned, but I don't understand why needing the official government recognition of marriage is that big of a deal.
Click to expand...

Exactly. After this it is just a bunch of crying.
 
#44
#44
VOLatile said:
I'm okay with it also, but as long as they're involved then it MUST be equal across the board.
Click to expand...

Govt should get out of the marriage business.

I would agree with you on your second point if only one thing were true. If the government would not force people to compromise their religious beliefs in order to make it equal, then I would not object to that.

Religious rights trump marriage rights. Religious rights receive an explicit constitutional guarantee. Marriage rights do not.

My father-in-law owns a jewelry store. If he doesn't want to sell a wedding band to a gay couple, he shouldn't have to. However, under current law, he can be sued. If gay marriage is made the law, the lawsuit against him will become much stronger. This is wrong.
 
#45
#45
To me, the whole issue of same sex marriage is on a similar track, for similar reasons, that interracial marriage was 60 years ago. Before 1948, those marriages were illegal in almost all states. It took the SCOTUS to finally knock down the various anti-interracial marriage laws extant in many states in 1967. Now most people have accepted interracial couples as old news. Eventually, same sex marriage will follow the same route.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#47
#47
vollygirl said:
Take "advantage" of that?

He designed a marriage between a man and a woman. Period. You can do it or not, totally up to you. What is the big deal? He doesn't force anyone to do anything.
Click to expand...

still brings up issues

- should a person that doesn't believe be limited by God's definitions?

- is it constitutional for the US govt to enforce God's rules?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#49
#49
Danl said:
To me, the whole issue of same sex marriage is on a similar track, for similar reasons, that interracial marriage was 60 years ago. Before 1948, those marriages were illegal in almost all states. It took the SCOTUS to finally knock down the various anti-interracial marriage laws extant in many states in 1967. Now most people have accepted interracial couples as old news. Eventually, same sex marriage will follow the same route.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this. The issue of interracial marriages is/was a pure racist issue... period. There is nothing I am aware of in the Bible against interracial marriages. They are a marriage in the purist definition of the word, whether some people choose to accept it or not.

The question becomes, as many people have pointed out in previous threads, if the government is going to change the definition of marriage to allow men to marry men and women to marry women, why shouldn't they also allow brothers to marry sisters, sons to marry daughters, and Newt to marry that sheep he's been seen flirtin' with. :)
 
#50
#50
Knowing the government as it has been for many, many years, they're probably working on a new definition for equal.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top