Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

[KenH]

The state has a vested interest in protecting marriage.

Relying on the state to protect God-ordained marriage is a terrible idea. By doing so one may be very disappointed in the years to come.

 

[Aaron]

Civil unions deal with property (in fact, it's a major reason to have a civil union). Parental rights aren't determined by civil unions.

Legal marriage isn't a divine institution, so it's apples and oranges.

Apples and oranges are your thinking and the Scriptures.

 

[Johnv]

Apples and oranges are your thinking and the Scriptures.

I didn't realize you were still in Junior High.

 

[Marcia]

A civil union IS a contract already, and no, it's not marriage (marriage isn't a contract, it's a covenant). It gets the governmetn out of peoples' private lives, and gets them out of the marriage business.

What about all the numerous liberal churches that perform same sex marriage? Where is the protection of "marriage" then? I think this is just playing a name game; same sex marriages are being performed and will be performer in numerous churches.

 

[Johnv]

What about all the numerous liberal churches that perform same sex marriage?

What about 'em? Their existence doesn't in any way warrant the government sticking its nose in marriage and making a state sanctioned entitlement out of it.

 

[Marcia]

What about 'em? Their existence doesn't in any way warrant the government sticking its nose in marriage and making a state sanctioned entitlement out of it.

I think you missed my point. You are saying take the government out of marriage. What good does that do if churches still perform marriages of same sex couples? They are married in a church, not by the gov't. So taking the gov't away does nothing.

 

[Johnv]

What good does that do if churches still perform marriages of same sex couples?

Who cares wht churches do? Just because soem churches do wierd stuff doesn't mean the government should stick its nose in it.

 

[Aaron]

So, some pervert can start his own little sect and declare that he and some young boy are married.

Gov'mint should stay out!

Hey, Muslims! Start marryin' them 10-year-old girls! Gov'mint don't got no say!

SNIP

 

[Johnv]

So, some pervert can start his own little sect and declare that he and some young boy are married.

There's a huge difference between consenting adults, and the exploitation of minors. I'm not surprised that you didn't discern the difference.

 

[Aaron]

So the government CAN get involved in marriage. It can say who is and isn't qualified to be married based on age?

 

[Johnv]

Does your lack of discernment come naturally, or is it something you work at?

 

[Aaron]

Answer the question. Who is government to say a marriage cannot exist between a 10-year-old girl and a middle-aged Muslim?

 

[Johnv]

Who is government to say a marriage cannot exist between a 10-year-old girl and a middle-aged Muslim?

Protection of minors should be enforced without regard to the issue of marriage. I'm not surprised you're not discerning the difference.

Now, answer my question. Does your lack of discernment come naturally, or is it something you work at?

 

[Marcia]

Who cares wht churches do? Just because soem churches do wierd stuff doesn't mean the government should stick its nose in it.

I thought you were saying marriage should only be done in churches and the gov't should have nothing to do with marriage laws. How does that help when churches themselves are worse than the government? It is still not legal to have same sex marriage in most states, because of the government laws, but all over the country churches perform marriage ceremonies (in some cases, not legal marriage) for same sex couples.

What good is it to take gov't out of marriage laws? I don't see the point of doing this.

 

[Johnv]

I thought you were saying marriage should only be done in churches and the gov't should have nothing to do with marriage laws. How does that help when churches themselves are worse than the government?

What I hear you saying is that you support government telling churches whom they can and can't marry, in favor of marriage being regulated by the government? I'm not sure a lot of Christians would concur.

 

[Marcia]

What I hear you saying is that you support government telling churches whom they can and can't marry, in favor of marriage being regulated by the government? I'm not sure a lot of Christians would concur.

I believe what Rom. 13 says, that government/rulers are put in place to uphold God's law. This doesn't mean they always will, of course, but we should not do away with the model God has given us according to scripture.

 

[Aaron]

Protection of minors should be enforced without regard to the issue of marriage. I'm not surprised you're not discerning the difference.

By what standard do you judge certain marriages as exploitation, and a 10-year-old as a minor? Where is it written other than in a statute somewhere?

If Judaism says a 12-year-old girl can be married off, who are you to say otherwise? Isn't it your religion?

The point is that despite all your bellerin', you actually expect and desire government regulation of marriage as long as your own freedom isn't in jeopardy. You will tolerate homosexual "marriages" just because that's how you feel, and you lack the discernment to see the destructive influence on the general welfare of society as a whole, and on the protection of your own union specifically.

The same basis that a government can forbid marriage to what we call minors is the same basis that government can forbid marriage between two men or two women.

 

[Johnv]

Aaron, you realize, don't you, that your comments aren't making sense, and that all you're doing is demonstrating lack of discernment. Then, when you can't make your argument stick, you falsely accuse me "tolerating" gay marriage, when in fact, I do no such thing. Typical of your ilk, but not surprising.

 

[Johnv]

I believe what Rom. 13 says, that government/rulers are put in place to uphold God's law.

If that's what it says, then speaking out against the government is rebelling against God. Yet we do that all the time.
Nope, the Constitution was not put into place to uphold God's law. It was put in place to guarantee the rights and freedoms of individuals. There's no such thing as a "right" to marry, which is why I have never been comfortable with the government regulating it.

 

[tinytim]

There is a reason there is no official Marriage ceremony in the Bible. God meant for governments to oversee Marriages. There is no way for a civilized country to stand if the Government separates marriages from laws...

For civilized countries are based on the foundation of families.