It was the intent. There are some white people that would love to kill black people and vice versa. Does that mean they all do? That's the intent I got from Denny. It was this "your Christian friends do this so you all do this!" Type hyperbole.
You looooove going after people and then telling them to relax or calm down after they respond, don't you? Too bad I didn't actually get upset.
I don't need music or drugs, I just happen to like them! So if it's not a drug addled mind that makes you type like you do, what is it? Old age? Not a native English speaker? Some other type of handicap?
What year did they change that dictionary Denny? You know it was changed, heh? Like the word Gay changed to cover the homosexual, then marriage in Websters. Will Burton's and Oxford follow or was Webster premature? Will Cousins be granted equal protection too? Why not? Surely you can't let prohibitions in the Bible or the Koran keep them from equal protection, heh? Then there is the Pervert Dad and the Daughter just in dire need of your sense of equal protection! Let the many religious bigots pound sand the Denny way. How did Denny come by this equality compass? A sense of equality superior to all moral teachings in the history of mankind. How did we become bless with such insight for our all knowing moderator???
I'm unclear on your concept. By definition, a Mormon sealing is unequal from a Catholic ceremony. I pledged to my wife "Till death do us part". A Mormon ceremony ensures those people are together, even after they pass. In a civil ceremony, people can get divorced at any time with no bias from the government. In Catholicism, if you get divorced, you can't get remarried in the Church. That's not equal. I get the point you're trying to make, but it's nonsensical. You're attempting to create an equality of outcome. My point is that the government cannot discriminate. Right now, that's what they're doing every day they deny people who wish to join equal rights to do so. The government serves to provide people who wish to join their lives a legal framework to do so. A religion serves to provide people who wish to join their lives together a spiritual framework. They each serve a separate and distinct purpose. So...separate the legal from the spiritual. A government must not only support the majority view, but also respect and defend the rights of the minority. It represents the temporal only; it shouldn't shove those beliefs down the throat of people who find the concept of marriage as anything but one man and one woman offensive. What it should do is to treat everyone equally. That means providing survivor benefits to any couple or group, adoption rights to any couple or group, visitation rights to any couple or group and the ability to dissolve such a union when one or more parties wish it to end.
"Governments" in this case were meant to refer to local and state governments and the Federal government of the United States of America, not anyone else's. Thanks for the Hitler reference, though. I don't have one entire side of my family because of that regime, so I'm pretty aware they treated my kind differently than the Aryans. We as Americans are all entitled to equal protection under the law. Right now, we're not receiving it. My prescription is to separate the legal from the spiritual. Everyone who is a consenting adult can get a civil union. If you wish to add a spiritual dimension and can find a faith to marry you, then you have a marriage. In the eyes of the law, everyone would have equal rights. However, not everyone would have equal rights under the spiritual realm.
Wait. Where did I say we owned Aldridge like a slave? I don't really care what you think of my posts, but I do care that others portray my ideas and thoughts accurately. Otherwise, it's just trolling.
Sorry if I misrepresented you. Denny seems to be borderline insane these days, and I made the mistake of taking his interpretation as being factual. My bad.
I like this bit from John. 4 Jesus and the woman at the well John|4:16 Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither. John|4:17 The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband: John|4:18 For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly. John|4:19 The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. You see marriage is the blessing ceremony preformed in the eyes of god. The womans man was her common law partner. Not truly a husband given to her in marriage in the eyes of god. So why attempt to steal the word, you can't achieve the meaning in the eyes of god.
Why did you skip merriam webster? It was the first link in the google search results for "marriage definition." Didn't suit your needs. Well done.
Like I said. Those religions can do whatever they want. The government hands out marriage licenses and marries people. Let them do their job. Under your scheme, am I supposed to bring my marriage license in to some govt. office to have it replaced with something else?
