JLD wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
JLD wrote:
[b]I used to agree with what you were saying but when put to the task of backing up why marriage should be limited to one man and one woman I couldn't come up with a single real reason for limitation.


You LDS?

Also, regardless of what a religion's stance is on the issue, that is neither here nor there. No one should force their religious views over others. I was appalled when the LDS spoke out on the issue...so much for separation of religion and politics.

EDIT: I'm referring to the LDS releasing a statement that they approved of legally defining marriage or something to that effect. I'll have to go looking for it now, I don't remember the wording.


The way we look at it, if you were LDS maybe you know this, is that it must have been pretty important for the church to have stepped in and made a statement, which they normally don't do. As we believe the Prophets are inspired and speak for God. God must disapprove pretty mightly if the church asked us to vote against it.


The church isn't forcing it's views on anyone, merely stating it's doctrine clearly, as we believe the Prophet speaks for God. No more than we would be forcing our views on anyone if we said we agreed that any sin is wrong.


That's one thing I personally love about the church, is the clear, set, doctrine. And a willingness to come out and say what God doesn't like. I wish more religions would have the courage to do this personally, but they don't want to offend, and don't even claim to speak for what God wants.

bif wrote:
This thread discusses the Content article: California's top court overturns gay marriage ban

Disgusting. There's nothing noble in one guy sticking his penis in the hole from which another guy evacuates fecal matter. How romantic. . .

Wow You sound romantic bif,

Do you really think romance is sticking your penis in something, anything?? I don't think romance has anything to do with your penis bif...

Everybody Loves Raymond wrote:
Time to get rid of these Dem activist judges. If you want more of this, just vote for Obama and his immoral Dem Congress. They will apppoint just these types of judges. Keep it up and you can soon marry your Yellow Labador.

Oh and don't forget, God forbid your daughter marries a BLACK MAN..!!

Everybody Loves Raymond You're an Idiot....

Everybody Loves Raymond wrote:
JLD wrote:
It is amazing that for so many people that are vocally anti-gay they can't come up with one good reason for being that way.


Uh, how about this one, the Bible says we are to be "anti-gay." Can ya top that, Mr. Rainbow?

"LOL" boy we can tell you read the bible "LOL"

Dubbs wrote:
JLD wrote:
[b]I used to agree with what you were saying but when put to the task of backing up why marriage should be limited to one man and one woman I couldn't come up with a single real reason for limitation.


You LDS?

If he is Dubbs, he's a very smart and a very upstanding member and God has blessed him with the Knowledge to not judge others....

Dubbs wrote:
JLD wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
JLD wrote:
[b]I used to agree with what you were saying but when put to the task of backing up why marriage should be limited to one man and one woman I couldn't come up with a single real reason for limitation.


You LDS?

Also, regardless of what a religion's stance is on the issue, that is neither here nor there. No one should force their religious views over others. I was appalled when the LDS spoke out on the issue...so much for separation of religion and politics.

EDIT: I'm referring to the LDS releasing a statement that they approved of legally defining marriage or something to that effect. I'll have to go looking for it now, I don't remember the wording.


The way we look at it, if you were LDS maybe you know this, is that it must have been pretty important for the church to have stepped in and made a statement, which they normally don't do. As we believe the Prophets are inspired and speak for God. God must disapprove pretty mightly if the church asked us to vote against it.


The church isn't forcing it's views on anyone, merely stating it's doctrine clearly, as we believe the Prophet speaks for God. No more than we would be forcing our views on anyone if we said we agreed that any sin is wrong.


That's one thing I personally love about the church, is the clear, set, doctrine. And a willingness to come out and say what God doesn't like. I wish more religions would have the courage to do this personally, but they don't want to offend, and don't even claim to speak for what God wants.

Baaaaa Baaaa Baaaa, did you say something Dubbs


P.S. "LOL" Like God need the LDS Church to speak for him..!! "LOL"

Sounds like Dubbs and his Church are full of themselves "LOL"