John

Yes.  We agree on certain points.  My point is that US citizens should not have to abide by the beliefs based on Christianity concerning marriage/mating.  A Jew or Muslim has a better argument based on their religious practice however neither has any basis to impose their ‘religious beliefs’ into a law which all US citizens are oblige.  So that the ‘Christian’ argument based on belief holds no merit since that religion has been hostile to marriage or any type of ‘heterosexual’ relations as their alleged followers were unmarried, had no record of any sexual contact with wome, hence no children.

It is the Christian ‘belief’ of what marriage is or the sexual law which is the driving force in the US although clever lawyer types like Bill Clinton or Barak Obama just leave it with opinion such as ‘their belief’ which does not reveal the source of it.

Where we do agree is that the Gay Issue is political and a false civil rights issue.  In that it s similiar to women who want to become Catholic priest without having the courage to face the reality that Misogyny is a cornerstone of the religion.  The Gay Marriage issue is primarily an attempt by Gays to have Christianity accept their sexual orientation because they want to be Christian and Gay instead of realising that this is manmade and hostile to them in its hypocrisy.

The Christians have the right to refuse homosexuality in their midst but do not have the right to impose their beliefs into law where all are oblige to follow.

This leaves the legal-financial issue of those benefits enjoyed by marriage.  Many of them can be realised with a Business Partnership but Gays want the Christian based legal marriage as much or more than they want the financial benefits.  So much for the Gay Marriage hypocrisy.

My prime issue here is that US citizens should not have to follow laws based on what Christians consider ‘appropriate’ marriage based on the US Constitution prohibition of Establishment of Religion and the hostility Christianity has had for marriage and family based on the actual scriptural references to Jesus Christ, Paul and the celibacy of the Roman Catholic Church.

hello again. you same sex enthusiasts are revolting, deceitful, and in denial. oral is smelly and distasteful. in the rear is unnatural and filthy. the reason you need to change our religiously founded view of marriage is so you can have monetary benefits from the death of your partner. why do you not get them when they are alive? marriage is to procreate.

Why should a Christian’s belief influence marriage law?  Jesus Christ was not married.  Paul the real founder was not married.  The Catholic priests were not married.  So Christianity has been hostile to marriage and family from day 1. Those who could not resist the ‘natural urge’ to marry were considered weak in spirit and hence the term ‘layman.’  Ask anyone of them, even Bill Clinton and you get childish nonsense on the level of ‘Because God said so.’  There is not a single logical or rational response from any of those strongly opposed to homosexual marriage and again Christians have no theological right since their founders were not only single but hostile to marriage.

The logical reason to be against homosexuality was more Jewish or even Pagan Roman then Christian.  It would be logical for any people or nation which depends on population growth for power to be against homosexuality. Hence Rome was different than Greece who’s geography could not sustain a large population whereas Rome understood that more citizens meant more soldiers, laborers and taxpayers.  Who cares about Christian belief determining a nation’s marriage laws? Especially in a country which makes big boasts about Freedom of Religion?  And since the US prides itself on ancient Greek ideals of democracy and freedoms then the precedence has already been made concerning homosexual marriage hasn’t it.

Its time for sexual people to stop allowing celibates and those who strive towards asexuality as a virtue to stop dictating who should have the right to marry who.  Congress shall make no law establishing religion so get the Christian belief out of our laws on marriage.

hello. another photo whereby Oboymamma gingerly
cowers beside the Terminator, afraid at any moment he
will turn and put him in a pumped-up body hug: which
squishes him alike a bug. “Exterminator”, trying to
single handedly eradicate that Democratic disease.no,
i see AHnold playing the getting on the side of
federal government bailouts, by presenting public
disruptive controversy, in line with the progressive
game plan back door take over of America above the
will of the people. he is setting the table with
upcoming cannabis fights, and immigration fights, and
we just need to bail out the super blundering
economic legacy he leaves- or is that just another
play from the progressive game book? full disclosure
before he snaps from a flash back…, “all the
Democrats are diseased.”
stomp.crumble.squish.agonized moaning shout,“you
don’t let me smoke my cigars indoors after a very
delicious,expensive meal.you people are
everywhere.you have infected my government.you must
be exterminated..“beware.

Schwarzenegger may actually believe in the idea of gay marriage, or simply wants to do something he thinks will put him on the right side of history - his version of Nixon going to China.

As for Obama, he’s a homophobe and a cultural reactionary.