Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Stand up for Real Marriage - between a MAN AND A WOMAN


calfoxwc

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Marriage, also called matrimony or wedlock, is a socially or ritually recognized union or legal contract between spouses that establishes rights and obligations between them, between them and their children, and between them and their in-laws.[1]

And what exactly is wrong with that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Therefore, a REAL MARRIAGE entails responsibilites to the children, if the man and woman

do have children, which is ALWAYS, for the most part, possible, unless surgery or

something amiss causes it not to work out.

 

Now, m-m, w-w, can NOT POSSIBLY bear children. It's a biological impossibility. Always

Absolutely impossible.

 

Therefore, calling a civil union a "marriage" is a farce, and a deliberate culture war perversion of the true

meaning of the word.

 

I have now kicked your sissypants ass to the top of Ben Nevis, then into the English Channel, then all the way

back to Westminster tower near Big Ben. STFU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodpecker - there is no gender to different colors of skin.

 

Please get assistance with your trying to be a legit part of this board.

 

As to what Logic said...I agree 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Therefore, a REAL MARRIAGE entails responsibilites to the children, if the man and woman

do have children, which is ALWAYS, for the most part, possible, unless surgery or

something amiss causes it not to work out.

 

Now, m-m, w-w, can NOT POSSIBLY bear children. It's a biological impossibility. Always

Absolutely impossible.

 

Therefore, calling a civil union a "marriage" is a farce, and a deliberate culture war perversion of the true

meaning of the word.

 

I have now kicked your sissypants ass to the top of Ben Nevis, then into the English Channel, then all the way

back to Westminster tower near Big Ben. STFU

That chess-playing pigeon is pretty spot on about now.

 

So, marriage can only be between men and women because they'll have responsibility to their kids? So, should we prevent people who don't want kids getting married? Or just limit that to those who *can't* have kids? Like, people who have had ovarian/testicular cancer, old people, people who have been in any of a thousand or more different accidents?

 

And are we just ignoring all the same sex couples who do actually have kids, through surrogacy, adoption or whatever?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't recall a Church being FORCED to marry gay people.

 

Maybe I'm wrong, as I don't search the internet 24 hours a day, for such things. And I don't receive emails from any political crap, on either side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cal just posted a list of links.

Having read cal's posts, not one Church was forced to marry a gay couple in the USA.

 

The one was a for-profit chapel, not a Church

 

Another post is a proposed law about churches that rent out their buildings to the general public would not be allowed to discriminate “against a gay couple who want to rent the building for a party.” Again, they are not FORCED to marry a gay couple.

 

Still haven't read or seen a CHURCH being FORCED to MARRY gay couples, in this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why read and look into the info presented in an article when you can just google scary phrases and paste the best sounding article titles.

 

 

 

 

Oh crap, I hope that post is up to Blowes standards. Maybe I should add some ranting and raving about my freedoms being taken away?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having read cal's posts, not one Church was forced to marry a gay couple in the USA.

 

The one was a for-profit chapel, not a Church

 

Another post is a proposed law about churches that rent out their buildings to the general public would not be allowed to discriminate “against a gay couple who want to rent the building for a party.” Again, they are not FORCED to marry a gay couple.

 

Still haven't read or seen a CHURCH being FORCED to MARRY gay couples, in this country.

You're not getting the point of the thread. That's right, churches being forced to marry gays is not happening in this country YET, and believers in traditional marriage want to keep it that way. Cals link proves the threat is there...one small step at a time.

 

They been forced to in Europe and as you know we are always a step behind those "evolving" freaks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/denmark/9317447/Gay-Danish-couples-win-right-to-marry-in-church.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why read and look into the info presented in an article when you can just google scary phrases and paste the best sounding article titles.

 

 

 

 

Oh crap, I hope that post is up to Blowes standards. Maybe I should add some ranting and raving about my freedoms being taken away?

If you knew how to read you would know that I wasn't defending MY freedoms.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a dim view of religion.... not spiritual beliefs.

 

And I care about our country, our culture, our society.

 

And those three things are going into the toilet, liberal wise.

 

Time to turn around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes you did in your flaccid attempt at insulting me. Blowe

 

"Oh crap, I hope that post is up to Blowes standards. Maybe I should add some ranting and raving about my freedoms being taken away?"

************************************

"THUNK" Darts%20Hit%20The%20Bullseye.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it happens in Denmark we are next!

Yeah sure Woody.

 

Europe has socialized medicine, now we get socialized medicine, Europe marries gays, now we marry gays...how absurd the notion that once Europes churches are forced to marry gays that we aren't far behind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hang on with that Denmark ruling, is the fine print that "members of the church" should be able to get married within the church? So it is that church's were happy to take in gay people and their weekly donations, but when it came to marrying them no way? That's not right if they allow gay people to be open members of the church but refuse them marriages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure it is. Allowing gays to attend is their choice.

 

But being forced to condone a phony, perverse redefinition of marriage, no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you allow openly gay people to attend, therefore also taking their money....than imo you start to lose your moral standing in your opposition to their marriage request. Gray area than when they say they were open but church says "who knew we thought they were regular cunt slayers".

Sure it is. Allowing gays to attend is their choice.

 

But being forced to condone a phony, perverse redefinition of marriage, no.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...