There is no such thing as same sex marriage, or straight marriage, there is just marriage. Prove me

RickeyD

@YeshuaRedeemed ; Your opinion is irrelevant in Truth and in God's World. What matters and what is relevant is what God has said and God has clearly articulated the Marriage Covenant as existing ONLY between one-man and one-woman becoming one-flesh for life. Anything outside of this Covenant as established in The Beginning (Genesis 2:15-25) and reiterated by Jesus Christ - Yeshua in the Covenant of Grace - anything other than a Covenant between the man and woman becoming husband and wife for life is sexual perversion and will be judged lest the participant(s) repent and turn to Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin and walk in obedience to Him by the indwelling Holy Spirit.

ZeusAres42

@RickeyD

Yeah, but your God is the false one. And you do not accept this because you are spirtually dead and ignorant.

maxx

im not exactly what part of your post you wish to have answered.   the question about no such thong as same sex marriage?  that is wrong.  if 2 people who are the same sex get married are of the same sex, then that is same sex marriage.  the second part, is as long as what ever other individuals do with their lives do not affect me or my family in a way I do not want, they can do and live however they please. yet both psychological and biologically speaking, gay people are wrong in nature; gay people only exist because of the ability of straight people to reproduce(technology of today set aside)@YeshuaRedeemed

YeshuaBought

RickeyD said:

@YeshuaRedeemed ; Your opinion is irrelevant in Truth and in God's World. What matters and what is relevant is what God has said and God has clearly articulated the Marriage Covenant as existing ONLY between one-man and one-woman becoming one-flesh for life. Anything outside of this Covenant as established in The Beginning (Genesis 2:15-25) and reiterated by Jesus Christ - Yeshua in the Covenant of Grace - anything other than a Covenant between the man and woman becoming husband and wife for life is sexual perversion and will be judged lest the participant(s) repent and turn to Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin and walk in obedience to Him by the indwelling Holy Spirit.

It is not an opinion, and it ia relevant. The first link in my signature will take you to a site with high quality scholarship and articles that prove you wrong.

MichaelElpers

@YeshuaRedeemed If the government didnt have there hand in marriage no one would care.  If Judeo christian religions started the institution of marriage and want to keep their traditions...fine let them.  If other people want to have a union outside of those institutions no one cares.  It only because the government groups them together and grants certain tax statuses ect to each of them that this is even an issue.

RickeyD

@YeshuaRedeemed Again, you trust in man's opinion as opposed to God's Truth (Psalms 118:8) and you will not be judged according to man's laws or man's opinions...you will be Judged by God's laws if you die in your sin without Jesus Christ as Lord.

You will either humble yourself and repent of your sin, seek and trust in Jesus Christ as your Lord for the mediation of those sins or you'll die in sin and ultimately lose your soul and body in Hell (John 8:24). It does NOT matter what scholarly articles or men have said about the subject...there is NO same-sex marriage covenant! Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) is a godless, pagan, heretical, demonic lie! Two-people of the same-sex cannot be married and if they engage in a sexual union, they are living in sin and violating the ONLY Covenant of Marriage recognized by God and that is the one established in the Genesis between ONE-man and ONE-woman becoming ONE-flesh for LIFE. 

YeshuaBought

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed If the government didnt have there hand in marriage no one would care.  If Judeo christian religions started the institution of marriage and want to keep their traditions...fine let them.  If other people want to have a union outside of those institutions no one cares.  It only because the government groups them together and grants certain tax statuses ect to each of them that this is even an issue.

Mind your own business. You don't have the right to say who people marry. It is none of your business.

YeshuaBought

RickeyD said:

@YeshuaRedeemed Again, you trust in man's opinion as opposed to God's Truth (Psalms 118:8) and you will not be judged according to man's laws or man's opinions...you will be Judged by God's laws if you die in your sin without Jesus Christ as Lord.

You will either humble yourself and repent of your sin, seek and trust in Jesus Christ as your Lord for the mediation of those sins or you'll die in sin and ultimately lose your soul and body in Hell (John 8:24). It does NOT matter what scholarly articles or men have said about the subject...there is NO same-sex marriage covenant! Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) is a godless, pagan, heretical, demonic lie! Two-people of the same-sex cannot be married and if they engage in a sexual union, they are living in sin and violating the ONLY Covenant of Marriage recognized by God and that is the one established in the Genesis between ONE-man and ONE-woman becoming ONE-flesh for LIFE. 

It is not an opinion, you hateful bigot. You don't have the right to spread hate.

MichaelElpers

@YeshuaRedeemed. Again you didnt read. Where did i claim i get to tell people who they marry?  I claimed no one would care if the government didnt combine religious marriage with a civil government union.

MayCaesar

I do not think there should be marriage in the first place; it is a governmental/clerical entity that should not be taken seriously. If two or more individuals love each other, they can "sign" a verbal contract vowing to be with each other forever, and if the love is real, then they will stick to that vow - and if it is not real, then they have no reason to be together anyway. A group of individuals should not need a government-issued certificate for their arrangement to feel complete.

One could make an argument for privatised marriage, where a third part acts as a witness of a legal contract and takes responsibility for its fulfilment. But I am not sure if that would still be formally classified as marriage.

YeshuaBought

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed. Again you didnt read. Where did i claim i get to tell people who they marry?  I claimed no one would care if the government didnt combine religious marriage with a civil government union.

Again, you are are trolling. I read what you wrote.

MichaelElpers

@YeshuaRedeemed Alright then please quote where i said that i or others have the right to tell people who they marry.

You never seem to be able to do this.

John_C_87

Do you have any legal objection as why two people can be united by Binivir or UnosMulier speak now of forever hold your peace?

John_C_87

@RickeyD ;
She is a public witness her opinion maters.....
As a witness like many other people she simply may be unreliable in this matter. A legal objection must be made by her on a union of Binivir or Unosmullier or she will be proven wrong.

John_C_87

Summarizing all concern.

Religiously the argument of same gender marriage is basically over alienating parental right placed in danger by children created as a type In Vitro Fertilization, Immaculate Conception, or Virgin Birth by medical science. The cost of the medical research has created a demand for return on investments made in not just human life but in money. Some of those investments by public investors in an open market as public holdings.

The real educated failure may occur when followers of religious institutions did not understand the basic responsibility that are created by a United Marriage state legal by law. This bond has left those who fail at the union with a burden to create there own title upon their failure. Those who succeed with Marriage responsibilities of defending the basic union. The words till death do they part is simple making an agreement that Marriage is a title which can not be dissolved, period, ever. Even when the legal ties of the union have been dismissed by courts and nations, it is a verbal likelihood and lives on past the couples it is carried by. 

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

Do you have any legal objection as why two people can be united by Binivir or UnosMulier speak now of forever hold your peace?

I don't have to prove my rights to you.

YeshuaBought

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed Alright then please quote where i said that i or others have the right to tell people who they marry.

You never seem to be able to do this.

Answer my question, or leave.

MichaelElpers

@YeshuaRedeemed. I did answer it.  You then misrepresented my argument, called me a troll, and then refused to quote the argument that you misrepresented.

You call people names and misrepresent arguments.  When your called out on it, your only defense is calling me a troll.

So ill give a second chance, find the quote in my posts where i said we should be able to choose who people marry...otherwise you are the true troll

YeshuaBought

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed. I did answer it.  You then misrepresented my argument, called me a troll, and then refused to quote the argument that you misrepresented.

You call people names and misrepresent arguments.  When your called out on it, your only defense is calling me a troll.

So ill give a second chance, find the quote in my posts where i said we should be able to choose who people marry...otherwise you are the true troll

And you're done. I am not going to allow you to control this debate. I read your statement, and responded accordingly.

YeshuaBought

@MichaelElpers No you didn't answer my question. I will say it again: Should gays be allowed to get married? Answer, or be muted.

John_C_87

YeshuaRedeemed said:

John_C_87 said:

Do you have any legal objection as why two people can be united by Binivir or UnosMulier speak now of forever hold your peace?

I don't have to prove my rights to you.

No-one is asking about your right or wrong. Do you, or anyone you know have a legal objection in describing two people united in public likelihoods as Binivir, Unosmulier, or even Virmulier ?

Does anyone on this forum?

John_C_87

YeshuaRedeemed said:

@MichaelElpers No you didn't answer my question. I will say it again: Should gays be allowed to get married? Answer, or be muted.

The problem with the question YeshuaRedeemed is being Gay/Lesbian is grounds to break all legal ties to a marriage already as a legal precedent. The two are not the same commitment. The likelihood is still a gay man could be married to a lesbian woman instead of being united as Binivir, even Bini-Mulier.

MichaelElpers

@YeshuaRedeemed I did.  Anyone should be allowed to marry whoever they want, but they shouldnt be able to force religious institutions to perform it.  Again if the government just stayed out of marriage in the first place it wouldnt be a discussion at all.

Lol you still cant quote where i said that i should be able to tell people who they can and cant marry.  You cant even backup your own statements.

YeshuaBought

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed I did.  Anyone should be allowed to marry whoever they want, but they shouldnt be able to force religious institutions to perform it.  Again if the government just stayed out of marriage in the first place it wouldnt be a discussion at all.

Lol you still cant quote where i said that i should be able to tell people who they can and cant marry.  You cant even backup your own statements.

I am a Christian, and I affirm same sex partnerships. Religious bodies don't have the right to force their beliefs on other people.

John_C_87

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed I did.  Anyone should be allowed to marry whoever they want, but they shouldnt be able to force religious institutions to perform it.  Again if the government just stayed out of marriage in the first place it wouldnt be a discussion at all.

Lol you still cant quote where i said that i should be able to tell people who they can and cant marry.  You cant even backup your own statements.

@MichaelElpers

You’re a poor witness in preserving a public likelihood as the church is not being forced to perform a Marriage. The church is forced to perform a Civil Union. The church is basically forced to witness a likelihood it does not condone, or wishes to be part of.

 Does a church agree to a witness account in written documented with Binivir or Unosmulier without legal objection?

Do you legally object to a union made by Binivir and UnosMulier?

John_C_87

YeshuaRedeemed said:

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed I did.  Anyone should be allowed to marry whoever they want, but they shouldnt be able to force religious institutions to perform it.  Again if the government just stayed out of marriage in the first place it wouldnt be a discussion at all.

Lol you still cant quote where i said that i should be able to tell people who they can and cant marry.  You cant even backup your own statements.

I am a Christian, and I affirm same sex partnerships. Religious bodies don't have the right to force their beliefs on other people.

I object. Affirming that same gender contracts are outside the boundery set by Marriage and are private Binivir and Unosmulier conducted by legal counsil directed by civil aligation brough public by an accuser not legal counsil. Legal counsil has to questioin its roll in a persuit in malpractice of law that is undertake by a forced public perjury of witness, in publicly fashion, and should not be made a pupit in abuses held by uncredible witness accounts of longstanding likelihood.

There is no reason to beieve you are Christain, nor should it matter, only a witness in public liklihood.

MichaelElpers

@YeshuaRedeemed Right. So just like a religious institution shouldnt be able to keep someone from becoming married, no one should be able to force a religious institution to marry them.

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

YeshuaRedeemed said:

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed I did.  Anyone should be allowed to marry whoever they want, but they shouldnt be able to force religious institutions to perform it.  Again if the government just stayed out of marriage in the first place it wouldnt be a discussion at all.

Lol you still cant quote where i said that i should be able to tell people who they can and cant marry.  You cant even backup your own statements.

I am a Christian, and I affirm same sex partnerships. Religious bodies don't have the right to force their beliefs on other people.

I object. Affirming that same gender contracts are outside the boundery set by Marriage and are private Binivir and Unosmulier conducted by legal counsil directed by civil aligation brough public by an accuser not legal counsil. Legal counsil has to questioin its roll in a persuit in malpractice of law that is undertake by a forced public perjury of witness, in publicly fashion, and should not be made a pupit in abuses held by uncredible witness accounts of longstanding likelihood.

There is no reason to beieve you are Christain, nor should it matter, only a witness in public liklihood.

No true Scotsman fallacy. Christians can support gays.

YeshuaBought

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed Right. So just like a religious institution shouldnt be able to keep someone from becoming married, no one should be able to force a religious institution to marry them.

Strawman fallacy. No one is supporting forced weddings. We are just saying to stay out of my bedroom, and mind your own business. Religious bodies, DON'T have the right to FORCE their brand of religion on other people. We have a democracy, not a theocracy.

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

YeshuaRedeemed said:

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed I did.  Anyone should be allowed to marry whoever they want, but they shouldnt be able to force religious institutions to perform it.  Again if the government just stayed out of marriage in the first place it wouldnt be a discussion at all.

Lol you still cant quote where i said that i should be able to tell people who they can and cant marry.  You cant even backup your own statements.

I am a Christian, and I affirm same sex partnerships. Religious bodies don't have the right to force their beliefs on other people.

I object. Affirming that same gender contracts are outside the boundery set by Marriage and are private Binivir and Unosmulier conducted by legal counsil directed by civil aligation brough public by an accuser not legal counsil. Legal counsil has to questioin its roll in a persuit in malpractice of law that is undertake by a forced public perjury of witness, in publicly fashion, and should not be made a pupit in abuses held by uncredible witness accounts of longstanding likelihood.

There is no reason to beieve you are Christain, nor should it matter, only a witness in public liklihood.

They actually are not, but whatever. Be as homophobic as you want.

MichaelElpers

@YeshuaRedeemed we are actually a republic.  And yes i can see that happening.  We are already forcing people to bake cakes and provide birth control.

YeshuaBought

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed we are actually a republic.  And yes i can see that happening.  We are already forcing people to bake cakes and provide birth control.

MichaelElpers said:

@YeshuaRedeemed we are actually a republic.  And yes i can see that happening.  We are already forcing people to bake cakes and provide birth control.

Hate speech, and lies. No pastor is forced to perform a gay wedding. People like you, are who lead to gay suicide. Fact: Gays have the right to get married.

John_C_87

YeshuaRedeemed said: Fact is Gay's have a right to get married. 

@ YeshuaRedeemed: Yes true, the fact is a man who seeks legal attachment to a man, or woman to woman, as a man or woman, can still get married to a woman as man, and man as woman. ( confusing statement) However two men cannot be legally married to each other nor two woman, this do to legal precedent created in the preservation of marriage, prior to creating all woman as equal. The legal precedent itself can be changed that will not fix any relationship to the manipulation taking place of witnesses in wholesale fashion. As you have not objected directly only implying of discrimination, and a state corporation had been created regardless by use of plagiarism, which is a potential crime that can be legally witnessed as it is formed under the title Binivir and Unosdmulier.

Keep in mind Marriages can themselves become crimes, or criminal. Discrimination is criminal as well as perjury and the whole public is a witness to a perjury account. Also very important is Gay and Lesbian are accusation to that become a potential crime after someone is united in Marriage.

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

YeshuaRedeemed said: Fact is Gay's have a right to get married. 

@ YeshuaRedeemed: Yes true, the fact is a man who seeks legal attachment to a man, or woman to woman, as a man or woman, can still get married to a woman as man, and man as woman. ( confusing statement) However two men cannot be legally married to each other nor two woman, this do to legal precedent created in the preservation of marriage, prior to creating all woman as equal. The legal precedent itself can be changed that will not fix any relationship to the manipulation taking place of witnesses in wholesale fashion. As you have not objected directly only implying of discrimination, and a state corporation had been created regardless by use of plagiarism, which is a potential crime that can be legally witnessed as it is formed under the title Binivir and Unosdmulier.

Keep in mind Marriages can themselves become crimes, or criminal. Discrimination is criminal as well as perjury and the whole public is a witness to a perjury account. Also very important is Gay and Lesbian are accusation to that become a potential crime after someone is united in Marriage.

Two men and two women also have the right to get married, and you don't have the right to say otherwise.

John_C_87

So, we are not confused in the grievance of basic principle. Are you trying to tell me how to be a witness on an open public likelihood? All marriage’s can be objected to, all Binivir’s and Unosmulier’s as well.

We the people have a right to BiniVir, Unosmulier, marriage, and civil union as a legal right being witness…..Gay and lesbian are accusations as much confession when connected to people.

The legal concern that qualifies a truth otherwise is not a right, it is a duty. I have a duty not to commit perjury on official record.

 I will not go into detail of the disturbing fact how innuendo of sexual perversions are a part of basic principle in witnessing account that is instructed. Again, another pressing legal matter. Discrimination does not limit the idea any basic truth in simple easy to follow principle along a line of legal history.

This is a new clear legal objection as statement of grievance. The grievance is not saying a focus of witnessing could not have been married. Elaboration can go on to say as a witness that those who have multiple so called marriages with use of divorce are by witness account simple VirMulier, VirFemina, and so, when demonstrating only the ease at which someone, anyone can be married until their death without use of lethal force.