U.S. Senate Rejects Gay Marriage Amendment

Bocephus wrote:

It is not about being able to conceive children that should be the reason for getting married.
The bible tells us that God made Eve to be a help mate to Adam.
The gay life style is an abomination in the eyes of the Lord and is a sin. Those who agree with these life styles and those who vote for the same sex marriage is a party to their sin.
God help you all. And in the day that the Lord rewards his faithful, the gays and lesbians will not be a part of that reward if they are living in this sinful way.
Rev. Thurston Hill
Kershaw, S.C.

Chris Shelby Ohio wrote:

Gay marriage??? You have got to be kidding me!!!! Man with man, woman with woman?? I don't remember reading about this in Genesis.
To all you sorry Liberals who want to preach Seperation Of Church & State....PLEASE show me in the Constitution or the Bill Of Rights the phrase "Seperation Of Church & State". Liberals & the ACLU like useing this to take God & everything HE stands for out of our culture!!!! I don't care to hear the crap about a gay person is born "Gay", thats the dumbest thing I have ever heard. It is a choice that person makes.

Love Poodle Skirts wrote:

<quoted text>I bought several on ebay but they do get in the way when I am shifting my big rig. Once I got an oil stain right next to the face of the poodle and it make it look like a tear stain. Very precious.

djd wrote:

gay marriage??? is that a contradiction in terms??? If gays can do what heteros do naturally, that is, conceive & bear children naturally, then I'll go to Gods court for them... otherwise it isnt about division, its about seeking redemption from a stigma...... thank ye, no!

djd wrote:

gay marriage??? is that a contradiction in terms??? If gays can do what heteros do naturally, that is, conceive & bear children naturally, then I'll go to Gods court for them... otherwise it isnt about division, its about seeking redemption from a stigma...... thank ye, no!

Bill wrote:

<quoted text>
Aside from the "abomination in the eyes of the Lord" mantra, how exactly would a union between two men, or two women, adversely affect you?
What tragic event would occur to you personally if this happened?
And what about those Pastors/Priests/ etc. that are openly homosexual? Are you saying those Churches that have allowed such to occur are also an "abomination in the eyes of the Lord"?

Lonnie wrote:

When will this foolishness stop? What next, marrigage to a five year old? Marriage to a dog? After all, they are merely lifestyle choices.

WeAreInThisTogether wrote:

<quoted text>
Apparently, Bill, for all the theological knowledge you claim it seems the concept of the "good steward" escapes you. Your interest in "the moment" seems self-serving.
What tragic event would befall me? The tragedy is when people think only of themselves (those in the here and now) and not of the consequences that "their actions" could have on other people, both present and into the future.
No. We don't know what the future holds for us. However, we do know that procreation is what allows us to have these arguments, unless of course, you prefer only your voice and your opinion.
We should be asking ourselves what we are getting into, and what does the future look like should we decide to go down this road. Then ready ourselves to live with the consequences of our actions. It really is that simple. As the saying goes, you can't have your cake and eat it too.
We want but we want without consequences. That just doesn't happen.

PCD wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't remember marriage being reserved solely for Christians, either.
<quoted text>
Such history and beliefs were integrated into the U.S. Constitution with the passing of the Bill of Rights containing the First Amendment. The clause of the First Amendment that adopted the founders' principles of separation of church and state and freedom of religion is known as the Establishment Clause. It states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_ch...
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. " -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802
<quoted text>
Unfortunately for your position, the weight of the scientific evidence indicates genetic and epigenetic factors (during fetal development) most likely account for determining sexual orientation. Here are two of several dozen recent citations from peer-reviewed scientific publications:
Hum Genet. 2006 Feb;118(6):691-4. Epub 2005 Dec 21.
Extreme skewing of X chromosome inactivation in mothers of homosexual men.
Bocklandt S, Horvath S, Vilain E, Hamer DH.
Department of Human Genetics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Human sexual preference is a sexually dimorphic trait with a substantial genetic component. Linkage of male sexual orientation to markers on the X chromosome has been reported in some families. Here, we measured X chromosome inactivation ratios in 97 mothers of homosexual men and 103 age-matched control women without gay sons. The number of women with extreme skewing of X-inactivation was significantly higher in mothers of gay men (13/97=13%) compared to controls (4/103=4%) and increased in mothers with two or more gay sons (10/44=23%). Our findings support a role for the X chromosome in regulating sexual orientation in a subgroup of gay men.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2005;29(7):1057-66. Epub 2005 Apr 25
The neurodevelopment of human sexual orientation.
Rahman Q.
School of Psychology, University of East London, The Green, London E15 4LZ, UK. q.rahman@uel.ac.uk
[...] Here, evidence is reviewed which supports the proposal that sexual orientation in humans may be laid down in neural circuitry during early foetal development. Behaviour genetic investigations provide strong evidence for a heritable component to male and female sexual orientation. Linkage studies are partly suggestive of X-linked loci although candidate gene studies have produced null findings. Further evidence demonstrates a role for prenatal sex hormones which may influence the development of a putative network of sexual-orientation-related neural substrates.[...]

justpassnthru wrote:

I wanna marry my dog. It's not sexual, I just love my dog and could use the tax deduction!

PCD wrote:

<quoted text>
Dogs can't file tax returns.

PCD wrote:

<quoted text>
Dogs can't file tax returns.

justpassnthru wrote:

Yeah, but if we can redefine marriage to include animals

TwoDaddies wrote:

<quoted text>
Excellent, where does the road of allowing gays to marry lead?
Straight people giving up their sexuality and jumping on the gay train? This is how you truly see it isn't it? Becuase you see Sexuality as a chosen like which lipstick to wear or shoes to put on, you assume that the mainstream acceptance and normalization of Gays will encourage more poeple to "choose" it.
Science, psychology, and historical studies just don't back this up. We may find truly that sexuality is more liquid than our narrow man made constructs have been enforcing these last few centuries, but truly, can you see yourself becoming gay just because nobody is going to abuse, spit on, or demean you for it?
Or are you just really afraid that your children will have to give up your petty hatreds and bigotries?
Didn't christ teach love? Must have seemed a slipperly slope to all of those that had been managed and manipulated by fear mongering churches and governments at the time.
Think outside of the box here. Religion has always come out in support of the wrong side of our most precious and valued freedoms, when they were being fought for. Women's rights, Black civil liberties, Slavery, indulgences, corruptions, Theocracies, witch hunts, inquisitions, crusades, imperialism, individual freedoms and rights, human sexuality, Science and knowledge, and Free Agency.
Religion fights it all and the armies of mindless servants pushing for their own oppression never catch on.
Is there no shame to be felt by the mindless accomplice? Certainly if you can ask where gay marriage will lead society, you should consider where religion has taken its toll on all of our histories. It's not all men in silky robes, chopping newborn penises, and vaginas protected by mutilation, there's some bad in there too

Chris wrote:

Now we're talking about marrying dogs? This has nothing to do with the topic of gay marriage.