-
Website
http://randythomas.org/ -
Original page
http://randythomas.org/2008/09/29/andy-comiskey-blogs-about-marriage-in-support-of-proposition-8/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Jonathan
139 comments · 3 points
-
donbeeson
12 comments · 3 points
-
mdturner77
18 comments · 1 points
-
Matt_V
17 comments · 1 points
-
editorgal
65 comments · 4 points
-
-
Popular Threads
Just got an eMail news item forwarded to me by my brother that I thought you might be interested in seeing if you hadn't already.
Google opposes anti-gay marriage measure.
Really frustrates me because I use google for so much and I'd like to untangle myself from them in the light of this news.
can pray for the people at Google, that perhaps someone influential
might be touched by someone dealing with this issue personally, and
get their company to withdraw their support.
feel as though when corporations start making stands like this it's a
slippery slope in the political realm.
Just got an eMail news item forwarded to me by my brother that I thought you might be interested in seeing if you hadn't already.
Google opposes anti-gay marriage measure.
Really frustrates me because I use google for so much and I'd like to untangle myself from them in the light of this news.
can pray for the people at Google, that perhaps someone influential
might be touched by someone dealing with this issue personally, and
get their company to withdraw their support.
feel as though when corporations start making stands like this it's a
slippery slope in the political realm.
We must support Christian movies. The movie took in over 6 million the first weekend. :)
remember the name Wayne Floyd, he's hilarious
We must support Christian movies. The movie took in over 6 million the first weekend. :)
remember the name Wayne Floyd, he's hilarious
The Lord does allow for divorce in the instance of sexual adultery but other than that, I don't know if a constitutional amendment is needed but I am all for making divorce a lot harder to accomplish. When it is simply another option for people to not keep their vows, it is just as detrimental as redefining marriage because it does the same thing ... it redefines marriage out of "holy" matrimony and makes it into only a policy benefit to opt in or out of.
Also "Holy" matrimony is a matter of interpretation. Quakers, now the Society of Friends, believe that sitting quietly and listening to God speak to your heart is a vital part of their religion. If God tells you it is okay to marry a same sex partner, that would be considered "Holy". A number of religions are okay with gay marriage and marrying the couples. Why should your belief dominate over theirs? Thus taking this question out of the religious community and putting it up there with equal rights, in which the original decision was judged.
... among a myriad of other possibilities. Marriage is already in chaos as a social benefit. I don't thinking ruining any semblance of what marriage has always been is the answer.
You also make the mistake of assuming that we are all "hearing" from the same god and/or confusing our own thoughts as the will of God.
To be more direct, if "God" told you it is ok to redefine marriage ... with all do respect ... we do not serve the same God.
And just like you, I have a right to exercise my freedoms and engage the process. "Why should your belief dominate over theirs?" is a false argument because it isn't about that. Even though it is tempting to ask you the very same question.
Plus, my "belief" is backed up by thousands of years of world history and even scientific studies that say children are best raised with a Dad and Mom in the context of a lifelong committed marriage.
It is about participating in democracy to hopefully shape public policy in a way that is best for us all. You do what you have to do and I will do what I have to do. At the end of the day, we will still be fellow citizens trying to make it in this world.
The Lord does allow for divorce in the instance of sexual adultery but other than that, I don't know if a constitutional amendment is needed but I am all for making divorce a lot harder to accomplish. When it is simply another option for people to not keep their vows, it is just as detrimental as redefining marriage because it does the same thing ... it redefines marriage out of "holy" matrimony and makes it into only a policy benefit to opt in or out of.
Also "Holy" matrimony is a matter of interpretation. Quakers, now the Society of Friends, believe that sitting quietly and listening to God speak to your heart is a vital part of their religion. If God tells you it is okay to marry a same sex partner, that would be considered "Holy". A number of religions are okay with gay marriage and marrying the couples. Why should your belief dominate over theirs? Thus taking this question out of the religious community and putting it up there with equal rights, in which the original decision was judged.
... among a myriad of other possibilities. Marriage is already in chaos as a social benefit. I don't thinking ruining any semblance of what marriage has always been is the answer.
You also make the mistake of assuming that we are all "hearing" from the same god and/or confusing our own thoughts as the will of God.
To be more direct, if "God" told you it is ok to redefine marriage ... with all do respect ... we do not serve the same God.
And just like you, I have a right to exercise my freedoms and engage the process. "Who are you to dominate over my beliefs?" is a false argument because it isn't about that. Even though it is tempting to ask *you* the very same question.
It is about participating in democracy to hopefully shape public policy in a way that is best for us all. You do what you have to do and I will do what I have to do. At the end of the day, we will still be fellow citizens trying to make it in this world.
It is time for America to wakes up! & Defends her little childrens!
The IP finder also says that they/him is located in the Los Angeles area. The exact same area a couple of my online stalkers usually post from. Coincidence? ... maybe.
Anyway ... I suspect the comment is just someone trying to create a firestorm here so I will not get into it in any depth and will moderate comments coming from this/them.
I will say this, stop trying to stigmatize those who identify as gay. Many of them do help the poor, pay their mortgages, give comfort to the hurting and help inner city kids. And some of them may be rich as all get out but when I was gay... I was homeless for a while and never lived the life you describe.
... and ... having same sex attraction is NOT a choice. How we deal with them, or what role they have in our lives is an empowered choice a person can make if they determine that is what they want. I don't know a single person who "chose" to be gay. I know plenty of people who chose to not allow same sex attractions determine who they are, what they do or what their goals in life are.
::: watching :::
It is time for America to wakes up! & Defends her little childrens!
The IP finder also says that they/him is located in the Los Angeles area. The exact same area of LA that a couple of my online stalkers usually post from. Coincidence? ... maybe.
Anyway ... I suspect the comment is just someone trying to create a firestorm here so I will not get into it in any depth and will moderate comments coming from this/them.
I will say this, stop trying to stigmatize those who identify as gay. Many of them do help the poor, pay their mortgages, give comfort to the hurting and help inner city kids. And some of them may be rich as all get out but when I was gay... I was homeless for a while and never lived the life you describe.
... and ... having same sex attraction is NOT a choice. How we deal with them, or what role they have in our lives is an empowered choice a person can make if they determine that is what they want. I don't know a single person who "chose" to be gay. I know plenty of people who chose to not allow same sex attractions determine who they are, what they do or what their goals in life are.
::: watching :::