In response to:

Marriage: A Relationship Unlike Any Other

EarsToHear.net2 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 9:48 PM
Marriage is the favored Design of God ("the mystery of the church") Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled; but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. (Hebrews 13:4) God's design of marriage and the relationship between one man and one woman correlates with Christ (the bridegroom) and His Church (His bride). For this is the will of God, the One Who sanctifies you, that you abstain from immorality. Each of you knows to take a wife for himself in holiness and in honor, not in lustful passion like the heathens, the ones who have not known God. (1 Thessalonians 4:4-5) Marriage is the foundation for all of society regardless what any "reprobate mind" (Romans 1) may spew. More at: http://www.earstohear.net/Kingdom/marriage.html
Mark1963 Wrote: Feb 15, 2013 8:32 AM
Precisely. Marriage of men and women represents all that is Good in God's Eyes. and if we hope to please Him, we should always strive to do the things which please Him.

Legalizing same sex marriages, (and after them adoptions), disturbs God's natural Order.

Consider the young gay child who comes out to his or her parents, and is disowned. Yes, they could live with gay parents, and thus be accepted, but would the "love" be the same as they experienced with their natural parents? Probably not.

Also, consider the fact that young men and won don't need to "come out of the Closet" in order to declare their love for each other, and to marry.

And this is another reason why gay marriage is unnatural.
Tinsldr2 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 9:55 PM
US Supreme Court Decision Loving V Virginia:

The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.

Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.


Circuit Court case of Dragovich

The Court finds that Section 3 of the DOMA violates the equal protection rights of Plaintiff same-sex spouses, Therefore, both provisions are constitutionally invalid to the extent that they exclude Plaintiff same-sex spouses ,,,,,,

Religiously you are right, but legally that holds no water.

Cambermeister Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 11:47 PM
Hey Tinsldr2, I've got an idea...instead of telling the truth...you could spend some time on gay websites and find some pending court cases...then you could predict the outcome of those appeals by finding super secret stuff in the Constitution...you know...stuff even Kagan can't find.
Does that sound like a neat idea?
Brian953 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:40 AM
Marriage is not a case of protection under the law, so disparate treatment of marriage vs same sex unions cannot be a case of unequal protection under the law.

Marriages are licenesed, and sometime licenses are not permitted. That kind of governmental activity cannot be undertaken where the law is concerned (you don't license some to be protected from assault, but not others, for instance).

This ruling is activism, not jurisprudence, and has no effect.
Mark1963 Wrote: Feb 15, 2013 8:36 AM
News Flash: The only "secrets" contained in the Constitution are seen by the Liberals. To those who recognize it for the work of Genius that is truly was, (and still is) nothing else is necessary.

So don't amend the Constitution to Create a Civil Right that isn't a God given Moral; Right first!

NOTE: This is the fifth column in a series of columns related to National Marriage Week, Feb. 7-14, 2013. The fourth column is available here.

Many of us will recall the song from Sesame Street that begins, “One of these things is not like the other.” The song conveyed to viewers that not everything, or every relationship, is the same; we have different capabilities and purposes.

The government routinely sings this song as it recognizes and seeks to support certain relationships based on their uniqueness, their distinctive purpose, or their benefit to society.

One such relationship that is unlike...