Gay Marriage To Be Overturned, Suit Filed, SCOTUS Will Overturn Obergefell. #MRGA
(youtu.be)
𝕊ℙ𝕀ℝ𝕀𝕋𝕌𝔸𝕃 𝕎𝔸ℝ𝔽𝔸ℝ𝔼
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (108)
sorted by:
Honestly, I don’t have any problem with gay people. To each his or her own. As far as marriage goes it’s between a man and a woman. I’m fine with them having some kind of contract that allows them to receive the same benefits as a true marriage. Just keep your gay shit away from me and I’m good. Don’t flaunt it in my face and expect me to agree.
Agree but you missed one of the most important points....
Marriage is originally a religious institution. The government didn't invent it. They didn't define it. Therefore they don't get to redefine it.
I 100% agree with you about the contracts. If people want to make partnership contracts then that is within the government's authority to issue and enforce.
That being said I don't believe that employers should be forced to recognize those contracts in the workplace if that violates their religious beliefs. For example if your job includes health benefits for you and your spouse, I don't believe that a Christian employer should be forced to pay for those benefits for a gay marriage. Don't like that? Don't work there. Companies that want to attract fagots in the workplace can offer those benefits and companies that don't, won't. This will also help prevent conservative institutions from sliding left rapidly.
Thank You I agree 100%
If marriage is a religious institution then divorce should be illegal expect for adultery.
Divorce is an extremely huge deal in the New Testament. Like people underestimate how serious Jesus took divorce.
Marriage is a church institution? Sorry I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you on the broader question of whether the state should be involved in it or not but what do you even mean when you say that it’s a church institution? Do you mean “church” invented it? Do you mean it’s something churches support and involve themselves in or what? What exactly does that mean and how do you suppose that impacts whether the state can or should be involved and how? Should the government simply not issue marriage licenses at all? Or do you think that if they do they should only issue them to straight couples or what?
When I say marriage is a church institution, I don’t mean that Peter was sitting in Rome in 50 AD drafting up wedding paperwork, or that some medieval bishop invented the idea one rainy afternoon after losing at chess. I mean that marriage is a creational ordinance from God, given before there even was a civil magistrate, and entrusted to the stewardship of God’s people. In other words, the “church” didn’t invent it, but the Author of Scripture did, and His people have always been the primary guardians of it. The state didn’t create it any more than the state created gravity, and therefore the state doesn’t get to redefine it without looking like a toddler trying to “redefine” bedtime.
So how does that impact state involvement? Well, biblically speaking, the magistrate’s role is to recognize and protect what God has established, not to pretend it can legislate reality into existence. If the state wants to require marriage records for property and inheritance purposes, fine—but that’s an administrative function, not a theological one. What the state must not do is try to make a counterfeit covenant and then stamp its seal on it like that somehow makes it genuine. That’s like a DMV deciding your bicycle is a semi-truck because they issued it a license plate.
Should governments stop issuing marriage licenses altogether? Ideally, yes—because the state should not be in the business of “authorizing” what God has already commanded and defined. They should recognize lawful marriages (male and female, covenantal, permanent) as they recognize any other pre-political reality. But if they are going to issue licenses, they have no more right to issue them for two men than they do to issue “pilot’s licenses” to penguins.
In short: marriage belongs to God, is stewarded by the church, and should be respected by the state. The state is a witness to the covenant, not the author of it. And when the witness tries to forge the document, it’s time to take the pen away.
“I mean that marriage is a creational ordinance from God, given before there even was a civil magistrate, and entrusted to the stewardship of God’s people. In other words, the “church” didn’t invent it, but the Author of Scripture did, and His people have always been the primary guardians of it.”
So the Bible should be used to define it based on…what exactly? It’s a religious claim you’re making, but it’s a real-word practice engaged in by many other cultures that predate the Bible. So how exactly do you expect such an argument to hold weight wity the Supreme Court if in fact they agree to hear this case? So the Bible says stuff about the God it touts ordaining marriage, how would such an argument hold up in a court of law? Again, I’m not saying it shouldn’t, and I genuinely appreciated and enjoyed your answer, I’m not sure I disagree with it, but I’m not sure I feel comfortable with it yet either. How do you think the most conservative justices on SCOTUS will view that argument and why?
I believe they were saying it is a religious thing and not a government thing. AKA government marriage is only to screw over men with the guise of no fault divorce and alimony and child support etc. If these things were fair to men then they would work. As they are now is one of the top reasons marriage rates are abysmal and divorce is SO high. Modern feminism ideas have gutted it as well.
It was originally a religious institution, but it's been more than 2,000 years of government involvement.
I honestly don't even care if the government calls the certificate it hands out "marriage" as long as it's not forced on the church to recognize that.
That being said, I disagree about health insurance. Health insurance is secular as is the dollar bill, which was directly dealt with by Jesus....in coin form, at least. If ceaser says we pay for health insurance tax, we pay for it l.
I will say that this argument has always felt like people wrapping their greed in the scripture, to me. But I admit, growing up I had a lot of jackasses around me that would use the same argument for denying charity. 'God wants them to be poor/homeless and suffer so I'm not giving them money' sounds a lot like 'God doesn't support gays so Im not going to give them money [for healthcare]' to me.
I don't believe that people should be forced to hire anyone they don't want to work with, however - but that's been gone since the 60s.
😂
Are you serious? Bro please tell me that was a typo and you're not that ignorant.
And what ignorance do you suggest I possess?
First you were supposed to accept it, then you were supposed to agree with it, then you were supposed to encourage it, then you were supposed to celebrate it. If you don’t do all of that, there’s obviously something wrong with you.
Thats kind of a cop out, isnt it?
But you should have a problem because God had a problem with Sodom and Gomorrah.
God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve
When my daughter was around middle school age we both headed to Costco near us.
We headed back toward the food section and out came a queer worker. Flailing his arms like he was drowning and letting everyone know what he was about.
It visibly upset my daughter.
The next day I got ahold of the SouthWest regional manager for Costco.
He did the usual spin that we cant discriminate yada yada.
But I said oh but you must be descriminate of the people you interview and hire.
You dont want proselytizers in your stores.
Shoppers want to see hard working, helpful workers and aside from that they dont want to see a "scene" they would not like.
Get your managers under control.
Next time I was in the store a couple weeks later, he was gone. Never seen him again.
I remember Obama saying he (I think the term he used) evolved into thinking, or re-thinking gay marriage and decided it was fine. I guess so, if Michelle is actually Mike.
I didn't care about gays and what they do once upon a time, that is until their sexual deviancy turned towards the children. Now I'm at a point to were it needs to go away and freaks need to go back into hiding.
The hiding freaks are the ones that made it public and blew it up into what it is now. We need a society where people aren't grown into freaks.