14 Comments

• loreric says:

  February 27, 2009 at 20:52

  How? A stable relationship of two contributing to society, boy, is that subversive..The idea that the bible is against homosexuality really comes out of,what, two injunctions. There are more injunctions against adultery. This refers to only the old testament. There is no condemnation of this in Christ’s teaching.
  The old testament puts more emphasis on diet, for instance no shrimp,lobster, oysters,clams,rabbit,coney and of course pork.
  Anyone who consults a seer or an astrologer, well, your not going to heaven. Anyone practicing any sort of divination is to be stoned to death.
  If your son is rebellious and a substance abuser the bible says stone him with your neighbours at the gate of your town. Some of you will have to build a gate.Or a few.
  Women have to be virgins when they marry.
  You can’t make or wear clothing made of two kinds of materiel’s.
  No tattoos.
  The list goes on and the injunction against *** love is one line and the act is only detestable. By the way there is nothing said of lesbianism.
• ksmoot says:

  February 26, 2009 at 00:39

  I agree with Georgia Geezer
• Melissa D says:

  February 24, 2009 at 17:06

  none… there is in my opnion no reason why society should look down on it.. the only people that seem to are religous in my opnion
• anarcho says:

  February 23, 2009 at 21:38

  They aren’t a threat to society. The fundamentalist christian right only says that so they can impose their beliefs upon everyone.
• gwhillikers2000 says:

  February 23, 2009 at 13:20

  No threat. I am in favor of leaving “marriage” to the religions that believe in it. The state should only provide for legal partnerships, based on a contract, which would eliminate all the expensive lawyers who make millions from divorce cases. Any two persons should be able to enter into a contract–even two brothers, or two sisters, etc., who want to share a life (and death). Then I would also require a license before anyone could have a child. If you need a license to drive a car, surely you need one to care for a child!
• darren m says:

  February 20, 2009 at 03:07

  Agrre the true threat to society would either be privatization of warfare or Human Supremacist Attitudes resulting in Human Accelerated Global Warming. Suicidal greed damaged Ecosystem , humans as center of life involved. Were talk more of combining three religions Judaism,Christianity, Islam into something which has elements of each another issue of more import could be addressed. Questions on why a person need be convinced to be a Christian when to be the other is as valid. Questions why people complain about being wronged by either but do nothing to bring eachother closer instead stay apart worshipping in seprate buildings.Taking of Anti-this and Anti that. Does no one see the irony here.
• canada4ever444 says:

  February 19, 2009 at 02:27

  it is only considered that in backwards countires that are under repressive religious governments. In rational countries, its legal.
• tompin says:

  February 16, 2009 at 09:25

  I don’t see how they can be a threat to society.
  Gays and ******** usually mind their own business and don’t want to live in the homophobic suburbs anyway. And isn’t it ironic that the people who talk about “government not interfering in your life” often vote for the candidates who speak most strongly against *** civil unions/marriage?
  No one wants to require all churches to perform or recognize *** marriages, but people should have the right to legally declare whoever they want as their partner/next of kin/spouse. It’s not “the church lady’s” business, so stop your coveting.
• one louder says:

  February 13, 2009 at 10:44

  none that I know of. opponents of *** marraige argue that marriage is between a man and a woman. that is how it is defined in the dictionary. but who says that the word can’t be redefined? it’s just a word and meanings of other words have changed with time and progress as well. I think *** marriage and it’s eventual (and it WILL happen) acceptance into mainstream society can only serve to increase tolerance and open mindedness in tomorrows generation.
• socrates says:

  February 11, 2009 at 05:05

  Personally, I think we should offer cash incentives to gays and ******** who want to marry. We might provide some relief to our hideously overpopulated world, and being married will keep them from having *** (ba da boom).
• lordkelvin says:

  February 9, 2009 at 18:01

  Changes the definition of marrage… which is for the children’s sake.. not to ratify someone’s lifestyle choice
• playboi1988 says:

  February 8, 2009 at 14:58

  well two dudes is just wrong two girls is ok not sure about the civil unions
• borca says:

  February 7, 2009 at 18:51

  The only objects you can make are religous objections.
• YeeHaw says:

  February 4, 2009 at 06:57

  I didn’t know they were.

Trackbacks