Vote yes on 2

[elgordoboy]

Let me make myself clear I dont condem homosexuality, GOD does. It is not my place to condem anyone. I love all people the same ( or try my best to ) If you are of another faith then that is between you and GOD. Marriage is held sacred by the Lord and when its definition is watered down to reflect sin Then I am forced against my relegion to accept a worldy definition for marriage, which is a GODLY act.


what if there was an amendment on board to change "Buda" to orange, would that be acceptable? Of course not. Or Baptism for washing an elephants behind. I have no problem with the term "civil Union" and reconizing gay rights, no problem at all. But when socitey want to twist a christian term then its time to speak up, because my rights are in jeopardy.

John 3:17 for GOD did not send his SON into the world to be its judge, but to be its savior

Now Jesus defined an act of Marriage as between a Man and Woman can YOU find me Anything to the contrary I bet not

Now though I have not spoke out of hatred, but out of my heart for what is REAL, I have drawn the adversity of many. I have not been hateful or rude to anyone. But to those who wish to mock me or my faith I leave you with this. Jesus is the only one to fulfill every prophesy about his coming. Just to give you an idea of the true meaning of that. The very likelyhood of that happening is like taking the state of Texas and filling it 1 foot tall with quarters and painting 1 red and dropping it in the mix, then calling over a blinded stranger and having him pluck that quarter out. If you want to believe or not believe thats up to you! But do not Mis quote the Bible or use sections of it to promote your own little purpose without knowledge of what it says as an entirity. Other wise the Bible will be used to point that out.

To those who wish to condem me I am not angry for you and I am happy for me I leave you with this.

John 15 :16 If the world hates you, just remember that it hated me first. 19 ) If you belonged to the world then the world would have loved you as its own. But I choose you from this world, and you do not belong to it; that is why the world hates you 20) Remember what I told you: "no slave is greater then its master." If they persecuted me , they will persecute you too;

I will not repost less I am psoed with more qoestions or there is attempt to mislead through the Bible.

My definition of Marriage is MY right and the government can not force me by law to reconize it as anything other then between a man and a woman. CIVIL UNION is thegays right, just as long as they keep there hands off of that which is made sacred between a man and a woman, and no not call it marriage

VOTE YES YES YES on admendment #2

I most definitely baptize after washing an elephants behind or I have the three times that I have washed one, I try not to make it a habit.
As it was originally written in the Bible, I imagine it was a Hebrew word and not "marriage" at all. The etymology of marriage and civil union appear to be very similar..whats the difference?

 

[swampfox]

I most definitely baptize after washing an elephants behind or I have the three times that I have washed one, I try not to make it a habit.
As it was originally written in the Bible, I imagine it was a Hebrew word and not "marriage" at all. The etymology of marriage and civil union appear to be very similar..whats the difference?

Marriage is sacred term to Christians civil unio is not

 

[Jdarg]

I am still wondering why the government should be weighing in on a religious definition of marriage.

 

[swampfox]

I am still wondering why the government should be weighing in on a religious definition of marriage.

Its important to us Christians. Very important

 

[idlewind]

This should have nothing to do with religion. The simple fact is that the traditional definition of marriage should be protected. It is that simple.

 

[John R]

Vote yes on #2, it is the best move to protect our society and its traditions.

This should have nothing to do with religion. The simple fact is that the traditional definition of marriage should be protected. It is that simple.

There are those on this thread feel that it's only about religion.

How will yes protect society and it's traditions? What is at jeopardy?

 

[MattChrist Live]

But do you not see how this amendment will end up hurting the traditional definition of marriage?

 

[elgordoboy]

But do you not see how this amendment will end up hurting the traditional definition of marriage?

I see how it will alter the definition of traditional marriage. Much like Martin Luther altered the definition of traditional worship.

 

[swampfox]

I see how it will alter the definition of traditional marriage. Much like Martin Luther altered the definition of traditional worship.

How did MLK alter the definition of traditional worship? And how does Gay marriage constitute an act of worship?

 

[elgordoboy]

How did MLK alter the definition of traditional worship? And how does Gay marriage constitute an act of worship?

Quoting for posterity. I don't have the heart.