Glenn’s take on gay marriage

Rick Santorum is under fire for his views on gay marriage. He’s being labeled a “bigot” by the left for having a different opinion and different moral certitudes.

Watch Santorum’s comments below:

Glenn took a moment this morning to point out what exactly the word “bigot” means. “The definition of “bigot” is somebody that won’t listen to anybody else’s side because of their point of view, just won’t even listen to it.” The media, along with those who don’t want to see Rick Santorum as President of The Unite States don’t seem to care why Rick Santorum has the stance he does on marriage. Instead, they just want to stamp the big public label of “bigot” on his forehead.

Glenn then turned his attention to Santorum’s comments.

While emphasizing that he is not opposed at all to Civil Unions (one of the few opinions he shares with President Obama – or so Obama says), Glenn gave a great analysis on why you can’t just change the definition of marriage, and most importantly who defined what marriage is (Big hint: it’s not the government), using the example of a simple math equation.

The equation is: 1 Male + 1 Woman = Marriage

Glenn, summarizing Rick Santorum’s remarks, explained that gay marriage changes the equation to:

1 Male + 1 Male = Marriage

OR

1 Woman + 1 Woman = Marriage

Glenn explained that if we make the argument that we can change one variable (gender) then you can also change the other variable (number of people).

Pat said, “They want to change just one part of the equation. Well, you can’t do that.”

But does the left call for polygamy? Of course not. Even in the video with Santorum above, the left tries to dodge his arguments.

“It’s like if you’re on the left and you want to argue for gay marriage, whatever. That’s fine. But have the balls to also argue for this,” Stu critiqued. “You should have the balls to say it’s another moral choice between consenting adults.”

Essentially, if the argument for gay marriage is equal rights for consenting adults – are they going to stand up and fight for the rights of three thirty year old women to marry a sixty-five year old guy? If that’s their argument, they would have to …that is, of course, unless they’re a “bigot.”

But what’s the solution? And does this mean that Glenn is anti-gay?

“I’m for civil marriage. All the rights, civil marriage, that’s fine,” he told listeners. “My solution is take government out of marriage entirely. What is government doing in marriage?”

Glenn, Pat and Stu all said that marriage should not be tied up in tax laws and other government legislation and loopholes.

“You didn’t get married for tax deductions,” Glenn said.

“I’ve held it together for 30 years just so I can hang onto those deductions,” Pat joked.

Glenn further explained that, whether the left likes it or not, the Constitution was based on Judeo-Christian values.

“Our laws are based in Judeo‑Christian values and laws. That’s the way it’s set up. Now, you don’t like that; that’s fine. Then change the Constitution. Because you cannot pick and choose,” he said.

Watch the video at the top of the page for more on these concepts.

  • landofaahs

    Saying that “marriage is between a man and a woman” says nothing about whether or not one or both is straight or gay.  Could you imagine if a father married his son in order to dodge the inheritance tax.  What would the liberals do then?  LOL

  • Anonymous

    If anything this is just further reason why we need to get government out of the equation period. If there are a group of three guys, (To use one of the examples from the video clip) that want to have a…thing. That’s really no one else’s business, least of all the Government. Remove all financial incentives to get married, and remove the requirement to get the Government’s permission to have that kind of commitment to your significant other, or others. If the people involved are the age of consent, and there is something willing to perform the ceremony, then bully for them to utilize their natural freedoms to associate with whom they choose. I may not think some of these things are ‘ok’, but I’m not going to tell someone how they should live their life so long as it’s not infringing on someone else’s life, liberty, or property. 

  • Anonymous

    Gay marriage is nothing but legalized perversion.

  • http://www.facebook.com/joshuasteimle Joshua Steimle

    Sounds like Glenn has the same position on marriage that Ron Paul does, get government out of it. If government is allowed to define marriage, then it will increase the amount of fighting going on to make sure each side has their people in office so that they can “control” what marriage is, because whoever is in power will be forcing the other side to do things their way. Get government out, let individuals and churches define marriage as they have for most of history, and we’ll all be better off.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000164494569 Adriane Peterson

    Government absolutely has a role in supporting traditional marriage as the foundation of healthy societies. While some marriages don’t produce offspring, most do, and children deserve a mother and a father in a secure and committed relationship. Strong marriages provide the best environment for children’s healthy development. Same sex-couples are free to choose to live in same-sex relationships, but they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for society. They shouldn’t be harassed, but left to live their lives as they choose. They also shouldn’t be on equal footing to adopt children like a married man and woman, which same-sex marriage would cause. I don’t believe adults wants or desires should come before the best interests of children. With marriage failing in so many cases today, we clearly see the havoc that has resulted in our society. We shouldn’t redefine marriage, we should be more committed to making marriages strong. But that takes selflessness, something in short supply these days it appears.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GFCSH3R6UHLSG5IOY57LXWFS7Q Kris

    The answer to all of this is simple.  Marriage should be between one man and one woman.  Since our tax dollars are already going to pay for sex change operations for people on Welfare, then let one of the partners in a gay or lesbian relationship get that sex change operation and then their marriage will between one man and one woman.  Case closed.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000164494569 Adriane Peterson

    They can have a “thing” just don’t elevate it to the status of marriage. That degrades marriage and its importance in raising the next generation of responsible adults in civilized societies. It does infringe on someone else’s life…children who are intrusted to adults for their welfare.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Victor-Tiffany/100001320367593 Victor Tiffany

    Four Key Questions for extremist Santorum

    With Mitt Romney high atop the polls in New Hampshire, some are looking to South Carolina as the early-primary state that truly matters. Here are four questions Rick Santorum must answer before voting there begins later this month:

    —How do you square the carefully cultivated, bootstrap-populist image with the well-paid consulting for industry groups and lobbying firms after leaving Congress?

    —Do the intemperate racial remarks draw a major walk-back or simply a shrug?

    —The recent cash influx is nice, but can it fend off a pro-Romney onslaught in South Carolina, where negativity plays better than in New Hampshire?

    —Once the attacks start to take hold, do you respond in fierce Santorum fashion or embrace the gentler angels that betrayed Newt Gingrich?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FJSLMAKK3GKTZ6L6XF4DQPW6PY PaulH

    So is your point of view, but I wouldn’t outlaw it.

  • Ryan Roland

    “Same sex-couples are free to choose to live in same-sex relationships, but they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for society”

    Most I’ve talked to don’t want to redefine marriage. They want the same recognition of rights. Govt calls it marriage, so they either want govt to say those same shared rights can apply to other people, or they want their unions to be called marriage. 

    I agree with Glenn, get govt out of it.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t believe in “telling others how to live their lives” either. Thankfully, we don’t have to do that. That’s the Lord’s job. I don’t believe in “civil marriage” either. It’s still giving the stamp of approval on something that is unnatural, no matter how much we might try to redefine it, rename it, and do all sorts of mental and verbal gymnastics in an effort to try to convince ourselves that there’s nothing wrong about it or that it won’t end up harming our culture or future survival as even a civilized country, much less a country founded on Judeo-Christian mores. And do you seriously think that “gay’s will be satisfied with that first step? if you think that, then you might want to read, “The Stoning of Sally Kern” and find out what their real goals and tactics are.

  • http://twitter.com/apexadam Adam Hrebeniuk

    Like the others.  Marriage is not an institution of government.  It is a religious one.  The government neither legitimizes nor institutes marriage.  Therefore, get out of the marriage business and let the religious and irr-religious institutions deal with religious matters.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ktashrobb Tash Robb

    I believe in the separation of church and state and the constitution.  There is NO Constitutional right to marriage, PERIOD, no exceptions.  I think that Marriage is a religious state and should not be a State conferred status.  I think that civil partnerships for everybody who meets WHATEVER criteria the states set should be totally divorced (pun intended) from marriage as a religious institution.If we were to follow this model there would be no problem if, say my Rabbi, refused to do interfaith marriages or if a Metropolitan Community Church minister refuses to do an other sex marriages.  No harm, no foul.  I also feel that the argument of sexual reproduction is false because current marriages are not annulled for refusal or inability to reproduce. (And there are options to a marriage coupling in reproduction ie: adoption, single parenting, third party reproduction and the like.  As to the tax code:  this should be gender, civil and reproductive status neutral.  A family with 3 persons should be able to claim 3, a family of 2, 2 and the same with no prejudice for or against marriage and/or children.  I am concerned about children.  I feel that people who are biological or intentional parents regardless of civil status, should take on a responsibility to provide for their progeny.  There is a terrible track record on this issue regardless of the parent’s marital status. (I am a Nurse Midwife and this is a BIG issue for me).I am sure this is out of phase with majority culture (both Gay and Heterosexual) but it steps us out of the who gets “better” privileges/obligations  and levels the playing field for all children.  Like the Mormons who had their their marital relationships nullified when Utah entered the Union, we should effectively tolerate marriages that have occurred under the old system but insist that new recognitions conform to the new standard of a civil union +/- a religious marriage.Feel free to argue, it is your G-d given right and the goverment has not taken it from you, yet.

  • Ryan Roland

    “Our laws are based in Judeo‑Christian values and laws. That’s the way it’s set up. Now, you don’t like that; that’s fine. Then change the Constitution.”

    But I don’t believe that the Constitution has anything about marriage in it – let alone defining it. Most I’ve talked to don’t want to redefine marriage. They want the same recognition of rights. Govt calls it marriage, so they either want govt to say those same shared rights can apply to other unions, or they want their unions to be called marriage. 

    I agree with Glenn, get govt out of it.

  • http://twitter.com/apexadam Adam Hrebeniuk

    Marriage is not and should never be a government institution.  Stop begging for government over sight in matters of religion.  It is tantamount to the government forming a religion.

  • Anonymous

    So-called “gay marriage” is impossible, a Lie — it doesn’t happen, no matter what man-made “right” or law dictates.  Another instance of a group trying to hijack a term and use it for their agenda and claim “equality” and “rights”.

    People have the Free Will choice to do whatever they desire but the people want more, they want the permission of government, society and individuals.  If the government is supposed to “stay out of it”, then stop asking the government for permission.

  • Paul Ille

    Sounds like exactly what Ron Paul advocates…and only Ron Paul.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XJIHVCCI4OKWM2S3P4MMAUEX2U John

    Polygamy? Oh please, Glen….don’t give the left any ideas…. haha 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZN2U5RGZZSZSXP7WTTFDL2SAHY Chelistina

    Government should not be involved in marriage.  All gays should have the right to marry and recieve the same rights that straight married people have.  If couples want a marriage by the their church, or religion then that should be separate.  But to deny two people the ability to spend their life together shouldn’t be decided by gender.  Two consenting adults should be able to marry. Yes, the constitution was based on Judeo-Christian values, but slavery was also permitted and we changed that.  Unfortunately gays cannot change their life since it is what they were born as.  But as a free society, we have the ability to change the laws to help them live their lives in the pursuit of happiness and not to make them second class citizens.   To deny them because we don’t like what they do is to deny them their freedom.  The word marriage has been changed in the dictionary to include a relationship with the same gender.  To some it may be a perversion, but to some it is also a perversion to be married and have affairs with many partners.  Like John Lennon said “Let It be”

  • Anonymous

    Wonder if you or the liberal media will be asking President Obama any of these thought provoking questions??  They all have ‘colorful’ pasts, but no one wants to potentially upset the Whitehouse with a look at his past.  Why??? 

  • crispus attucks

    I am amazed at how many people are so in favor of gay marriage yet oppose smoking/smokers.  Both are life style choices (medical/psychological facts) that have severe medical risks and costs!  We (government and society) do everything in our power to dissuade everyone form the EVILS of smoking!  Government tells us by raising taxes on cigarettes that they see it as destructive whether or not you agree. If you look at the gay lifestyle (whether you are speaking about gay men or women) the lifestyle breeds more significant risks in: drug abuse, STD’s, AIDS, alcohol abuse, depression, suicide, and more than 50 sex partners in a lifetime (all facts found in CDC findings).  This does not include medical (psychiatric findings) on the harm caused by raising children in a same gender household (this includes single parent, abusive parent, or non engaged parent where only 1 parent is involved in rearing a child) on the child’s psychological welfare as the child grows into maturity. As a teacher educated in childhood psychology, it is known that at certain stages ALL children NEED and attach to the Father and at other important times the child needs to attach to the Mother…without these important bonds being made children are generally found to have developmental delays and shortcomings both in emotional and psychological formations of their own. Comments by Sen Santorum are also well taken as many who want to see the gay lifestyle become accepted in society through marriage rights laws will be waiting in the wings to challenge for their specific sexual psychosis such as bestiality (a man wanted to marry his horse because he loved it) or those gay males who are interested in little boys (NAMBLA – out in the open about sexual intimacy with children).  Where do we draw the line? If you begin to make exceptions and create Precedents int he courts you will NOT be able to stop the onslaught jsut like the killing of our own citizens on our own soil to the tune of 50 million Americans DEAD (for those of you that are slow…ABORTION!)

  • Anonymous

    These stupid kids really don’t have a clue!  I am so glad I would be around when they have to face the repercussions of their misguided view points.  These are the same people who voted for Obama-and that says it all. Sorta sad, but they can’t see the forrest for the trees.  And for all of you morons who think any two people can be together I have two words-Greece and Rome.  Ours laws were set for a specific reason. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bruce-Pergament/1159792468 Bruce Pergament

    where in the Judeo-Christian Bible is polygamy banned? I’m not for it, but is that a valid argument?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Adrianne-Georgia/1274643336 Adrianne Georgia

    People always freak out about giving “equal rights” to gays, but we already HAVE equal rights for gays.  Each person has the right to get married to someone of the opposite sex, gays included.  Allowing gays the ability to marry someone of the same sex would be giving gays a special privilege, when we’re all meant to be equal under the law.

  • http://www.facebook.com/domaku Daniel Craig Anthony

    Why not just give them the rights provided by marriage but call it something different? I figure that they want rights and the other side wants Marriage to stay between a man and a woman. Problem solved if that’s the case right?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZN2U5RGZZSZSXP7WTTFDL2SAHY Chelistina

    Many straight marriages end up in divorce.  Many straight parents abuse their children.  Many single women raise their children without a father.  And many single men raise children without a mother.   Where is it written that two people must be of opposite sex to raise a child?  There are many gay parents that have raised children in a loving home. Marriage is the commitment of two people to spend their lives together, whether they are gay or straight it is the same definiton.

  • http://www.healthinsuredirect.com cheap health insurance

    the whole thing is just weird to me and goes against simple biology.   What rights are they missing out on by not being able to marry? 

    losing $ in divorce.. and paying higher taxes..

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Argelia-Arocho/1279476135 Argelia Arocho

    No gay marriage that is agaist God law,  that is sick people who have a pervert mind

  • Anonymous

    I’m sorry, Glenn.  But that’s just stupid.  Of COURSE the state has an interest in the legal definition of marriage.  It has nothing to do with taxes necessarily, and everything to do with the stability of real families and what that brings to a society. Gay activists always tout the civil rights of adults, but when you bring children into the equation, their argument ALWAYS falls apart.  Children have a right to be raised by their real moms and dads, to have that connection, and to have the closeness of both a mother and a father to teach them, in those formative years, what the opposite sex is like and how they are different.  Mothers and fathers are different, and they invariably approach parenting differently.  We won’t even talk about the lack of monogamy among gay so-called couples.  Yeah, I get it that our current view and attitudes towards marriage need a make-over, but destroying them and the laws and policies that support them isn’t the answer.  The answer is creating a more moral nation; a nation that deeply values families and children; a nation that our founders and the framers of the Constitution would actually recognize.  Frankly, I think they would – with a few notable exceptions – be appalled with your idea of getting government out of the marriage busineses, especially in this current climate of social and moral decay.

    Besides that, I know you’re not stupid. But how can you even possibly think that the push for gay “marriage” is anything but a push for the complete acceptance of the gay lifestyle. At its heart, it is also completely anti-religious, because they blame religion on people’s lack of acceptance of their behavior.

    You need to rethink your thoughts on this one, Glenn.  

  • Anonymous

    My argument has always been that you can’t just arbitrarily change definitions.  It’s like declaring that from now on all cats will be considered to be dogs.  You can say it, but it doesn’t make it true.

  • Anonymous

    I guess it depends on whether you believe The Bible or not…in 1Cor. 6:9 it is a perversion and that is why Sodom and Gomorra were destroyed by God…it actually uses the word Homosexual in the verse… My feeling is that I love the person by do not condone the behavior… I do NOT think we should have gay marriages….

  • Anonymous

    Legally polygamy would be a mess, you’d have to limit tax exemptions to just one. Gay marriage doesn’t have those legal complications. It’s odd that sleeping around and having affairs is not illegal but polygamy is. There’d have to be some sort of limit because you can’t have a man married to 11 women each of whom is married to 8 men. So if it were made legal or decriminalized you have to limit the federal stuff that comes with marriage in some sort of practical and reasonable way.

    Anyway, as a gay marriage supporter myself, I’d be fine with the  civil unions for all, gay or straight, option that Glenn notes.

  • Anonymous

    No it wouldn’t give special privileges because everyone would get the ability to marry someone of the same sex. You’d just choose not to use that option much like gay people would choose not to use the ability to marry someone of the opposite sex.

  • http://twitter.com/cajunmaverick Cajun Maverick

    If marriage is a religious institution, then why are so many atheists getting married?

  • Anonymous

    The story of Sodom involves the one supposedly good man in the city offering his daughters to rapists (it’s not even like it was about consentual homosexual relationships). That’s not exactly a story I consider to be useful for morals since Lot is a scumbag in my opinion.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_X2NAPSXIXUJPOPPGU6CXVFQFLA Snorri Sturluson

    As long as gay marriage or plural marriage does neither physical nor mental harm to the participants, I just don’t care. As long as the participants pay for their children and not the taxpayers, I just don’t care. Marriage in the U.S. is defined by law. If some man or woman wants more that one spouce or partner, I just don’t care as long as I and society don’t have to pay for the consequences of such unions.  For those of us who consider traditional marriage as the only option, be sure to vote.

  • Anonymous

    In Utah a single homosexual (or any single person) can adopt a child but a gay couple cannot. It doesn’t even make sense if the argument is children needing both genders of parents.

  • Anonymous

    My former apartment-mate being gay doesn’t harm me in any way. Second hand smoke would.

  • Anonymous

    Marriage is much more than “a commitment” and “love”.  The definition of “gay marriage” was that the man and woman were married and happy.  Doesn’t mean that anymore to people whose definitions have become nebulous.

    The government does not stop people from having “commitments”, “love”, “living together”.  Apparently, that’s not enough — certain individuals keep asking for a redefinition of the word “marriage”.

  • Anonymous

    Kind of ironic though since polygamy was for the most part instituted in this nation by the founder of Glenn’s church.

  • http://twitter.com/aaronsapp Aaron Sapp

    While I agree that we need stronger marriages, I don’t think keeping the government involved necessarily helps that. Just look at the divorce rate. It would be just as easy to split up if there were no government involvement as it is to get divorced.

    I would argue that it may even be better because people wouldn’t get married for the sake of getting married.

  • Anonymous

    Evil always does harm to everyone, everywhere.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jaron-Berry/100000698012391 Jaron Berry

    Oh please.  The Government should have a role in Marriages, since a Marriage gives many legal rights to both partners, such as important medical procedures needed when a partner is unconscious and tax benefits. So you see why the Government is not going to get out of Marriage.  When something effects society and people for long periods of time the Government should have a say in it.  From a lot of comments I see people think that legalizing Gay Marriage is some sort of perversion, because last I checked you don’t need a marriage license to have sex and while I’m on this, you think Gays are a perversion?  Have you even seen REAL perversion that people do?  You do realize that people have sex for pleasure and in many other ways than just the missionary position for the sole purpose for reproduction right?  At least they’re human.  You people that think being gay is a lifestyle are absolutely clueless, Homosexuality has been observed in just about every mammal.  Its not a lifestyle its genetic and has an important Evolutionary function.  Many scientific papers have concluded almost a decade ago that children raised in same sex relationships are perfectly fine.  When you get down to it, its not that your trying to protect society your just trying to appease your God by trying to come up with as many “reasons” as you can to justify your ancient Bronze Age method of thinking.  If you can’t get with the 21st century then please stand aside and those who can pass, stop hindering society out of your fear.

  • Anonymous

    I see where several are for removing government from the definition of marriage.  This may be ok on one level when considering tax breaks, but what about visitation rights, inheritance, insurance, etc.  It seems there would need to be two levels, civil unions which the state defines and recognizes and marriages which the church defines and recognizes.

    But then what is the purpose of recognizing marriage?  Many would argue for the sability of society for the role of procreation and raising children.  As a society we are missing this!  TOO many kids without a mother and father in a committed relationship!  TOO many children born to unwed mothers.  So what would the benefit of a marriage over a civil union, other than a ceremony and an oath before God? So if states define civil unions without concern for moral standards that churches should promote for marriage, what impact would that have on our society?

    IF churches are to be the bearers of marriage they need to step up to the plate more.  ONE churches need to do a better job of pre-marital counseling and counseling distressed marriages.  TWO churches need to encourage purity before marriage but still stand by those who fail.  THREE churches need to help train/guide/advise/mentor parents, especially fathers.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_J6KBA53QJHFKLPO3WABVWOJ6SU PatriciaB

    Government & Marriage should be separate just as Church & State are separate!! What business does Government have in the institution of marriage which is an institution or faction that stems from religion so separate them and let people get married!!!

  • Anonymous

    I some cases here it appears that posters want the gays to marry straights.  Ask around, see if that was good.  Memory serves me that social diseases have been around oh, for centuries, killing kings.  You want that?  While founding on Judeo Christian values, we have taken a few steps forward..even since the founding of our country..so please, don’t raise that issue either. I am lost, as a republican, we can’t abort them, we can’t allow them to marry, we can’t allow them to serve,..what, do we just keep them around for additional planks in our platform?  Marriage, by definition in law is Civil and is in the Civil Rights.  Remove that…I wish everything were “white picket fences” and mommy and daddy and baby..but GET REAL.  That is not happening.

  • Anonymous

    On the face of it I tended to agree that government should stay out of this issue, but then another question comes to mind.  Will the government recognize gay marriages/civil unions for tax purposes?  This question would seem to force some stance on gay marriange by the federal government.  How do you get around that?

  • Anonymous

    Because the atheistic man and woman have the capacity to give the sacrament to each other — even if they don’t recognize the sacrament.  However, they can only give it to each other if the marriage is valid, otherwise it’s cohabitation.  And validity is another subject.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RFMUSD3XWPSTLVQO7JOEDDRXU4 Mary

    I’d like to say this is an easy issue but it just isn’t.  My son is gay, he has been in a civil union for 2 years.  They consider themselves married and I consider the other person my son-in-law.  I can’t frankly think of how else to treat him.  Being an evangelical christian this is very difficult for me.  My husband and I do not have the same thinking on this and he does not accept our son.  Trust me, I took him to church regularly and he tried dating girls in high school.  He was never molested and I did take him to a psychiatrist (a christian based doctor).  This issue can seem very easy to people who are not directly affected by it.  I pray about this and my son is a spiritual person that has found a church that accepts him.  For that I’m greatful.  So as a parent of a gay person, I have to feel that the government should stay out of this issue.    

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jaron-Berry/100000698012391 Jaron Berry

    Aaron, its not because of the Divorce Rate why the Government should be there, its because of all the legal functions that come with it.  Someone has to enforce those functions across the country and give legal recognition of it internationally, the only thing that has power across the country is the Federal Government which also has legal power internationally.  That is why the Government is needed in Marriage.

  • Anonymous

    I feel sorry for all the folks (even Glenn), that believe other’s actions do not affect themselves. America will incur God’s wrath someday for embracing sodomy and we will all pay.

  • Anonymous

    What is gay marriage and who made up the whole crazy mess. First of all being gay has nothing to do with a gender. It’s homosexuality and nothing more. It’s called an abominable sin when a man lays with another man or a woman with a woman. Get that through your thick skulls all of you homosexuals. It’s total perversion in it’s total form. You defy nature itself and expect to have the same rights as a man and a woman. That is totally disgusting. it makes me want to puke. God loves you but he does not condone your actions and sins. Sorry, you can’t have it both ways. God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Everrett or Susie and Bridgette.
    No, marriage was consumated by God himself and that is just the way it is.

  • Anonymous

    Consider a possible future American family:
      Bob is married to Carol, and Ted is married to Alice.
      Bob, however, is also married to Ted, while Alice is also married to Tom, Dick and Mary, but not to Bob.
      Carol, who is married to Bob but not to Ted, is also married to Larry, Moe, and a “multi-gendered” person called “Jacko.”
      Alice’s second husband Dick, meanwhile, is also married to Ellen and Rosie, who are also married to each other, but not to Alice, Tom, Mary, or Ted.
      Billy-Joe is the biological son of Bob and Carol, but his surrogate mother was Ellen, whom Carol paid to carry Billy-Joe to term, so Carol could concentrate on her research career in “alternative genetics.”
      Bobbi-Sue is the biological daughter of Ellen and an unidentified male sperm donor, but her adoptive “father” is now Rosie.
      Bert and Ernie are the biological twin sons of Rosie, but have no father at all, because Rosie chose to be impregnated with a cloned embryo of herself, which split into twins during Rosie’s pregnancy.
      Ernie, however, is currently in the temporary legal custody of Bob, who is also Ernie’s attorney, as Ernie is suing Rosie for parent-child divorce, on the grounds that she violated his Constitutional rights when Rosie, a Vegan, refused to let Ernie exercise his freedom of religion by biting the heads off chickens, as required by the teachings of the Voodoo cult he joined last year during a middle school field trip to Mardi Gras.
      If all this seems absurd to you, then you probably don’t watch much Reality Television. In any case, it seems likely that in the future, the word “family” may mean something very different from what it has meant until now.
      If it means anything at all.

  • Anonymous

    Guess you haven’t been listening to Glenn very long.  There is NOTHING – absolutely NOTHING in the Constitution that defines a separation of church and state.  The establishment clause talks about the ESTABLISHMENT of a state religion, which they DID intentionally prohibit, but that doesn’t mean we can’t have the 10 Commandments on a wall in Federal Courtroom, that the Justices of the Supreme Court have to stop saying an opening prayer on the first Monday in October, or that Congress should remove its chaplain.  This is a bogus argument made up by the ACLU and organizations like the Freedom from Religion Foundation to try to end religious liberty in this country, even those guaranteed by the first amendment.

  • Anonymous

    There seems to be a lot of confusion about what is and isn’t already in effect.  My understanding is that it differs from place to place.  I am all for most rights, ie; inheritance, medical, lifestyle, with in  a Civil Union , but still not ok with MARRIAGE part of it being up for debate. All societies must be governed. You can not take it out of marriage completely, but surely something could be done to issue MOST of those same rights without  dismantling What God had established as Marriage.  I can’t see in this that I would agree with Glenn, unless I misunderstand his meaning.   

  • Anonymous

    Well said—you put it out there just like it is!!!!……the right candidate will do this too, and “not bow” to “praise of man”  or big offers of money  bc he has “deep-felt convictions!!!   What’s right is right and what’s wrong is wrong–period!!!!

  • Anonymous

     What about Greece and Rome? Rome fell because it got too big and hard to govern, it had wars in every direction and such a large percentage of the population were slaves that when one area would be liberated the slaves would just fuel enemy armies if they hadn’t already revolted beforehand. Gay sex had nothing to do with it. Besides, in case you haven’t noticed, all the civilizations from that time period that were straight fell too.

  • Anonymous

    This is a simple arument of mathematics, mechanics and law…mechanically a man and woman produce off spring…children…a man and a man cannot nor do a woman and a woman…not without a third party…another man or woman. Mechanically it is known as vaginal intercourse…a homosexual couple cannot have this no matter how much you change the laws, beliefs, positions or people, it is physically impossible.  1+1=2    1+1+1=3   1+1+1+1+1=5  Simple

  • Anonymous

    Religious liberty does not exist if one religions’ rules are imposed on others.

  • Anonymous

    I have read of three cases where adopted children of ga y couples requested se xual reassignment. How many more cases of same have we not heard about in the news media?  The children were younger than seventeen years old.  This is not normal.  Children are searching for their normal gender during their developing years, and their vulnerability and environment is crucial. It can be very influencing to them to have ‘parents’ who are of the same se x. They need to be raised by both a Mother and Father to draw their own conclusions. Even Chaz Bono commented about ‘his’ influencing youth. 

  • Huss Family

    Well of course it’s a redefinition. Where do we get the idea that marriage is a “right”? It is not  anymore than having a driver’s license is.  They’re privileges, and in the case of the former, an institution. That’s NOT the same thing as a right. The whole issue is a matter of definition. And misdefinition. And while government cannot elevate a privilege to a right it is also part of government’s job to set some of the bedrock parameters of society – like murder is wrong, for example. The family is the foundation of society, and as such any government that wants to protect society’s future must strengthen and safeguard those fundamental definitions and the family. To allow the definition of marriage and family to become so watered down that they mean little or nothing is societal suicide.

  • http://twitter.com/mrsjja94 Kelly McGee-Allen

    There are three things the government should never get involved in, marriage, the Bible, and abortion. Marriage was ordained by God as one man and one woman, and should be respected and enfored as such. The Bible is God’s Word and should NEVER be tampered with, or used to support your interpretatin of how things should be, and Abortion is about what a woman chooses to do with her own body, and government has no place in that decision. It is a decision between a woman and God and that’s it.

  • Anonymous

    I’m on the fence about gay marriage. It doesn’t really apply to me so I don’t feel strongly either way. That being said, I really would like to see an argument from the right other than that it is morally wrong. I do disagree though with the equation that was used for marriage. I believe that marriage better follows the following equation:

    x+y+love+trust+respect= marriage

    Gay marriage proponents can substitute x+x or y+y if they would like.

    I believe that man + woman, man + man, or woman + woman = friendship

  • Anonymous

    Glenn and Santorum have got it right – marriage is a sacred sacrament between 1 man and 1 woman.  This is still a Judeo-Christian nation with the values that are best for raising a family.  I don’t think Beck or Santorum are opposed to civil unions for gays as long as it isn;t recognized as a marriage.

    There has to be limits in a free society.  Otherwise humans would live like animals. .

  • Anonymous

    I am very clear where I stand on this issue.  I also respect other’s right to stand firm in their beliefs. Then to respectfully discuss and then vote on the subject seems to be the right way to handle this and of course respect the voter ruling. It seems mud slinging often appears to dirty the person it has targeted, but in the end little Johnny does get caught and in big trouble. I liked the Rick Santorum video.  How graciously he handled it. He stood his ground, while allowing those to offer respectful input.  They threw away their opportunity to reason their cause.  I remember the first time he and amny others spoke and couldn’t remember anything more than the guy whos Last name started with an S realy had my attention.  Even though I really would like to… like Romney.  Now I would like to see more of Rick Sandtorum.  He seems like he would make a good father of our nation.

  • http://www.facebook.com/gnelbach Gwendolyn R Nelbach

    Yes! Yes!! Yes!!! I agree.

  • tshow99

    Why can’t gays marry? Maybe it’s not ok for a man or woman to marry more than one woman, or man, but I think marriage among gays is a good thing.  It does promote faithfulness and helps to slow down promiscuity among humans.  I can’t see that it hurts heterosexuals in any way.

  • Anonymous

    I am a displaced Christian who has no house of worship for lack of finding a religion that has not either scared the be-geebies out of me (with the fire and brim-stone) or has completely broken my heart and my trust from pedophilia infested parishes and cover ups.  But I have to ask you randomly as I presume from reading your post,  a person of biblical knowledge, making reference to “abominable sin.”  
    What does the Bible say about incest?  As with Genesis (I can’t remember Ch. & ver. ) but I think it was somewhere around Chapter 17 verse I don’t know and I’m not going to look it up, so I imagine, you’re ahead of me there anyway.
    It speaks of while Abraham and his daughters were hiding in the caves after..I think Sodom fell correct so far (kind of ??) or not???  
    Anyhow, yes I know from distant memory that there was some reason why the daughters got their father drunk on what wine they had brought with them (it’s been a very long time that I’ve tried to understand the Bible and mostly it’s this one Chapter that stops me from reading further every time)  but as I POORLY remember it, the daughters might have thought they would never marry or I don’t know…but the daughters got Abraham their father drunk and each layed with him.  Now this is not a got-cha or to compare to this article to my post even.  It’s the word ABOMINATION, and the chapter and verse in the Bible and you said “who made up the whole crazy mess” about gay marriage and I don’t have an argument with you but I’m going to start asking questions of people who call other people crazy and adominable.
    I have to ask you personally, do you think the incest of Abraham committed upon him while drunken by his daughters abominable?  And why, you do or don’t.  Please.

  • Anonymous

    I am a displaced Christian who has no house of worship for lack of finding a religion that has not either scared the be-geebies out of me (with the fire and brim-stone) or has completely broken my heart and my trust from pedophilia infested parishes and cover ups.  But I have to ask you randomly as I presume from reading your post,  a person of biblical knowledge, making reference to “abominable sin.”  
    What does the Bible say about incest?  As with Genesis (I can’t remember Ch. & ver. ) but I think it was somewhere around Chapter 17 verse I don’t know and I’m not going to look it up, so I imagine, you’re ahead of me there anyway.
    It speaks of while Abraham and his daughters were hiding in the caves after..I think Sodom fell correct so far (kind of ??) or not???  
    Anyhow, yes I know from distant memory that there was some reason why the daughters got their father drunk on what wine they had brought with them (it’s been a very long time that I’ve tried to understand the Bible and mostly it’s this one Chapter that stops me from reading further every time)  but as I POORLY remember it, the daughters might have thought they would never marry or I don’t know…but the daughters got Abraham their father drunk and each layed with him.  Now this is not a got-cha or to compare to this article to my post even.  It’s the word ABOMINATION, and the chapter and verse in the Bible and you said “who made up the whole crazy mess” about gay marriage and I don’t have an argument with you but I’m going to start asking questions of people who call other people crazy and adominable.
    I have to ask you personally, do you think the incest of Abraham committed upon him while drunken by his daughters abominable?  And why, you do or don’t.  Please.

  • Anonymous

    Neither does it exist when its expression is prevented or suppressed by those who hate it.

  • Anonymous

    If Homosexuality is genetic, how is it an important Evolutionary function? If anything, it is surely a detriment to our Evolutionary process. So wouldn’t passing laws that help promote the “gay” gene down through our generations go against our natural selection or fittness for survival? We should we promote it? The goal is to evolve into the best species possible. Lately, we don’t seem like religion anymore in this country, right? We are all about Science, so let’s pass laws based on our Scientific views. Promoting “gay” genes will only help create an eventual world in which everyone is attracted to the same sex, and breeding goes out the window. And this will eventually evolve us into having to start all over again by reproducing asexually like our primordial goo ancestor. This is taking a step in the wrong direction. It’s a conundrum Jaron. You’re not being efficient!

  • Anonymous

    Nothing is forcing churches to marry same-sex couples, and I would oppose any effort for that to happen.

  • Anonymous

    Statistically, that is simply false.  It is well documented that monogamy among gays is not their priority.  In fact, they tout “open” relationships as being high on their list of priorities, and cite having multiple partners as something they value.  Get the facts correct, please.  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html

  • Anonymous

    And Gwendoyln if Moondoggie doesn’t answer me, maybe you could give me your answer to my question.  If you wouldn’t mind to.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7UCSUSNEHHONOIXQA3VDAJZ5RY Tricky-Nicky

    Yeah, ’cause that’s a reasonable response. The government shouldn’t be involved in that either.

  • Huss Family

    …hmm I would maintain there’s lots more things government shouldn’t get involved with.  Abortion?  Again, there’s a definition disconnect.  Yes, a woman should make decisions about her body.  Unfortunately, there’s another human being here.  And when it comes to making the decision to murder another human being, no, I as a woman do not think I have that right.  Viable babies that we spend thousands to save in neontal intensive care units are dismembered and thrown in the trash. Hmmm.  Exceptions in case of rape or incest or the life of the mother need to be approached prayerfully and individually.  Otherwise, the point is, it’s NOT her body we’re talking about….. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WOZDYJTFTJHLVDWXCUYCUWKQ6Q James

    Brilliantly said. I like this correlation to equations. Open society get crazier and crazier. In history we already have an example of Rome and what happened to them. Looks like we are going same path. Pity, real pity to see how our great country gets diminished by so called “progressives”.    

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GLWMDJ6K3KXBK67LZFHI3BYFEI Micah79

    Moral, logical common sense by nature its self shouts.. Should a man couple with another man or a woman couple with another woman brings nothing into play but self sexual satisfaction and self and selfish pleasure. Man and woman were made to reproduce other males and females. Same sex copulation produces nothing but distain from the laws of nature. Should one chose to live that kind of life style, let them do without the aide of the front page news or try to change the absolutes as to what America’s foundation was built upon. Whether it is accepted or liked, America was founded on the basis of a man and a woman marrying and by the grace of God begin a family of heritage. There are other places that happily accept homosexuality and embrace it, that country is where all the homosexuals of America should buy passage.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VU3UNSU7JZ5IV6DW65HQIFTTQE yogi

    So true, and we know it is perverse by its very nature. There are several sites in the Bible which state it so. So then, what comes next, beastiality, or perhaps polygamy. It is amazing how some will accept same-sex marriages, and then try to draw their own line as to how much is “too much”.

  • Suzanne McLennan

    I am very clear where I stand on this issue. I also respect other’s right to stand firm in their beliefs. Then to respectfully discuss and then vote on the subject seems to be the right way to handle this and of course respect the voter ruling. It seems mud slinging often appears to dirty the person it has targeted, but in the end little Johnny does get caught and in big trouble. I liked the Rick Santorum video. How graciously he handled it. He stood his ground, while allowing those to offer respectful input. They threw away their opportunity to reason their cause. I remember the first time he and amny others spoke and couldn’t remember anything more than the guy whos Last name started with an S realy had my attention. Even though I really would like to… like Romney. Now I would like to see more of Rick Sandtorum. He seems like he would make a good father of our nation.

  • http://www.facebook.com/doris.carman Doris Carman

    No one said they cant live together as a couple. The problem arises when they want to call it marriage. Since it is an alternative lifestyle and not the norm why call it marriage. They can have most of the same right as in insurance,visiting in hospitals, buying a home renting a home whatever they want.They dont need to call it marriage.And yes for sure govt. should stay out of it.

  • Anonymous

    Right, Beck.  Christian values.  Not Mormon values.

    Yes, take the government out of marriage.  Then you can marry as many women as you like.

  • Anonymous

    You can change the constitution to support/condone, legalize whatever you want, but you can’t make those destructive things healthy or prosperous. You can put a law in that gives permission to ppl to buy heroin/meth and use it, but it will not negate the consequences of following that law or make that law/permission, “Right” “Good” or “Healthy”. Healthy principles are a part of our creator/creation and are discovered by us, not created out of thin air. As if well, “We have decided that jumping out of planes without a para shoot is now healthy..” Somethings lead to quality of life and other things lead to misery and death. Glenn supports homosexuality, but what does he base this on? Why does he support it? If it’s healthy, good, right and leads to life then I’m also a supporter. But if it’s unhealthy, destructive and leads to misery and an unnecessary, painful, early death then I’m not.  And just because the constitution doesn’t say homosexuality is wrong, doesn’t mean we should support it. Even if our founders were all gay, that would not make homosexuality healthy, just because ppl prefer it/practice it. Nor would them rejecting it be the evidence that it’s wrong.

  • Anonymous

    Someone needs to ask Glenn if he believes homosexuality is unhealthy/destructive. If he says no, we can then ask why the God he (and I) serves has an issue with it, no posative things to say about the behavior at all, and Glenn doesn’t. If he says yes, then we can ask why does he say, “I don’t care” or “Do w/e you want”. He talks about moral certitude and how if homosexual marriage is ok, then why isn’t polygamy ok? Who is to say what is right, wrong, healthy? Well how about evidence? Statistics? His/our creator? Does he put the founders /constitution above the creator?I s all behavior equally healthy? Of course not. If something is unhealthy/destructive whether it’s smoking or dangerous unhealthy sex, we shouldn’t say “Do w/e you want” “I don’t care about you”. For we are to “Love our neighbors..”..  Unfortunately those who do support it immediately show their intolerance and try to stigmatize you as hateful or bigoted, while they manifest that very behavior against their opponents.

  • Anonymous

    And by the way.. Who is Glenn to say it’s wrong for gays to marry? (technically) but he supports civil unions? Why do you support the one and not the other? If homosexuality is a good thing, we should be supporting a deeper commitment between them and not telling them to go shack up.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jdesteve2011 Steve Winnicki

    The biggest problem our world has is religion and all of its false gods. If any god existed it would be available at your beck and call to answer you questions and meet your needs. Society would be a constant utopian paradise. No pains, No illnesses, No Deaths, No violence, the very existence of all of these things simply proves that a loving god does not exist for if it did these things would not exist. Free will is only the churches answer as to why god doesn’t answer to us when he is called upon to hear our prayers and help us in our moments of needs. The best thing we can do for ourselves as a society is to form a new set of truths and beliefs and quit living on the foolish misguided and entirely invented beliefs of the past that were simply used to control the uneducated masses by those in power. Live Free and let others do the same.

  • Anonymous

    “They need to be raised” ??  That’s how the Gov. gets involved with our every move.  Because they convince themselves they must see us through to our “needs.”  
    But what of the divorced straight parents and their children?  Since you say “they need” (which I’m in complete agreement) but what of them?   “vulnerability” “environment” “crucial”..I don’t know if you know it or not, but your vocabulary is a progressives dream.    
    God created those people you talk about as “…not normal.” 
    I’m not gay, I don’t have any gay friends, I don’t personally know anyone who is gay, as a matter of fact I was 22 years old before I ever knew what it meant to be homosexual.  I tell you the truth.  But if a person is good, kind, decent, caring, loving,…it’s only God’s business isn’t it?  And the gay and bisexual and transgender communities should respect my heterosexual life and please!  KEEP me out of their business!!
    I mean, I rather doubt there is a school age kid or a couple (that’s decent that is) that wants to hear about me and my heterosexual-ness!!!  Or do you support a totalitarian country that would NOT stand for each of us living our lives as we see fit. (and again, I’m talking about good, decent, caring people.)

  • Suzanne McLennan

    It still does amaze me how many people seem think God doesn’t have a problem with the gay lifestyle.  Do none of them ever read the Bible. All these issues are addressed in it.  While I have no desire to be one of a threesome I really don’t know why
    God gave David so many wives as he authorized others as well, but it is in there.  Men and men, and beasts. Creepy, but the negative consequences are in there. Is there a connection between the sodomy laws and the City in the Bible?

  • Anonymous

    Well at least we know why it’s been so important to the everyday progressive liberal to get this issue out in the open and in every school possible, in as many alters as possible and in our faces if possible.  
    Because otherwise we’d just…worship God in church, do our work at school, earn our pay at work, and be none the wiser. (yeh, I can see how that wouldn’t work.)  sigh*

  • Anonymous

    Gay marriage is the acting out of two aberrent wishes by gays that want to emulate the traditional straight wedding by exchanging rings and or articulating thier shared desires to one another   . Why is it that gay activity always wants the endorsement from third parties, and if it not forthcoming, harsh words have come to be expected. Why do I here the word “Homophobic” so often when wrankled gays feel that they have been somehow mistreated by the straight folks. Homophobia is a code word for gays to hide behind it simply means an inordinate fear of Homosexuals. Homosexuals pose no threat to me as long as they don’t intend to indoctrinate my children or extended family into what I consider to be a sad and unnatural lifestyle that seems to involve ill health and a high incidence of suicide.   

  • Anonymous

    I am praying for you Steve Winnicki.  Your post is the “invented beliefs”  “that were simply used to control the uneducated masses by those in power.” 

  • Anonymous

    Genesis 19 is the reference, and the reason Lot (not Abraham) was in the cave was due to him fleeing after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Additionally, that account does not read positively, although the Levitical proscriptions against incest come much later in the time of Moses.

  • Recynd

    Forget the polygamy argument; how about this: religion aside, why can’t I marry my father/brother/sister if I want to, if we’re both consenting adults?  If two men or two women can marry, why can’t I marry my brother?  Because it’s gross?  Says who?

  • Anonymous

    The bible says that it is wrong. Is the bible wrong or is the pro-homosexuality gay-marriage proponents wrong?

  • Anonymous

    Or there’s a country where homosexuality is punishable by death for your passage Micah.

  • http://gabrielshorn.myopenid.com/ gh

    No one is outlawing homosexuality. However, marriage overseen by the
    state has a few very important purposes. The most important purpose is the
    creation of stable families for the sake of raising children into
    healthy, happy, productive adults for the continued survival of the
    civilization. This is why marriage is not a “right” as some would claim.
    If it’s a right, why must you get blood tests, a marriage license, and
    commit to that marriage in a ceremony overseen by a licensed clergyman
    or government official?

  • Anonymous

    “….there’s nothing new under the sun.”  Ecclesiastics I think..sorry.

  • Anonymous

    Thank you Adam.

  • Anonymous

    Thank you Adam.

  • Anonymous

    Oh Ok world go home Joyful and Moondoggie say it’s wrong – period.

  • Anonymous

    Rights don’t come from the government. If people would just get that through their heads, there would be a lot fewer arguments. All humans have the same God given rights. If you were on a desert island with no government, you would have the same rights as someone living in the middle of the largest government in the world. Governments have a habit of suppressing rights, not enhancing them. That is the nature of government. A small group of people trying to control a large group of people. Don’t get me wrong, there is a place for government in our society, but granting rights is not one of them.

  • Anonymous

    Thank YOU very much for the information.  are you sure it wasn’t abraham???  lol!!  no, just kidding!  Thank YOU!

  • Anonymous

    Rights don’t come from the government. If people would just get that through their heads, there would be a lot fewer arguments. All humans have the same God given rights. If you were on a desert island with no government, you would have the same rights as someone living in the middle of the largest government in the world. Governments have a habit of suppressing rights, not enhancing them. That is the nature of government. A small group of people trying to control a large group of people. Don’t get me wrong, there is a place for government in our society, but granting rights is not one of them.

  • Anonymous

    SOOOOOO WELLLLL SAID!!!!  You need to condense this and make bumper stickers!!!  This was the shortest version of what ails us that I’ve ever read!!!  Good work tchrjim!!

  • Anonymous

    Face it folks, if you believe in God, you believe that a man and a woman is what God wanted, not what you or government want.  It is as simple as this, man has been rebelling against God since Adama and Eve.  This is no different.  Activists want God out of the script.  No prayer in school, no Christ in Christmas, it is a right to screw around between the sheets and just throw away a life, marriage for gays. First, you have to believe that God will judge those that have denied Him and his Word.  Simple, it is against His order and should not be.  Call it something else and go have whatever life you have but quit messing with His order of things. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KKEPFMI4SDZOGX7JRNO34WF7KQ danny117

    Well Glenn, God gave marriage and when He did He have Adam & Eve. Not Adam & Steve.

  • Anonymous

    Because the marriage never takes place.  You assume we aren’t letting you “marry”.  That is incorrect.  You cannot marry (no matter what you may call it) and people do not have the authority to grant you permission to marry in the way you choose.

    You have Free Will to do as you desire.  You are asking people to be complicit in your desires and errors.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    DISCLOSURE… I am bi-sexual and conservative, a Tea Party Patriot and though I don’t agree with Glenn Beck on everything, I DO on most things. 

    THAT SAID:

    On Santorum’s answer: You do not answer a question with a question. That’s just evasion.
    Score 1 for questioner

    On his final answer: “Then should it be OK for 3 men to marry?”

    Mr. Santorum, as a VERY conservative America, I believe you evaded the question and answered something off topic.

    The question was about marriage between “A” man and “A” man, or “A” woman and “A” woman.

    Now, I don’t know where you studied math but if the base of the question is about the union of 1 person to another person (gender irrelevant) WHY did you go off on the polygamy tangent. The question was of ONE COUPLE (couple means 2) Therefore, your response about 3, 4, or 5 was off topic. So Mr. Santorum, 
    Score ANOTHER for the questioner. 
    Now for those that ponder how someone that is OK with 2 men loving each other (ME) and wanting to have a civil union (which has NOTHING to do with the church that doesn’t accept homosexuality)“I’m for civil marriage. All the rights, civil marriage, that’s fine,” he told listeners. “My solution is take government out of marriage entirely. What is government doing in marriage?” 

    “You didn’t get married for tax deductions,” Glenn said. 

    So on THIS Mr. Beck and I agree… Marriage is a sanctified union by the church that is recognized by the government. Always has been, always will be. The purpose for “marriage” is to live as one with the blessing of the CHURCH.

    Well, if marriage is a religious institution then based on the first amendment Mr. Beck is SPOT ON… GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF MARRIAGE ENTIRELY (and eliminate the tax benefits while you are at it!!)Which brings me to my last point…  Civil unions…

    Like marriage, a civil union would be recognized by the government as it should, for the purposes of 2 people living as one with all the rights, benefits, privileges, hardships, drama, trauma, PTSD, sleepless nights, arguments about taking out the garbage and nagging about this or that and a life of learning what the afterlife might be like if you get sent to that very hot place (HUMOR PEOPLE LIGHTEN UP!) The government has no place in recognizing ANYTHING that has to do with religion other than its RIGHT to exist and be practiced in America.  In like manner.. and THIS IS MY POINT..BECAUSE A CIVIL UNION IS THE LEGAL RECOGNITION OF 2 PEOPLE LIVING AS ONE as stated above, the CHURCH has NO PLACE OR SAY in that matter by the very same first amendment. CHECK MATE by Glenn Beck. SOOOOOO, I encourage my anti GB friends to RESEARCH FOR YOURSELF and don’t believe the hype. He is NOT opposed to civil unions but to gay marriage. (If it makes you feel better, call it semantics!) BUT PLEASE CAN WE MOVE ON PAST THIS ISSUE! WE ARE DROWNING IN A GLASS OF WATER AT A TIME WHEN OUR REPUBLICS FUTURE IS AT STAKE! DO WE REALLY THINK WE WILL SURVIVE ANOTHER 4 YEARS UNDER THIS ADMINISTRATION!? I would rather be hated but allowed to live freely in America than loved and accepted (for only a very short time) in an Amerika that enslaves me via dictatorial edict.  

  • Anonymous

    I agree with Beck that the government should get out of the business of sanctifying marriages, everyone should register as civil unions and can get married by the church of their choice, or not. It is perfectly reasonable for a society that adheres to the principle of “individual rights” to limit civil unions to two adult individuals as the practice of polygamy tends to degrade the value of the individual.

    I don’t know why Beck brings up Judeo-Christian values in this discussion, other than the value afforded to the individual human being who is created by God. That applies to gay and straight equally and is the basis of our Constitution. 

    As far as the Bible is concerned polygamy was the norm, so why go there? Furthermore, there is no “law” in the Bible that outlaws gay marriage, not in the Ten Commandments, not anywhere. 

    I can understand the sense of outrage that gay advocates feel when their individuality and rights are disrespected  by suggesting that two men or two women together is the same as polygamy or bestiality.  

  • Anonymous

    My sentiment exactly, if a “Gay guy and guy” or “gal and gal” want this so much then the government or themselves for that matter ought to find the right place for themselves and live out the rest of their lives in peace, by all means leave the U.S. if you have to. But, my personal stance on this matter is a God ordained thing, “He said to Adam, This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; She shall be Woman (Not Man), because she (Not he) was taken out of Man.” Not unless someone can without a doubt prove that it didn’t happen this way, then teach me something. I am always open to researching your answer to this topic of what “Homosexuality” really means and where it came from and the why as to their logic. If no one has the answer, then move on and live somewhere else and paddle this ungodlyness somewhere else, NOT HERE IN THE U.S!

  • Anonymous

    It has been said that people cannot cohabitate if the relationship involves sexual conduct between parties — in any combination.

  • Anonymous

    In fact, the humans would be slaves — the complete opposite of freedom.  That is how they are deceived.

    What some people are asking for is a *permissive* society.

  • Anonymous

    Let us all remember…..DOMA…(Defense of Marriage Act) which is the law of the land which Obama and his minions, including Holder, do not and will not support it…However, it is the law of the land…and it says marriage is between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN…Let us remember also the Judeo Christian values which this country was once founded upon….The Bible calls homosexuality an abomination….we all know what God did to the last two cities that embraced homosexuality..in place of heterosexuality….Can we say Sodom and Gomorrah???I am afraid we are becoming such a place and our country will be held accountable for INTENTIONALLY,turning our backs on God and His sacred Word. God have mercy on us all.

  • Anonymous

    My sentiment exactly, if a “Gay guy and guy” or “gal and gal” want this so much then the government or themselves for that matter ought to find the right place for themselves and live out the rest of their lives in peace, by all means leave the U.S. if you have to. But, my personal stance on this matter is a God ordained thing, “He said to Adam, This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; She shall be Woman (Not Man), because she (Not he) was taken out of Man.” Not unless someone can without a doubt prove that it didn’t happen this way, then teach me something. I am always open to researching your answer to this topic of what “Homosexuality” really means and where it came from and the why as to their logic. If no one has the answer, then move on and live somewhere else and paddle this ungodlyness somewhere else, NOT HERE IN THE U.S!

  • Anonymous

    Even a Civil Union is an abomination in God’s eyes.  A good reading of Romans chapter one will sum up God’s opinion of perversion.  I believe Glen is right when he says that the government should not be involved in marriage.  Some believe that the church should be the only ones who should provide marriage.  The state should have nothing to do with an institution that gets its origin from God. 

    I don’t believe in Civil Unions.  Here is the great lie, “between consenting adults”.  That is the the measuring stick for morality?  God doesn’t say, “if you all like it it is OK with me”.  I admit that sexuality goes beyond procreation.  But common sense says that two members of the same sex cannot procreate.  We have suppressed the knowledge of God in perversion and debauchery and God has allowed us the recompense of our error.  I believe the Bible is the word of God — esp. Romans the first chapter.  People who baulk are true haters of God and his word.  God loves sinners but he hates their sin.  If homosexuality is not a sin, then the Bible needs to be rewritten to accommodate the perverts.  I think not.  One day, every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess the Lordship of our Christ.  When standing face to face with the judgment of a Holy God, no one will open their mouth in opposition.  His Holiness will dissolve all our excuses.  And, no one will be able to stand behind the euphemism of “consenting adults”!

  • Jon Hettinger

    There is no more restriction on maintaining a traditional definition of marriage than there is on enforcing immigration laws that impose deportation for illegal aliens that would cause a family to be separated if one or more were to be deported.
    In both cases, there is freedom to choose.  A gay person may chose to marry, simply by doing so within the definition and marrying a person of the opposite sex.
    An illegal immigrant’s family need not be separated in the face of a deportation.  They can accompany that person and remain intact as a family.
    Choice has consequences.  We as a society and nation shouldn’t be asked to change laws and legal definitions because a person chooses to act in opposition to them. (Thanks to my son for initiating this reasoning)

  • Anonymous

    People who are for gay marriage say “We just want the same rights as everyone else”        Well the way I see it is…they already have the exact same rights as “everyone else”. They want special new unique rights. They want to fundamentally redefine marriage…and that’s morally WRONG!

  • Anonymous

    Well said garyms4! Well said.

  • Anonymous

    Abortion = people asking other people for permission to kill God’s unborn child.
    Marriage = indissoluble union of man and woman.
    The Bible = The living word of God.

    People have Free Will, they choose to kill God’s unborn child only with the permission of Lies they have embraced and/or the deceptions of like-minded people.

  • Anonymous

    So are you saying that polygamists shouldn’t have the right to marry?  What moral law says that and who made that moral law?

  • Anonymous

    The god you want was played by Barbara Eden back in the 60s.  What you are really describing is that YOU wish to be god and dictate what that god should or should not do.  You have the cart before the horse and miss entirely the relationship of the created to the Creator.  In true christianity, God molds His own to a character that He defines.  To have a god that acts on all our wishes and whims is a recipe for anarchy and chaos because it would not take long before your genie god and someone else genie god  would be working in direct opposition to each other.  Or, you both would have the same terribly schizophrenic god trying to satisfy divergent and conflicting desires.   

  • Anonymous

    The argument that Rick Santorum had with his audience was very very interesting!
    I totally see how many bigots there are…..I believe that the constitution was established to protect our rights, so I understand why marriage is also overseen by the government . My position is that the equation as Glenn puts it, is correct. 1 man + 1 woman = marriage. Because of the institution of marriage there are certain blessings bestowed upon that man and woman. Why should gays expect the same blessings, when they are going against the laws that have been established for others who respect the laws of the land and of God?

  • Anonymous

    Santorum is correct.  God created humanity and instituted marriage to be the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of any and all other combinations and He is therefore the only entity entitled to change that configuration.  We should respect the mandate of our Creator.

  • Anonymous

    The Bible is not a dead letter.  The Bible also does not have words about not performing euthanasia through use of a blowtorch.  You will not find “euthanasia” or “blowtorch” in The Bible yet the action is still Evil because the living Bible instructs us that such actions are Wrong and immoral — regardless of the wordsmiths.

  • Anonymous

    Zero originality points for you.

  • Anonymous

    The argument that Rick Santorum had with his audience was very very interesting!
    I believe that the constitution was established to protect our rights, My position is that the equation as Glenn puts it, is correct. 1 man + 1 woman = marriage. Because of the institution of marriage there are certain blessings bestowed upon that man and woman. Why should gays expect the same blessings, or rights and privileges, when they are going against the laws that have been established for others who respect the laws of the land and of God?

  • Anonymous

    Anyone who has been revealed Truth has more expected of them — to advise others not to embrace Lies.  Glenn is not the source of Truth but he, like anyone else, can try to convey Truth.

  • http://WWW.ANOINTEDIMAGES.COM FRANCES LOUISE

    Someone posted this a few days ago on The Blaze. I was HORRIFIED when I read it! Anyone who really thinks that all homosexuals want is the right to be “married” need to read this and wake up. I hope someone close to Glenn shows him this. I had no idea how insidious this agenda really was until I read all of this which is documented. Check it out. This agenda will effect children and parents even at the kindergarten level, and parents who don’t like it are the ones criminalized and even jailed for objecting to their children being forced to endure this indoctrination which is the real purpose for the push for so-called “gay marriage”
    http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html

  • Anonymous

    How much clearer can we make it?
    In the King James Version, Leviticus 18:22 is translated: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”
    Although the verse appears to most readers to apply only to sexual behavior between two males, at least two Bible translations appear to mistranslate the verse in order to widen its scope to include lesbian sexual activity:Living Bible: “Homosexuality is absolutely forbidden, for it is an enormous sin”New Living Translation: “Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin.Homosexuality is a perversion of the rules of God,man and nature.  Some may not agree, but that doesn’t change the truth of what IS.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5IREKUTFNBIH2GHOWXDAO3OWPU Thomas

    CELEBRATE…..!
    1.        Character
    2.        Courage
    3.        Conscious
    4.        Perseverance
    5.        Excellence
    6.        …
    7.        …..
    8.        …….
    :
    :
    50 (-ish)         ………………Diversity

  • Anonymous

    Many people confuse permissiveness with “diversity”, “welcomming”, “tolerant”.

  • Anonymous

    Even though I have difficulty conceptualizing the sexual coupling of two males (or two females) I do not oppose civil unions for homosexuals. If they were as intensely interested in same-sex relationships as they are in destroying traditional marriage between a man and a woman we would all get along. Gays represent themselves to be 10% of the population when, indeed, they are less than 2%. As soon as I am bombarded with hateful rhetoric from gays I stop listening. Tolerance goes both ways.

  • Anonymous

    Polygamy is not the norm in the Bible.  You have to know the whole book.  The Bible must be understood in its total context.  That is why we fundamentalist read it every day.  Some of us are able to get thru every two months or so, some of us do it in a year.  The point is the Bible teaches to us and not vice versa.  If our country would just get back to our Judeo/Christian ethics, we would see the benefits of 2Chronicles 7:14.  We understand how the Old testament coalesces with the New.  We understand the importance of dispensationalism –  a paradigm that unifies the whole of the Bible.  In science, unifying paradigms are evidence for their own veracity.  When Jesus was speaking to the Samaritan woman at the well he told her that she had more than one husband.  That was a sin Jesus was willing to forgive her of if she repented — changed her ways.  So this notion that polygamy as a norm only demonstrates that you use the Bible to serve as a tool for perpetrating your sophistical notions instead of truth.  Jesus was against polygamy.  But he came to save those who were lost — to free them from the bondage that such sin imposes upon a person.  Dispensationalism is the concept that God deal differently with mankind throughout the ages in separate economies of time.  God, nor our own law condones polygamy today.  Read Romans chapter one and then tell me how God feels about homosexuality.  It is high time Christian everywhere toss aside the Lie that is “political correctness” and just tell it like it is.  We will experience heavy resistance.  But then what should we expect, is the servant greater than the master?

  • Anonymous

    I am very sorry for being so blunt, but this subject matter demands it. I have two male friends that I love so much, that I WOULD step in front of a bullit and die for either one of them. I DO NOT however, have ANY desire to stick my “dick” up their asses. The ONLY difference between a straight person and a gay one is sex. I do not care how often two males or females ingage in perverted sex, a child will never be the result of it. GOD made the institution of marriage, and made male and female in order to continue and multiply the human race. The institution of marriage is sacred and MUST be upheld.
    It is an absolute tradgety that instead of trying to help the homosexual understand the perversion their life style demonstrates, society and governments apease them, and they are left to a life of confusion and despair
    Please, Please, any homosexual that reads this, seek out the GOD of the BIBLE, and seek the counsel of a person who REALLY cares for you, that desires to see you have a wonderful life with a woman (or man. if your a woman),, GOD desires to have you have a NATURAL life style, and you WILL be eternally greatful when you do.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    So I guess that Jesus’ sacri-fice for us was in vane and his TWO NEW COMMANDMENTS that HE said “fulfill ALL of the law of the Old Testament” were lies?

    GET OFF YOUR SACROSANCT BS PULPIT AND STOP TRYING TO PLAY G O D.  

    You can quote scripture till AFTER the rapture all you want, the d3v1L does too, but he is STILL the d3v1.

    A true Christian evangelizes through the testimony of his life not by how much scripture he thinks he knows. But what do I know.. I am just a sinner. (That happens to have an unshakable faith in JESUS regardless of what you or any other so called christian says.  

    Hey buddy here is another news flash, I am also HIV+ and what many of your ilk call a curse, I count a blessing and another we apon in  Gods a rsenol to make fools of the proud and the boastful that HE be glorified. And NOT by works but by my unshakable faith in Him. 

    Pity the foolish who have not the love of G O D in their hearts

  • Anonymous

    Tony, I agree. I was being sarcastic. Certain Truths are apparent, moreso as we develop of course. (Babies are not “Truth” aware) It’s something that becomes apparent based on development (Even though truth is in existence already) I’m asking why Glenn (An Adult who subscribes to the judeo Christian beliefs, supports sex out side of marriage between two ppl of the same sex. (Civil Unions)What criteria does he use to say, “I don’t care if to men have sex” It’s not the biblical one for sure. I’m a GBTV subscriber and I agree with Beck on most things economic and even morally. Just not this one. If homosexuality is good, then why stop at civil unions? Why would you deny them a legal marriage? See I don’t support the behavior so it’s easy for me not to support legal marriage or civil unions.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    I can assure you that one group does not speak for all.  And those of us that don’t agree with movements like this walk lock-step in unity with GB AND the Tea Party. We are here.  It’s just not convenient for the MSM to expose us.  

  • Anonymous

    Homosexuality is learned behavior, much like learning how to drink alchohol, doing drugs, smoking and many others that require rehab.  It’s a disease that needs to be discouraged, especialy in our schools.  The Obamas are hipocrites, one is supporting Homos all across the board to include our public schools.  The other is telling us as parents we can’t give our children Happy Meals from McDonalds.  Is anybody forcing their beliefs on the 1st family as they are doing to ours???   I like how Iran handles this issue of Homos. 

    GySgt B

  • Anonymous

    two points, if someone has a thing that they say is born in them &  they should be allowed to act on it like being gay. under that logic two people that are born to injoy killing should be allowed to do that. its not the being gay are anything else . its being allowed by law to do it . their are a lot of things that people can do but they don’t because it would not be the best thing to do.it go’s back to the sixtys feeling of if it feels good do it

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    I think you better go back and listen to the question and the response. a civil union (which is what gays want) is NOT by ANY stretch of the imagination, polygamy and to try to move the argument that polygamists should have equal rights is a sorry play on words.  Polygamists have a right to their own opinion and to fight for what they want. IN THAT FORUM. BUT THE QUESTION WAS NOT ABOUT POLYGAMY!  And as to their rights to marry, you completely missed the point that there is a difference between MARRIAGE and a Civil Union and that difference is recognition by the church, which I can assure you, most LGBTQ can care less the opinion of an institution that erroneously condemns homosexuals in light of the facts I presented.  So, take your polygamy argument and insert it where it is valid and not where the debate is about legal vs. spiritual recognition of two and only two people.

  • Anonymous

    If two people of the same sex want to unite and spend their time together, with equal standing and privileges, let them.  Only thing is, it would’t be a marriage, just call it something else.  Marriage has been arount at least 5,000 years in recorded history.  That says a lot.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    On this I agree but it is because of semantics.  Many people interchangeably use marriage and civil union erroneously.. so Yes, I agree, because of that it WOULD be a redefinition of marriage and that too is wrong.  SO SORRY FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT DON’T SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO.  

    I AM ALL FOR THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE.. OUT OF RESPECT FOR GOD AND HIS WORD…

    LIKEWISE, A CIVIL UNION IS THE LEGAL EQUIVALENT NOT SPIRITUAL EQUIVALENT OF MARRIAGE AND THEREFORE…

    THE CHURCH, AND ANYONE THAT BELIEVES IN MARRIAGE DOESN’T HAVE TO LIKE IT, OR RESPECT IT, BUT IF IT BECOMES FEDERAL LAW IT TOO IS COVERED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE AS MARRIAGE IS BY THE CHURCH AND A CIVIL UNION IS GOVERNMENT!

    How much more clear can I make it?

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    When I see those words “A civil union is an abomination in God’s eyes” IN THE BIBLE, then and only then will I reconsider your statement. Until then, you do NOT speak for GOD. Oh, and neither do I. 

  • Anonymous

    There are many facets to the Evil that has permeated society.  People try to put a “positive” spin on it but all they do is be complicit in disguising and propagating Evil — and call it good.  The so-called “civil unions”, “hooking up”, “love”, “right to (whatever)” are all attacks against Truth.  Many of us are on a road, some are on the way to Truth some are heading for a cliff, some are on a dead end.  I can’t give Mr. Beck a “pass” on “civil unions” but being imperfect ourselves, our embrace of the Truth can vary and is formed each day.  Perhaps more Truth will be revealed to Mr. Beck.

  • Anonymous

    Really??  Just what is perverted about a man and a woman being married?  Let me explain it to you:
    1 man + 1 woman = children
    1 man +1 man =  000
    1 woman + 1 woman = 000
    This country was founded on Judeo/Christian values.  One of the Ten Commandments states:  Thou shalt not commit adultery.
    There you go.  Plain and simple.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    Listen Your Royal Highness, 

    When you become leader of the Theocratic States of America, I won’t wait for you to tell me. Until then, you are NO ONE to dictate to ANYONE that is not an American citizen to get out.  Step on my property with that stance with your first amendment freedom and I will introduce you to my 2nd amendment RIGHT! GOT IT BUB!  

    You ARE the reason Obama and his cronies are getting away with such atrocities and rather than bringing souls to salvation through Jesus showing the love of God through actions of faith and hope, instead you spew the venom of a pharisee and that didn’t turn out too well for them either!

  • Anonymous

    I think when gays get married that is a good thing. then when they get old like my wife & i they can be penilzed for being married. we both worked over 40 yrs we married 10 yrs ago. we have income of 20.000 each. combined 40.000 we can’t get any gov. benfit. but if we were not married & only had 20 then we would be approved for benfits

  • Anonymous

    You will never see that phrase in The Holy Bible.  The phrase “civil union” was not in use.  However, through understanding of the word that lives we do know that fornication is Evil.  If “civil union” is “fornication” then it is Evil.  That is why Sola Scriptura is a very dangerous method of reading and understanding The Bible.  The Bible speaks to us and He has a lot to say.

  • Anonymous

    you are using the old testiment & the new testiment to prove your point. you forgot about saved by grace.christ was born to save us from our sin not to aprove of sin.

  • Anonymous

    Jesus answered questions with questions all the time.  You have to be blind not to see that Santorum had the moral high ground.  Jesus confounded the Pharisees all the time.  He  simply said if you want me to answer your question, answer mine first.  I don’t know  who set up the rule you contend, but the God of the universe used that technique all the time.  He was able to do so because he knew their thoughts before they spoke.  In Santorum’s case, it was a brilliant stroke of unveiling the reasoning of hypocrites — a brilliant stroke.  In fact, the manner Santorum comported himself demonstrated an ability to think on his feet.  He is a man of God  using the same techniques as our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ — a divine stroke!  He demonstrated that we can go by man’s law and do what we want, or return to our Judeo/Christian roots and see the restoration of our government.  Christians everywhere should realize that God has sent them their champion in Rick Santorum.  He is only a man.  God has a way of turning ordinary men into great leaders when they are willing to follow his principles.  Rich Santorum is the exact photo negative of Obama.  I think he is being politically correct in supporting Civil Unions.  I am certain that a Holy God does not condone civil unions.  This is one Christian who is no longer going to capitulate to the lies of Satan and the rhetoric of those who hate God.  Romans chapter one.

  • http://www.facebook.com/bbies1973 Brian Biesemeyer

    It’s funny, I’ve been making that same argument in regards to polygamy being ignored because homosexuality is the current “fashion trend”, and I get accused of blowing things out of proportion.

  • Anonymous

    If the homosexual cohabitants are having a sexual relationship, call it fornication — accurate and truthful.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NABBLX63ZLDXNUM4HKB6JVHOJQ John David

    “They also shouldn’t be on equal footing to adopt children like a married man and woman, which same-sex marriage would cause. I don’t believe adults wants or desires should come before the best interests of children.” That is absolute bullshit. I’m sorry. I know that people are saying that Gay Marriage or Civil Unions or WHATEVER is tearing up marriage, but you know what, that’s a load of crap. Have you LOOKED at what our kids see every day? Celebrity Divorces after a week, a month, barely a year of marriage. Parents “faking” that they want to be together and fighting behind the scenes. I’ve seen MORE happy Gay couples that have stayed together for years and years, and are STILL together, than I have happily married straight couples. And they raise their children just as well. So don’t feed people the crap about “mommy and daddy.” I’m a straight woman, married to a straight man, and I think that they should be allowed to have their rights as parents, as a couple, and as a family. Family isn’t what the government or anyone else tells you. It’s what you make of it. Many “straight” couples today have a very wrong sense of family, and it’s because of our media, of the crappy celebrity role models, and because children are raised by TV sets, not their parents.  Don’t blame it on gays and lesbians. You can’t blame them for Marriages falling apart.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    ON THIS I AGREE!

    For all you so called christians…. Gays, because of people like you, have an ingrained fear of God based on hatred and retribution when He is ALSO MERCIFUL AND FORGIVING and ALL of you that bash others in the name of God, MOCK JESUS CHRIST! YOU are saying His sacrifice was ONLY for you who THINK you are saved. Well if that’s the case, then lets just shutter the doors so we don’t let those devil worshiping gays come in and pervert the priests who are too busy with the little boys and the church sanctified couples that have married “until death do us part” according to the church and yet are already in their third fourth or fifth marriage! 
    HOW ARE YOU ANY BETTER YOU PERVERTS!”AND I SAY TO YOU, LET HE THAT IS WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE”  DON’T STAND THERE AND JUDGE ME WHEN THROUGH MY AFFLICTIONS LIKE HIV, GOD IS GLORIFIED BECAUSE HE MAKES FOOLS OF THE WISE THROUGH HIS LOVE AND MERCY ON ME! 

    HE DIDN’T CURSE ME.  HE ALLOWED ME TO LET HIS GLORY SHINE THROUGH ME FOR WHICH THERE ARE NO WORDS I CAN PRAISE HIM HIGHLY ENOUGH!

    ALL YOU christians ARE ALREADY DEAD!  And yet I…. though dead, according to you.. have LIFE THROUGH CHRIST JESUS WHO SHED HIS BLOOD ON THE CROSS FOR ME AND YOU AND YOU AND YOU! HIV allowed me to EXPERIENCE His love and grace and mercy and has given me new hope. How sad the truth that in the land of the blind, even the one eyed man is king.

  • Anonymous

    The point Santorum was making was that if one variation from traditional male-female marriage is accepted, then what about further variations?  Should they not also be considered? Wouldn’t it be discriminatory to polygamists– possibly homosexual polygamists– to not allow their marriages or civil unions?  Where does it end?  Santorum was using reducio ad absurdium to demonstrate his view, therefore his question was in fact a clear answer.
     But hey, all this aside, at least we agree on the fact that Obama need to go right?  I mean if we want to have a country left to discuss all these other things. Seriously, all American’s, straight and gay, will suffer if that idiot retains the Presidency.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    ” I like how Iran handles this issue of Homos.  ”

    Hatred too is learned behavior. I see you graduated with honors.

  • Anonymous

    People who desire gay marriage have an argument with God, plain and simple.  Marriage is one man + one woman.  I did not say it, God did.  You can look it up.  You probably don’t believe in God, Jesus or the Bible, so what do you base your beliefs on?  Are you your own god?  A dangerous place to be.  Read the Bible and sincerely ask God to show you the truth.  He will!

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    Hate is wrong in all colors shapes and sizes. And to be clear, I am NOT defending them for attacking Christians.  NO ONE is free from sin. 

  • Anonymous

    People are to judge actions, not people.  For people, there will be a Final Judgement and it will be Clear, Right, Just, unarguable and Forever.  We all fall short but that does not excuse us from trying again and again to dispel those actions that are sinful or lead to sin.  Jesus carried The Cross and endured without sin and forgave everyone.  We are called to do the same.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1768014683 Betty Richardson Belt

    Marriage is NOT two men entering into a “union”, nor is it two women entering into a “union”. It is a sin in the eyes of God. God ordained marriage between a man and a woman. Period.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1768014683 Betty Richardson Belt

    I did. I’m not typing it again. Love your show. Long may you wave.

  • Anonymous

    do you not hate? I think not, you just use yours to try & prove a point. you missed the mark.

  • Anonymous

    Here is a reply to you both. Go stick you dick in some guys ass and all you will produce is a sore ass! get it that crap does not work. Call it what you want but it is not a marrage.

  • Anonymous

    Hey dumb ass So you have proof that it’s learned behavior? And you want our government to be like Iran and murder gay people. You are a very sick man, just like those muslims in Iran. People who talk like you tend to be closet fags. I bet you act really macho and secretly you fantasize about bending over and getting big fat dirty cock in your ass, while somebody else stands in front of you with their big hairy balls slapping your chin don’t ya? Then afterwards you feel really guilty and get mad at gay people all over again because they get to do what you really want to do. All the atrocity’s that have happened in history were because people who think like you have somehow managed  to get in power. You sicko closet faggot, why don’t you go see a shrink before some fairy surprises you and kicks the shit out of you for fucking with the wrong homo.

  • Anonymous

    Read about Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible.  God destroyed those cities due to sexual sin, homosexuality and beastilality.  Rick Santorum is absolutely correct!  God Bless Rick Santorum for standing up for God’s rights!

  • Anonymous

    Le
    18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind,
    as with womankind: it i

  • Anonymous

    I agree. I just hope it’s an issue of lack of understanding/truth vs fear. I tend to give Beck the benefit of the doubt.. with regards to “fear” as I know he has put his life on the line with regards to other moral issues. Thankfully he has ppl around him that I know do not support/agree with, Homosexual behavior. I wonder how some of the pastors he interacts with who know he endorses Civil Unions will approach him about this or if they even will. Anyways, good to talk to you. If you have a facebook account, feel free to add me: https://www.facebook.com/Wovenx

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    The LORD Jesus Christ IS my Lord and ONLY Savior. 

    I love God “with all my heart and all my spirit”AND”I love my neighbor as I love myself.”So, I guess, by Jesus’ own words, I (u know that gay, HIV+ guy so condemned by the pharisees) I HAVE FULFILLED ALL OF THE LAW OF THE OLD TESTAMENT AND I am saved by FAITH through Christ Jesus who shed His blood on the cross and died for the remission of my sins and on the third day rose and thus took the keys of life from death that I should have life everlasting. and yes I am paraphrasing not quoting.Anyone that has a problem with that, take it up with God, you are wasting my time when I cast pearls before swine. It is not MY problem.. but YOURS. I HOPE AND PRAY that at least ONE of you give my words some thought tonight and REALLY talk to JEHOVAH through Jesus our intercessor.  LISTEN TO YOUR HEART for God speaks to it.  

  • http://www.facebook.com/xxTH3CHADxx Chad Mitchell

    Glenn has the right position here, but I bet he doesn’t know that it was the early leftists of the French Revolution who introduced the idea that Government should be the one to issue marriage licences and to secularize it. Constitutional the Federal Government has no business in marriage while the States can make the argument they do have business in it. I would like to see it all returned to the church, but Santorum will never support that because in his mind freedom doesn’t work. You need Government force to make society function and the fact of the matter is that kind of Statism is not something I normally associate with Glenn Beck. Rick might be a moral man, and I know Glenn admires that. However, Santorum’s record points to more Big Government social engineering just as most of the candidates resumes point to. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Dianne-Hays/100000097998613 Dianne Hays

    I support the State’s rights to recognize gay marriage or civil union.  I do not believe the federal government has any place in marriage or the abortion issue.  I have a “moral compass” to direct my path – it does not enable me to act as anyone else’s Garmin or Tom Tom.  Live according to your own beliefs and ethics and accept the priveleges and the consequences of your choices.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    Couldn’t have said it better myself. Thank you

  • Anonymous

    My issue with gay marriage is that it defys logics. You cannot have three different combination of human beings in a relationship, and call each by the same title. If one man plus one woman = marriage, then one man + one man cannot be called marriage, neither can we call one woman + one woman marriage. If the first combination is the set called Marriage, the other two combinations cannot be a logical subset of the set called Marriage. Each is a subset of something else maybe liscened debauchry. If we stop to ask the question-When is marriage not marriage? A reasonable answer could be-  When the equation is changed from one man +  one woman combination. The demand gay marriage is an effort to destroy marriage, as we know it. I go out on a limb here and say that the forces of jealousy and envy are at the root of all this war against marriage.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bruce-Pergament/1159792468 Bruce Pergament

    make it a contract

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Scott-Clapper/1145289893 Scott Clapper

    Gay Marriage, Christians and Politics.
    http://scottfree99.blogspot.com/2012/01/gay-marriage-christians-and-politics.html 
    This has been on my mind for some time now, please let me explain.Its seems to me that all this talking about this issuewill never accomplish is the same as Roe v. Wade on the abortion issueIts all about “civil rights”, and this issue we will only losejust like Roe v. Wade, you can’t dictate moral responsibilityyou can only model it. I just wonder where in the Constitution does it say anything about government regulating marriage. This will come down to “civil rights” once again, and the pastors will be forced to perform gay marriage’s or risk going to prison. This “dog will not hunt” it is time that we as Devout Christiansget the Government out of the marriage business, and stop taxing us for the luxury of there “wise council” Besides, if you vote for one man, one woman, they through the courts will over rule you. (see California Proposition 8)A marriage is a convent between one consenting man and one consenting woman and there GOD, not between two people and there Government. How about removing all the tax benefits from marriage and let others have a Civil Union with all the other benefits that go along with it, death benefits, health care, etc. Yea I believe that a marriage is between one man and one woman, however, how about we outlaw lying ?That would go longer way to creating a more just society, would it not? Think if we could lock up all the corrupt Lying Politicians! Wouldn’t that be something!Some of things we should be looking at for the near future,would be youth Euthanasia and Population Control this will be the next fight.This is what the “Elite” really believes in, under the guise of “Mother Earth (there god)” using Global warming, Abortion, Euthanasia, Gun control, No death penalty for harden criminals. Through Government health control, Planed parenthood, vaccinations etc.(“if we really do a good job we can reduce the population, Bill Gates”)They don’t believe in smaller Government, they believe in bigger Government and smaller “We the People” and much poorer population also.This one is a Must, No 503(c)3 state run Church’s (This was to silence the Church on talking about the moral integrity of our leaders running for office and abortion and Homosexuality)No tax exemption, for tithing (render unto Caesar whats is Caesar’s)No Home deduction, (this is also not there charter under the Constitution)No marriage deduction,Then maybe we could have a flat tax, as the bible says if you pay more than 10% you are living under tyranny! ( 1 Samuel 8:15-17)Abortion will have to be fought under “person hood” and then there rights as a Person. I know all these things are painful (especially the money and tax deduction part, however this is the only way to get Government out of our way)They do not have the best intentions for us as “Christ followers” or “We the People”How I changed my life:I participate in the system as little as possible.No 503(c)3 Church’sNo stock market (This is corrupt at its core)As little as possible in the banking system (low dept, there is no real interest anyways) invest in gold/silver/farm land own your home.Do not over pay your taxes, why give the government a interest free loan (pay @ the end of the year) Grow your own food, healthier anyways.Have a well for water, also healthier.Solar for your home, Barter with others.Try and not use Large corporations for commerce, use mom and pop storesbuy fruits/vegetables from local farmers. 

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    Compared to being nailed to the cross, stabbed by a spear, given vinegar to drink, spat on, laughed at, scorned, left for dead, I will take that in a heart beat. But because He did, I don’t have to.

  • Anonymous

    Yes, but Jesus asks us to repent of our sins and that means that once you ask for forgiveness and are granted forgiveness by Jesus, then you are to abandon your wicked ways.  Being gay (what I used to use as happy….not any longer) is a choice and is a choice that is considered an abomination by God.  To get his forgiveness and take the sin away, the person asking for forgiveness must stop doing the same sin once he has been forgiven by God.

  • Anonymous

    Frankie, why are you yelling? :)  I agree with the first part of your statement but there is a BIG problem/inaccuracy with your last sentence. The first amendment does not mention anything about the separation of church and state. That is a very common mistake.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    It wasn’t a “point for Santorum to make” It was a specific question for him which he deflected and failed to answer.

  • http://patsdailyrant.blogspot.com/ PRH

    Anybody want to bet PaulH is nicknamed “Captain Brown Eye”….he, like those he supports, is a pervert.

  • Anonymous

    You have left one thing out of the equation, if you want to call it that.  Yes God is merciful, and forgiving, and died and shed His blood for everyone. But in His word He said to the people accusing the prostitute, “you who have not sinned, cast the first stone”, but to the prostitute He said “Go and sin no more.”  I am not perfect, therefore I have to repent of my sins and turn away from them.  If I slip again, I confess my sin to Him and  know I have His grace if I have accepted Him as my Lord and Savior. I also believe and the Book of Romans in the first few chapters talks about gays and lesbians.  Read it for your self.  I am sorry you have HIV but that comes from your sin.  Repent of your sin and God is truly merciful and full of Grace. And it sounds like you have done that.   I also believe that the reason gays have an ingrained fear of God is because God placed in each of us the ability to “choose life or choose death,” choose right or choose wrong, choose good or choose evil. It is our choice.  God gives us that freddom to choose His way or choose the way of the world. It is up to us in the end how we choose. 

  • Anonymous

    By the way.. when liberals in the audience talk about “Right to Happiness” does that exclude my rights to be happy? I mean supporting or giving my approval to homosexual behavior would not make me happy.

  • Anonymous

    I consider it assisted masterbation.

  • Rich P

    He is right

  • Anonymous

    This whole argument is about moral truth.  Is there a moral truth or does truth just come down each individual’s own opinion.  If you believe in God and the ten commandments and what scriptue says is right, then that’s it!  There’s no his opinion or my opinion about the whether something like homosexual acts are right or wrong.  It’s wrong because the Most High God proclaims it to be wrong.  It doesn’t matter what we think….what is our opinion based on?  Our feelings perhaps or our perception of what might make us happy?  We have to be very careful if we only base our ideas of right and wrong on our feelings.  So, is porn okay?  Is it okay to marry children?  Well, some would say “Of course, it makes me happy.”  That’s not true happiness.  Do people really think that the one who created us doesn’t know what will truly make us happy.  Thank God our laws in America are based on Christ’s teachings.  If we were wise, we would not stray from it.  Just take a look at other countries whose laws are based on a dictator’s feelings….scary.

  • paula marshall

    People actually DONT read the bible.  Very few, in fact, have read that book they dust so carefully on their shelves.  It is an odd phenomenon. Rather than getting to know the Laws and Wisdom of our ONE GOD, people would rather fantasize-up the GOD they think they would PREFER, (one that would always be OK with anything they choose to do or to not do, regardless of whether or not it blatantly breaks one or more of the ONE GOD’s decreed/ declared laws) rather than find out that GOD actually expects them to conform and to deny themselves any one thing they are hung up on.  Too, if they actually DO profess knowledge that GOD said no,…then, HE must surely just think they are stupid sinners not capable of self-control and will surely forgive them anything they do, even tho HE actually said in the Bible they will indeed suffer the consequences HE has laid out before us all, should they break a law or commandment…Woe to the world of the Gays, then, -or even those who find out that GOD thinks even gluttony (therefore most obesity, including my extra #lbs) is disgustingly bad!  They’ll drop their respect and their love of GOD for a big Mac in a heartbeat!  Most wont even ask HIS forgiveness for it.  Thus, do not be so amazed at them, Suzanne.  We’ve all a long way to go… Sodom and Gomorrah sort of remind me of parts of SanFran, or parts of Europe, -dont they you?

  • http://twitter.com/CSSchiro Craig S. Schiro Sr.

    Glenn-
      You are a Christian and believe in the risen Lord Jesus the Christ THE GOD almighty.  You do not get to contradict the Holy Bible and the teachings of GOD. Marriage = One Man and One Woman! COME ON!

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    He demonstrated that we can go by man’s law and do what we want, or return to our Judeo/Christian roots and see the restoration of our government.”

    Our government is based on law stated in our Constitution NOT THE BIBLE. It is BASED ON but IS NOT the Bible. Learn the difference! First point.

    Are you saying I want you to capitulate to me? Are you saying that what I have posted is a lie? All the things I have said or ANY of them for that matter, about God and His son Jesus (the second member of the Holy Trinity)are wrong? Lies? Cuz I will tell you, I have that blessed assurance and peace beyond understanding. I DO NOT believe in PC and I loathe it but I am tiring of arguing with iniquity for it does NOT “have an ear to hear” that ALL I have spoken of is of the LOVE, GRACE and MERCY of THE LIVING GOD. I have reminded everyone of Jesus ultimate sacrifice on the cross and victory over death and how through my weakness He is made strong. I have NOT denied the deity or grace of God. And yet, so many of you have attacked me. JUST LIKE THE PHARISEES FOR THEY TOO WERE IN FEAR THAT JESUS WOULD TURN THE PEOPLE FROM POWER AND AUTHORITY!

    Those of you trying to pass yourselves off as “christians” BEWARE WOLVES IN SHEEPS CLOTHING.

  • http://www.facebook.com/aaronwbateman Aaron W. Bateman

    I personally feel that the constitution was inspired by God to give us, His children, the right to worship Him of our own free will rather than because we simply have no choice. And as it was inspired by God it was also made to function in a righteous society, it simply doesn’t work in a society that detests His law. So the answer is simple. Glenn Beck has already told it to us. Change the heart of a man and he will change the heart of his family. Change the heart of a family and they will change their society. Change society and they will change the government. How do you change the heart of a man? The answer is love.

    And whether that love comes from my God, Christ, or from your God it doesn’t matter. As long as it does

  • http://www.facebook.com/aaronwbateman Aaron W. Bateman

    I personally feel that the constitution was inspired by God to give us, His children, the right to worship Him of our own free will rather than because we simply have no choice. And as it was inspired by God it was also made to function in a righteous society, it simply doesn’t work in a society that detests His law. So the answer is simple. Glenn Beck has already told it to us. Change the heart of a man and he will change the heart of his family. Change the heart of a family and they will change their society. Change society and they will change the government. How do you change the heart of a man? The answer is love.And whether that love comes from my God, Christ, or from your God it doesn’t matter. As long as it does

  • http://twitter.com/IanStumpf Ian Stumpf

    So, Glenn’s position is also that of the constitutional candidate Ron Paul. Get the government out of the equation, let consenting adults do whatever they like and call it whatever they like?

    Complete agreement. 

  • Anonymous

    I disagree with Glenn.  He said “I’m for civil marriage. All the rights, civil marriage, that’s fine,” he told listeners. “My solution is take government out of marriage entirely. What is government doing in marriage?”  Civil unions by the very nature involve the government – County Clerks.  Homosexuality is an abomination before God and when County Clerks – oh, right, government – gets involved in issuing a “license” of approval regarding any perversion, we slip even further down the proverbial slope.  

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    Yours are kind words and I appreciate that. What I have found is peace in my spirit about my personal relationship with Christ. But as you pointed out…

    “If I slip again, I confess my sin to Him and know I have His grace if I have accepted Him as my Lord and Savior.”

    This I believe but if it applies to heterosexuals, does it not also apply to gays who already torture themselves for being the way they are. And although I agree that for many it was a CHOICE… it is equally true that for many, they were born that way.

    SO MANY gays commit suicide because of this self loathing when God LOVES them.

    So many are murdered because of there fanatical misunderstandings of scripture.

    I am not fully gay. I am actually bi but many call that a cop out. I had a wife for 15 years who I was faithful to. And I loved her.. and still do.

    HIV does not always come from sin as children are born with it and what sin have they? And what about accidental transfusion of which I can cite hundreds if not 1000′s of cases just within the last 2 years HERE in America. What choice did they have?

    PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE know that I am NOT defending the gay agenda or gays in general. I am standing on God’s word and my faith.

    Salvation and faith are VERY personal things and NONE of us is the moral authority to judge that. We live and die by the choices and mistakes we make. We also must answer to THE LIVING God for everything in our lives. I have MUCH to answer for and then I will say,

    “Father, thank you for allowing me to have had freedom to choose so that I may receive Your mercy and feel Your grace. Were it not for my many mistakes, I would never have known Father. And were it not for that, I could NEVER have been able to share Your love and grace and mercy with myriads in a world darkened by sin and iniquity.”

    I am physically tired now. Just physically. I appreciate your words. I have to try to force myself away from this thread for now… if I can =-)

    But I tell you this, those who hate me, it is not me that they hate but that blessed assurance that I do have. And let me tell you, for what it’s worth, I get it from BOTH sides… “christians” and gays. What am I to do? KEEP MY EYES ON GOD AND KNOW THAT HE IS.

    God bless you.

  • Anonymous

    “I will introduce you to my 2nd amendment RIGHT! GOT IT BUB”!  The truth has a way of bringing out the best in people or the worst.  What you have done is threaten someone with firearms couching it in euphemistic camo.  I always thought you weirdos are inherently dangerous.  Thing is, God is the person you are really mad at.  And, you aren’t going to like this, but the bible says that homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God.  Do I have to look that one up for you capable of find that for yourself.  Do you even own a Bible.  If you do, shake the dust off of it and start reading.  If I say the Bible says something, it says it.  It’s amazing how much one can learn in 40 years of study.  Understand this, in order to receive Christ you must confess and repent from your sins.  You won’t even acknowledge sin.  If we love Him, we will keep his commandments.  You know the Bible is anti homosexual.  You have to delete or reinterpret to come up with another conclusion.  Read Rev chapter 22 on that one.  You cannot be a homosexual and a Christian too.  Sorry, God’s words not mine.  Amazing how hateful you weirdos are.  BUB! 

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    REALLY! DO TELL! What Constitution are you reading?

    Mine says,

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    Two clauses in the First Amendment guarantee freedom of religion. The establishment clause prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. It enforces the “separation of church and state.” I don’t think you can spin that any other way

  • http://www.facebook.com/D.R.Films Michael Dontigney

    So, once again, Glenn agrees with Ron Paul.. “My solution is take government out of marriage entirely. What is government doing in marriage?”.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    If God thought we could “live by the law” He would not have sent His only begotten Son “John 3:16″ and given us a NEW Testament.

    Remember, he who lives by the law shall die by the law. Take it up with God.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZXUEQGPR6MW5KYTYESISHCMB4M WonderingWanderer

    This is only for the followers of Christ.  Try going to http://www.biblegateway.com or one of the other bible online sites.  Put in the search engine “Sodom” for both Old and New Testament.  Read all the scripture references.  What thoughts come to mind?  I really wonder if there is any benefit to arguing with unbelievers.  People who are not in Christ can’t understand.  They don’t have the Spirit to help them yet.  They don’t even seem to be able to understand that millions have been subject to early disease and death as a result of unnatural, forbidden  sexual habits.  Every time a few people die of a virus or bacteria from eating a tomato, cantaloup, bird excrement, etc. the whole world is on it.  If  millions and millions of people die of sexual practices it is a, politically  protected human right  and any who object are called vile names and accused of the most  vile motives ever invented.  We know who is behind this.  We were told it would happen.  At the same time we have to use every power within our means to keep the deceived  from seducing others into  this death style.   

  • Anonymous

    Bingo!  Well said!

  • Anonymous

    If hate is so wrong why did you threaten BUB with your second amendment rights.  H Y P O C R I T E!

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    WOW! an OPENLY GAY MAN? I threatened you? I bet you were bullied by some little girl while you were in elementary school…. You did go to elementary school didn’t you?

    I find your comment that I don’t even acknowledge my sin humorous. That’t not even worth going back over.

    Nice that you have 40 years of study. That means you will always be 4 years behind me.

    PLEASE DO EXPOSE MY HATRED.. I WOULD LOVE THAT!

    You ought to recognize it since you appear to be an expert with 40 years on the subject…. BUB!

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    FUNNY HOW YOU CALL THE SECOND AMENDMENT A THREAT UNTIL IT SUITS YOUR PURPOSES… NOW WHO IS A HYPOCRITE

  • Jarrod Carter

    What in the world are you saying?  That is the most nonsensical post I have read in a long time.

    Are you saying that you are homosexual and that you are saved by grace through faith?  Are you saying that we should love those who are homosexual in spite of their lifestyle choice?  What are you saying?

  • Anonymous

    Government is involved for the record keeping, so that other states can recognize the marriage (and also for the money for the licensing). Marriage is defined as “the union of one man and one woman as husband and wife”. Civil Union is defined as “the legally recognized union of two people of the same sex”. Notice, there is already a defined term for same sex and opposite sex unions. Both definitions already specify the total number of participants. Neither definition mentions anything about consent (however, it is kind of implied from ‘man’ and ‘woman’ as opposed to ‘child’, inferring some mental maturity).
    Since there are already defining terms for each of these, there should be no need to redefine either term to include both types of union. If either term is redefined, that opens the door for further redefinitions to possibly include any other variation of sexuality as Rick Santorum was trying to say.

  • Anonymous

    Much of what Glenn is saying is also what Ron Paul advocates in his Liberty Defined book on the subject of marriage, pp 183-186. I hope Glenn has a copy.

  • paula marshall

    Mbbman, the Books tell us that we are to DO everything we possibly can-  good works, charity, et al, and that it still wont be enough, and when that isn’t enough, THEN the Grace of Jesus’ gift to us (added on top of all our works and our faith) will then be sufficient for our being saved from Damnation, and we will enjoy Eternal Life because of Jesus.  So, for those who dont even try, or who dont care, because they think they have a free-pass through Jesus, they are missing a HUGE part of the formula.   We are saved by Grace alone, (since we cannot do it by ourselves no matter what) but Grace will NOT wipe away our foul filth we cloak ourselves in if we dont admit we are fallen and ask forgivness, then TRY to become better and live by GOD’s Commandments.  Its in the Books.  (the collection of books-  the bible) The biggest problem is the definition of “try”.  Most seem to think that the word “TRY” is defined by “I will sit and think that I really SHOULD do ___, and if It actually happens that I DO it; if suddenly I get this big Desire that comes over me to do it, (or to stop doing it) and I breeze right through it, then Yay, but either way, at least I TRIED.”  No.  -Not the def of ‘try’, at all.  To TRY to do something is to make a strong attempt to SUCCEED at doing something- which implies that one will do everything in his/her power to first think it through, formulate a plan, then work the plan to make it so, and if, in spite of every ounce of effort, it still fails to culminate, while one is still attempting, then one has actually, honestly tried.  Most people wont even honestly try to stop sinning.  We should TRY.

  • Anonymous

    First, Glenn, you are wrong.  The government is not based on Judeo-Christian laws.  The founders were Deists.  They did not believe in the Bible, they were not Christians.  To them, God is the creator of the universe and nothing else.  God is nature, period.  God is not a man and God never talked to Moses or anyone else and gave them laws.  The Bible and all the rest is a man made thing that gave certain people power over others and created revenue for the one who did the preaching.  So, lets get that straight and the rest will fall into place.  Your religious beliefs are none of my business so keep them out of my government and my life.

  • http://WWW.ANOINTEDIMAGES.COM FRANCES LOUISE

    Spirit of compromise is an anathama to what the Word of God says: He says to be holy as he is holy. He is a Holy God and we are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling not keep making excuses and being coddled in the behavior. Yes Yahshua paid for every sin but that is not an excuse to keep on with the same sin.
    Humanity as a whole is born into a condition of sin…we all are supposed to mortify the deeds of the flesh, we are supposed to put down our lower nature, not cultivate and celebrate it. There is a spirit of perversion behind this LGBT agenda and whether you like hearing that or not it happens to be the fact.
    “gay” is nothing more then a lack of self-control and discipline of baser emotions and allowing oneself to be given over to darkness and depravity. Period.   There is  such a fight of ferocity to maintain an aberent life style, a demonic ferocity. Love the sinner but don’t love the sin or make excuses for it and most surely don’t be part of normalizing it.
    The Almighty did not say it was an abomination and at the same time curse some to be born with no choice but to be that abomination. That is preposterous. This is a choice. If you believe this you are being decieved with the lies of the enemy of your immortal soul. It may not be PC what I say but it is BIBLICAL TRUTH.

  • Brandon Reed

    If God is the value of marriage then the State needs to stop having anything to do with marrige. If any of you think that gay is a choice you need to step out of your peferct Bible world and relise that somethings are different with some people which doesnt make right to deny them any rights shared by us. Life, Liberty and the purcuit of happiness. It isnt Life, Liberty and the purcuit of happiness according to anyones relgion. Freedom and state laws are a totally different entity then religon. Read Thomas Jeffersons tomb stone and you will relise how important it was to make sure that religon never stepped on the rights of any minority.If you think that someone having cowboy butt sex in the privacy of their home under the vows they took under state law (not in your church because thats your right) is going to have anything to do with your spot in heaven then you need to read a little deeper in your precious book. We are judged on our OWN actions. The best idea is not to assume everyone believes the samethings as you and tend to your own affairs and sins instead of casting stones at people different then you. After all, if this was Iran we’d all be dead for free thought.

  • http://www.google.com Doodaddio

    The Narcissist pontificates once more. Your presuming to be credible enough to dictate what questions should be asked of anyone is sublimely ridiculous. Just because you own a computer and have a bald head doesn’t give you the authority to interrogate anyone. Your authoritarian stance is laughable, especially in view of the fact that you have no emotional self control. We have all seen the work of Vicky33, and you have been judged and found wanting.

    Here’s the real Victor;

    “If you were an actual person and I had the
    resources, I could and would sue your sleazy and worthless ass for libel.

    As it is, I can only point out that if you’re a “Christian,” then
    you’re a complete hypocrite for lying about me and my marriage. You’re also so
    desperate to attack me that, like every chimp on the planet, you pull feces
    from your ass and throw it at me. You are on a very low branch on the tree of
    evolution. F$%king pond scum ranks higher than you.

    You f$%king coward! Tell the world what your name is, so that henceforth we can
    all know who the scumbag liar is on the road to hell.

    You are a much bigger dirtbag than Beck ever dreamed of being. I’d love to meet
    with you sometime; when you lie about my marriage, I get so furious that I’d
    happily rip your face off and shove it up your ass.”

    “Come by my office; you can have a very brief chat with my lawyers:
    Smith and Wesson. Tip: call the county morgue first for a pick up.”

     
    “I’ll cut your face off and shove it up your ass.”

    I certainly hope you don’t forget those threats, but if you do I will be
    sure to remind you.

    ****************************************************************************************

    Yes those are the words of a man who deigns to dictate who others should vote for. I am sure that a lot of people out there will read your words, Victor, and be impressed, but not in the way you think they will.

    A prudent person will align themselves with truth, honesty, and honor. Victor, you don’t have any of those qualities, which makes you 180 degrees out of phase with intelligent people everywhere.

    You may have an education, the quality of which seems dubious, but you have to be one of the most ignorant fools that ever walked.

  • paula marshall

    Its not a ‘good thing’ when gays get married.  Indeed, it isn’t even a ‘good thing’  when many heterosexuals get married, since they rarely are honest about their goals and plans to each other, and their marriages (and mine) end in divorce.  Marriage SHOULD be a sacred union entered into by a man and a woman, with the determination to make it last till death do they part, and I am not referring to the fairly commonly utilized penchance for murder than some actually employ nowadays to make the death-part happen unnaturally.  That is as unacceptable as bestiality or any other perversion of GOD’s decree of marriage.  A marriage license should be incredibly difficult to obtain, which might make it more precious to those who use it.

  • Anonymous

    If you think that Government should be out of marriage, then why do you support Santorum’s position? He wants government to define marriage, even going so far as saying that he wants to control what gays do in the bedroom(see his thoughts on Lawrence v. Texas people, he has advocated restrictions on gays that look like something out of Tehran). Secondly, our laws are not based on Judeo Christian ideas, they are based on enlightenment philosophy which defined natural rights. Granted a vast majority of those rights originated from the Bible, the Bible provides free will. The whole idea of America is that we don’t force people to aspire to a single philosophy or a single way of life just because we think it is good for them. We were founded as a haven for religious freedom and tolerance. Santorum wants to force his ideals on everyone, even those who reject it. I am a devout Christian and I live a conservative life style but Christ would not have used a government mandate to define marriage. Marriage is sacred, and is above any type of government definition. Even if we allowed gays to marry, would they truly be married in the eyes of the Lord? He is the one who defines marriage, not us and we all would be better off realizing that and no longer trying to force our ideology on everyone who disagrees with us. On to the polygamy portion of the statement, no one argued with him because it is such an absurd comparison that quite frankly you don’t know what to say to the man. Polygamy involves multiple marriages, not a single marriage. The reason for banning polygamy is also different than the reasons for banning gay marriage and civil unions. It has to do with sexual abuse and kidnapping that often accompanies polygamy, especially with radical religious sects such as the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints. To compare the two shows what a complete dunce Rick Santorum is, they are in no way shape or form similar and the fact that he thinks that they are is idiotic. He does not understand the idea of pursuit of happiness. You may pursue your dreams at your own expense, not at the expense of others. Polygamy, 90% of the time involves pursuing your happiness at the expense of a teenage girl that was probably kidnapped and raped as was the case with Elizabeth Smart. Gays enter into relationships consensually and there is no abuse taking place. Yet Santorum wants to compare them to polygamists? How can anyone take him seriously…

  • Anonymous

    If you think that Government should be out of marriage, then why do you support Santorum’s position? He wants government to define marriage, even going so far as saying that he wants to control what gays do in the bedroom(see his thoughts on Lawrence v. Texas people, he has advocated restrictions on gays that look like something out of Tehran). Secondly, our laws are not based on Judeo Christian ideas, they are based on enlightenment philosophy which defined natural rights. Granted a vast majority of those rights originated from the Bible, the Bible provides free will. The whole idea of America is that we don’t force people to aspire to a single philosophy or a single way of life just because we think it is good for them. We were founded as a haven for religious freedom and tolerance. Santorum wants to force his ideals on everyone, even those who reject it. I am a devout Christian and I live a conservative life style but Christ would not have used a government mandate to define marriage. Marriage is sacred, and is above any type of government definition. Even if we allowed gays to marry, would they truly be married in the eyes of the Lord? He is the one who defines marriage, not us and we all would be better off realizing that and no longer trying to force our ideology on everyone who disagrees with us. On to the polygamy portion of the statement, no one argued with him because it is such an absurd comparison that quite frankly you don’t know what to say to the man. Polygamy involves multiple marriages, not a single marriage. The reason for banning polygamy is also different than the reasons for banning gay marriage and civil unions. It has to do with sexual abuse and kidnapping that often accompanies polygamy, especially with radical religious sects such as the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints. To compare the two shows what a complete dunce Rick Santorum is, they are in no way shape or form similar and the fact that he thinks that they are is idiotic. He does not understand the idea of pursuit of happiness. You may pursue your dreams at your own expense, not at the expense of others. Polygamy, 90% of the time involves pursuing your happiness at the expense of a teenage girl that was probably kidnapped and raped as was the case with Elizabeth Smart. Gays enter into relationships consensually and there is no abuse taking place. Yet Santorum wants to compare them to polygamists? How can anyone take him seriously…

  • Anonymous

    I guess I agree in the concepts put forward.  If gay people want to marry, they should be allowed to do it.  If multiple consenting adults wish to get married, they should be allowed to do it.  If a person wanted to marry a goat, they’d have to prove the goat consents.  As long as the government is engaged in the business of marriage, people should share the same ability to get married, whether they be hetero, homo or polygamist.  Likewise, any religious institutions should have the right to run their churches within the confines of their religious beliefs.

  • Anonymous

    I was raised Roman Catholic but I do not agree with everything the bible says. It was written by men not GOD himself. Who really cares what other people do, why can’t you live your life according to what you “know” to be “fact” and let other people live their lives according to what they “know” to be “fact”. I read some other great books the Seth books, books by Jerry and Ester Hicks. I found these to be very interesting. so what if gay people want to get married, how does this physically affect your life? It doesn’t.  We are all here for our own reasons and they have nothing to do with anyone else’s reasons. Focusing on such a non matter wastes your time. And just so you know if you were to read Our Toxic World you could learn a little about how common chemicals we ingest regularly unbeknownst to most people actually affect the endocrine system, they are know as gender benders.  who really knows ultimately how many people have been affected by these chemicals, how far back and what other conditions or chemicals can cause the same outcome. I found this information interesting. It would mean that its not a choice but that biologically we can be changed so maybe it can be reversed. I don’t think anyone chooses to be gay, I think they just eventually realize they have to make themselves happy and not worry about what other people think. 

  • Anonymous

    An they say the Homosexuality is not a predatory life style! Why do the Homosexuals demand that thing happen to benefits there desires? Continually, looking for new blood to violate or bring into their lair, through legislation and pressuring the weak to give in!

  • Huss Family

    “The government is not based on Judeo-Christian laws. The founders were Deists. They did not believe in the Bible, they were not Christians. To them, God is the creator of the universe and nothing else. God is nature, period.”
    Boy I’m tired of people who don’t read their history throwing this argument around.  I invite you to look up what Deism really means, and then read, oh, say, just a few dozen pages of quotes by our founders on their take on God the Bible and faith and God’s place in our country and our government.   Then you’ll see just how assinine this groundless assertion is. 

  • Brandon Reed

    This is the whole reason Im having a problem voting republican. I do not like Obama at all but I absolutly can not vote for anyone taking freedom away from a group of people that want nothing more then to share in the misery I mean happiness of marrige. Then you have a mormon on the ticket. I know a little about their beliefs and find it very strange that of all the places on earth Independence MO is where the garden of eden is. So, we have the same ol same ol with Obama. Pushing his will but getting nothing done with a lame duck congress, a ‘dunce’ who wants to make sure that our beliefs are his beliefs and a plastic molded politican who believes in some “outside the box” religon

  • Anonymous

    You lack understanding and knowledge of this time in history and what was actually happening.

    Numbers 6:24-26

  • Anonymous

    You’re free to have your beliefs but like many posters to this discussion thread, your argument is based on religious beliefs.  The gay marriage debate is a political one in the space where there’s a separation of church and state.  While your argument may be convincing to Christians, the basis of the argument doesn’t even make it to the floor in the debate on gay marriage, at least as long as government is in the business of marriage.  A solution that would never gain traction would be for government to issue only civil union licenses with a civil union being defined equally between hetero and homo.  Marriage would be reserved for religious institutions.  I say it would never work because it would be deemed unfair for religious institutions to have the benefit of receiving the definition of marriage.

  • Huss Family

    “As long as the government is engaged in the business of marriage, people should share the same ability to get married, whether they be hetero, homo or polygamist”
    I have to disagree with Glenn -and you – on this one.  The government has every right and all the business in the world to get involved with the definition of marriage.  Government’s job is to safeguard society.  Marriage is the fundamental unit of society, and it is in government’s and society’s best interests to protect it.  It is the unit that forms the family, which ensures that that society and that civilization will physically, morally and culturally reproduce and survive.  If government starts granting that protected status to any kind of sexual relationship that feels good, whether it’s with their mother or their toaster, that is a recipe for societal suicide.  Just look at the societies that have gone that route…or not; they’re not around anymore.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CXFUJCUOQU7O2RFRDWHD6N6RRM Suzanne

    HarmonyandLove- You could benefit from some serious self-examination.

    The devil himself is the one that originated the lie of “what I do is my own business and doesn’t affect anyone else.” This would be true if God had created a planet for each of us, which He did not do for a reason.Everyone knows that we are all connected. Evil actions always affect others, even if indirectly. Even without doing evil, doing less than our best has an impact on others. This is without even considering the widespread impact of the laws of a society.While I concur that there are probably toxins contributing to the confusion, individuals still have compasses by which to make brave decisions. All forms of addiction are breakable with sacrifice.Don’t confuse surrendering to temptation with happiness.

  • Brandon Reed

    The job of our constitution is to safeguard society from its government. NEVER NEVER trust them to safeguard anything. Do you really think bfallecause they make gay marrige legal everyone will become gay and births will stop? Also, as sure as somethings rises it will fall. Societys fall to make room for others not because there were gays in that society. Is that you Jerry Fawell?

  • http://twitter.com/knightcreeper Bret Bennett

    I agree with Glenn completely I never understood why the Government was involved in Marriage. To me it is completely a Religious thing. If your religion defines marriage between a Man and Man then that is fine but don’t force my religion to agree… That is a perfect example of separation of church and state in my opinion. I believe in LIMITED Government not a Nanny State. Marriage should not be about government rights or deductions. It is not a contract between whoever and the government but a contract between whoever and their Creator.

  • Rex Whitmer

    You are saved by his grace when you give up all your sins and repent of them.  His grace does not create any sort of forgiveness for unrepented sin, which DOES include homosexuality.

  • Rex Whitmer

    Actually he is NOT forgiaven until he gives up his sins and fully repents from them.

  • Anonymous

    I personally believe G-d is on my side every time I affirm, love, honor, respect, and lift up someone who happens to be gay. Being a compassionate human being is not the same as endorsing, condoning, or encouraging one sexual orientation over another. IT IS ABOUT COMPASSION AND JUSTICE. It’s about liberty and freedom and all the things we hold dear as Americans. It is about decency, and brotherhood, and LOVE for our neighbor.

    What do we say to people who say the Bible tells us being gay is a sin? I personally believe the Bible has been interpreted and reinterpreted so many times, by so many cultures and governments, that some of what’s left may not necessarily reflect the intention of its writer(s). It is probably much more of an evolving historical document than a Divine one. If you are given an interpretation of the Bible that teaches being Gay is a sin, QUESTION IT. Numerous respected scholars feel it is a misinterpretation.

    Perhaps the Biblical injunction to “Be fruitful and multiply” was intended to a apply to an entire tribe, rather than to an individual. Couldn’t a person’s contribution to society, made through their career or through their volunteering, be toward the greater good that satisfies this commandment? Each time an individual or childless couple does something to make the world a better place for children, they are following G-d’s plan, in my humble opinion.

    The Biblical injunction to “not spill one’s seed” must also be taken in historical cultural context. In Biblical times, before there were modern government programs to protect the most vulnerable in our society, women were seen as the property of men. They did not own property — only men did. Property was passed from father to son. A woman’s only chance at a long life and survivol was dependent upon being married, and when her husband died, having sons. A man having sex with his wive(s) and providing a son for each of them meant increasing the likelihood the wives would not starve to death, should he die. Sex outside of marriage, whether homosexual or heterosexual, potentially denied women a rightful heir to insure against their premature deaths. Sperm was not to be “wasted” because it was a valued commodity for these women — it might be the difference between life and death for them. In some historian’s opinions, the injunction against “spilling one’s seed” was not meant to equate homosexual sex with being evil; it was an early attempt to provide a social safety net for the welfare of widows.

    The Bible also contains some important ethical lessons for us all, if we choose to read it as a historical depository of generations of wisdom. It tells us that which is Divine is in our hearts, and that G-d is love. The Golden Rule tells us to treat others as we wish to be treated. All of the world’s great faiths teach us to “LOVE AND CARE FOR EACH OTHER”. What more could we possibly need to know?

    There are increasing numbers of churches and synagogues that welcome and affirm gay members and help them to feel lovable and valuable. These churches make it clear that all people are equal under the sheltering arms of a loving G-d. They put LOVE up front, where it is supposed to be, where Jesus and Moses and Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr. and the Dalai Lama, and so many other spiritual leaders have told us it should be. Many of these churches show rainbows on their websites and use words like “welcoming and affirming” in their descriptions. As a general rule of thumb, Unitarian-Universalist churches, United Church of Christ, and many urban community churches are like this. If you are looking for a spiritual community that teaches love and acceptance for everyone, call PFLAG and ask for some suggestions in the community where you live.

    My friend Ben killed himself when we were young because the people around him were bullies. Losing my friend Ben changed my life more than 25 years ago, and gave me my mission — to offer compassion and comfort to people who feel disenfranchised in some way. That mission includes speaking out against injustices perpetrated toward people who are gay, lesbian, transgender and bisexual. They — WE — are all made in the image of G-d.

    Whether you agree with me religiously or not, please help me spread the message within our communities, that OUR JOB ON THIS EARTH IS TO LOVE — not to judge, humiliate, shame, belittle, torture, shun, banish, punish, or change other people. Please join me in condemning such hatred and emotional violence, every place, every situation, every time.

    Life is too short for hate. Our job here is to LOVE.
     

  • Brandon Reed

    Because people like you are telling them their desires are wrong. Im thinking you didnt learn a thing about how powerful hormones work in the body. The reason our wives want to kill us one week outta four is hormones. Do you really think that they couldnt get mixed up and if so whos fault is it? Gods, since he or she was made in his image?

  • Anonymous

    While I respect your opinion, I’ll disagree on the basis of the fallibility of government, which is nothing more than people.  When you put the charge of safeguarding society in the hands of government, think of the control you just handed over to people you never elected (i.e. representatives and senators from various states you never got to vote for or against).  You want to give as little responsibility to those dopes as possible.  Remember you get what you ask for and they won’t stop at the subject of gay marriage.  They’ll invade every other aspect of our lives under the guise of “safeguarding society.”

  • DC/Tex

    The homosexual (not PC gay) agenda is the most evil and the worst disease on the morals of the USA and the world. Homosexuals WERE NOT BORN THAT WAY so homosexuality does not qualify as a civil rights dicrimination issue. All professing Christians must denounce the homosexual agenda and their queer lifestyle.

  • Anonymous

    Excuse me but homosexuals were born that way. God made them that way! They should have the same rights as everyone else.  Who died and made you God to judge them? They only want the same rights that you have! 

  • Anonymous

    Why do gay couples insist on being “married”? By definition, marriage is between a male and a female with the ability to procreate offspring. Why don’t gays settle for commonlaw couples, which makes a heck of better sense and still entitles them to take the benefits of living as a couple?

  • Jules Child

    Is this really as important an issue as it appears to be here and everywhere else?  I have friends who are fighting (and some are dying) in another country for my freedoms.  One child will grow up never having known his father.  I have sponsored several children and families here and abroad because they could not afford food or clothing.  I am deeply concerned about how our children are growing up, what type of society they see and think is reality, what type of future is there for them, and what will they make of it?  So much so that I’ve started talks in several local schools to help kids learn self respect, physical responsibility for themselves and others, financial responsibility so they don’t do what our generations have done to this country.
    I have and still do attend church, and believe that God is everywhere.  I can see the beauty in life.  But for us to be so concerned about “relationships” and what constitutes a real marriage  when there are much bigger tragedies out there is very sad.  If we could turn our energies, loves, respect and even religious beliefs to improving what we have now, and helping those who truly need it, that is what God wants us to do.  I’m not asking anyone to share my beliefs, nor do they have to defend theirs.  I’m just weary of the anger and hatred out there.  What type of soul are we giving to God when we spend so much time hating on others?
    I’m just saying…..

  • DC/Tex

    Homosexuals choose their lifestyle!

  • Anonymous

    There is no temptation that makes you gay, you are born that way. Are you saying God is imperfect? That he made a mistake? This has been proven that homosexuals are born that way and it has nothing to do with choice.  Why are people remaining so ignorant when it comes to this? They deserve the same rights as anyone else.  They are entitled to love another human being. Look at the state of marriage now-is it 50 or 60% divorced after 3 years? So heterosexual marriage is better? I don’t think so.

  • http://twitter.com/Stormin_Steve Stephen Todd

    “sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don’t”  HA! Pure comedic genius!

  • Sandie

    This threat is enough to get him banned from the website. You can c/p the offending post and sned it with a complaint to the website managers… customerservice@glennbeck.com (and customerservice@GBTV.com)

  • Rex Whitmer

    You, my friend, are re-interpeting the Bible to your own thought.  Homosexuality has been regarded a sin since man found God!  Were it only one or two phrases we might consider your conjecture; but it is a constant statement.  Before Christ it was worthy of death.  Afterwards it’s punishment was lightened to not associating with it.  Today we associate with it and ignore it so long as participants don’t get in our face about it.  Homosexuals however often want to get in our face and claim equality with the sacred ceremony of marriage.  It is not marriage and never will be no matter what Non-Christians and non-Bibical Christians may put on their law books.  As far as so called natural desire is concerned, I may have a natural desire to drive a stake through your heart, but I doubt you will ever consider it right?  I am a human and thus have the ability to control myself, so I learn act like a human being and like God intended us to act.

  • Ron Brancatelli

    ! man 1 woman that’s marriage.  Since the beginning of time….now it’s a moral issue NOT to let two men marry or two woman?

  • Brandon Reed

    It would be like saying you have the right of freedom of speech but you have to say it this way. Why should it be different for them? Does it infringe on anything that happens in our lives. I never understood homosexuals till it was put to me in lamon terms. We all had the friends brother who instead of playing war or football enjoyed tea partys and dolls. We teased them and picked on them but it finally clicked when I relised he had been that way since we’d known him. Is it really a choice is the ultimite question. I believe it not to be, so it would imply its something they cant change. You either like the fish or the tube steak and theyre born that way. We dont bash or deny rights to peope who look or talk different then us so why should we against them

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_D2HL5SEVRKJFK5BN5VIIV6FPN4 Phyllis

    I think I look at this issue differently than others…..It’s not as much a “marriage” issue as a freedom of religion issue.  Many religions see only marriage between a man and a woman is ethical.  But what about those who aren’t members of those religions, or aren’t tied to any religion at all?  The concern I have is about using the word marriage in a new law is how that law will be manipulated for personal or financial gain by others.  I’m afraid of those who will not hesitate to twist the wording in order to take other folk’s rights away.  In this case, if they allow gay folks (or polygamists) to “marry”, then does that mean they will be able to force certain churches, synagogues, mosques etc to participate?  Forcing organizations to perform marriages that are against their religion is a violation of our freedom of religion.  Just like forcing Catholic hospitals to provide birth control and abortions.

  • Ron Brancatelli

    1 man 1 woman = marriage. 
    1 man  1 woman = marriage.
    1 man  1 woman = marriage.

  • Brandon Reed

    That can never happen as long as you stand up for you religous rights. The day might come when they try but thats your time to outshine.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ed-Pfaff/100001312271702 Ed Pfaff

    YOUR Position on marriage equality is MORONIC!!!!!!!!!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/leaanne.j.morrison Lea-Anne Joy Morrison

    You know what? I don’t give a damn what the lil gays say about marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman, end of story. They can have a civil union, call it anything else but not a marriage. They can call me bigoted, in fact I hate gays, it is wrong, they have a mental issue. In saying that they can do what they want behind closed doors but keep it behind closed doors. They are trying to make people think that they are normal, ha ha, no they are not, they have a mental sickness that should not be encouraged. The real issue is children, they want them but a child should be raised by a father and mother, not a fag and his play thing ( I just got a little sick). I know there are some crappie mothers and fathers but that is another issue. They can make as many hate laws as they want but a fact is a fact. What they do is wrong and any children in their  care should be removed. If your going to take offence to what I have said here remember this, I don’t care, I would tell you to go to hell but your already there if your a gay. 

  • Brooke Alton

     “GOD made the institution of marriage, and made male and female in order to continue and multiply the human race”. Many are not going to want to hear this but this explanation is also why polygamy is also part of God’s plan. Abraham had more than one wife and it was his wife, Sariah who initiated it! Polygamy can bring more children into this world to good men and families faster. Thus multiplying the human race more efficiently. I had never thought of this before. Thank you for bringing it up.

  • Rex Whitmer

    I would suggest Ninja that you blow the dust off that Bible sitting on your book shelf and re-read it. 

  • Anonymous

    Are you saying you’re ambivalent about the sexes and could go either way but make a conscious choice to be with someone from the opposite sex?  Are you equally attracted to both men and women but choose the opposite of yourself?  I assume you engage in sex because it’s pleasurable.  Do you imagine sex with someone of the same sex as you as pleasurable?  If not, why do you think a gay person would engage in something so unpleasurable?

    I’m hetero but have good friends that are gay.  They’re everyday folks like you and me that you’d never know were gay.  They’re in monogamous relationships with nothing to gain other than the love they share with their partner.  Gay people are no different than us and want the same things.  Everyone has choices but I can’t find the upside of making the choice you’re talking about here.  I’m certain it was never a choice for you who you were attracted to.  Why do you think it’s different for them?

  • Anonymous

    The gay community complains that they don’t have the same
    rights as straight people when it comes to marriage and so when you give it to
    them and call it Civil Union they cry foul… It is not that they want the same
    rights …they want to change those that accept marriage as being between one
    man and one women and force their morals on those that don’t accept it as their
    own. Then like Glen says then if we go by that thinking and change the variable
    then why not change all of them… why because it does not fit into their
    ultimate Goal. Have homosexuality as the norm and have heterosexual not the
    norm.

  • Ron Brancatelli

    I have a right to happiness. I have a right to a job. I have a right to a lot of money and a really nice car. I have a right to party through out college and do what ever I want to do and then when I’m done I have a right to a really good job. I have a right to healthcare. I have a right to a 3 week vacation a year. I have a right to children. I have a right to a summer home. I have a right…..NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT.

  • Brandon Reed

    Very true. Trampling of human rights is also a tragity and if we were gay I think our rights to be treated the same as everyone else wouldnt be on a back burner. Some problems hit a little closer to home then others.

  • http://www.facebook.com/casselmans Brad’n Kim Casselman

    The government set this issue on self destruct when they assumed to be the authority on marriage.  Marriage is a contract between mankind and their God and the state should have never gotten involved.  They will never find peace with this issue until they give it back to the leaders of morality, that is to say the churches.

  • Brandon Reed

    1 pope 1000 politicans= the rape of freedom

  • Anonymous

    I’m sure this is how Jesus said it himself.

  • Brandon Reed

    Not equality? Sounds like thats all they want. You forgot the right to a Obama phone lol

  • Anonymous

    Two points:

    1. This is a perfect example of how it is absolutely impossible to “reason” with the Left.  We Americans have to accept and realize what they are. 

    Let me provide some quotes:

    Harry Stein, conservative author:
    “Anyone who believes that a liberal can be straightened out if only reality is explained to him, simply and clearly, is doomed to fail.”

    John Leo, a syndicated columnist and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, said:

    You can go your whole life and not hear a liberal take seriously any conservative argument – they just yell ‘racist’ or ‘fascist’ and think they’ve won.”

    2. Anyone who tries to reason with them simply does not understand them.  This puts the onus on we Americans to deal with this reality.

  • Brandon Reed

    True but that cats outta the bag when the state found it to be a good money maker.

  • Sharlotte W

    Right…What????? AND Jehovah IS Jesus.  Frankie makes NOT sense.

  • Anonymous

    Frankie,  Check your bible sweetie. Jesus also said he didn’t come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it.  We need to realize that just because we live under grace, that doesn’t mean that we can just keep sinning. If you love God, then you want to stop sinning, not make excuses for why you have to keep doing it.

  • Anonymous

    Bingo!

  • Anonymous

    One more comment: Santorum was steadfast and showed how one MUST respond to these invidious challenges.

    There is one rule: Never – repeat, NEVER – defend YOURSELF.  And I mean NEVER.  What Liberals do is attack the person.  They will say you are a racist, a homophobe, a sexist, lacking compassion and so on.

    If you try to prove that charge wrong, you have LOST.  The Liberal won.  NEVER say why you are NOT a racist, homophobe, etc.  Rather, ALWAYS go on the attack.  Turn it around.  THEY are racists, for example, because they view people as belonging to groups before looking at them as individuals.  THEY are racists because they profess to speak for a group, thus implying that the group is in need of help and inferior.

  • Anonymous

    While at the same time claiming that we’re “forcing our beliefs” on them.

  • Darren Anderton

    Okay, I’m going to go out of the norm of my political beliefs for a second. Fist of all, I don’t believe in gay marriage. Second of all, I don’t believe that everyone else should have the exact same beliefs as I do.  I believe, by my religion, that marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman. However, the government sees marriage as merely a combination of assets between two people. If two gays or lesbians wanted to be married, who cares if it’s legitimate in the government’s eyes if it’s not legitimate in God’s eyes? I understand that the argument is that marriage is defined as a unity between a man and a woman, and I believe that to be true, but imposing my belief onto other people who disagree with me (and they are many) through governmental regulation would make me a hypocrite.

  • Dave Sebastian

    Adultery ,, an Fornication are described as sexual sins in 1st an 2nd Corinthians ,, Homosexuality in called an (abomination) through out the old an new testament. Sin is sin an if you comet one you have failed in all however there are degrees of judgement from God for different types of sin. That being said it is also a sin for a person that claims to be a Christian  to not tell the truth about the wages of sin and also to water down the truth about the living God. This country in slipping into Judgement like it cant even imagine because of the lie it has been living for a very long time. When we nick name one of our states (SIN CITY) ,,an under the protection of the laws written by MAN we MURDER BABYS by the thousands,, when we say that it is religious freedom in America to serve Pagan Gods,, Islam,,Hinduism,, Buddhism,and all the other CRAP that is Satanic in nature but covered up,, dressed up and made to seem like just another,, path or way to GOD,, JUDGMENT IS IMMANENT ! unless America repents and does not any longer tolerate SIN IN THE CAMP. EVERY NATION not some nations,, EVERY NATION THAT GOD HAS HAD HIS HAND OF BLESSING ON and the same has turned complacent,,luke warm, and even welcoming of sinful lifestyles has fell,, and fell hard.            

  • Anonymous

    Good point.  They are asking for special rights, extra rights, of course.

  • DC/Tex

    It seems as though that you think that if it feels good do it. I have known a few homosexuals in my life and they did not flaunt their lifestyle and even though I do not agree with their chosen lifestyle I got along with them okay. It is the homosexual agenda that I have a big problem with, such as teaching their filthy lifestyle to children in schools to make them believe that it is natural and okay, having a queer (not PC gay) pride day, with perverted nasty parades, and wanting to be married and again wanting everyone to believe it is natural and okay.  The homosexual agenda must be stopped now! Professing Christians know it is wrong and must stand up and denounce this filth.

  • Anonymous

    I agree that the government just needs to step out of marriage altogether, except in the limitations of children marrying.  If it’s not a legal union, but a civil contract, then marriage can be whatever you want it to be.  The military and various government agencies discriminate against those who marry for convenience, benefits, tax deductions, etc. that are not involved romantically.  Why can’t I … “marry my best friend and never be intimate” or “marry my first cousin”?  I can have sex with my best friend and first cousin legally.  I can conceive children with them.  I can live with them in a cohabitation arrangement.  I can have threesomes with both of them.  So, why do I get discriminated against?  (Not really, I’m married to a man and have kids and am an absolute Christian who believes sex of various kinds is damaging to the union god intended, including the aforementioned consentual threesome.  But the point is, why the focus on same sex partners redefining the narrow view of marriage.  Once you take that step to prevent “bigotry” or “discrimination,” where does it stop?  Ever know a couple who “got married” in the commitment sense, but never filed it with the government?  Ever know a couple who split up and remained that way for years or even decades without ever filing their estrangement?  The point is, it shouldn’t be a government thing.  It should be personal.  If Sarah and Joanna want to have a wedding and commit their lives together before God and witnesses, so be it.  It doesn’t make the commitment any greater or lesser if the union is or isn’t filed.  As for “divorce” and the government’s part in that, an adult couple who lives together should be able to sign a business contract or what have you, and let it be about that.  Whatever. 

  • Anonymous

    When the government “legalizes” something, it is a tacit endorsement.

  • Brandon Reed

    Yeah, I kinda argee. I have a gay cousin and its a unwritten law that theres no messing around i.e kissing or any other horse play in front of all of us. Children should not grow up in a gay relationship. Very weird! Aunt Steve is weird enough but that doesnt mean they dont deserve equality. psyco mofos have the same rights we do if not more.

  • Anonymous

    Yes, very true  In addition, there are movements to revise history to include a certain proportion of homosexuals in history and literture, and to describe the sexual lives (who is homosexual) in the textbooks.  Kind of a “quota” system for homosexuals.

    In addition, are you aware of their “Hate Crime” legslation?  If a person does something illegal to Mr. X, for example, and he happens to be homosexual, the federal government (FBI) can be called in for the investigation and arrest of that person.  In addition, judges are pressured to give stiffer penalties – for the same crime! 

  • Anonymous

    So is other marriage.  I wonder if a married couple’s sex play and porn usage is also perversion?  I wonder if refusing to have sex at any time in marriage is a perversion?  I wonder if adventurous sex, say outdoors or in a hot tub or in the kitchen, is a perversion.  Label it how you will, but you sound ignorant.  I’m not a proponent for gay marriage and am not too keen on the gay “lifestyle.”  But, for Christ’s sake, have some compassion and demonstrate some love.  Think about what leads a person to that path of homosexuality and care about the person.  Geez.  This is the most embarrassing type of comment that the Savior can read.  Sad.

  • Anonymous

    That isn’t even the issue here. What is being discussed is whether or not it’s being bigoted if you stick to your own morals, but don’t try to shut other people down. Gays are the ones who go to public meetings and blow whistles and shout people down, usually Christian people. If freedom were all it was about, they’ve already got that. It’s not about freedom, not for anyone who opposes them anyway. It’s about putting a muzzle on anyone who doesn’t agree with their lifestyle, or might dare to think of it as sin or perversion. Last I checked this was still a free society, in name anyway, but we’ve strayed far from the ideal. People are supposed to be able to express any views that they want even when others find it repugnant, but the last few decades the cancer of political correctness has crept in further and further until I’m afraid we’ve let it go to far and freedom is terminally ill. You can’t promote free speech for those on one side of the argument and silence the other side. If you do, you have something other than a free society. People who are really secure in who they are or what they think are not intimidated by others who disagree, and don’t need to resort to acting like babies to be heard.

  • Anonymous

    In essence you’re point is, God doesn’t really care what man decides on this.  His rules are his rules and you play by them or you don’t.  So really, this is much ado about nothing.  Man can’t overrule God so what we decide on gay marriage is irrelevant.  Where most of the objection to gay marriage is based on religious beliefs, this may be the most salient point on this thread. 

  • Anonymous

    Exactly Phyllis. The gays don’t really care about anyone else’s rights, they just want to force other people to “accept” them. While they may have succeeded in making enough people afraid enough of the “thought police” to keep quiet about it publicly, they have not changed many peoples’ minds. 

  • DC/Tex

    The rope sucker Barney Franks is not running for reelection, thank God. All openly homosexuals should not be allowed to hold office that could affect the law and all homosexual judges should be removed from the bench The homosexual agenda must be stopped!

  • Huss Family

    Another of those convenient leaps of logic.  It has not “been proven” that homosexuals are “born that way.”  That is one of those “truths by tyranny” that an extremely powerful and vitriolic and in-your-face lobby has bullied down society’s collective throats.  Check your science elsewhere than what you hear from the bought and paid  “politically corrupt” media.  Homosexuals do indeed have the right to have sex with anyone they want to.  They do not have the right to co-opt the institution of marriage to sanction their predilections. Marriage is an institution – NOT a right. 

  • Anonymous

    Agree.  When Mary the adulteress was going to be stoned in the streets, Jesus intervened.  She repented and He said “Go and sin no more…”  not “go and live freely and do what you want and come say your sorry every once in a while.”

  • Anonymous

    What people are “hating” Jules, is having a small, extremely vocal and aggressive group of people demanding that everybody embrace their alternative lifestyle. There are those of us who actually believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible and that homosexuality is definitely a sin. If you don’t agree that’s your business, but don’t try to tell me what to believe, I’ve already made my choice, and don’t try to force your beliefs on my children by getting overreaching laws passed to have this stuff crammed down kids’ throats in public schools. Next they will be clamoring for the private schools to have to include it in their curriculum too, wait and see.

  • Anonymous

    Have you read this thread?  If anyone wants to force someone else to conform, it’s the people posting on this thread that want gays to conform to a hetero lifestyle.  What rights of yours are gays trampling by trying to push forward gay marriage?  The right to not allow gays to marry?

  • Darren Anderton

    It’s not up to the government to endorse anything. We as Americans can make choices of our own, and by your screen name, I would hope that you believe that as well. Gays can choose to be homosexual, (and believe me, there is a difference between the two,) and if we don’t like it, well sucks to be us, but it’s not up to us to tell them how to live their life.

  • Anonymous

    Actually, no it’s not, but sinners sure wish it was. There are very old manuscripts that match the newer ones pretty closely. Believe in it, or don’t but you can’t hijack the Bible and try to turn it into something it’s not.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ben-Millan/1015841292 Ben Millan

    First, those of you who say that gay marriage is “legalized perversion”, etc., sweep off your own doorsteps first.

    Check out the following websites:

    ChristianChildAbuse.Blogspot.com
    http://www.Reformation.com

    I call raping a child far more perverse than a man having sex with another man. So long as we’re talking about consenting individuals, it’s not a matter of right or wrong. The moment that the Christian religion completely puts an end to the child abuse committed by it’s own clergy, then I might start listening to their viewpoints on “morality.”

    Until then, quit bitching about gay people if you’re too weak to expel child rapists from your own churches.

    Second, the institution of marriage is not the cornerstone of Western Civilization. It’s the nuclear family. Arguments against polygamy are not the same as arguments against gay marriage. Polygamy was originally contrived as a form of selective breeding, but bottlenecks the gene pool and results in a culture having much less genetic diversity.

    ***
    Most people who argue against polygamy do so because it often also entails arranged marriage. Social Liberals HATE the idea of arranged marriage for the same reasons they hate the idea of gay people not being allowed to marry.
    ***

    Third, the United States Constitution was based off of both Judeo Christian AND Anglo Saxon principles of law. However, it was also founded as a representative republic, NOT a democracy. The reason for this is that democracy is based off of the idea that the majority can determine what is right and wrong.

    If you can vote away gay marriage, then you can also vote away gun rights, free speech, etc. I, for one, don’t want that!

    Democracies ALWAYS fail for a number of different reasons (read The 5,000 Year Leap) but one reason is that they turn into mob rule. Saying that a democracy DOESN’T turn into mob rule is like saying Communism DOESN’T result in mass murder. It’s simply making an excuse because the idea offends you! Nevermind the facts.

    Laws against the blending of church and state are for the protection of individuals FROM the majority. Try and look at this objectively. We have a civilization which was founded on the nuclear family, which means monogamous marriage. Our civilization was also founded on the precept of freedom of religion, which includes freedom FROM religion. It’s not freedom of religion if the law is, you can belong to any religion, but you still get burned at the stake if you break a rule from the predominant religion.

    But there is a simple answer to all of this. Either a.)get rid of all government benefits and definitions of marriage, or b.) respect the rights of gay people to get celebrate/commemorate/sanctify their relationships by getting married.

  • Darren Anderton

    @RightThinkingOne:disqus

  • Anonymous

    Simply define “institution,” where it originated and the laws under which it exists today. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/leaanne.j.morrison Lea-Anne Joy Morrison

    Religious beliefs are not the only beliefs here. As an agnostic I stand solidly with the 1 man & 1 woman = marriage  view point.

  • Anonymous

    @mbman… that would all depend on your definition of being saved?
    Okay… We are saved from sin… then what? The simple fact, sins usually have
    to do with things that enslave us to one sort of addiction or another and by
    obeying Gods Laws and through repentance we free our self’s from the bondage
    that sin brings to us. For more times than not we are more punished by the sin
    then for the sin and can harm others like throwing a rock in water… it has a
    ripple effect. So being saved from sin is not enough. Once we are saved from sin
    then what? I know the answer do you? Let me say that all men are saved regardless
    of who or what they did, that is if your definition of being saved is
    resurrection but what comes after that? I know do you? Life eternal is not
    immortality if that was all there was to it than this life would be
    meaningless. You know that already but like Glen said getting back on point. If
    you change the variable then you change the equation and our laws are based on Judeo-Christian
    laws. It is not equal rights the gay community wants because if that was the case
    they would be fine with Civil Unions. It is because they want to change the
    definition of marriage and family and all that it represents. It is something
    they don’t have which is acceptance of their life style and for their life
    style to be the norm and for that which was instituted by God to be destroyed
    and call good evil and evil good! For men’s hearts grow cold and prey on the
    meek. Stand up for America and stand up for virtues, for if you don’t many will
    fall.

  • Darren Anderton

    I thank you for your openness to new opinions.

  • Anonymous

    So true, so true, very well said and the truth will set you free!

  • Anonymous

    Seriously? This from the man that claims to have lobbied Congress? Hypocritical much Victor?

  • Anonymous

      Read Leviticus 18:22, Lev. 20:13, and Romans 1:22-27.  God can not lie and He does not contradict Himself.  So..what do we do with these scriptures, that are obviously, against homosexuality? 

  • Anonymous

    That’s fine.  Most of the posts are arguments based on religious views.  Put forth the agnostic argument as to why government should not allow gay marriage.  It’s one thing to have the view of marriage being between a man and a woman, which is fine, but the issue at hand is under what grounds should government be stopped from allowing gay marriage.  The grounds based on religion won’t make it to the table, but agnostic ones would.  What are those?

  • Anonymous

    Your argument is full of holes all over the place, but in the interest of conserving time and space I’ll pick one:
    ****************************************************************************************************
     it was also founded as a representative republic, NOT a democracy. The reason for this is that democracy is based off of the idea that the majority can determine what is right and wrong. 
    If you can vote away gay marriage, then you can also vote away gun rights, free speech, etc. I, for one, don’t want that! 
    ****************************************************************************************************
    In order to do that one would actually have to re-word the Constitution, and that would take much more than just a majority vote of the citizens.

  • Sandie

    Claims to have lobbied Congress and ran for Congress….LMAO … and a Q for Vic …. “have you stopped beating your wife yet?”

  • Anonymous

    Nor “them” to tell us.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LFSACZOP3JMVTP226W33ONDHPE Matt

    ” The institution of marriage is sacred and MUST be upheld.”

    Then outlaw divorce.

    Also…it’s really hard to take you seriously when you misspell words like ‘engage’.

  • Anonymous

    If you believe in an Almighty God who was able to create all you believe in, why not believe He is capable of making sure His Living Word would not stay intacted.   Could it be that man’s own convictions cause him to seleck and choose, deleting what doesn’t fit their life style.  I personally could not serve a God who couldn’t even keep His word together.  Yes JESUS is THE already come SAVIOR!

    Numbers 6:24-26

  • Anonymous

    Jesus said that He did not come to do away with the law. The law was before Adam and is still in effect and that INCLUDES “fornication!” That is any sexual content with someone outside of marriage or of the same sex.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry Dixie, I was just responding to his/her point about homosexuals choosing their lifestyle.  I think in that regard my response was on point. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LFSACZOP3JMVTP226W33ONDHPE Matt

    Controlling gay marriage (by saying who can and who cannot wed) is such a liberal idea…what a power grab eh? What an intrusion into someone’s personal life!

    I am a conservative, I listen to all of the shows, with all of the hosts whenever I can…but I just cannot wrap my head around why people care who weds who.

    It’s none of your business.  Two men and two women can love each other and love a child just as much as a straight couple. 

    You want to know what’s a REAL threat to the institution of marriage?

    DIVORCE!

    If you people were truly concerned about the “institution of marriage”, you would outlaw divorce.

    But that makes too much sense now doesn’t it?

  • Anonymous

    Try passing the SB48 Bill in California, that completely re-vamps school curriculum “in order to portray gays in a positive light in history” their words, not mine. Call me a silly fool, but I think what’s important to teach about history, is history, warts and all. We don’t need to rewrite history so that some people can “feel good” about their contributions to history. And by the way, if they weren’t trampling on other people’s rights, why did they put a provision in the bill that forbids parents from opting their kids out of such teaching? Live the way you want, but when you try to interfere in how others teach their kids morals you’re crossing the line.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YIHTNJ4AYRK2EK5WKD4RNNOG3Q TT

    Glenn Beck is truly going off the deep end with his Jon Stossel idiot neo libertarianism

    Get the government out of marriage? Really?
    Marriages are recorded by the government for good reasons.  It makes the husband legally bound to the children born during the marriage.
    In Beck twisted world, we’d never round up dead beat dads because wed first have to determine who they are, then force them into court, then force them to take a DNA test  , then force them to fork over support if he has any money left after paying the lawyer

  • Anonymous

    Um, Abraham only had one wife, Sarah.  Gen 13  Abraham and Sarah were both very old when God told them they would have children and they would own all the land that Abraham could see and through the descendants become a great and mighty nation.  Sarah became impatient and doubted God’s word when she told Abraham to have her maid-servant, Hagar.  Ishmeal (spelling) was born of that union.  Sarah became pregnant with Isaac and out of jealousy banished Hagar and Ishmeal.  The covenant between God and Abraham of becoming a great nation went to Isaac the legitimate son of wife, Sarah.  But because Abraham was also the father of Ishmeal God blessed him with land as well.  Follow the family tree a few years and you will see that Isaac’s descendants became the nation of Israel, and Ishmeal’s descendants became the Arab states as we know them today…
    The union you are speaking of was not polygamy but rather adultery with consequences still being paid today, in the form of an epic sibling rivalry in the middle east.  

    Polygamy was a pagan practice.  To the Hebrew people, marriage to one wife was important for inheritance purposes to make sure the family blood line stayed pure and family heirlooms stayed close.   When God created Adam, He told him that He would create Eve so Adam would not have to live alone.  Marriage is about more that bloodlines and procreation, its about everlasting companionship, love, trust, cooperation, family, communion and fellowship with God.

    I agree, the government should get out of Marriage, they have made a business and a mockery out of something that was intended for beauty.

  • Anonymous

    First point: if you’re a Christian, why did you spell God with a small g?
    Second point: If gays are allowed to claim for themselves the same status as heterosexual married couples then they will have the right to sue churches that refuse to marry them, or ordain gay married couples as pastors, etc, and don’t think for a minute that they won’t.

  • Anonymous

    Agree. A Republic form of government can only exist as long as the people retain morality.

  • Anonymous

    Marriages and children were raised for many years before the government started recording.  Back when men where as good as a hand shake and women were still ladies and one’s word and honor meant everything.  The government needs to be out of marriage.

  • Anonymous

    Not really. It would just mean that you are rock solid in your beliefs, but that’s not what the issue is anyway. The issue is that gays already have the same rights through civil unions. They only want to claim the marriage title to further blur the line between themselves and heterosexuals.

  • Anonymous

    Marriages and children were raised for many years before the government started recording.  Back when men where as good as a hand shake and women were still ladies and one’s word and honor meant everything.  The government needs to be out of marriage.

  • Anonymous

    But we’re not, and some of us would just like the right to be left alone, and not forced to endorse something we do not accept.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YIHTNJ4AYRK2EK5WKD4RNNOG3Q TT

    You nutty neo libertarians are mindless, 

    A legal marriage has a purpose , To insure that future CHILDREN have a father that is legally bound to them,  All children born to a wife in a legal marriage are automatically bound with the force of law to the husband .
    In your retarded neolibert world,  all dead beat dads would first have to be identified, tracked down, dragged into court,, forced to fork of DNA samples, then if found to be the father, then support for the chidren comes if any cash if left after paying the lawyers.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YIHTNJ4AYRK2EK5WKD4RNNOG3Q TT

    There is a reason that your marriage license doesnt require you to state your religion , why it doesnt ask you if you are in love, are committed for life and monogous . It has nothing to do with religion ….the religious ceremoney is seperate the sole desire of the couple
    A legal marriage is a societal need that prevents far more unsupported children than we have now.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YIHTNJ4AYRK2EK5WKD4RNNOG3Q TT

    “Most I’ve talked to don’t want to redefine marriage”
    You are gay and not fooling anyone

    Marriage is NOT a right , and its not a recognition.  A legal marriage is the recording of the father of future children for the childs benefit, not the couples not for love, not for recognition.
    It assigned the RESPONSIBILITY to the father automatically for the children born during the marriage.
    In your backwards world, children dont have a right to be supported by the man that brought them into this world, but homosexuals garner sexual desires from their odd sexual desires.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YIHTNJ4AYRK2EK5WKD4RNNOG3Q TT

    So you want to make it harder to get dead beat dads to pay up, but removing the verything that identifies them as the legal father  Brilliant

    Libertarianism is a mental illness

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YIHTNJ4AYRK2EK5WKD4RNNOG3Q TT

    You  are not born gay
    Homosexuaity is a symptom of an underlining mental /emotional disorder.  There is NO gay gene.
    “Gay” means the lifestye, homosexul is the person

  • eric macy

    pretty sick of hearing the argument that our laws are based in Judeo-Christian values.  Considering how much Glenn Beck has studied the founding fathers he should know that most of them did not believe in the christian religion at all, but were in fact deists.  Besides even if the country were founded on christian values that wouldn’t make it right.  Consider that at the time of the founding of this country slavery was legal, so according to Glenn Beck slavery is a Christian value.  If that’s the case then I want nothing to do with christian values.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    “you are changing the variables, why can’t I change the variables?”

    There’s a very simple, non-moralistic answer to that. In point of fact, from a moral point of view i really don’t care how many people get married as long as it’s consensual.

    BUT

    The reason it’s not the same as same-sex marriage is because our entire legal structure is based on a binary marriage relationship. Divorce law, property law, child protections, on and on and on, is based on a two-person model and the legal complexity necessary to write laws which would allow group marriage if unlimited numbers is simply not workable.

    therefore, from a simple practical real-world point of view, without any reference to morality, recognizing marriage between 3 or more people simply can’t be done. 

    By contrast, same sex marriage challenges or changes NONE of those legal realities.

    Apples and oranges.

  • Robert Lawson

    I think that the government should get out of the business of performing marriages altogether.  Except for the census and taxes (and we need change our system of taxation) it’s none of their business who is married and who is not. 

    Marriage is a religious ceremony and should only be performed by churches.

    Except for when a gay person wants to get married, the secular left (and some secularists on the right) despises marriage anyway and most of them just live together.  So why should the state make available a religious ceremony to people who disrespect it.

    If a church wants to blaspheme and perform gay marriages that is their right as is my right to not be a member of that church.

    If the people of a particular State vote in civil unions then that is also their right, but don’t call it marriage because God is not a part of that union.  And if the people of that State vote to allow unions between same sex couples, multiple partners, bestiality, etc then that is their problem, I don’t have to live in that State.

  • vieteravet

    You need to go back the school, every leader we’ve ever had in this country acknowedged that our laws are based on Judeo-Christian teaching.  Answer this, “Why is the Supreme court and every major federal building in DC have scriptures written on them?” 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    as for the argument overall against same sex marriage, it’s kind of silly. CIVIL marriage – non-religious ceremonies performed by agents of the government with no religious component AT ALL have existed from the very founding of our country. IF the founders had been of the opinion that our government was based on Christianity to the extent that marriage was a purely religious institution, this would not be true. 

    And it’s not called “unions” or “partnership” – it’s called MARRIAGE even though the church had nothing to do with it and the partners are not religious.

    if that’s true, and it self-evidently is, then every American citizen is entitled – according to the constitution – to equality before the law in THIS point of interaction with the law (unless the government has a compelling state interest in denying that equality, such as a vulnerable person or a child being involved). I’ve yet to see anyone explain to me what the compelling state interest is in denying same-sex marriage OTHER than claiming it’s somehow a threat to the social structure and heterosexual marriage.

    it defies reason that the behavior of <3% of the population can undermine the entire social structure and i assume me Christian brothers and sisters ought have more intellegence than to claim that.

    Furthermore, there ARE legitimate and recognized religious institution which preform and recognize same sex marriage. IF your argument is "the church gets to define marriage according to God's word!! No one else gets a say!!!" then you have to explain to me why the voice of the church which says "yes" is less legitimate than the voice of the church which says "no"

    To do so is an act of religious discrimination that is flatly at odds with the first amendment.

    so either way, secular or church, the argument against same sex marriage is illogical and unreasonable.

    and for you believers – i remind you what our Lord said about the "traditions of men"

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    and yes, the best solution is to separate the institution from government altogether, but that sure as heck isn’t Santorum’s view.

  • vieteravet

    “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    Is “God a part of that union” when a judge marries two Atheists?

    Does the state decline to recognize the marriage on that basis?

  • Anonymous

    I had this discussion with my pastor who asked why I was opposed to gay marriage and not opposed to a man and a woman living together and having sex outside of marriage. After thinking about it I say that there are two reasons. It is not natural, and God made Adam and Eve to be partners. God did not make Adam and Adam or Eve and Eve. Secondly, with todays divorce rate, it is not all that bad an idea to spend ehough time together to know that you belong together instead of jumping into a situation that brings regrets and misery later.

  • vieteravet

    Why, he’s for civil unions, let the fudge packers have their way.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    yes, civil no-denominational religion, not sectarian.

    since there are in fact religions in the judeo-christian tradition which affirm gay marriage, it is not consistent with the First amendment for the government to prefer the doctrine which forbids it over the doctrine which allows it. 

    whatever else may be said about our founding, their intense interest in the government not taking sides on doctrinal disputes or preferring one sect over another is abundantly clear.

  • vieteravet

    Who performed Adam and Eve’s ceremony?  Who bought their license?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    point of order: not all birth defects arise from a genetic cause. Even if you are right that “there is no gay gene” (and, by the way, it’s unscientific to say “there isn’t one” – the proper terms is “one has not been identified”) it is not necessary for their to be a gay gene in order to be born gay.

    your fact does not support your conclusion.

  • vieteravet

    So,by that civil unions for tax, life insurance, and medical should be perfect.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    who wants to get rid of DNA?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    then why do we allow infertile people to marry?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    well, gotta admit it’s certainly working like gangbusters now, ain’t it?

  • vieteravet

    It’s a chioce, give me a break,  a guys married for 20 years and decides he’s! B-ullsh1t

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    Adam and Eve were “married” in the same sense that billions of other couples since have been married – because they said so.

    folks who fight for “traditional marriage” try hard to ignore the hundreds if not thousands of different ways marriage has been defined in human culture, and quite a few different variations even within the Biblical tradition.  all “traditional marriage” really is, is a dodge to cover peoples backsides when what they really mean is “don’t change the way i want to do it”

    There’s no difference in this argument and what white racists in my home state of Mississippi were saying about white and blacks marrying in 1970. That’s right. less than 50 years ago “traditional marriage” had another definition which we do not apply today (except in one town in Kentucky apparently)

    Want another example? within the last 100 years, it was not uncommon for a 20-something man to marry a 13 or 14 year old girl – an act which would get him arrested today. “Traditional marriage” for Loretta Lynn wasn’t the same thing as the traditional marriage a modern parent wants for their own daughter.

    The point: there’s really no such thing as one singular definition for “traditional marriage”

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    or he hid it for 20 years because he knew folks like you were out there…

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NKYJ7L43AKBZUHCVIPHPE4W6KU Mark

    I feel sorry for those people that give up the best sex for 2nd rate or no sex.  The most powerful orgasms are found by making use of the human bodies best matched parts in the most natural way,  This is by matching the male penis to the female organ of the same species.  Oral sex is a nice appetizer but who can live on just appetizers?  The male body was not built to get orgasms out of anal sex, plus is badly damages the rectum doing just anal all the time.  As they say in the “joint”, you lose your grippers, can’t hold your mud!  Even if 2 women really like plastic toys, it’s not the real thing.  And those creatures so twisted that they are willing to have their normal “God given organs off and have surgery to make them a shallow approximation of the opposite sex really should be defined as having a serious mental illness that puts them in danger of hurting themselves!  They will never be able to enjoy the best sex the body has to offer.

  • Anonymous

    Do you believe in God?  If you do why bother?  (He had it written in His word for one such as you, written by man but inspired by God.)   Why believe at all in a God who can’t even get His word right.  Not very powerful to me.   And if you do believe but not everything, how do you pick what is right and what is wrong?  If we are going to pick just what feels right to us we might as well be our own god and write our own bible.  I do not see how faith in God plays a part in your life.    You seem to be very busy reading books written and inspired by man and coming to these very worldly conclusions.  Now read God’s word,  my conclusion is SIN!!       I ask and write this with all humility.  I will leave you with a bit of His word to meditate on. 
       Proverbs 3:7-8    Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the Lord and depart from evil.     It will be health to your flesh, And strength to your bones.  
          Proverbs 19:16     He who keeps the commandment keeps is soul, But he who is careless of his ways will die.
         Romans 8:5-6       For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.    For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.   

    Numbers 6:24-26   

  • Anonymous

    Yes but we all know he lost in the primary.

  • eric macy

    The current building the supreme court meets in was built in 1935 long after the founding of our nation so that is irrelevant to my point.  If you want to argue then argue against the point I actually made which was: Most of the Founding Fathers were not Christian, they were deists.

  • Anonymous

    Boy, that was quick. I don’t see anything in Genesis that speaks to Adam and Eve being married. There is an interpretation that speaks to God marrying them. However, marriage licenses are a recent addition to the taxes we pay. In the early United States a couple might have a child or three before a minister happened by and the only record was a note written in the family bible. The same was true of births and deaths. One didn’t need a death certificate either. Credit the lawyers with all of that.

    Back to Genesis; when God queried Adam about eating the apple, Adam did not say “my wife”, he said “the woman”. Eve said that the devil made her do it(sorry, could not pass that one up) and God cursed the serpent.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Waldenberger/752750084 John Waldenberger

    Glenn, how about one “by law partner” be it man or woman… and if you choose to marry multiple partners for religious/happiness reasons then OK but those extra people are not “legal spuouses” for tax/beneficiary reasons….

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    the problem with your theory (speaking within the context of a literal reading of Genesis) is that god’s original creation was PERFECT and Adam and Eve (initially) reflected God’s perfect ideal. BUT the sinned, and the world fell. and after the fall, all sorts of bad things happen that do NOT reflect God’s perfect will.

    for instance, god said to Adam and Eve “be fruitful and multiply” – that was his perfect will.

    BUT since the fall, many people are infertile, even infertile from birth – they CANNOT live according to God’s perfect plan. do we thus ban infertile people from being married because they fall short of God’s perfection? or do we recognize that this world is not perfect and do the best we can?

    Before the fall, no one would have been born gay (or blind, or deaf, or autistic, or dwarves, etc, etc) but after the fall, these things happen and we do the best we can.

  • http://www.facebook.com/kovidog Kavita Singh

    I’m a libertarian and this is the libertarian answer. It doesn’t matter if you’re a social liberal or a social conservative – who says there is one way to live? Thanks very much, Glenn.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    nonsense from start to finish. so much biased opinion put forth as fact.

    There’s so many ways to take it down one scarcely knows where to start. 

    first: it is not, in fact, only sex. if you took a vow to abstain from all sex the rest of your life, would you cease to be heterosexual/ No? then the same is true for a homosexual.

    second: reproduction is irrelevant to whether or not one may legally marry or infertile heterosexuals wold not be able to obtain license.

    third: if marriage is sacred, then explain to me what is sacred about a government employee such as a judge preforming a marriage of two atheists.

    fourth: what business is it of the government to take not of what is “sacred” – particularly when different religions disagree about what constitutes “sacred”? Are you advocating that the government prefer one religion over another? James Madison and Thomas Jefferson would like a word with you.

    Fifth: even if I decline to debate you about your misguided false doctrine, the fact of THIS matter is that it’s not the government’s place to correct people’s moral decisions when those choice bring no harm to another. it’s certainly not their place to advance religious doctrine.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    David was “a man after God’s own heart” and had multiple wives, Solomon was selected by God to build his temple, was considered the wisest man who ever lived, and he had hundreds.

    Try again. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    what do three passages having to do with pagan temple prostitution have to do with anything?

    proper exegesis will deliver you from false doctrine.

    By the way, i’ll see your passages and raise you Romans 14

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    since when is it the business of the Government to enforce one interpretation of the Bible over another? How would you like it if the Government declared that all people must attend Catholic mas sunder penalty of law? or that all must be baptized by immersion? or that all must tithe to the Mormon church?

  • Anonymous

    Sorry, missed it when I sent my reply. I just noticed you’re a vet, me too! 65/66 and part of 68. Welcome Home!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    if you find that God condemns unquestionably all homosexuality in your Bible, then you do not truly understand your Bible.

    and argument can be INFERRED from some passages that SEEM to indicate it is POSSIBLE he disapproves, but if you think it’s undeniable then you simply have not done proper exegesis.

    bible study involves more than reading a few chapters in the king James English and assuming you know all there is to know.

    One example: in the New Testament, Paul used a word he coined himself in several places, which literally is an amalgomation of two Greek words meaning “man” and “bed” which they took to mean “man-bedder” (even though most reputable modern scholars, even conservative ones, agree that that sort of entomology is a very poor translation technique) and began to translate it with some term that refers to homosexuals.

    the problem is that there were already FIFTEEN other Greek words which indisputably refer to homosexual behavior.

    if we believe the Holy spirit leads Biblical writers to clearly communicate the will of God (as conservatives do) then HOW do we explain paul not choose a clear and indisputable word in these passages instead of making up a new one?

    THAT reality alone is enough to forbid us from claiming we know indisputably that God is opposed to all homosexuality.

    and there are dozens of other contextual considerations which are overlooked by those who first decide being gay is a sin and THEN look in the bible to find verse which support their pre-determined conclusions.

    how do i know? i spent most of my adult life doing exactly that, like most of the rest of my fellow Southern Baptists. Thankfully God led me out of that nonsense.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    so…it is your position that one can lose one’s salvation if one sins after the salvation event and does not repent of it?

    I know there are whole denominations that believe that – and there are whole denominations who don’t.

    I KNOW! Lets get the GOVERNMENT to decide!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    they sure are doing a bang up job on the whole “stable families” front so far, ain’t they?

    in point of fact, MORE people getting married leads to MORE stability in the society, not less.

    The mythology that gay people can’t raise well balanced children is too laughable to debate, particularly in the face of the tens of millions of children of heterosexuals being raised in single parent homes and other unstable and unhealthy situations. 

    Here’s a thought – when was the last time you say a “Casey Anthony” type case in the news in which the accused was a gay person?

    Laying even all that aside, gays are <3% of the population, that is not a significant enough proportion for the government to have cause to make them second class citizens based on some social theory.

    (I though conservatives were against governments engaging in social engineering anyway?)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    Stay classy PRH. Keep showing that Christian morality in all it’s glory. 

    (actually, i kind of hope you deny being a Christian – it will be one less of my brothers and sisters who’s behavior i have to apologize for) 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    please cite me the verse of scripture which says the whole purpose of man is to have children

    Judeo-Christian values, yes. but such values have changed quite a bit even in the last 200 years. And one of those values is that the government ought not prefer one doctrine over another, which they would be doing if they used a religious justification to treat homosexuals unequally.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    so, Rick Santorum believes that existing gay marriages should be dissolved. how does that promote the welfare of the children who live in those homes?

    (I disagree with several other points in your post but i confess i am weary of repeating myself to refute the same talking points over and over)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    why “most” and not “all”?

    and, as i have asked before, what is “sacred” about a judge marrying two atheists? if the church was worried about the government defining what constituted marriage (as opposed to God defining it) then they ought have spoken up 220 years ago. Because the government has been setting the parameters for marriage all along. it’s not the church that requires blood tests, it’s not the church that sets age limits, it’s not the church that describes how close kin may be and still marry, it wasn’t the church which said it was illegal for blacks and whites to marry for most of our nations history – it was the government.

    True, some of these reflected prevailing religious opinion, but not all of them.

    likewise, the government has always defined how and on what terms a legal marriage may end. not the church (despite their being vastly more clear cut Scripture about divorce than about homosexuality) 

    It’s an awfully late date for the church to be upset about the government re-defining marriage. in fact, the government did EXACTLY that in the Loving v. Virginia case in the 1970′s and, strangely, the world didn’t end.

    The plain fact is that civil marriage exists, it always has (in the history of this country) and it is not necessary for God or religion to be involved for such a marriage to take place. that being the case, there is no legal justification for denying gays the right to participate in that. The government must show compelling reason to limit equality before the law and there is no compelling reason in this case.

    likewise, it’s a plain fact that some churches DO perform and affirm same-sex marriages, and thus any attempt to use religious grounds to protect the definition of marriage is an act which prefers one religion’s doctrines over those of another which violates the very first principle of american freedom.

    it is, in fact, something that all good Christians should abhor, even if they do find homosexuality sinful.

  • Sandie

    Right. The locals knew to clip that lunatic in the bud before he could become a full blooming idiot and embarrass their state.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    the question is – why is it your business?

  • Anonymous

    What in God’s name are you talking about? Do you even know what you’re trying to say here? You have to be the most arrogant ignoramus in all of New York. Get a life, moron and stop pretending you have brain cells. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    being for “civil unions” is not being for “getting the government out of marriage”

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    indeed. does God join together two women who are married by, for instance, an episcopal priest? 

    (there are, in fact, ministers in every faith tradition who will preform a ceremony uniting two of the same sex)

    if you would argue that he does not, that’s your right – but what business is it of the government to take sides on that point of dispute?

  • Sandie

    The last two he has are busy remembering where he lives. I might have to remind him where he lives if he reassigns them to anything else….LOL

  • Johannes

    So freedom is only important when it is on your terms?!
    Santorum, in my opinion, wants to dictate what freedoms we are allowed!
    Why is the Govt involved in marriage anyway?! As I see it, it’s between me , my partner and God!

  • Johannes

    Why should ” tax, life insurance, and medical” be an issue in any case?
    Isn’t it about love?

  • http://www.facebook.com/JeremyLArmour Jeremy Armour

    The one area that I disagree with Glenn here is that ‘gay marriage’ & polygamy are morally (or immorally) equal & equally reprehensible.  They are not.  To say that polygamy is a sin, or is adultery, doesn’t make much sense.  As I recall, most of the Bible’s great patriarchs had multiple wives, and did so with God’s blessing.  I also recall a part of the Bible where God tells King David, after David’s adulterous affair with Bathsheba, that if David had wanted another wife he [God] would have provided one for him.  The Bible also says that God had blessed David with all the wives (notice wiveS, plural) of David’s former master, Saul.

    For the record, I am not personally in favor of polygamy.   In our modern culture it likely causes more trouble than it is worth.  I prefer the standard of 1 man + 1 woman=marriage.  Still, I can find no reason to morally condemn those who like the idea of multiple wives.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    OH PLEASE! TELL ME THAT AFTER YOUR NEXT BACON AND EGGS SANDWICH!

  • Anonymous

    He never has admitted what percent of the vote he received.

  • Anonymous

    Gays and lesbians want to legitamize their deviant behavior by using a familiar term, marriage, and apply it to their perversions.

  • Lioness

    The purpose of sex is for procreation. Love does not exist in sex, in most cases it’s just one individual pleasing themselves anyway. Besides it’s boring, and just plain disgusting in most cases. Isn’t it bad enough that you have to use the bathroom everyday? For all of you who do it, I truly hope you enjoy it. Not just because the media shoves it in your face, or cause you feel you have to do it to be loved. Gender identity seems to be a serious issue and does have a debilitating effect on the individual. I believe most true cases of gay/lesbianism does involve this to a certain extent, although I have known same sex couples who do not partake in sex. They just love each other. Love is the main theme I’m trying to express here actually. Not vacuum pumps and extension pills. Are people really that bored? Are we nothing more than hopeless animals? And don’t give me that crap about how sex bring two people spiritually together, I can accomplish spiritual togetherness in many ways that doesn’t involve the slapping of two sweaty, smelly, bodies. Just a different thought for all of those who are getting frustrated with the over emphasis on sex as a recreational activity.

  • CindyLu

    You are absolutely right.  It’s disgusting because men and men don’t go physically well together.  It’s against all nature of our God. 
    Put it back behind closed doors and let us be the way God wanted us. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/JeremyLArmour Jeremy Armour

    When the govt grants the ‘right’ to gay marriage it not only undermines the very basis of civilization itself–that being the family–it also opens up a number of doors that should remain forever closed!

    If two men or two women have the ‘right’ to get married, then would any church or clergyman who refuses to marry them based on religious & moral beliefs not be infringing upon that ‘right’ & discriminating against the couple?  Would not a photographer that refused to participate in a ceremony that went against his own beliefs, such as the marriage of a lesbian couple, & provide them provide his services to that couple (which does require participating in the ceremony) be infringing upon their ‘right’ to get married & therefore discriminating against them?  Would not that couple then have  ‘right’ to sue for damages based upon said discrimination if ‘gay marriage’ were a govt sanctioned ‘right’?

    You may discount the possibility of these things actually happening, but the fact is that it has ALREADY happened!!!!  Just last year a photographer was sued by a lesbian couple for refusing to participate in a ceremony that defied her own religious beliefs. 

    Marriage is more than a contract between two people. It is a religious contract between two people & their God.  When you grant the ‘right’ to gay marriage you are effectively forcing people who disagree with that ‘right’ on religious & moral grounds to not only accept that it exists but to participate in it as well, and therefore infringing upon their rights! Civil unions, a true contract between two people, already exist & are already legal.  That is enough.

    BTW, if we can not legislate morality then consider this: There are many cultures around the world where it is considered perfectly alright to marry and then have sex with a child.  Muhammad, Islam’s ‘perfect man’, married his wife Aisha when she was six years old, and then “took her into his bed” when she was only nine!  If we can not ‘legislate morality’ then how can we legislate against this?  After all, to billions of people it is not at all immoral.  Consider that.

  • CindyLu

    What is wrong with you guys?  God will ultimately deal with the gay people for their sins.  We are not to make judgements that belong to God.  But, I don’t think that exposing our very young children to this lifestyle is appropriate.  I truly believe that some of our misguided teens are “becoming gay” because it’s a fad and maybe even part of a cause.  Lady Gaga is leading the way with her music. 
    Look, I have friends that are gay and I just except them as I would any one of my friends.  I don’t think, however, that it is appropriate for two men or two women adopt a child as their own.  It is a mockery of the way God has planned the family. 
    All I can say is “remember Sodom and Gomorrah? (spelling?)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=581834054 Ginny Auldridge

    if we had kinder people, there would be no reason to want to have ‘gay marriage’. example; if your loved one is hospitalized, and you get turned away for not being ‘spouse’ or family, that is simply unkind. the individual should be visited by people that make them feel better, not nessisarily a relative/spouse.
    I’m not ‘gay’. I am divorced, and had to figth to keep my ex-spouse away when I was hospitalized [he would have murdered me].
    No law should be changed to make marriage have new meanings, or we will have adults marrying children, people marrying animals, and all manner of garbage.
    let’s stop even calling it ‘gay’, it’s queer. 

  • Anonymous

    This is always the problem.  Here’s the main argument for why most of those who argue that anyone who is against gay marriage is a bigot, yet, they are NOT bigots if they are against plural marriage.  Most plural marriages are polygamous (more than 1 female).  According to most gay marriage advocates that I have heard address this subject, especially lesbians, heterosexual marriage is misogynistic, therefore, the domination of more than one female in a polygamous relationship is WRONG.  See, the argument has little or nothing to do with what is fair or equal.  It absolutely has much to do with the idea that they are right and anyone else is wrong and the sharpest weapon they can grab hold of to fight that battle is bigotry. I have heard this over and over and over again and I have personally stood in front of a group of moronic students who tried the same attack.  It’s amazing how, being “nurtured” in that liberal atmosphere leaves them virtually defenseless when someone stands against them in an argument based on fact and reason.  All of the students were for gay marriage, but violently opposed to plural marriage.  Big surprise.  Simple question.  How is it NOT bigotry.  Glenn is correct.  Bigot means a person who does not care about ANY facts or reasoning made by another person who does not agree with them.  I made the point that they now know what it is like to be a bigot.  Here’s the deal.  You can’t make that kind of an argument.  Nobody has a right to be happy.  You have the right to pursue happiness, but that right ends when someone else’s rights are infringed.  Where’s the harm with allowing gay marriage?  This argument has now spawned many other arguments that were previously considered unthinkable.  For example, now, there are groups that are arguing that boys and girls are capable of making sexual decisions at age 14.  The age of consent is now creeping downward in some states because there is a groundswell of support for this.  What’s the big deal?  This argument was originally proposed by a shadow group of supposedly homosexual men.  The group is known as the Man/Boy Love Association (MBLA).  Previously, the would not have dared to even speak about this in a public environment, but now, given the argument that everyone should have the right to happiness, how can they be kept out?  There are 14-yr-olds who probably are more mature and may be ready for sex, even marriage.  How can we discriminate against them?  Don’t they have a right to happiness?  What about those who consider non-human species to be their equals?  One of the biggest problems with this sophomoric argument is that, in the American system of laws, virtually all decisions that change previous laws based on Judeo-Christian mores and norms, are made on the basis of precedents.  It doesn’t take long for a precedent to legally outpace what the public and society are prepared for.  But our system is not based on the individual.  We used to know this.  What is the symbol for the American justice system? A woman holding a scale…blindfolded.  Why do we say that justice is blind?  Because we are simply incapable of justice based on an individual scale because we cannot know the heart nor the mind of the person who violated the current law.  These students are too young and too stupid and too brainwashed to understand that no matter what they feel should be, when you start to make decisions based on a legal argument that attempts to interpret “happiness” and “rights” that can only be understood by that individual, completely outside of moral norms codified in legal language that reflects those values, it is simply impossible to prevent further change.  You can’t say that you are moral because gays have the right to marry and this is simply compassion and a lack of bigotry to feel this way, and then, codify within the law that those who want plural marriage in any form or interspecies marriage in any form, are immoral and wrong.  Once the courts head down that path, it can be quickly perceived that there is no end to the lengths that the law can be stretched in order to justify the “right” of an individual to the nebulous concept of “happiness”.  In this type of environment, where all moral reasoning is removed from the law, only codified law based on what the culture will tolerate at the moment, even pedophile have to be given rights because we cannot know what happened in their childhoods to drive them to such actions.  The argument could even be made that the majority of pedophiles who kill their victims do so because they know that their actions will not be tolerated and they could face lifelong ostracism.  When morality has no place in the law, only “tolerance”, the pedophile’s “right to happiness” has to be considered.  If some 14-yr-olds are mature enough for sex, and this becomes part of the law so as to reflect the individual rights of those teens, then who is to say that there are not even younger children who might be capable of such physical precociousness.  There are even medical conditions that cause early virilization, especially of some males.  Why do they not have rights?  The arguments of these students are completely specious, yet they are so used to having them validated by moronic teachers who shout down any student foolish enough to try to apply reason to such arguments, that they don’t know how stupid they truly are.  Why do students ever “grow out of” this type of reasoning?  Usually it happens right about the time that they have children and realize that they  have a profound responsibility to protect those children and that means supporting legal arguments that do not make exceptions that validate the idiocy that passes for case law.  They simply don’t care at that point.  Hmmmm…does that make them bigots?  Or are we genetically programmed to this type of protective instincts?  The wish to be “tolerant” sounds great, but the sad fact of the matter is that these brainwashed teens and their idiot professors are only surpassed in “intolerance” by the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda at the height of genocide.  No, I am not just calling names, here, folks.  I hold a PhD in molecular biology and a medical degree.  I have had far more education than most of these people will ever have.  I KNOW what goes on in these supposed institutes of “higher” education.  Trust me, any voice that attempts to argue against any of this idiocy is always labeled, ostracized and their career will be ruined with a ruthlessness that engenders visions of hyenas tearing apart and consuming prey while it is still alive.  THAT is the collegiate version of “tolerance”.  Basically, a better word would be HATE, or perhaps PREJUDICE or maybe, if you were daring enough, TERRORISM.  Because that is exactly what happens to those who try to tell them something they don’t want to hear.  The facts are not on their side, the precedent is well established and they NEVER try to place themselves in the place of those they hate, yet they and their professors call this, “tolerance”.  Sorry folks.  Rick Santorum may not be a genius, but he sure was the only genius in that room that day.  Funny how the moronic masses judge intelligence to be stupidity.  Someday, they will realize that truth and fact is not based on OPINION.  It simply is.  That is truly inalienable.  

  • Anonymous

    I am always appalled at how little most people know or are able to reason about. The chief difference between genius and stupidity is that there are limits to genius but no limits to stupidity. In many ancient cultures, it was the common practice for wealthy men, mainly rulers to have many wives.

    This was usually the result of kings and rulers giving daughters to other kings and rulers to seal treaties. Most of Solomons’ wives were daughters of petty rulers in other  city states who wanted to have some influence with Solomon.

    Of course, most of the cretins on this comment list would think of the only reason they have a wife but, particularly in ancient times, being somebody’s wife was the ONLY way a woman could have ANY right to be looked after by somebody else. It was a cultural understanding between the kings and others who had multiple wives that the wive would be cared about and provided for by a man for all of her life and any violation of this was considered a personal insult to her family and country and a possible cause for war.

    Even people who know very little look smarter if they don’t comment and show how little they actually know. It may be hard for some people to realize how much they don’t know but it would be good for everyone to think that just might be the case and do some real checking before you express an opinion that proves you really know nothing.

     

  • Lioness

    Total logic. Send it to Santorum! You have a lot of good well thought out points on this topic, unfortunately it will take time for the world to catch up. Belief in certain “man” made religious texts unfortunately prevent people from expanding there minds to this extent.

  • Anonymous

    The homosexual agenda isn’t asking for freedom – it’s asking for permission. Permission that people have no authority nor right to grant. So-called “gay marriage” never happens. Five billion false “permissions” changes nothing and results in five billion Lies.

  • Anonymous

    There are an infinite number of ways to live. Choose wisely.

  • Lioness

    Excellent point. Love is so important and at this point if you can find it, don’t ever let it go!

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    LEAVE THEM AT THE CROSS! You are all acting as if homosexuality is the only sin… EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU that has married, and divorced and re-married are FORNICATORS AS WELL!

    EACH ONE OF YOU THAT TELL YOURSELVES THAT YOU ARE GOOD AND PERFECT ARE NOT ONLY LIARS BUT YOU ARE LIARS TO YOURSELVES!

    EACH ONE OF YOU SO CALLED MEN THAT HAVE TATTOOS AND/OR ONE EARRING ARE GUILTY OF DEFILING THE TEMPLE OF GOD!

    EACH ONE OF YOU THAT HAD SEX WITH ANYONE BEFORE MARRIAGE IS GUILTY OF FORNICATION!

    EACH ONE OF YOU THAT MASTURBATES IS EQUALLY GUILTY!

    EACH ONE OF YOU THAT WISHES DEATH UPON EVEN YOUR ENEMY DOES NOT KNOW GOD!

    Each one of you that works on the Sabbath are sinners!

    EACH ONE OF YOU THAT DOES NOT PRAY FOR ISRAEL IS GUILTY OF NOT FOLLOWING GODS WORDS THAT TELLS YOU TO PRAY FOR HIS PEOPLE ISRAEL

    EACH ONE OF YOU THAT TURNS YOUR BACK ON THE HELPLESS AND THE HOMELESS HAVE NOT THE LOVE OF JESUS IN YOUR HEART!

    EACH one of you that uses the Lords name in vane ARE SINNERS!

    Each on of you (women) that has ever had an abortion are guilty of murder and therefore sinners!

    Each one of you that has a little statue or charm of Jesus is guilty of having graven image

    Each one of you that drinks and smokes is guilty of defiling the Temple of God!

    AND I COULD GO ON WITH YOUR LINE OF THINKING WHICH REMINDS ME WHY I LIVE THE LIFE OF A CHRISTIAN AND STOPPED ASSOCIATING WITH HATEFUL JUDGMENTAL SHORT SIGHTED, BIGOTED PEOPLE WHO GO TO A BUILDING TO CONVINCE YOURSELVES THAT YOU ARE THE CHURCH WHEN YOU ARE NOT!

    THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IS UPON YOU AND YOU KNOW IT NOT FOR IN YOUR DENIAL YOU JUDGE THE FORGIVEN LIKE ME WHO SEEK GOD IN TRUTH AND SPIRIT WHILE YOU GO ABOUT YOUR OWN SINFUL WAYS. MY BIRTH NAME IS FRANKLIN LOPEZ AND I SAY IT BECAUSE I AM NOT ASHAMED OF WHO AND WHAT GOD HAS MADE ME. A BELIEVER IN CHRIST JESUS WHO PRAYS THAT SOMEDAY, YOU SEE THE LIGHT!

    KNOW THIS, FOR ON THAT DAY, WHEN YOU STAND BEFORE GOD IN JUDGEMENT FOR YOUR SINS OF COMMISSION AND YOUR SINS OF OMISSION, YOU WILL REMEMBER WHEN THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST WAS TRULY GIVEN TO YOU FREELY WITH LOVE AND COMPASSION.

    YOU WILL HAVE TO ANSWER TO JESUS HIMSELF WHY YOU COULD NOT TARRY WITH HIM FOR BUT ONE HOUR OF THE DAY! YOU ARE GUILTY OF TURNING YOUR BACKS ON HIM!

    REMEMBER WHEN THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN WERE GIVEN BUT YOU FAILED TO OPEN YOUR HEARTS AND SEEK THE LOVE OF GOD AND GIVE IT AND GIVE IT IN ABUNDANCE FOR IT WAS NEVER YOURS TO KEEP!

    I DO NOT STAND IN JUDGEMENT OF YOU FOR IT IS NOT UP TO ME TO DO SO, NOR WILL I SAY THAT YOU ARE CONDEMNED TO A HELL OF FIRE AND BRIMSTONE FOR I TELL YOU THAT THE REAL HELL IS SEPARATION FROM GOD FOR ALL ETERNITY.

    I WILL PRAY FOR YOU WHO STILL HAVE THE SPIRIT OF LIFE EVERLASTING IN YOU THAT YOU WILL SEEK THE LOVE OF GOD AND NOT STORE IT AS IF IT WAS YOURS TO KEEP!

    HE GAVE ME HIS LOVE, MERCY AND GRACE THAT I TOO MAY GIVE IT FORWARD.

    I NEED NOT GLORY IN MY WORKS BY TELLING YOU WHAT THEY ARE FOR THEY WILL LIVE ON AND CONTINUE TO SPREAD THE LOVE AND LIGHT OF CHRIST JESUS, LONG AFTER I AM DEAD AND GONE.

    MINE ARE NOT WORKS… THEY ARE GIFTS TO SHARE BECAUSE THEY WERE GIVEN TO ME NOT TO KEEP BUT THAT GODS LIGHT MAY SHINE THROUGH ME!

    PITY THE SELF RIGHTEOUS FOR THEY SHALL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN

    I STAND 4 SQUARE IN THE BLESSED ASSURANCE THAT THERE IS ONE GOD ABOVE ALL AND I WILL NOT BOW TO YOUR PEER PRESSURE.

    IF I AM WRONG THEN I AND ONLY I WILL PAY FOR MY SINS, NOT YOU! SO IF YOU ARE TRULY CHRISTIAN, PRAY FOR ME BUT DON’T STAND THERE IN JUDGEMENT OF ME WHEN YOU SHOULD BE BEGGING FOR FORGIVENESS OF YOUR OWN SINS!

    LET YOUR ANGER AND SELF RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION BE LIKE A SIGN FROM THE HEAVENS THAT YOU HAVE TRIED TO PLACE YOUR OWN SELVES UPON THE THROWN OF THE MOST HIGH GOD! ACTING AS IF ONE SIN IS GREATER THAN ANY OTHER FOR ALL HAVE FALLEN SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD! YOUR CONTINUED N

    YOU WHO HAVE CAST STONES AT ONE WHO COMES TO YOU IN PEACE HAVE ONLY DONE SO AT GOD FOR MY BODY WILL RETURN TO THE EARTH FROM WHENCE IT CAME, MY SPIRIT TO GOD WHO GAVE IT AND MY SOUL WILL BE SENT TO WHERE EVER GOD AND ONLY GOD WILLS IT! NOT WHERE YOU MODERN DAY NEW TESTAMENT PHARISEES WANT TO LOCK ME UP FOR FEAR OF THE TRUE GOSPEL OF CHRIST BEING SHARED AND BRINGING TO CHRIST THOSE THAT HAVE AN EAR TO HEAR, EYES TO SEE AND YET BELIEVE WITHOUT HAVING SEEN! THOSE WHOSE FAITH GROWS ANEW IN THESE TRULY DARKENED TIMES.

    AND YOU WILL KNOW THAT WHAT I SAY IS TRUE FOR WHEN I HAVE CLOSED THIS POST, YOU WILL SPIT ON MY NAME AND SPEAK ILL OF ME AND EVEN CALL ME AN ANTI-CHRIST AND ALL MANNER OF NAMES THAT MAKE YOU FEEL BETTER ABOUT YOURSELVES BUT AS YOU JOURNEY OFF TO SLEEP, MY WORDS WILL RING TRUE TO YOU THAT NO ONE IS ABOVE GOD AND IT IS GOD THROUGH CHRIST JESUS THAT FORGIVES, JUDGES AND CONDEMNS.

    GOD BLESS THOSE WHO TRULY BELIEVE AND SEEK GOD IN TRUTH AND SPIRIT AND HAVE MERCY ON THOSE WHO WILL SPIT THERE VENOM WITH EVEN MORE NEGATIVE COMMENTS HURLED AT ME.

  • Anonymous

    Infertile man and woman can be married. As long as they do not present an artificial means to evade conception they live (in part) according to His will. Recall Elisabeth thought to be infertile who Mary was instructed to visit.

  • Anonymous

    If you really want the government out of it then stop asking the government for permission.

  • Lioness

    LOVE, it’s the most important thing in any relationship. If sexual behavior is all that is in question here, than marriage may as well be left to those who only couple for the purpose of making babies, a majority of those relationships our lust based anyway. Outside of sex you can love anyone you want!

  • Anonymous

    That is why a only a man and woman can be married only once (until death). The two give the indissoluble sacrament to each other. The “traditions of men” include (in part): divorce, fornication, abortion.

  • Anonymous

    The people have the Free Will choice to be together if they so desire — that does not make a marriage. An Episcopal witness should know better concerning marriage matters but then King Henry VIII thought he knew better. If you want the government out of marriage matters then don’t ask the government for permission.

  • Anonymous

    It’s everyone’s business because they keep asking the government and the people for permission.

  • Anonymous

    With the Biblical knowledge you have, what kind of “problem with the gay lifestyle” do you want to see out of “people?”   

  • Anonymous

    Truth does not change else it isn’t Truth. There is a singular definition of Marriage — it is the imperfections of people that appear to make the definition nebulous.

  • Anonymous

    yep!!!

  • Anonymous

    I will pray for you.  Please pray for me.

  • Anonymous

    Divorce never happens. Those deceived by the concept of divorce who engage in sexual relations commit Adultery. Adultery, fornication, contraception and abortion are all attacks against Marriage.

  • Sandie

    Probably not enough to round up to 1%

  • Anonymous

    People are born all sorts of ways. Why? Only He knows. However way we are born does not mean that we must live that way. Indeed, we are all called to shed the way of Lies and embrace the way of Truth.

  • http://WWW.ANOINTEDIMAGES.COM FRANCES LOUISE

    Hi CindyLu you might want to check this out about how far the “gay agenda” goes – it is really horrifying what happened in Mass in the last few years. I had no idea till I saw this it will shock you, this has removed from me any doubt as to how relentlessly those who still want a moral society must fight the “gay agenda” which the clamor for marriage equality is just a trojan horse for the real purpose and it goes to even indoctrinating kindergarten children and putting parents in jail who object!
    http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html

  • Tyler Anderson

    Isn’t the real argument tax benefits and medical visitation rights?  Can’t there be some non-Christian based “marriage like” institution that includes the same tax benefits???  Wouldn’t that satisfy the parameters? I have no opinion on the right or wrongness of being gay. But we’re all Americans, right?

  • raycharon

    We all have an equal right to marry. No one is telling gays they can’t marry. For those who want to make this and equal rights issue, the law does place restrictions on us all equally, WHO we can or can’t marry. Regardless of our individual desires, we can’t marry someone who is under age, someone from our own family, someone from our own sex, someone who is already married, someone of another species. The law treats us equally despite our different desires. I might have seen some desirable 17 year old girls I would have liked to marry, but I can’t. I was attracted to one of my girl cousins, but I couldn’t marry her. I dated two sisters and would have liked to marry both of them, but I couldn’t. Just because we have certain desires, doesn’t mean we can fulfill them. We all have to control our personal desires to live within the law.

  • Anonymous

    If you must bring the bible into it then get it right.
     
    In bible times marriage was never anything to do with the synagogue or church. It was a legal contract between two families and a dowry was paid to effectively bribe the man to take the girl. If she didn’t produce a son within a given period then she was returned in disgrace to her father. Such girls often killed themselves as they were then used goods and no man would touch them. It was a cruel system but the times were cruel. The two may even be children or not even born when the contract was concluded but when the marriage was finalised they would attend the synagogue for a blessing. This is the origin of the church wedding. Then they would have a party to celebrate, this is the origin of the reception party. In Judaism of the time a man was allowed up to four wives. The dowry was also to help the man set up his own household so that he could support his wife and family to be. It was an entirely practical arrangement. Don’t forget he and his new family might well be living in the next door tent.  If you don’t believe me check it out.
     
    If the above is true, and it is, then objection to same sex marriage is silly. Any two parties can enter into a civil contract. If two men or two women wish to live together as a couple why is it relevant to others? What business is it of theirs? If you have a traditional marriage and the parties next door are homosexual and choose to live as such then how does this hurt you? It may offend you but it does not harm you in any way. Are you any less married because they are? Do you love your children any less because they love theirs? And such couples often do have children from previous marriages that have broken up. Surely under the rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness (None of which are in the constitution or bill of rights,) such liaisons must be legal otherwise their rights have been offended. You have a right to offend and be offended, what you don’t have a right to do is harm or otherwise militate against another person because you don’t agree with their lifestyle.
     
    Freedom has a price and it often means you must tolerate those things with which you may disagree otherwise you may be free but at the expense of the freedom of another. Not acceptable.
     
    Tony Pollock

  • Anonymous

    If I listen to a persons side and still say I don’t agree because I believe in Gods Word and what he says about the subject, and then I would ebe called a bigot because I didn’t change my mind,but if I explain my side to them and they don’t change their mind to agree with me I quess they are not a bigot. I’m sorry I don’t want any harm to come to anyone but I will never say sin is ok. Will never say anything nasty or mistreat a gay person but will never give approval.

  • Anonymous

    Our Federal gov. probably THINKS it has “legal power internationally” but I’m pretty sure you just meant nationally.

  • Anonymous

    here’s my rationale FOR gay marriage and i don’t think you have to change the Constitution to get it.

    heterosexuals are “allowed” in America to have one spouse under the law.

    WHY SHOULDN’T HOMOSEXUALS?

    homosexual couples are not afforded any benefit under the law because they are not “married” and/or the state does not recognize their union as a legal and binding one.

    when i say allowed, i do mean that which is within the law and, if you will, what is accepted moral practice.

    SO, even though you may not like the idea of a homosexual union it still equates to a heterosexual one in number and in sentiment.  a man loves a man. a woman loves a woman.   you may not understand it, but that’s not your problem.

    ONE SPOUSE for everyone and you don’t have to change any laws.

    so i think you’re still in the box if you think the above explanation equates to bragging “moral certitude” and for that matter, have 10 wives.  NO!  have 1 wife; have 1 husband BECAUSE that’s where we are today and it’s not up to the Constitution to pick and chose our mates.

  • Anonymous

    Ohhhhhh how mighty white of you and righteous I’m sure, giving your advice to the “Gay guy and guy or gal and gal” to seek out the “right place for themselves” to live their lives in peace, and you giving your blessing “…by all means leave the U.S….”  Maybe you could see to it that they have their colorful star to attach to their clothing, ya know, so when they board, lets say…a train..all the superior human beings will know why and where they’re going.  
    I have some history for you.  It’s several thousand years more recent than your lesson, but unless you “…can without a doubt prove that it didn’t happen this way…” I will have taught you something.  It’s the history of a little piece in time called…THE HOLOCAUST!!!!  ll Million people died, some where homosexuals who were told that there was a place they’d be taken to so they could live out their lives in peace. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-S-Tonks/548405251 Michael S. Tonks

    First: your argument fails. Abstaining from sex would not eliminate sexual desires, it would merely be a refusal to indulge in them. The difference between a heterosexual man and a homosexual man is their sexual desires, not their capacity for love.

    Second: Infertile, heterosexual couples reinforce the cultural norm that when boys and girls grow up, they get married and one day hopefully become mommies and daddies. Homosexual couples are a stark deviation from that norm.

    third: Sacred, inviolate, sacrosanct, etc. Our Founding Fathers used similar terminology to refer to our God-given rights as human beings. Monogamous marriage is an institution essential for the establishment and maintenance of civilization. Don’t mess with it. THAT is what sacred means.

    fourth: I think I have already established that your understanding the definition of sacred belies your ignorance, so I wont repeat myself other than to point out rather bluntly that you are ignorant and your arguments are weak and unpersuasive.

    fifth: you are, in fact, advancing your OWN moral doctrines when you limit morality to the intuition of “it is doesn’t hurt anyone, it must be ok”. There many moral intuitions not acknowledged by the ledt today, that are the linchpin of civilized society. And again you show yourself to be an ignorant fool with your statement, because it actually IS the role of government to enforce those moral social codes that society agrees upon, provided they do not violate the rights of man outlined the Constitution. It is simply not the role of the FEDERAL government. Let the states establish the institution of marriage as they please.

  • Anonymous

    You’re degrading!!!  “..its importance in raising the next generation of responsible adults in civilized societies.”  Do you honestly think that Christ is proud of you?  Do you???   You talk about other human beings that you don’t even know, as if you were talking about a band of renegades or wild animals.  Lord God Almighty…”children who are intrusted to adults for their welfare” ??  these are our countrymen and women, not a pack of rabid wolves.  
    You are God’s police force!!  If any of you that are touting the Word of God at every turn truly truly believed..you’d know He is in control!!  He will judge us each and hatred is the antithesis of Christ. 

  • Anonymous

    Even though David was a man after God’s own heart, that does not mean David was incapable of human error.  The big picture was the heart and pursuit of God by David.  Even though God may have preferred one man one woman, he didn’t erradicate David’s life, because it was not an abomination and the deeper sin of perversion, which God deems a further hardness of heart.

    The reasoning that each and everything David did was perfect, just because he loved God dearly, is a misnomer.

  • Billy Hill

    Anyone who is married or has been married knows that they have also joined in a “civil union”.  In between the ceremony and the reception in my case, myself, my husband and our two best friends signed papers with the minister.  We then received in the mail a certificate from the state. 
    As far as I am concerned, the ceremony allows us to sleep together (since we hadn’t up until then), and the state certificate joins our property and puts us in a different tax situation. 
    The real argument has always been about money, tax laws, inheritance etc., because anyone can have a ceremony and set up housekeeping together.

  • Anonymous

    The ONLY solution to this controversy is for the government to get out of the business of “marriage”.  “Marriage” is a religious ceremony, no more, no less.  It should be left to the religions.  Anyone wanting to give a partner survivor’s rights, and the right to make medical decisions should be required to do it with a legal document.  A legal relationship and “marriage” would be two unrelated things. 

  • Anonymous

    Get government OUT of marriage, the best idea you presented. 

  • Anonymous

    By quoting Scripture, I have somehow proven to you that I “have not the love of God in my heart?” You also know by that quote that I don’t evangelize through the testimony of my life? Maybe you need to get off your pulpit from which you tell the faithful (those living by the Law) that any abomination that you choose to commit is ok, because the merciful God will forgive you (which He may – that’s certainly not my call). We live in a world where the non-sinner is narrow-minded and intolerant. Perhaps it’s the sinner who needs to take a closer look at their behavior. You have no right to call me the devil. You have no idea how I live my life; but your condition tells me a bit about how you live yours.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_25EXD6IGK7TQEGDKXXDPST3HV4 Jack

    Simple answer. READ THE BIBLE> It’ll tell you the answer to your question.  I doubt though you’ll except it. By the way, You can call me names if you like, but, it aint so. I have a gay son, n hes got the same opion about gay marriage. Hes satisfied with the civil unions, but not marriage.

  • Anonymous

    Correct… Our laws are based on Christianity that is what makes us very different than all the other countries.   Unfortunately, LDS is not a religion either.  Any religion that has a book (Book of Mormon) to accompany the bible and beliefs are not a religion.  There is more to it, believe me my brother and I get into religion every time he comes up.  He is a Priest in the LDS cult.  You cannot add nor take away from the Bible, it is as simple as that.  And the gays need to read the bible and try to understand that.   I know I am grounded in my Christian beliefs and I most certainly know where I am going when I leave this world.  Thank the Good Lord!!!

  • Anonymous

    Also, check out your bible.  God made man and WOMAN not man and man, or woman and woman.  At least that is what my bible teaches.

  • Anonymous

    I will solve the problem of gay marriage.Simply, give them the same rights as marriage and called it parriage.But you don’t change the definition of marrige just to satify homosexuals.Parriaging would give them the same rights as marriage.Parriaging-two individuals of the same sex.Problem solved.Homosexuals now have the same rights as heterosexuals without changing the definition of marriage.If homosexauls would object to this solution, then, clearly they have a secret agenda.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lester-Peoples/1558461120 Lester Peoples

    Tammy Rainey might get an A+  if she were sitting under a college prof.’s class.  But.. to follow what a soverign creator God chose to place in his word’ the bible’ would leave her wanting!   Rules, commandments and guidelines were set in place for humans to follow and they will stand accountable for disobediance at the day of judgement, whether or not you don’t believe that either,  that is even more your loss.  “His” word claims “there is a way that seemeth right to man, but the end thereof, leads to death” [possibly eternal].  In other words, follow authority–not mere mans decisions and ideas that Satan places in their mind.  Strive for truth and pray for wisdom and knowledge.  Seek for everlasting things,  not pleasure and you will be rewarded a hundred fold’

  • Anonymous

    Our laws are based on Christianity that is what makes us very different than all the other countries.

    I don’t know about this.  The Church of England is an official state religion.  Orthodox Christianity is the state religion of Greece.  I don’t doubt that the laws of these and a number of other countries have as a substantial portion of their basis the religion of Christianity.  Israel is a Jewish state, is it not?  And that’s not remarkably different from a county that has a Christian influence on its laws, since Christianity and Judaism share the core moral principles of the Ten Commandments and the two Great Commandments (which were given in the Torah long before they were reiterated in the Gospel).

    Any religion that has a book (Book of Mormon) to accompany the bible and beliefs are not a religion.

    This is spurious as well.  You may argue as to whether such a religion is heretical or whether it is a “cult” (and them you can hem and haw like a pastor recently did on TV about the meaning of “theological cult” as opposed to … what did he say … “sociological cult”), but there should be no doubt that it is a religion.  Even if you find it offensive.

    Isn’t Glenn Beck a Mormon, by the way?  Shame, I guess, to have such an irreligious cultist on the side of traditional marriage.

    Just throwing in my thoughts on these odd remarks quoted, but, in case you feel like attacking me, I’ll be candid and note that I am a Christian, and I am opposed to the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex couples.  I’m just generally depressed by the inanity of the discourse.  It’s not just the Internet, where one expects to see madness.  It’s the nitwit mainstream media, who, for instance, are now all saying that Rick Santorum equates same-sex marriage to bestiality and incest, or that he would outlaw contraception and institute a theological state, when he has said nothing of the sort and has in fact stated the contrary.  I wish I could find an intelligent discussion of this somewhere.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LFSACZOP3JMVTP226W33ONDHPE Matt

    “1 man + 1 woman = children
    1 man +1 man =  000
    1 woman + 1 woman = 000″

    That’s th most ignorant thing I have ever heard.

    What if a straight couple doesn’t want to have any kids?

    1 man + 1 woman = 0 children?

    I personally HATE children.  They are nothing but money hungry pains in the butt.  I don’t ever want the misfortune of having children.

    What’s your take on that?

  • Anonymous

    Thank you, Rick Santorum, for bringing a logical arguement to the table!

  • Anonymous

    One can simply solve the problem of Gay Marrige without changing the definition of Marriage by calling two individuals of the same sex as Parriaging.Marriage = one man  + one woman.Parriaging is defined as individuals of the same sex.Marriage=1man + 1woman.Parriage =1man + 1man or 1woman + 1woman.

  • Thomas Amuso

    I am Roman Catholic, and do not believe that gay marriage should be allowed in any shape or form (the same goes with abortion, but that’s for another day). It is immoral and goes against common sense. Think about it: People are always saying that we are just animals. So, do you see guy animals mating with guy animals, or female with female? No. For us to allow gay marriage would put us BELOW animals. Now, don’t get me wrong. I have nothing against gay people. If you’re “gay,” then that’s how your mindset has been put based on the environment that you grew up in. I have a problem with these “very close friends” trying to make marriage into something that it really isn’t. Next thing you know, I’ll be able to “marry” a rock. It’s sad how much of a Godless society we are becoming…

  • Anonymous

    Union between two individuals of the same sex could be called Parriaging and the individuals would have same rights as married individuals.Why change the definition of marriage?Simply create a category called parriaging.

  • Anonymous

    There is no alternative naming that would satisfy the same-sex marriage movement.  As much as the movement touts the importance of same-sex couples receiving the same legal treatment (social security benefits, joint income tax returns, and so on) as married couples, the bigger picture is the desire fully to normalize same-sex relations.  So they will say that anything other than “marriage” is inherently unequal–some of the better students of the civil rights movement might even mention Brown v. Board of Education–and all the while they will not be satisfied until the government itself, through its laws, tells them, “Your way of life is good.”

    Also, there would no doubt be many opponents to same-sex marriage who would be dissatisfied by giving same-sex couples all the legal status but a different name for their relationships, since affording all of the same privileges and obligations (the status) of marriage to an entirely new group tacitly makes the two types of relationships identical, and many opponents to same-sex marriage are strongly of the opinion that the two types of relationship are fundamentally not identical.

  • Anonymous

    I am that ugly guy, they call me killer.? That is why I joined the military, as for the rest of your letter, yes your right, I do fantasize.? A woman with big tits that can bear children and create life the way God intended it too be.? Sorry your such a failure at this, I will pray a slower death for you and your pet. ?
    Gunny?
    ?

  • Anonymous

    I wouldn’t be this way if your type kept your lifestyle in your house, not for our children to see how out of control adults have become with sexual behavior.

  • Anonymous

    Did you take the time to read your own response? You make NO sense AT ALL! Maybe you were in a hurry and needed to get to Denny’s for your morning grand slam. Next time take the time to read  and understand the quotes before you hate on them, like I am doing you. It doesn’t feel so good when the shoe is on the other foot huh Tammy?

  • Anonymous

    EXCELLENT Michael! I cringe when supporters of gay marriage say “It doesn’t hurt anyone else”  That’s just not true. These misguided immoral and often Godless fools just don’t get it. Allowing gay marriage will eventually hurt EVERYONE. It is another HUGE step down that slippery slope to moral decay and societal degradation that will eventually destroy us all. If you look at every great civilization that has ever existed throughout history you will see that rampant sexual immorality, moral decay, wickedness, Godlessness (The one true God) and acceptance of immorality lead to their destruction. Every one of them without fail.

  • http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/ keyboard jockey

    Anyone that wants to know about Rick Santorum only has to read his book “It takes a family” The man wants to turn back the clock to the time when women stayed home and were barefoot and pregnant. Apparently that’s Mr Santorum’s take on a woman’s place breeding. This is no accident when you get married in the Catholic church you are required to go through classes and sign an agreement that you will multiply and you will raise your children Catholic. Santorum is a devout Catholic who’s want’s to turn the clock back to the 1950s. Mr Beck should be careful and learn more about Santorum before he decides to go all in defending his archaic sense of American social order- A woman’s place is in the bedroom and kitchen. Mr Santorum has a very big problem when it comes to women voters…..has Mr Beck ever asked himself why? It’s not just Mr Santorum’s position on referring to poor people as black people and his bizarre views of homosexuality being equal to bestiality. When people find out what Rick Santorum really stands for and it’s not limited small government he will drop in the polls like a rock. 
    Rick Santorum’s “Real Concerns” About The Tea Party http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLQnoVpkyqc&feature=youtu.be 

  • Anonymous

    I cringe when supporters of gay marriage say “It doesn’t hurt anyone
    else”  That’s just not true. These misguided immoral and often Godless
    fools just don’t get it. Allowing gay marriage will eventually hurt
    EVERYONE. It is another HUGE step down that slippery slope to moral
    decay and societal degradation that will eventually destroy us all. If
    you look at every great civilization that has ever existed throughout
    history you will see that rampant sexual immorality, moral decay,
    wickedness, Godlessness and acceptance of immorality
    lead to their destruction. Every one of them without fail. Don’t tell me it doesn’t hurt anyone else. That’s just another liberal lie.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steve-Crawford/100000190219121 Steve Crawford

    Definition of homosexual in a nutshell : he or she who doesn’t want to bother trying to figure out how the opposite sex thinks and would rather go the easy and less spiritually fulfilling way of attaining sex and companionship – your’e not born gay; God doesn’t make mistakes. Definition of bisexual: he or she who is weakminded enough to feel the need to increase th
    Post as … Imagee odds of getting laid by subverting the natural order of life by increasing the pool of potential life partners.

  • Anonymous

    … your’e not born gay; God doesn’t make mistakes.

    I have never understood this reasoning.  I am a Christian, and so I believe that homosexual behavior is sinful, but I do not see how anyone can with a straight face (or a rational brain) say that “God does not make mistakes” is the argument against it being from birth.  Surely there are better ways to investigate this question, and I doubt that modern man has really figured out the cause of homosexual urges: indeed I doubt that there is one solitary cause.

    Back to my main point.  God doesn’t make mistakes?  I agree, but this is a corrupt world, and we are subject to corruption from the beginning.  Would you also say, no one is born with scoliosis, because God does not make mistakes!

    It’s a remark so specious I’m embarrassed that I took the time to comment.

  • Anonymous

    If God is omnipotent, do you really think He needs the assistance of the US Government to enforce His laws?  Do you oppose gay marriage because you are disgusted by sodomy, or because you want gays not to sin so they can go to heaven with you?  What exactly is the outcome you want?

  • http://www.google.com Doodaddio

    Don’t forget that we are talking New York State, there are plenty of unembarrassed full blooming idiots here… Look at who they elect to Congress.

  • Anonymous

    God created man (male & female).  Adams fall = sin & death.  God’s plan and it shows man that  he can not keep the whole law (OT).  There is nothing man can do on this earth that can please God except believe in his son. In the Old Testement it proved that.  We now live in the Church Age (New Testement) in which we are not held to those laws but to Grace.  Starts in Acts II.  READ it. Why God came in the form of Man in his humanity (Jesus).  He gave of his own free will, & it was everyman born from Adam that placed him on the cross.  A gift from God (salvation). He gave his only begotten son. God makes it simple and man makes it difficult.  Believe in who? and thou shalt be saved.  When man gets to his end and gives up his arrogance, pride, he will (some) finally realize what they have rejected and what they could lose.  In the NT it warns of false profits and teachers – many churchs/religions today are not teaching truth (doctrine).  In the NT it clearly states that the first institution God created was marriage = One man + One wife.  And only gave man one reason for divorce = adultry (NT).  God loves all but hates the sin.  Just as a Father loves his children but hates to see them do wrong.  The Bible is a blueprint for how to lead our lives.  Love your neighbor as your self. Judge not so you won’t be judge. He forgives us & we must forgive others.  But be careful & not put your own thinking into his word.  Most & even most Christians (so called) do not read the word & are clueless & can not love God or even know him if you don’t read his word. You can not love someone until you get to know them.  God gave us his son & his word for us to learn and live by.  We all have a purpose in this life but if we live not for Christ then we have no hope.  Two men being crucified next to Christ.  The one on the left didn’t believe/rejects who he is.  The man on the right believed and knew who he was and realized what he had done in life, horrible acts/crimes & looked to Jesus and Jesus said you will be with me in paradise. In the last few minutes of his life he believed.  These two men had done horrific things, their life a waste with no hope yet the one on right accepted Christ and went to heaven.  You will not be judged at deaths door for your sins but wether you have accpeted or rejected Jesus.  A gift & how simple.  Its not religion, or religous acts, etc… Paul said its those that hold on to the law, & legalistic practices, hold them back from growing spiritually and even keep them out of fellowship with Christ.  Confess (Name) your sin & he forgives and it is remembered no more.  Keep short accounts with God and on a daily basis.  Regardless of what you have done it all can be forgiven and God will give you a new heart and a life worth living until he calls you home.  His word – It gives absolutes and is for us to use to defend the truth not in arrogance, or judgement but is for us to use to defend God’s Word and Not mankind’s religious or personal views.
    . “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” (Colossians 2:8)

    . “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” (Colossians 2:8)

  • Anonymous

    Santorum just won it for me!

  • Anonymous

    Let me first say that I am a committed Christian. A Christ follower. Now having said that please remember in the early years of this country, weddings, marriages were only performed in a public setting by a civil servant. The marriage certificate is not a church document,but a civil document. Now scripture is quite clear however for all believers there is no allowance to live in sin and in particular the sin of same sex, sex..thus no same sex marriage.

  • Anonymous

    I’m getting to wonder why my posts are always removed and never posted. I am beginning to get paranoid about it. Is it because they are factual and really disagree with a lot of what Glenn says?

    It is clear that his knowledge of the history of the bible rather than what is in it is poor and he doesn’t like it when he is told the truth.

  • Anonymous

    None of this matters to anyone unless you are a believer. A believer knows the truth of the situation and must deal with it sooner or later. A non-believer will certainly deal with it in the end.  Either way there is always the choice of consequences. With free will you choose.

  • Anonymous

    Dearest Glen,
    The “Problem” began when “Holy Matrimony” Was reduced to Marriage…a simple contract between two people. Holy Matrimony is sanctioned by God. Marriage is sanctioned by “others”.  People do have a choice… God or others.  My best to you and your Family. Janitye

  • Anonymous

    I got married by a judge at 18. My marraige wasn’t recognized by the Church until 10 years later when we were married by a priest. In my opinion, my marraige was no less valid for the first 10 years than it’s been for the following 31. As far as the state is concerned we’ve been married for 41 years…not 31 by church law.

    That being said….the Church has every right not to recognize a same sex marraige, if they believe it is immoral. The state, on the other hand, doesn’t have to stand up the the church’s moral code. God made each one of us a unique individual and what goes on in our hearts and minds and souls is between Him and ourselves….as long as it doesn’t directly hurt others. I know a gay couple who has been together for 25 years and was just able to get married when NY changed thier law. You couldn’t find a better union. They love unconditionally, are charitable, kind, live a clean and virtuous life…the kind of people who’s souls just shine through them. Who am I to judge that? It is between them and God….and I believe God smiles on them…because God is love.

  • http://twitter.com/Imcallngunow Pat Bruton

    Excuse..me Glenn, take the Christian point of view out of marriage and retain the government if you are really supporting equal rights…remember its the religious organizations who are verbalizing who has rights (if you are “like” them), otherwise you can be eliminated and have no rights…are you so blind??

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C6AAO4YXWNA2KQ2ORAH7QWLZAM One_Man_Army

    How about the ground that the government should stay out of marriage entirely.  Now, I’m not an agnostic myself, but what gives the government the right to declare what kinds of marriages are acceptable or not?  They are NOT given that right in the Constitution.  The government should NEVER even have gotten into the whole marriage rights issue in the first place.  That is not part of the limited power granted to them in the Constitution, so they should stay out of it. That’s not a religious based ground but a Constitutionally based ground that should be the ONLY ground on the table in the first place.

  • Leonaria Slade

    Glenn, you do have to stop and step back a moment, as of right now, we have laws in place that protect religious choice, and unless you are going to limit marriage to only Christians or JudeoChristian religions, you are limiting the rights of those who do not follow those beliefs.

    I like the argument FOR poly-amorous relationships, in many ways they are more honest than the horrendous tradition of serial monogamy that we practice today.  It is far more healthy for a child to have a stable relationship between parents, AND to learn that love is not limited.  If love is a gift from God (or Gods or the universe, or the Big Bang) then why does it have to be limited by petty laws of man.

  • Anonymous

    Personally I believe the KJV Bible teachings on the subject.  My belief on this subject does not  state that I am, have been, or ever will be vengeful, bias, hate, or mistreat people that believe otherwise. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UQG6363FRERTLNXUV2AZKU3F2A john

    You are right in saying that these men were devout and dedicated to their God, but you also state that they are men. And the Bible that you are quoting is chock full of fallible men and women who do what they don’t want to do and don’t do that which they should (Paul.) I’ll concede the point IF, you can show me the reference that these men were commanded and/or condoned for their marriage practices.

  • Anonymous

    You are mistaken. Just because something is in the Bible, doesn’t mean it was God’s will for the situation. Was it God’s will that King David have an affair? It’s in the Binle, and I believe the Bible… Solomon was the wisest man to ever live. He wrote Proverbs and Ecclesiasties. Proverbs being an example of the wisest man walking with God, and Ecclesiastes an example of the wisest man out of relationship with God.

    Just because it is in the Bible as a record of someone’s life doesn’t mean God approved.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1039324943 Jeff Kalmar

    “I do not care how often two males or females ingage [sic] in perverted sex, a
    child will never be the result of it. GOD made the institution of
    marriage, and made male and female in order to continue and multiply the
    human race.”

    By your “logic”, heterosexuals who are medically unable to have children (like women who have had to have a hysterectomy due to cancer, for example) should NOT be allowed to marry or have sex, since “a child will never be the result of it.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1039324943 Jeff Kalmar

    The Constitution does not forbid same-sex marriage and Jesus does not say one word about homosexuality in the Bible. Where are your “Judeo‑Christian values and laws” now?

  • Anonymous

    Whether or not you believe in God, marriage exists as a religious ceremony.  Marriage vs civil union is more about making a distinction between religious vs. secular unions.  It actually makes no sense for straight people who are not religious to get married.  It’s like taking the sacrament or getting baptized just because it’s a social norm.
    No one is marching into the bedrooms of gay couples and slapping on chastity belts.  A gay couple in a state where gay marriage is legal lives no differently than a couple in a state where it is not.  So as much as people like to paint the picture that by not being allowed to “marry” they’re not being allowed to have a relationship, physical or otherwise, what they’re really fighting for is forcing society to accept their lifestyle by making the definition the same.  That’s why civil union is not acceptable to them.  The left doesn’t like giving grades, keeping score or differentiating between things like gender and sexual orientation.  Apparently we’re now defining gender based on emotions rather than biological markers.  (Sounds kind of anti-science) I wouldn’t be surprised to someday hear that activists want to remove the distinction between “men” and “women” and just call everyone the same thing.  Maybe someday we can live in a leftist utopia where we’re all the same gender, race, social class etc and we can all run around in beige onsies. The left gets so upset when you compare gay marriage to polygamy, incest or pedophilia but if you’re going to break down and change civilizations oldest social construct there’s no reason to believe anything will be sacred.  

    And plural marriage is next on the agenda to legalize.  Mark my words.  It’s already started.

  • Anonymous

    I agree w/Glenn on so many things, but he is just simply wrong w/his views on gay marriage.  As a heterosexual male, married in a church, by a minister, I have to say that the anti-gay marriage argument is probably the most asinine thing I’ve ever heard…and that’s saying something.  And the reasons you come up w/to support your arguments are so stupid that there is not an adjective strong enough to adequately describe how stupid.  You’re arguing over a word…a word.  Actually, you’re using a word to hide your bigotry.

    I at least admire those who will stand up and say that they are against gay marriage b/c it’s perverse or an abomination.  At least they have the courage to say what they feel and stand up for what they believe in.  The rest of you who say that you are for civil unions for gay people are just doing so b/c it gives you a reason to come out against gay marriage w/o giving the real reason.

    Marriage is not a purely religious institution, in this country is a social contract that imparts special social and economic benefits and responsibilities only to those involved.  Some marriages are sanctioned by the church, but there are many marriages that are performed outside the church and by non-religious officials, and still more common law marriages where people have not actually gotten married in the conventional sense, but they’ve been together so long that they are legally considered to be married.  Yet religionists insist that marriage be defined by their rules, and their rules alone.

    Religionists propose civil unions as a compromise, yet there is not supposed to be any difference between a civil union and a marriage, so why is there a need to compromise?  You can still have your religiously sanctioned marriage, and everyone else can have their non-religiously sanctioned marriages too.  One is recognized by a church, one is not, but they are all recognized as the social and economic contracts that they are.  Oh yeah, but that’s not enough.  You need need exclusivity on the word marriage…you need to semantically separate yourself from the heathens.  LOL, *sigh*.

    Oh, then there are those who float these laughable gems…that gay people CAN get married just like everyone else, just as long as they marry someone of the opposite sex, or that gay marriage is a slippery slope that will lead to polygamy or bestiality.  Marriage is still 1 person and 1 person, and having 2 men marry or 2 women marry in no way changes or endangers your marriage, but you either don’t realize, or don’t care, how stupid these things make you look/sound.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry Brooke, but your attempt to advocate poligamy is wrong. GOD NEVER honored any of the Biblical people who had more than one wife. Who was the son that Abrahams maidservent bore? Ishmael. Do you know who he was? He is the leader of the Arabs. GOD cursed Ishmael even before he was born. Genesis 16: 9-15. Who do the Arabs hate and call for their elimination? Israel. Who is the founder of Israel? Abraham. Abrahams own son who he loved, is the one who started the Arabs, and since the departure of Ishmael from Abraham, has tried to eliminate Israel from this earth. Read Genesis 16 to see that GOD not only does not honor poligamy, but judges it for the life span of this earth.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry Brooke, but your attempt to advocate poligamy is wrong. GOD NEVER honored any of the Biblical people who had more than one wife. Who was the son that Abrahams maidservent bore? Ishmael. Do you know who he was? He is the leader of the Arabs. GOD cursed Ishmael even before he was born. Genesis 16: 9-15. Who do the Arabs hate and call for their elimination? Israel. Who is the founder of Israel? Abraham. Abrahams own son who he loved, is the one who started the Arabs, and since the departure of Ishmael from Abraham, has tried to eliminate Israel from this earth. Read Genesis 16 to see that GOD not only does not honor poligamy, but judges it for the life span of this earth.

  • Anonymous

    Put forth the agnostic argument as to why government should not allow gay marriage.

    What’s most interesting to me about this challenge is the word allow.  This whole debate is not about whether government allows same-sex marriage.  It’s about whether government positively defines and thus gives a host of specific provisions to same-sex marriage and its members.  Surely anyone is allowed to have a marital ceremony between two men or between two women (some churches will do it), and any man is free to call another man his husband, unless he does so in order to commit fraud or to violate the law in some other way.

    This may seem a hair-splitting point, but it goes directly to “the agnostic argument”: once the state recognizes same-sex “marriages,” it will then expend some portion of its resources towards that new status.  Social security, inheritance law, employment law, insurance law, courtroom spousal privilege, and many more examples.  All of these privileges and obligations will be extended by the state to a new group of people, and this begs the question, are same-sex relationships so similar to heterosexual relationships that the law must recognize them as legally identical?

    Same-sex relationships cannot produce children.  Only heterosexual relationships conceive offspring, and in countless cases it happens (within marriage as well as without) accidentally.  Does the law in recognizing marriage as a unique status not take this into account?

    To those who would say that same-sex couples can adopt, the answer can be given that so can unmarried couples and unmarried individuals.  Should all get the same tax treatment (and every other marital legal distinction possible) as married couples on this account?

    To those who would say that some heterosexual couples are infertile or choose not to have kids, the answer should be that they are a small minority within a population whose relations overwhelmingly and inherently produce children.

    The state affords a particular status to married couples, because they have a particular status that no other kinds of couples have.  The very nature of heterosexual relations confers a host of benefits upon society, and the state takes note of this.  It is not, as some proponents of same-sex marriage would have it believed, just about the love or commitment between the married partners.  If that were all that traditional marriage had ever been (a relationship where children are not inevitable and the man and the woman are at the center or indeed the only members), then our civilization’s treatment of heterosexual couples would almost certainly have taken a radically different path from the path it has taken.

    There is something fundamentally self-centered about the same-sex marriage movement, because it is principally about the benefits for the couples who would be “married.”  Whether they have children is up to them and something they have to go to considerable effort to do, whereas it is almost a certainty and requiring little effort at all (indeed, again, often happening by accident) that heterosexual couples have children.  This is why marriage transcends the couple, and this is why marriage deserves its own unique consideration in society.

  • Anonymous

    Its always interesting to me that taking things out of context, somehow makes your point more valid. If two men want to live together and have no desire to have perverted sex, then they are not homosexual are they? Yes, I do agree that “marriage” between a man and a woman is not soley for sex and the continuence of the human race. I am trying to explain that homosexuality is a perversion of how GOD and why GOD made male and female. Again, the homosexual should be helped by those who care, to have them come to experience a NATURAL lifestyle, and not live in fear and dispare.

  • Anonymous

    Its always interesting to me that taking things out of context, somehow makes your point more valid. If two men want to live together and have no desire to have perverted sex, then they are not homosexual are they? Yes, I do agree that “marriage” between a man and a woman is not soley for sex and the continuence of the human race. I am trying to explain that homosexuality is a perversion of how GOD and why GOD made male and female. Again, the homosexual should be helped by those who care, to have them come to experience a NATURAL lifestyle, and not live in fear and dispare.

  • Anonymous

    This is so scripturally true!!!!

  • Anonymous

    Your “third” stanza and your final statement contradict each other.
    “Don’t mess with it. THAT is what sacred means.” vs. “Let the states establish the institution of marriage as they please.” 

    “THAT is what sacred means”  ??  
     SACRED: to be made or declared Holy.

     

     

  • Anonymous

    I agree completely- the government should get out of the marriage business altogether.  The Justice of the Peace would still execute ‘civil unions,’ which should ascribe all the rights and privileges for property ownership, insurance beneficiaries, estate law, etc. currently afforded to married couples.  If the argument is an ‘equal rights’ argument, then that should satisfy those currently proposing gay marriage.  Unless, of course, their objective is to impose their beliefs on   the millions of people who believe the scriptural definition of marriage (an institution that has survived several thousand years).
    It would be up to each denomination (from all religions) whether they were willing to perform gay marriages or not, the leadership of which would need to do some serious and prayerful determination.

  • Anonymous

    Like I said I have a mormon brother and we have had many discussions, and they believe only in parts of the Holy Bible – what suites them. I mean if you can be sealed to your wife and then in death go to a planet and have baby spirits and procreate your own planet, I find offensive and no where in my bible does it mention it. I know Glen Beck is mormon, but he doesn’t shove it down your throat either. They are brain washed and taught only one thing and one way, that says cult to me. Of course you have your own opinion – that is what makes us a great nation. We can agree to disagree. I, however, know what I feel and where I am going. We’ll see you wins in the end!!!

  • Anonymous

    So are you saying homosexuals are committing illegal perversion?  And if so are you sure you want to make that statement?

  • Anonymous

    This is so true!!  May God bless those who will speak the truth even if all is against them.   When Santorum
    stood against gay marriage,knowing he’d turn some away, it just made me want to support him for sure!!
    This seems like leadership to me!!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UQG6363FRERTLNXUV2AZKU3F2A john

    Wow FN sounds like you should take your words to heart! Read and meditate on 1 Peter 3:13-16. Please focus on verse 16.

  • Anonymous

    I’m going to assume that your statement that you have fullfilled all of the law in the old testament is stated wrong. If you have fullfilled ALL of the law, then you are the only human being other than Jesus Christ Himself, that does not NEED a saviour. In fact you would be GOD himself!!!!!! The only reason for the coming of GOD to this earth, was to expose the imperfection and impossibility of man to follow the law. NO man can obey the law, which exposes his utter inability to be GOD, and mans sin, requires a saviour.

  • Anonymous

    I’m going to assume that your statement that you have fullfilled all of the law in the old testament is stated wrong. If you have fullfilled ALL of the law, then you are the only human being other than Jesus Christ Himself, that does not NEED a saviour. In fact you would be GOD himself!!!!!! The only reason for the coming of GOD to this earth, was to expose the imperfection and impossibility of man to follow the law. NO man can obey the law, which exposes his utter inability to be GOD, and mans sin, requires a saviour.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZJXCIC2B6TRCALFTGO5BPMQUWQ Marvin

    We are all sinners, even David and Solomon. It is those who repent of their sins that are men after God’s own heart. Read Psalms 51 and Ecclesiastes and you will see. Their sins brought them down to destruction but their faith brought salvation to them. This is to help you to see the path of destruction you are on if you take to heart God and His Word. Now read Romans chapter 1 verses 14 – 32. God showed them their sins and they responded after “God’s own heart.” How will you respond? I wonder.

  • Anonymous

    The Constitution does not forbid same-sex marriage and Jesus does not
    say one word about homosexuality in the Bible. Where are your
    “Judeo‑Christian values and laws” now?

    The Constitution also does not forbid insider trading.  I don’t recall which part of the Constitution speaks to the issue of drunk driving, nor can I remember the part about child abuse.  Are all things permitted that are not specifically addressed in the Constitution?

    As do the Lord and homosexuality, I would direct you to Matthew 19, verses 4 and 5, where He states plainly that God made man and woman for each other.  He also mentions “fornication” in there (a word found in extensive commentary by the Apostle Paul as well), and this means sexual immorality, which includes homosexuality.  Speaking of the Apostle Paul, he is very specific about homosexuality, as is the Lord Himself in the Old Testament.

    Of course those who are not Christians are usually automatically inclined to say something like, “Well, those epistles were written by the Apostle Paul, not Jesus!”  It is an observation that hardly merits the refutation, since it is so plainly insipid.  The books of the Gospel were written by the hands of men too.  Christians accept their accounts as accurate and God-given.

    Indeed any argument that attempts to say that homosexuality is not condemned in the Bible is itself one so inane as to beg not to be answered.  The Bible is very clear on rules of sexual and marital relations.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thomas-A-Wathen-Jr/100003309707389 Thomas A. Wathen Jr.

    How hypocritical can the GLBT community be?! Marriage is a biblical principle, their lifestyles are anti-biblical!!!
       Keep your eyes on the skies, Jesus is coming! He loves y’all and so do I!!!

  • Anonymous

    That’s a valid point. Unfortunately that boat sailed a long time ago since the government is already in the business of marriage. And it’s not getting out. Regarding your reference to the Constitution, you’d have to show the government’s involvement is un-Constitutional. The Constitution doesn’t enumerate each duty specifically, it provides a framework for interpretation on matters like these. If this was even so slightly thought to be a constitutional matter, the challenge would have been brought forth by now. Who knows, maybe it already has but never was a strong enough case to make it to the Supreme Court.

  • Anonymous

    There’s a lot there and I can’t say I fully understood your point. I think what you are saying is that marriage between a man and woman produces unique benefits to society that can’t be duplicated by a marriage between a gay couple. As such, government has justifiable cause to define marriage as only between a man and a woman. If correct, this argument as a number of weaknesses.

    First, the core of the argument should be challenged that society doesn’t benefit from monogamous relationships of gay couples solidified by a contract of marriage.

    Second, you reference the “minority” populations that choose not to have children or cannot have them. Your suggestion must be interpreted that if you want to preclude gay couples from marriage because of their inability to have biological children, then you must prohibit those heterosexual couples as well because they fail the same test.

    Third, with technology today, in the least a lesbian couple could have a 1/2 biological child through invitro. This also raises the question about marriage between heterosexuals later in life beyond their childbearing years. Does this become not allowed by government due to lack of benefit to society?

    There’s a parallel argument to be made in terms of racial discrimination. Clearly anti-discrimination laws were put in place as a primary protection to minority populations, which benefits society as a whole. As such, should such laws only be available to minority populations and not protect an individual from a majority population? Or should such laws protect all people such that if you are a white person with a handicap, or female or older, the law works to protect you as well? (People the counter argument to this is that affirmative action is not meted out in an equal manner, which actually supports this point. White people get frustrated by the unfairness of that system, whether it is admissions to schools or testing requirements for civil positions)

    I’m not sure what you would call marriage but I’ll refer to it as a privilege. If government is in the business of regulating privileges, it’s my feeling that they must be granted to all citizens on an equal basis.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jasen.ewalt Jasen M Ewalt

    Tammy, there is a neat little book you should check out.  It’s called the Meriam Webster’s Dictionary.  Use it to look up the definition of homosexual vs heterosexual.  It IS all about sex.  If you simply have a non-sexual relationship with a member of the same sex, you are NOT homosexual.  It’s the sex that makes you one way or another.  And guess what, marriage  is a religion based institution.  Our country just happens to be based on the Judeo Christian religious institution and the Judeo Christian doctrine does prohibit homosexuality.  You don’t like that?  Go somewhere else.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jasen.ewalt Jasen M Ewalt

    That should read, Merriam, not Meriam.

  • Anonymous

    But then your definition of marriage as 1 person and 1 person is the same as someone saying marriage is just between a man and a woman.  You can’t just say your version is correct and then not say the same about everyone else’s.  Where did you get your version?  Is it in the Bible?  Because in Genesis, I’m pretty sure that God created Adam and then Eve and then joined Adam and Eve together.  Man and Woman.  He also spent several verses in that Bible using his prophets to condemn men and women who were engaged in unnatural activities – sex with someone of the same sex as you.  So, I’m pretty sure the Bible is clear.  Your argument is lacking.

  • Anonymous

    Jesus also told the woman caught in adultery to go and sin no more.  I think he would be saying the same thing to homosexual behavior.

  • Anonymous

    Because you choose to be kind to all it does not mean then that you should condone the activity.  Jesus himself says he loves the sinner, but he does not condone their sin.

  • Anonymous

    Tammy, I honestly feel sorry for you. EVERY “statement” you make is totally taken out of context.
    #1 Of course marriage is more than just sex. However, no two males and no two females can not have children. The idea that a married couple abstain from sex through some mutual agreement is SIN. GOD clearly states in His word, that the sexual relationship is to ONLY be experienced in a marriage, which is what makes a marriage unique, and, so that the couple does not fall into sin, sex should be experienced “OFTEN”. Also, GOD never stipulates that athiests can not marry or that their marriage is any less legitimate. Though we allow “judges” to perform marriages, doesn’t make it right. Marriage is to be performed by the clergy, only.
    #2 I always find it interesting when people like you try to claim that there should be a separation of Church and State. Question: What is the definition of religion? religion is “a belief system” Question: Why (if you do) do you vote? You vote because the individual you are voting for, hopefully has a similar belief system to yours. Why is morality so important to not having a corrupt government. If everyones “beliefs” were the same, don’t you think we would have less division in our government, and less corruption. We sure would. You see, whether you like it or not, Government IS a religion!!!!!! However, our forfathers knew, that because there are many religions, is why they insisted that their be “NO” Government mandated religion. This very Government system of forcing one to believe in a state religion, was the very thing they were running from. Our forfathers wanted religion to have an influence on Government, because religion provides stability to its people. All you have to do, if you can be honest, is look at our country as we get rid of religion, we have more violence and lawlessness. Whats accepted over the centuries to be right has become wrong, and what is wrong has become right. Today we celebrate the criminal and despise the victom.

  • Anonymous

    Tammy, I honestly feel sorry for you. EVERY “statement” you make is totally taken out of context.
    #1 Of course marriage is more than just sex. However, no two males and no two females can not have children. The idea that a married couple abstain from sex through some mutual agreement is SIN. GOD clearly states in His word, that the sexual relationship is to ONLY be experienced in a marriage, which is what makes a marriage unique, and, so that the couple does not fall into sin, sex should be experienced “OFTEN”. Also, GOD never stipulates that athiests can not marry or that their marriage is any less legitimate. Though we allow “judges” to perform marriages, doesn’t make it right. Marriage is to be performed by the clergy, only.
    #2 I always find it interesting when people like you try to claim that there should be a separation of Church and State. Question: What is the definition of religion? religion is “a belief system” Question: Why (if you do) do you vote? You vote because the individual you are voting for, hopefully has a similar belief system to yours. Why is morality so important to not having a corrupt government. If everyones “beliefs” were the same, don’t you think we would have less division in our government, and less corruption. We sure would. You see, whether you like it or not, Government IS a religion!!!!!! However, our forfathers knew, that because there are many religions, is why they insisted that their be “NO” Government mandated religion. This very Government system of forcing one to believe in a state religion, was the very thing they were running from. Our forfathers wanted religion to have an influence on Government, because religion provides stability to its people. All you have to do, if you can be honest, is look at our country as we get rid of religion, we have more violence and lawlessness. Whats accepted over the centuries to be right has become wrong, and what is wrong has become right. Today we celebrate the criminal and despise the victom.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jasen.ewalt Jasen M Ewalt

    Tammy, you should check out the dictionary before arguing the definition of a word. Simply loving someone of the same gender does not make you homosexual.  It IS all about sex.  Only if you have sex with that person are you a homoSEXual.  Amazing how the word itself even implies that.
    Judges act on the laws set forth by the constitution of the United States.  That constitution is based on Judeo Christian values whether you like it or not.  So one could argue that a judge acting under those laws is in fact enforcing a religious doctrine.  Not only that, but marriage itself is a religious institution.  It wasn’t until religion came along that people saw fit to marry one another, no matter what that religion is.
    Oh yeah, not to be sarcastic, really, but if you took a vow to abstain from sex for the rest of your life, you would be non-sexual.  Since as I pointed out, and can prove with the most widely accepted dictionary in the country, heterosexuality and homosexuality are all about sex.
    And yes, it does harm other people.  Mostly, the children.  Indulging them in a lifestyle that is still largely shunned by the majority of people, opens them up to a lifetime of scorn, right or wrong.   Even if the homosexual couple themselves don’t have kids, kids see it and think it’s a great lifestyle.

  • Anonymous

    I would also like to state here that some people believe that Gender is eternal.  God made certain of his children men and certain of them women and put them here to multiply and replenish the earth.  Which can only be done by combining the sexes.  If then gender is eternal, and you believe homosexuality to be condoned by God, then what you are really saying is that God made a mistake.  He gives us trials and tribulations to go through, but he still expects us to keep his commandments.  Marrying someone of the same sex actually, if you think about it, is nothing more than a way to thwart the plans of God. 

  • Anonymous

    If it is not eh government’s place to correct people’s moral decisions, then what about murder, that is a moral decision.  No police either????

  • Anonymous

    Divorce is outlawed, by GOD!!!!

  • Anonymous

    Divorce is outlawed, by GOD!!!!

  • Anonymous

    The US was indeed founded on Judeo-Christian principles…but it was NOT founded on Jewish or Christian scripture or religion.  The Founders were very clear on this.  Any attempt to advocate or enforce otherwise is to advocate or enforce a Judeo-Christian theocracy…which is profoundly anti-American.  The funny thing about most of the religionists here is that I guarantee
    most of them are against the idea of implementing Sharia law in the
    US…yet they are perfectly fine w/imposing their own Judeo-Christian
    version here.

  • Anonymous

    First, the core of the argument should be challenged that society
    doesn’t benefit from monogamous relationships of gay couples solidified
    by a contract of marriage.

    I would first point out that marriage is not a contract.  I am not making a religious argument here: I am saying that the law does not treat marriage as contract.  Although it has aspects of contract law, it is treated in a unique way by our laws and our courts.  It is a change in one’s status and the formation of a status relationship that, with no negotiation whatsoever (and subject to unilateral change by the state) confers a host of privileges and obligations upon the married and the state.  Consider also this: if two parties to a contract with by mutual agreement to cancel the contract, do they have to go through proceedings as extensive and time-consuming as a divorce?  Marriages are not contracts.

    As to your main point here, though, the proponents of same-sex marriage proclaim that they already have committed long-term relationships.  They are not seeking an “insurance policy”: as in, divorce is such a pain in the ass that they will be compelled to remain together, and somehow this will benefit everyone: the couples and society at large.  As much as society benefits from the stability of relationships, this is principally in the purview of the individuals in those relationships (married or not).  It is beyond government’s ability to force this in any efficient or surefire way by roping a new category of people into marital law.  It doesn’t even assure stability in marriages that exist right now anyway.  People need to be committed or promiscuous by their own choices.

    Second, you reference the “minority” populations that choose not to have
    children or cannot have them. Your suggestion must be interpreted that
    if you want to preclude gay couples from marriage because of their
    inability to have biological children, then you must prohibit those
    heterosexual couples as well because they fail the same test.

    This, as well as your third point:

    Third, with technology today, in the least a lesbian couple could have a
    1/2 biological child through invitro. This also raises the question
    about marriage between heterosexuals later in life beyond their
    childbearing years. Does this become not allowed by government due to
    lack of benefit to society?

    is easily answered by the needs of efficiency and lack of invasiveness to any government policy.  To require a fertility test for every heterosexual couple seeking permission to marry would encroach deeply into their private lives, and it would cost the applicants or the state in the aggregate a great deal of money, and what for?  All of that trouble, cost, and invasion, and all the while the overwhelming majority of applicants would pass the test anyway.

    There is also the question of defining the border of the ability to reproduce: how low should a man’s sperm count be under such a regime, before the test is considered a failure?

    And of course should it also be required that marrying couples swear oaths promising to try to have children?

    No, the state, in affording the status of marriage for heterosexual couples, is taking into account what is the condition for the overwhelming majority of them.  This whole argument is about the state dealing with things as they naturally and in the vast majority of cases are.  It would be an over-reach, excessive and unreasonable personal invasion, and waste of resources for the state to impose a system here on the account of the few who have no children.

    I don’t really understand your point about minority discrimination and whether white people who are handicapped should be protected.  Laws designed to protect those with disabilities are racially blind laws.  Laws that forbid discrimination based on race are a different subject, and they are (or should be, but let’s not get into affirmative action here) protective of the minority class, while they place no burden on the majority.

  • Anonymous

    Hmm, your argument is based solely on religion, and is completely devoid of logic, yet mine is the one lacking.  Riiiiiiiiight.

    Yes, both scenarios are the same…social and economic contracts that impart special social and economic benefits and
    responsibilities only to those involved.  You can choose to have yours sanctioned by your church if you so choose.

  • Anonymous

    Pretty sure you were meaning to reply to someone else, but … how petty to point out a typo. I missed the part where it says, “Thou shalt not forget to capitalize a word that is also used as a proper name when it is being used as a proper name.” Also … I was refused to be married in a church … because I hadn’t gong through three months of premarital counseling. My daughter was refused to be married in a clerk’s office a couple months before she turned 18 … because in that county, the juvie judge insists on approving all pre-age 18 marriages, which she refuses to do under any circumstances. My mother was refused to be married in a Catholic church … because she was previously divorced. I wouldn’t be allowed to be ordained in many churches because they have a standard that women can’t be ordained. I wouldn’t hire a straight, absolutely wonderful outspoken atheist to educate my children. You probably wouldn’t let a man who had been accused repeatedly, but never convicted of child molestation to care for your daughter. Then again, many people refuse to hire even the most amazing men care for their children, even though they trust them completely. A homosexual nightclub would not hire a nun to be a spokesperson. The deal is, just because someone is gay, doesn’t mean they should be eligible for every position. If I’m a wedding planner, I would absolutely have the right to refuse a couple who wanted a porn-themed wedding as clients. If I’m a wedding planner who specializes in non-spiritual, homosexual ceremonies, I would have the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to refuse to plan and facilitate the wedding of two strongly spiritual Baptists who had saved themselves sexually for their marriage and wanted many Christian and spiritual elements in their ceremony. Get over yourself. Don’t be hateful to anyone, gay, straight, transgendered, celibate. Just choose who you do and don’t want to invest personal time and energy in and respect that others have that same right. I, for one, have no problem being close friends with homosexuals, but I also would set limits on their display of homosexual affection in my home or on outings with my children. At the same time, I could and would set serious limits on married, monogamous, Christian friends who had a tendency to display some overtly sexual affection toward each other. I have a child that I also place serious limits on when she is visiting my house. Everything doesn’t have to be a lawsuit. Just get a grip on reality. Geez.

  • Anonymous

    The Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit.  Three yet one.  Where one is so are the other two.  They have all said it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KKNK6HJG4E4GQ57SGXNO7F6M5I james s

    Marriage is not an equation, marriage is a contract between the people involed and their creator. 

  • Anonymous

    why is it that you can’t take my main point to heart. Of course “marriage” is not for sex only. The justification of the homosexual lifestyle is WRONG. And instead of appeasing to their lifestyle by giving them “special” rights, why can’t we help them through councelling and other loving means, to have a them have a “natural” life. The homosexual lives a life of confusion and despare, lets help them experience loving relationships instead.

  • Anonymous

    why is it that you can’t take my main point to heart. Of course “marriage” is not for sex only. The justification of the homosexual lifestyle is WRONG. And instead of appeasing to their lifestyle by giving them “special” rights, why can’t we help them through councelling and other loving means, to have a them have a “natural” life. The homosexual lives a life of confusion and despare, lets help them experience loving relationships instead.

  • Anonymous

    The Constitution is all about limiting federal government power and protecting individual freedoms.  So it would be inappropriate to go there about homosexuality. 

    However the bible makes it clear that what we now call homosexuality is an abomination unto the Lord.  Recommend you read the scriptures daily.  You’ll be surprised at what’s in there and what isn’t in there.

  • Anonymous

    “……should (they) break a law or commandment…Woe to the world of Gays..”  
    You are trying to do God’s judging!  It won’t fool Him at all what you are trying to do!!  And btw..I think He knows His own laws, He probably has it all covered paula…He, afterall is in control. It appears so many of you know how to write that when it’s convenient but then elsewhere it would appear you’re afraid God’s gonna drop the ball, lest you butt in and take the lead. I mean how incompetent do you think God is that He needs us mere mortals to do His judging.  DO YOU TRUST GOD OR NOT!!!???
    His Word asks us to obey His laws and commandments, He will judge us, He will, trust that!! 
    I know there’s an abundance of Biblical theologians…but I think there’s a main premise here that all you experts are kinda missing.  THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GOD BEFORE ME.” 
    Well I’m reading a lot of “little caesar” comments here.  We have the law of man…man would bode well to stick to that and leave the Divine judgment to God Almighty Himself.

  • Anonymous

    This is why I love being a Christian, I can judge everyone else for their sins and know I am still going to Heaven!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_655U5HUSUOIGT3R5JRQCC2H33U jarretts

    I can’t understand why homosexuals can’t be satisfied with a civil union that has all the same rights and responsibilities as marriage without redefining the word marriage.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=733088682 Jenna Jones

    There is a very simple solution to this problem, take government out of marriage, and give it back to God. Government is not capable of instituting marriage because its Gods institution, not governments. The Church joins couples according to the scriptures and bounds them before God in that covenant… Take the power away from government, give it back to the church.. problem solved. The government took the marriage covenant away from the church because it was what “was good for us.” They wanted licenses to make sure people where healthy, kinda like how they want to legislate fats and tobacco.. lets face it… we gave government our most sacred institution, what did we think would happen? They would do a great job? Please. Stop arguing about what the future President should do to further deepen governments role in marriage, and instead, demand they get the heck out of it.

  • Anonymous

    AGAIN, God does not contradict himself! He will not condemn “Lying with the same sex or animals” in Romans 1 and then advocate it, “because they are weak”, in Romans 14. Remember, God loves the sinner, but hates the sin. Tolerance is not the issue here.

  • http://twitter.com/fallan12 frankie allan

    excellent Michael.But Christians know this moral decay was prophesied in the NT as a sign before our Lord comes.Jesus said just before the end the world would be like it was in Soddom and in Noahs day just before the flood.The “church is even accepting this immoral way of life and instead of it being a light to the world  the darkness of the world is slowly putting out that light.Have you noticed what is good for society is looked on as bad and what is bad for society is looked on as good.A price will be paid for this when an immoral world reaps the harvest for its sin..and it has already had that warning when aids first appeared in the 80s.Now again the bath houses have re-opened and the 80s is now forgotten but God sees its depravity and will judge them for it.

  • Robert

    I dont care what mans acceptance of marraige is, God says that you shall not lie with a male as with a woman, it is an abomination. It is one man and one woman, period!!

  • Anonymous

    MARRIAGE IS THE SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE ON A MAN & WOMAN LIVING TOGETHER FOR THE PURPOSE OF PRODUCING CHILDREN TO CONTINUE SOCIETY. MOST MARRIAGES FIT THIS PATTERN, NO, NOT ALL COUPLES CAN CONCEIVE & NO, NOT ALL WANT CHILDREN BUT OUR SOCIETY IS BASED ON THE MAJORITY RULE, NOT THE MINORITY AS SEEMS TO BE HAPPENING.

  • Anonymous

    I want to thank you for your response Miss NiniC. I don’t really think that you are getting the point. The point is that God says that homosexuality is an abomination, not I. I am definitely on Gods side and if He says that something is abominable then I will agree with Him and not with people who have decided that they are homosexuals. In your comment about Lot and not Abraham, I cannot say that what they did was an abomination. It is definitely sin but was condoned in that day and time. Their fear was the same kind of fear that Abraham’s wife had and shoved Abraham into the arms of Sarai”s slave. This sin is why Israel and the muslims are constantly at war. If you want to see what God sees as an abomination , look at The Bible as a whole. See what abominable, abomination actually means. Just as God loves you no matter what, he hates sin whether I sin or anyone else sins. Thank goodness His Son’s shed blood will wash away all of our sins when they are confessed and we try with all our heart not to do it again. If we fail again, confess it again and He will forgive you again Hope you have a wonderful day!

    ________________________________

  • Anonymous

    Yea ,  if  queers want to marry each other   move them all to the North pole and let them die out because they can’t reproduce,,,,,,

  • Anonymous

    I think it’s between each person and God. Christains who are intolerant and judgmental are not living as Christains…..even if they follow every commandment to the t. If Jesus was here today he would not, I believe, behave in the way so many Christains are. Judge and thou shall be judged. No one is perfect…everyone has a different idea of what right and wrong is. What matters is what’s in our soul. Keeping all the commandments, going to Church on Sunday, sharing The Word are ALL wonderful character traits……we shouldn’t ruin that by judging people because they are different from  us, or have different beliefs….or with a “holier than thou” attitude. Only God knows their soul….no person does, and no person has the right to judge them, less they be judged on thier behavior towards one of God’s children. We are ALL God’s children…straight or gay. I am  Christain…and believe being Christain is being Christ like….I believe there are many who have to check their behavior and look into their own souls before judging others. There have been many words used on this page that are very uncharitable and unChristlike. When people get get caught up in that, they give Christains a bad name…and religion a bad name. God is LOVE and behavior otherwise…for any reason is not GODLIKE.

  • Anonymous

    Maybe you didn’t read it, because you were too busy putting together insults and degrading comments that have no basis in this discussion of GOD, Judgement and Faithfulness.  The “hate” you mentioned..was the only word that hit this nail on the head.  

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    Glenn made some great points about same-sex marriage. Like the point about bi-sexuala who may want to marry both a man and a woman at the same time. The bigger issue is that the same-sex crusade is being used to silence Christianity in the public arena. And too many Christians are being intimidated into silence.

  • http://twitter.com/RedRacer7695 Mary Taylor

    The Word says in the last days right will become wrong and wrong will become right.

  • Anonymous

    God created Adam and Eve, not ADAM and Adam, EVE and Eve.Marrying the same sex are so disgusting, and those people are sinning in the eyes of God, married should only be men and women period.How in the world with the same sex can produce a baby?

  • Anonymous

    No, it’s not the nanny States job to make sure us boys and girls think exactly what and how the nanny State allows.  No it’s not the responsibility of the police THANKFULLY, to enforce our moral code.  
    I don’t know about you, but my Lord Jesus Christ saved my moral soul.  And He knows I’m not without sin.
    I don’t know about you…but I haven’t learned one single thing about being a good and decent person from my nanny gov. or the neighborhood sheriff.  
    The police enforce law…a individual is free here troopers to be amoral as they want.  The nanny nor the cops will change your decision.  When a parolee is released, they’ve either made good their promise to God in repentance, or they’ve lied through their teeth to the authorities to get out.  
    Do you want the gov or the police to school you on how to be a person of decency??  Please say NO!!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UQG6363FRERTLNXUV2AZKU3F2A john

    Your heart may be in the right place but, God did not “only” come to this earth to expose the imperfection of anything! He came to restore the relationship between Himself and man…which man could not do…through the law. The argument you are using flies in the face of John 3:16…for it does not say anything about exposing the fallacy of His creation.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KKNK6HJG4E4GQ57SGXNO7F6M5I james s

    Marriage is not an equation, marriage is a contract between the people involved and their creator. A civil union is the state reconizing the contract between the people involved

  • Anonymous

    Keeping this non-religious, your point above is that a married heterosexual couple that produces biological children provides benefits to society. And all other marriages are a net cost to society but government should only interfere with homosexuals seeking to be married because they’re a ‘known’ cost. By cost, I’m not sure if you mean pure financial cost, i.e. benefits, etc., or cost in terms of “the well being of society.” If the latter, we can stop right here because that’s purely personal speculation and subjective. Gays have existed in society for thousands of years and to date have never posed a threat to the future existence of man.

    Therefore it seems we need to focus on the financial cost of gay marriage. I would argue that there would be no financial cost to gay marriage for a few reasons. The first is that in most states, even those with laws against gay marriage, a civil union is available which provides those very benefits. Second, gay people pay the same taxes as straight people. Since all benefits received are paid by taxpayers, and there’s no tax credit available for being gay, if anything gay people have been subsidizing married heterosexuals for decades. I’m not a believer in entitlement but believe in this case they are entitled to the same benefits as married heterosexual couples.

    As far as my comments on discrimination, obviously my case was not well made else you would have understood it better. My point was that we expect government to carry out its duties equally to all citizens in other areas of society (I chose anti-discrimination laws) but for gay marriage we’re looking for an exception. I just don’t see how it would be different on this subject.

  • Lioness

    Adoption, sex has already done enough. Many children are starving or in abusive situations and need loving families. Love is real, sex only serves one purpose. Why cant we take care of the people who are on this planet right now. Children and the elderly should be our first priority. Not mans narcissistic desire to create another person in his own image. To me that’s just selfish.

  • Lioness

    Thank you for posting. It’s Christians such as yourself, that will make a difference.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UQG6363FRERTLNXUV2AZKU3F2A john

    Is your Caps Lock stuck, or are you yelling at everyone – those who support your argument as well as those who don’t. Cause if your yelling at everyone, you sound like a “Ron Paul” zealot – and just like those folks, you do more harm to the grace of God than good.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UQG6363FRERTLNXUV2AZKU3F2A john

    Wow Tammy your logic is “flawless!” If we believe the Holy Spirit leads the Biblical writers to clearly communicate the will of God….then wouldn’t “He” lead Paul also? Maybe next you’ll expound on how the red letter words are more important than the others.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UQG6363FRERTLNXUV2AZKU3F2A john

    Wow now we’re supposed to apologize for brothers and sisters behavior…is that another contextual consideration?

  • Anonymous

    I wish human beings could have a discussion about gay marriage without the emotions that lead to name calling. “If you’re gay or pro-gay marriage, you’re perverted. If you’re anti-gay marriage, you’re bigoted.” I, for one, am tired of being thought of as bigoted because I am against gay marriage. First, I have friends who happen to be gay. I like them. They’re very nice people. But I still don’t believe in gay marriage. Here’s why: For centuries, marriage has always been between a man and a woman for reasons stated previously. Now ONE group wants to change that definition. I don’t believe they have that right. However, two adults should have the right to be each other’s next-of-kin, etc. so I do believe in civil unions. BUT, if gays can have certain added rights, including tax benefits, insurance benefits, and so on, then why can’t I and my mother have those same rights? Here’s my argument: I am a female. My elderly mother lives with me and is on very expensive medication. Her insurance plan is horrible. Mine, however, is pretty good and would save her quite a bit of her fixed income if I could put her on my plan. But I can’t. So why can’t I marry my mother? If same-sex couples can’t procreate, then consanguinity shouldn’t be an issue. If consanguinity isn’t an issue, I should be able to marry my mother to put her on my health plan. After all, we’re blood relatives, closer ties than a gay couple. Now if logically, I should be able to do that, then why can’t one man marry more than one woman, or a woman marry more than one man? As soon as you dilute the definition by allowing one group to change it, you’re opening up the real arguments that it should be changed for other groups, too. Soon, “marriage” is not going to be recognizable any more. 

  • Anonymous

    It is an abomination for a man to lay with a man or a woman to lay with a woman in GOD’S eye’s read it !
    That’s good enough for our family!
    3 thing’s in AMERICA get people’s attention MONEY, SEX ,and FEAR !!!
    If you are gay judgement day comes to us all,but please wash your hand’s !!!!!!

  • Anonymous

    Keeping this non-religious, your point above is that a married heterosexual couple that produces biological children provides benefits to society. And all other marriages are a net cost to society but government should only interfere with homosexuals seeking to be married because they’re a ‘known’ cost. By cost, I’m not sure if you mean pure financial cost, i.e. benefits, etc., or cost in terms of “the well being of society.” If the latter, we can stop right here because that’s purely personal speculation and subjective. Gays have existed in society for thousands of years and to date have never posed a threat to the future existence of man.

    Although what I discussed above was purely about specifically calculable costs of money and other resources easily reducible to pecuniary value, perhaps I should take your advice and stop anyway, because there are other costs (what you call “the well being of society”) that certainly deserve consideration.  That homosexuals have existed for thousands of years is in itself immaterial in arguing to the contrary.  This time now is the first time in thousands of years (or thereabouts) that state sanction and support of their relations is seriously proposed.  One of the seminal accomplishments of ancient Judaism was its recognition of the destructive power of sexuality–in particular male sexuality–left unfettered.  We have the foundational unit of the family and the consequent betterment of women largely on account of the directing of male human sexuality towards women and conception rather than gratification.

    I am reminded of an article I read recently by a psychologist who was examining commitment among homosexual male couples and a realization that surprised him.  In his discussions with one couple, they disclosed that, some weeks after having committed to a “monogamous” relationship, they had had a three-way encounter with another man.  Just as the psychologist was about to tally that up for his study in the “failure” column for committment, the men told him that they had in fact not failed, because that was part of their relationship as they had defined it.  Men engaged in homosexual behavior are far more likely to have such “open” or promiscuous arrangements than men in traditional, heterosexual pursuits.

    But you don’t want to go there.  On the subject, then, of money:

    The first is that in most states, even those with laws against gay marriage, a civil union is available which provides those very benefits.

    This is uncertain, and the very fact that same-sex civil unions are not universally available (and in some jurisdictions are explicitly forbidden) is significant as well.  There remains, between states that offer the civil unions as well as those that do not, the opportunity for litigation or further legislation.  Whether same-sex couples must be given all of the same benefits in such situations remains unresolved, and many advocates for same-sex marriage insist that the civil unions do not resolve the matter.

    Second, gay people pay the same taxes as straight people. Since all benefits received are paid by taxpayers, and there’s no tax credit available for being gay, if anything gay people have been subsidizing married heterosexuals for decades.

    An oversimplification.  For one thing, not all of the costs come from government.  Is an employer who extends health insurance to his employees’ spouses required to offer the same to same-sex partners?  Would he be required to extend to same-sex “spouses” the same as to heterosexual spouses, if same-sex marriage were the law?  What similar burdens would this place on other private organizations in their dealings?  Would litigants in court be unable to elicit testimony on a matter due to an assertion of the spousal privilege by a member of a same-sex couple?  Would debtors who happen to be in same-sex relationships be able to avail themselves of the legal protections of marriage in order to escape their creditors?  Would same-sex partners be able to take advantage of the same strict-liability claims in court that are reserved for spouses and family?

    And all of these things, why?  To provide a group of people certain privileges they do not have, to normalize certain forms of human sexuality, and all to treat as identical things that unambiguously are not identical.  Because one group feels deprived of what the other has, in part, but also (and this is the attempt to change the culture) to compel society to demonstrate its acceptance of something: even though demonstrating its acceptance is demanded by a means that treats the thing society must accept as something that it is not.

  • Anonymous

    In regards to your third statement:  Your premise begins with – marriage is sacred.  Please allow me to clarify this for you.

    It is under certain conditions.  In order for a marriage to be considered sacred, the union must be blessed by an ordained priest, pastor, minister, rabbi, etc…  This constitutes a sacramental marriage blessed by the grace of God.

    In answer to your confusion about a judge marrying two atheists, or for that matter, any two individuals of any faith/non-faith – it is not sacred.  They have merely been united in a secular marriage.  They have a legal marriage according to our civil law.  They do not, however, have a sacred marriage.

    You asked for an explanation.  I hope this helps.

  • Ginny Allen

    Atheists purport there is no right or wrong, so I’m sure they do not believe in police, courts or prison, right?

  • Ginny Allen

    God is THE judge, but His disciples are fruit inspectors!

  • Anonymous

    You make a fact out of anecdotal story from an article you read. That as easily could have been an anecdote about a heterosexual couple. I know two gay couples, one married the other not. I’m pretty confident they’re not leading the “gay lifestyle” that so many equate with gay people. And it’s not that I don’t want to go down the road of “well being of society,” it’s that the road leads to nowhere. That’s because you can’t convince me that monogamous, married gay couples hurt the moral fabric of our society, just as I can’t convince you that they do no harm and actually enhance our society. Maybe some day sociologists will come together and do a scientific study on the matter with results that would be non-refutable by rational people and it would end discussions like these. Until then we’re stuck here.

    Insofar as costs, your comments leave me scratching my head. First, as you’ve pointed out, gay couples are less likely to have children, therefore their benefits would likely cost less. Second, currently unmarried gay couples that aren’t currently covered under one policy must be covered under two separate benefit policies. I know at my workplace, a benefits package for a single person is more than half the cost of one for a family plan. Therefore, if they could be covered under one policy, costs passed on to consumers (society in our debate) would be less. See, allow gay marriage and we’re already making money.

    Next to last, you’re rebuttal failed to address the inequity of homosexuals being forced to contribute financially to society at an equal rate but with inequitable benefits. I believe that stands as a major issue, especially as you state when many jurisdictions provide them no commensurate relief via other means such as civil unions.

    And lastly, gay people are under no delusions that anyone can be compelled to accept them. They simply want the same benefit plan that every other law-abiding, taxpaying citizen gets from their government. Doesn’t seem like they’re asking for much from society.

    Now a final, final note. We’ve had a good debate but it’s clear neither of us is convincing the other. Therefore we should sign off. I appreciate the good discussion and the respectful manner in which it was engaged. Thanks and have a great 2012.

  • Ginny Allen

     “We are saved by faith alone, but not by faith which is alone.  That is, we are saved, not by anything we do, but by grace.  Yet if we have truly understood and believed the gospel, it will change what we do and how we live.  Unlike cheap grace, which means going to church and hearing that God just loves and forgives everyone, so it doesn’t really matter much how you live, anyone who truly understands how God’s costly grace comes to us will have a changed life.  Costly grace changes you from the inside out.  Actions must follow what one believes, else one cannot claim to believe it.”  ~Dietrich Bonhoeffer  When we live for Jesus, out of our faith in Him, we will do good works in His name.  Faith without works is dead.  But works without faith in the One who calls us to Him is for naught.  It will be burned up.  
     It all boils down to abiding in Him.  “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free.  Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.”  ~Galatians 5:1  We are free in Christ to do that which is right, to surrender all to Him, His will, His way.  We are not free to go back into bondage in Egypt, back into living for our own sinful will and way.  We are not free to take license in the freedom of Christ to live however we selfishly want to.   
    As Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, “Cheap grace means the justification of sin without the justification of the repentant sinner who departs from sin and from whom sin departs.  Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance.  Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.”  
    As exemplary Bonhoeffer said, “Costly grace is costly because it costs a man his life, and it is grace because it gives a man the only true life.  It is costly because it condemns sin, and grace because it justifies the sinner.  Above all, it is costly because it cost God the life of His Son:  ‘ye were bought at a price,’ and what has cost God much cannot be cheap for us.  The only man who has the right to say that he is justified by grace alone is the man who has left all to follow Christ.  Grace simply means discipleship.”   

  • Ginny Allen

    God is THE judge, but His disciples are the fruit inspectors!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1043917478 Leona Laico Galal

    God bless Rick Santorum and help him speak by the Holy Spirit to these real bigots that want to make him drop his beliefs to accommodate their desires

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XJIHVCCI4OKWM2S3P4MMAUEX2U John

    You do realize that modern Mainstream Mormonism dissociate themselves from Mormon fundamentalists who believe in that weird marriage pluralism, right?  You do realize that Glen only has 1 wife, right?  You do realize that Romney only has ever had 1 wife, right?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XJIHVCCI4OKWM2S3P4MMAUEX2U John

    I don’t understand your thinking.  What makes a nation “gay” or “straight?” Are you saying that the “straight” nations that fell didn’t have 1 homosexual person?  So, what does that make Amercia.  Is America a gay or straight nation?  Your argument makes no sense.  I’m not going down the path that Rome fell because of homosexuality…there were a lot of reasons that they fell.  I’m just saying your labeling of a “gay” or “straight” nation doesn’t make sense.

  • Anonymous

    How do you judge my sins?  With what measure would you use?   You speak as a young Christian. Read Matthew chapter 7.
      What has been given you is a gift, not a pass to judge or cause harm.  You have been entrusted with a precious truth.  You are a disciple called to make disciples (other believers).  We recognize the sin in an unbeliever and do our best to show them what Christ did for them… and you… trying to lead them into all truth.  THOSE WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE!    For we are all saved by Grace, and it’s because of CHRIST BLOOD you may go to Heaven.
       The only ones you get to judge – and I share this with a bit of apprehension concerning your statement –  are those who claim to walk in Christ, other brothers and sisters in the Lord.   When… AND ONLY… when, we see them walking out of the will if God.   Then… only as lead to do so by the Holy Spirit and, without question, bathed in prayer and with all HUMILITY!  
       Romans 15:14-15   14,  Now I myself am confident concerning you, my brethren, that you also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able to admonish one another.    15,  Nevertheless, brethren, I have written more boldly to you on some points, as reminding you, because of the grace given to me by God.
      
    CHRISTIANS HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN THE SAME AUTHORITY AS GOD TO JUDGE EVERYONE ELSES SINS!

      Mercy and Grace is what YOU have.
    MERCY = NOT getting what YOU DO deserve!
    GRACE = Getting what YOU DON’T deserve!

    TO GOD and OUR LORD and SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST BE ALL THE GLORY!  AMEN!!!

    Numbers 6:24-26

  • Anonymous

    To transgress is sin. Sin brings judgement not only on the individual, but the nation. To steal is a sin. To murder is a sin. To lie is a sin, etc. For some reason the GLAD community has become a protected political class. Sometimes, the truth is a bitter pill to swallow, but it needs to be told. Sorry, that there can be no sweetner added into it. But, there is one thing that I do agree with Glenn on. Why do we need the government involved in marriage. Oh yeah, it’s for that marriage penalty tax. So, I guess the government is just looking for their share of taxes from gay marriages. BO stated, that one day gay and lesbian marriages would be just as valuable and admirable as marriage between a man and a woman. Thank goodness I don’t have to look to this man for collective salvation. It appears that G-d’s protective arm has already been removed from this country. So, it will be up to each of us to decide what road we wish to follow.

  • Anonymous

    Well said!  :)

    Numbers 6:24-26

  • Anonymous

    Does anyone know what “sarcasm” means?

    ________________________________
    From: Disqus
    To: foolyn10@yahoo.com
    Sent: Saturday, January 7, 2012 8:14 PM
    Subject: [glennbeck] Re: Glenn’s take on gay marriage

    Disqus generic email template

    hope4more wrote, in response to judgeothers:
    How do you judge my sins?  With what measure would you use?   You speak as a young Christian. Read Matthew chapter 7. What has been given you is a gift, not a pass to judge or cause harm.  You have been entrusted with a precious truth.  You are a disciple called to make disciples (other believers).  We recognize the sin in an unbeliever and do our best to show them what Christ did for them… and you… trying to lead them into all truth.  THOSE WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE!    For we are all saved by Grace, and it’s because of CHRIST BLOOD you may go to Heaven. The only ones you get to judge – and I share this with a bit of apprehension concerning your statement –  are those who claim to walk in Christ, other brothers and sisters in the Lord.   When… AND ONLY… when, we see them walking out of the will if God.   Then… only as lead to do so by the Holy Spirit and, without question, bathed in prayer and with all HUMILITY! Romans 15:14-15   14,  Now I myself am confident concerning you, my brethren, that you also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able to admonish one another.    15,  Nevertheless, brethren, I have written more boldly to you on some points, as reminding you, because of the grace given to me by God.
    CHRISTIANS HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN THE SAME AUTHORITY AS GOD TO JUDGE EVERYONE ELSES SINS!
    Mercy and Grace is what YOU have.
    MERCY = NOT getting what YOU DO deserve!
    GRACE = Getting what YOU DON’T deserve!

    TO GOD and OUR LORD and SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST BE ALL THE GLORY!  AMEN!!!

    Numbers 6:24-26 Link to comment

  • Anonymous

    Tammy, if a homosexual person abstains from sexual activity, then who cares what a person considers him or herself ?

    Question for you:  You seem to cling to the idea that the government should not prefer one religion to another. Okay, so name for me the major religion which considers marriage to be a relationship between two people of the same sex? 

    The doctrine you yourself are advocating is YOUR religious doctrine, and you are insisting that the state take YOUR side as opposed to the 90% of Americans who know that a marriage is between a man and a woman. There is no non-religious point of view.

    You are attempting to get the government to enforce your own version of religion on the rest of the country. So stop pretending that you don’t want the government to “correct people’s moral decisions”.  That’s exactly what you are asking it to do. Furthermore, any nation’s legal code IS the embodiment of the nation’s cumulative religious outlook. By prescribing what is and what is not lawful, any legal system institutionalizes a code of morality. You just aren’t happy with the morality the government currently recognizes, because you would prefer your own.  But there is no inherent high ground you can claim for your point of view.

    One major problem with homosexual marriage is that it is defined primarily as a sexual relationship, without any consideration of the factors of what actually constitutes a marriage. Marriage is not just a bond of two people “in love”, or two people filling out a tax return together. A marriage is a union or combination of a male and a female, both of which have distinct and inherently unique characteristics. A homosexual union simply, by definition, lacks this diversity. There is no way in which a man can substitute for a woman, or vice versa. Many homosexual unions simply fizzle out for lack of anything that really sustains a real marriage. Normal, heterosexual marriage is a prolonged exercise of real diversity, a diversity which is lacking in same-sex unions. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that there’s an element of narcissism in the desire for same-sex marriage.

  • Anonymous

    Are you purporting that their are those (atheists or other) that “…..don’t believe in police, courts or prison?”  Are you alright?

  • Anonymous

    Having watched the Rick Santorum clip here, I like him more, and I’m disgusted with the brain-dead, bullying bigots in his audience, who just yell, and don’t listen. They are obviously there merely to heckle him.

  • Anonymous

    uhhhh tammy can’t enforce anyone’s version on the rest of the country…that would be the Feds.  

  • Anonymous

    Well said, but you do realize Jenna that doesn’t mean that homosexuals will disappear like unicorns right?  I mean let’s grow up and realize that the gays will have their church’s too.  But…if you are a true believer you know that it’s God’s judgement. 

  • Anonymous

    OH PLEASE FORGIVE ME? I am truely sorry!!   It’s just that I have been dealing with someone who really does believe this way.  He is hateful and judgemental and calls himself a Christian.  It just breaks my heart for those who don’t know the real Christ to believe that that is how real Christians conduct themselves.

    Again I humbly apologize!
     

  • Anonymous

    jack, you are very defensive.  you assume i’m mad and want to call you names.  NOTHING I HAVE WRITTEN TELLS YOU THIS.  however, YOU ARE AN ANGRY MAN.  you think because your son says civil union is fine w/HIM and marriage is not important in a gay relationship that this is the answer we must follow. 

    i gave my opinion and you want to throw the bible at me.  well, guess what?  i don’t live my life through the bible.  i live it through the ten commandments and i do believe in G-D, but apparently, not your god.

    …and slow down when you’re upset — your spelling takes a hit.

  • Anonymous

    Although you have wisely suggested a sign-off to our civil discussion, I’m going to go ahead an reply, if for no other reason than the exercise of my own thoughts for myself and the possibility that someone else may read it. I’ve just finished watching the debate, so I’m a couple hours after your last remarks, but I hope you might get a notification and see this, but, in any case, here goes.

    You make a fact out of anecdotal story from an article you read.

    I can understand how it seemed that way, but I was not basing my conclusion on the one story. Have a gander at this, for instance:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html

    I’m not jumping to a conclusion without basis or giving in to a prejudiced stereotype. I’m talking about a condition that is far more prevalent in homosexual relations than in heterosexual ones, and there are even studies that support this. That article makes reference to one of them. You can research further, if your curiosity on the matter guides you.

    I’ll add that what I’m talking about is not, by and large, so much a comment on intrinsically homosexual tendencies as it is on intrinsically masculine human sexual tendencies. Who are the perpetrators of rape? Overwhelmingly men. Who are the principal “clients” of the sex trade? Men. Who consumes and becomes addicted more to pornography? Men in heterosexual pursuits have the distinct advantage that the objects of their pursuits are women, a fact that mitigates man’s more unfortunate predilections and directs him towards better and more stable ends. Men in search of homosexual gratification are far more likely to find in the objects of their pursuit the opposite, since the gratification they pursue is itself a male sexual drive.

    Insofar as costs, your comments leave me scratching my head. First, as you’ve pointed out, gay couples are less likely to have children, therefore their benefits would likely cost less. Second, currently unmarried gay couples that aren’t currently covered under one policy must be covered under two separate benefit policies. I know at my workplace, a benefits package for a single person is more than half the cost of one for a family plan. Therefore, if they could be covered under one policy, costs passed on to consumers (society in our debate) would be less. See, allow gay marriage and we’re already making money.

    But the benefits I most specifically referred to were not benefits paid for by consumers: they were benefits paid for by employers and other private business entities. If an employee is insured or provided with whatever financial benefit by his employer, and then the employer is required also to cover the employee’s spouse, who pays for that? The employer. This is a proposal that would force a private entity to take on an additional cost for a private individual (the same-sex partner) whom that private entity (the employer) has no relationship with. I find that unjust.

    The debate brought up another issue I think bears mention here on the subject of private organizations being harmed. How did Catholic Charities get driven out of Massachussetts? The courts said that, since same-sex marriages were on the books, the organization could not refuse to provide adoption services to same-sex couples. Not allowed an exception for conscientious reasons. I also find that unjust, and not just to the charity, but also to the children.

    Next to last, you’re rebuttal failed to address the inequity of homosexuals being forced to contribute financially to society at an equal rate but with inequitable benefits.

    But they do receive benefits on the same basis. No two people, of course, receive the exact same dollar amount, but every individual is just as entitled to social security benefits and all of the other programs as any other individual. It is merely that homosexual couples are not receiving every last one of the benefits as couples. That this causes some disparity seems beyond doubt, but the disparity is not a distinction based on the individuals: it is a distinction based on the nature of the relationships of the couples.

    This goes to the whole question of our entitled society, and indeed the matter I first talked about (whether government should allow same-sex marriages). At the debate, a viewer asked the question, what would you say to same-sex couples who want to have loving, committed, long-term relationships. My answer to that is, if you have one, treat it well, and, if you do not, treat your fellow man with dignity and look to cultivate one. It is not up to the state to provide one’s relationships, and it should also not be up to the state to manufacture exact economic equality to all people and the every relationship, no matter how noble or loving the relationship is.

    And lastly, gay people are under no delusions that anyone can be compelled to accept them. They simply want the same benefit plan that every other law-abiding, taxpaying citizen gets from their government. Doesn’t seem like they’re asking for much from society.

    On this note, I am afraid, you are only half right. Part of this is about the benefits, but this is also absolutely about acceptance. Why do you think we wind up with a question like the one the viewer of the debate asked? Why else do you think that the word marriage is so important to a good many of the same-sex couples who seek it. They want society to recognize the relationship, not just for pecuniary reasons. Offer the same-sex movement every last benefit, give them everything–joint tax returns, automatic healthcare powers of attorney, insurance rights, inheritance claims, the whole nine yards–except tell them that it is not a marriage, and you will hear an outcry. This is absolutely a movement to gain acceptance and to transform the culture. Why else does every other article about Rick Santorum (or anybody else who has any reservations about this stuff) call him a bigot? Because this is a movement to change the culture, and it’s about a lot more than money.

  • Anonymous

    Just wondering why, out of everything that is in the bible, you chose to believe in the 10 commandments?

  • John Burleson

    The question Santorum was asked was specific to relationships involving ONE MAN AND ONE MAN, OR ONE WOMAN AND ONE WOMAN.  Satorum decided to dip into his bag of ambulance-chaser tricks and answer with another totally irrelevant, BS question.  Why didn’t the Rickster ask about men and chickens, or women and starfishes? I don’t care what politicians say, because if their lips are flapping, they’re lying.  What I care about is the right of two people, regardless of ice cream proloclivities, to engage in whatever relationship they mutually agree on as long as it doesn’t involve cooking me for dinner. Santorum, that you lost my vote isn’t worth the time it took me to type it–you’ll buy another. You lost my vote because you’re a liar.

    John Burleson

  • Anonymous

    isn’t being gay just there sexual preference

  • Anonymous

    “Santorum, that you lost my vote isn’t worth the time it took me to type it–you’ll buy another. You lost my vote because you’re a liar.”

    hahahaha That’s got to be the funniest line I’ve read in a while. Here’s a clue… if you’re going to accuse someone of lying, don’t try so hard with all those ignorant prefaces. It makes you look like you are doing the same thing.

  • Anonymous

    Yes! Just like pornagrapy, but then that would be an infringement on pornagraphers first ammendment rights. We definately do not want homosexuals having any first ammendment rights!

  • Anonymous

    Let me see pornagraphic movies, magazines and books are legal due to the freedom of speech. We are not to deny pornagraphers their Constitutional rights. However, we must all stand our ground and not allow homosexuals to have any Constitutional rights (even if their religious views allow marriage between men and men and marriage between women and women). In fact we should make it a crime of treason to be homosexual since it is an infringement on our Judeo-Christian values and laws. Please write your Congressmen to ban all homosexual activity in this great land of freedom. We must suppress our religious beliefs on all Americans just as England did to the Pilgrims.  This way the homosexuals can flee this great nation of ours and start their own United States of Homosexuals.

  • Anonymous

    This is really a worthless time consuming argument.  There is nothing stopping gay/lesbians from marrying if they truly want to.  There is no gay police.  Big brother government does not need to create another entitlement group!  There are plenty of civil union contracts and legal guardian tax breaks to make everybody legally happy.  Why a particular group wants the Government’s blessing concerning a very private matter baffles me. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    then why do the religious fight so hard to reserve that blessing to themselves? Seems to me your point cuts both ways

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    put the pipe down. Crack kills.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    I’d prefer 10,000 hecklers to one man with the power to infringe my freedom and the willingness to exercise it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    given we don’t live in a theocracy, your (inaccurate) bible quotes  really are not relevant. if the government gets to pick and choose which doctrines to enforce, what will you do when it picks someone else’s doctrine to enforce on you?

  • Anonymous

    I was being sarcastic. I could probably marry a crack pipe legally than the human being I have been with for 23 years, and I have never been with anyone else. Woe is me, for I ruin the sanctity of marriage. In fact I think I alone ruined all of Rush and Newt’s marriages. I probably was the one that tempted Edwards into cheating on his wife as well. The people of America accept this as the norm. Yet, the human being I have been with for years and will be with for the rest of my life will never be able to have the same Constitutional rights as heterosexuals. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    there are clear answers to your comments but darned if it isn’t difficult to parse your comments out into response sized chunks.  I suggest paragraphs.

    You really should do more research on the history of marriage, it’s not really like what you’ve been told. One of the fundamental “truths” of marriage was changed, by an act of government, in the Loving case. another fundamental truth of marriage was changed in the 60′s when divorce law was radically altered. The idea that marriage is this long unbroken chain of unchanged standards is simply silly. 

    Just as silly is the idea that the church alone has the right to set the parameters of marriage (nevermind that there are churches today and for the last 50 years who bless gay marriages). the government does that, and has for the entire history of our country.

    As for your analogy with your mom, if i had my way any two people could enter into a domestic contract which carried all the mutual benefits in relationship to the law and government that legal marriage now carries. ANY. and marriage would be solely the pervue of the church.

    but simply because the culture is not yet ready to take that big a leap is not a valid argument against extending the privilege of legal marriage to same sex couples. Logically that doesn’t work.

    the premise is this – all citizens ought to enjoy equal protection before the law unless the government can demonstrate a compelling interest for treating citizens differently from other citizens (for instance, the rights lost by felons – the government has a specific compelling reason for that)

    i think all conservative and/or libertarian folks should agree with that.

    Now, in light of that foundational principle, WHAT is the compelling reason why people of the same sex can’t be civilly married? Making analogies to other theoretical pairings doesn’t answer that question. Absent such a reason, in a free and just society, the government should not play favorites based on the gender of the parties involved.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    I thought it was sarcasm, it was just really difficult to follow. Note for the record that we are on the same side, by the way.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    this answer dodges my question, not answers it.

  • Anonymous

    I’m cool with a Civil Union, however Civil Unions you do not have the same rights as a Marriage.

  • Anonymous

    Civil Unions do not have the same Federal rights as Marriage.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    please cite me the scripture which provides that singular definition so that we may discuss it farther.

    Oh, and while you are posting, please cite me the evidence that the Federal or state government is obliged to tailor the laws to a specific Christian doctrine to the exclusion of all others.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    your response is not relevant to the post i replied to. Please try to keep up.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    If you wish to speak forth on what ought happen in the church, that point of view might well have some merit, at least enough to be worthy of in depth discussion.

    we we speak here of the role of the government, and while it’s true that the government was predicated on a Christian worldview in a Christian culture (200 years ago) it was explicitly NOT designed to prefer one’s doctrine over another’s and that is what you and Santorum seek to do.

    We can certainly have a discussion about what god actually says about homosexuality and what he says about marriage, but that is not the same as discussing what the government ought do on these matters. This is not a theocracy.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    he what now? if Santorum brought any logic to the table he must have ate it along with his sandwich.

  • Anonymous

    It’s cool. People tend to forget who Jesus ate and visited all the time with. Jesus hung out with the sinners. So really, God has been on my side my whole life because he made me who I am. I just don’t understand why the non sinning Christians that judge me for being with the same human being for 23 years don’t think I am entitled to a few tax breaks here and there. I am cool with a Civil Union, but Civil Unions do not give you the same Constitutional rights as a Marrigae does.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    Baloney. Are you married? if you become impotent and no longer are able to have any sort of sexual relationship, will  you cease to be heterosexual?

    Sex is the RESULT of desire, the DESIRE makes you heterosexual or homosexual, the attraction. Sex is what you DO with it, not what it is.

    Your confusion arises because like so many, the word “sex” gets you all a flutter. The part of the word homosexual or heterosexual in question – “sex” – does not refer to the act of coitus, it refers to the persons gender, male or female (although gender and sex are not the same thing, i’m trying to give you some insight)

    it refers to the same thing as that “M” or “F” on one’s driver’s license refers to.

    so homo-sex-ual is one ATTRACTED TO or DESIROUS OF one of the same sex, and likewise heterosexual one of the opposite sex.

    that many, but not all, of these relationships ends up producing an act called “sex” does not mean that that act defines the person, the DESIRE is what defines them as one or the other.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    he’s entitled to his beliefs – he’s not entitled to legislate them

  • Anonymous

    I think Glenn does raise a good point. Why is gay marriage a rights issue, but not polygamy? Why is gay marriage not immoral but polygamy is? It seems ludicrous to be for gay marriage, but against polygamy. I’m for gay marriage and polygamy (as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult).

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    producing babies is not, according to scripture, the whole duty of man. Else those fellow on the Maury Povich show would be the best Christians of all.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    the word also says a lot on the subject of “who are you to judge another man’s servant”

    See Romans 14

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    As long as you don’t try to legislate your doctrine, you have the right to compete in the arena of ideas just like they do. either one of you is trying to silence the other, or vice versa, or both can go all out to win the argument – which FEELS like being attacked on both sides.

    unless you are willing to say they have every right to freely express their views, just as you do, then you cannot complain about being “silenced” without displaying hypocritical thinking. 

  • Anonymous

    I don’t even want gays paying into taxes at all. How dare they live thier gay lives and pay taxes to help public schools, libraries, or roads. All that gay tax payer money getting moved around could turn our heterosexual children gay. Especially the homosexuals that don’t have any children.  What if I’m driving down the road that my gay neighbors may have helped get repaved by paying into property taxes and my car turns gay. Oh it’s so deplorable.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    how very freedom loving of you. 

  • Anonymous

    For me, a lot has to do with semantics.  I practically cringe when I hear the term ”gay marriage.”

    Marriage is and should be between one man and one woman, and for many religions (depend-

    ing on the age of the couple) for the purpose of having and raising children.  When gay couples

    can reproduce without any outside ”help”, then, I’ll reconsider the marriage bit.  The couple who

    were gay and did have a child because one wasn’t yet the gender of his/her mate, doesn’t

    count.   However, I do agree with Glenn in civil UNIONS.  This subject was brought up today in

    the Rep. debates in NH (Sat.)  If a gay couple want a ”uniting, binding ceremony” which will give

    the other party contractual rights, fine.  Go for it.  But please, don’t redefine marriage.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    as soon as we become a theocracy, that will be relevant.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    are we running out of children?

    are all our children being raised in two parent homes with two married adult parents? 

    if your concern is about children and the future of society, don’t you have much bigger fish to fry than the fact that 3% of the population might marry and not have biological children?

  • Lioness

    As a conservative I am appalled when other freedom loving Americans can be so darn backwards, denying good God given logic for a few words of “religious” text. People are just obsessed with sex and gender. I guess when it’s shoved in our face by the media, it’s just expected. Religious folk like to say homosexuals are involving themselves in behavior that is immoral, yet what is the point of sex? For procreation? The argument could clearly be made that good hetero sexual Christians doing it for any other reason than to procreate are behaving immorally also. I personally don’t care either way. It just seems hypocritical to me.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey


    then what you are really saying is that God made a mistake.”

    tiresome argument is tiresome. Even more so when the whole thing is based on what you yourself says is what “some people” believe.

    “if gender is eternal” is really a useless statement if not everyone agrees that it is. furthermore, since this is not a theocracy, your doctrinal debate really isn’t relevant at all.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    Ummmm. no. Cultures around the world who have never heard of the Bible get married. (albeit, not with the English word – but Mary and Joseph didn’t use English either) 

    you can argue that the concept of marriage derives from God at a time that predates the diversity of human culture if you want to, but you cannot logically argue it is a BIBLICAL concept – as those are two different claims.

    You are wrong about homosexual relationships being anti-biblical too, but I can’t take the time to go into that with you here. not tonight.

    in any case, this nice little religious debate is irrelevant in a free society. When the theocracy arrives, then I encourage you to speak right up. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    schitzngrins I think you win the thread, well spoken.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey


    However the bible makes it clear that what we now call homosexuality is an abomination unto the Lord.”

    It really doesn’t. your (poorly) translated English copy says some things which reflect the bias of the church and the translator, but even then if understood in context they do not clearly define all homosexuality as sin. You are simply reading into it what you want to find there, or what you have been taught by others is in there, or both.

    In any case, this is all irrelevant to the question of what the government should do.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    but do you insist the law reflect your own personal theology?

    (i’ll bite my tongue on the KJV this time)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    no one is asking you to condone it. you are being asked to recognize that in a free society we dare not give the government the power to prefer one doctrine over another. that way lies the sort of tyranny our founders fled.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey


    Allowing gay marriage will eventually hurt EVERYONE.”

    How? don’t go and cite the scare tactics taught to you by those who look for arguments to support what they already want to believe, look into your OWN reasoning and logic.

    HOW precisely does the marriage of two lesbians in NY on any given day affect my marriage, or yours, or anyone elses? or the culture as a whole?

    in case you are not thinking yet, let me rub your nose in it. right now, as we speak, gay people are having SEX! they are in love, they are dating, they are putting their kids to bed or helping with their homework, they are doing the laundry together or having dinner. 

    They are not illegal, they are not shunned by the whole society, they are going about their gay lives doing normal things in their gay way and the country responds (except for a relatively small segment of obsessed folks like yourself) with a collective shrug.

    IF god was prepared to judge the country for this vast display of immorality, as you suggest, how would those same gay people having a piece of paper from the government make the situation drastically worse?

    (by the way, i’m not going to take the time to convince you, but that book you read – or the person who told you that myth read – which says that acceptance of homosexuality always causes the fall of great civilizations? You know the one? Yeah – see, that book is BS built on a faulty premise which found exactly what it went looking for which is bad history, just like finding in the bible what you want to find there is bad exegesis)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    why go to some much trouble to protect a WORD when the word has been used to describe non-religious unions between non-religious people preformed by secular officials for centuries?

    The supposedly “sacred” definition of marriage is LONG gone. The church is only upset about it now because they need a fig leaf to camouflage their bias against homosexuals. 

  • Anonymous

    Well friend all Christians are sinners, saved by grace. God has loved you all your life! But if I am to understand by the way you write He has Not been ok with your life style choice. This is not me saying this but God. He cares for you very much as do I. You will always be loved but sadly you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. If living a life being a good person can get one to heaven than Jesus died in vain. This may offend you, but I write these things knowing I may be rejected too. But it’s the love I have for God and His children, which you are one of, that drives me to speak the truth as He has revealed to me. Take care and be well.

  • Anonymous

    Because someone is trying to take it away. Greed, Envy. The permissions of people change nothing.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey


    There is no alternative naming that would satisfy the same-sex marriage movement. ”

    Nor would it satisfy the church. Already there’s been many complaints about giving gays “marriage in everything but name” and if that were the proposal, the church would be just as upset as the gays. They insist on a LESSER status for gay people and playing word games won’t do that for them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey


    Simple answer. READ THE BIBLE”

    What does this irrelevant response have to do with the government of a free nation?

  • Anonymous

    Freedom is Truth, Lies are slavery. Those deceived by Lies embrace slavery – by their Free Will.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey


    The law DOES place restrictions on us all equally, WHO we can or can’t marry. Regardless of our individual desires, we can’t marry someone who is under age, someone from our own family, someone of our own sex, someone who is already married, someone of another species.”

    Wait, what/?

    the GOVERNMENT defines marriage?

    Dang, a lot of people in this thread are going to be upset to learn THAT! ;)

    Here’s the serious reply: when a government acts to limit the liberties of free men, it must demonstrate a compelling reason to do so or it has acted unjustly. the fact that a law exists is not sufficient argument that the law is just.

    SO
    what is the governments compelling reason to limit the liberty of free people to marry a person of the same sex if they so choose?

  • Anonymous

    Mary, God be with you in your difficult situation.  I’m not sure how I would handle it if he

    were my son.  Love him, for sure.  Acceptance, might be harder.      Here is something I

    read today and it talks about today’s society.       “Mary and Joseph, in the fulfillment of

    their religious duties, were supported by the society in which they lived.  They lived in

    Nazareth.  The people there were all Jewish and the whole rhythm of life supported

    family and supported their Jewish religious practice.  Today, it often seems that to have

    a good family life and to be faithful to your God is to be out of step with society.   The

    rhythm of life today doesn’t always support family life.  It doesn’t always support what

    we do in relationship to our religious community.”      Today we live in a secular society.

    Look around.  Religion is often mocked or denigrated.  You see it on TV, in the movies,

    in what you read.  This administration certainly hasn’t been ”friendly” toward either the

    Christian or Jewish religions.  Some day, who knows when, we could be just like some

    of the European nations where almost anything goes.  Would that be a good thing?

    You tell me.

  • Suzanne McLennan

    Most Christians, I know anyway, don’t consider themselves perfect, without sin.  My understanding of the scriptures is that all who sincerely repent, turning away from what they did, not doing it anymore, giving restitution and offering a broken heart and a contrite spirit for an understanding that what they did was wrong.  We are not saved by Faith alone in Jesus Christ, but by Grace…after we have done all we can do.  Faith it’self without works is dead. Faith means we change our hearts to be more like Christ with his help of course. The Lord loves the rightous and the unrightous, but not the sins even in the least degree.You gave quite a list of sins and you are absolutely correct regarding much of those. Therefore those you mentioned do not exclude adultery, fornication, or beastiality, or even asexual behaviors.  Yet those who truly repent can have their sins remitted and the Lord will remember them no more.  So just like an unmarried man and woman living together will say they are living in sin…because it is true, so is the homosexuals as well.  Whether or not you are or not…I say just aknowlege it.  Quit trying to force everyone else to call evil good and the good evil.  

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    marriage in everything but name? the gay wouldn’t like it because it implies they are deviant from the norm, and the church wouldn’t like it because they would recognize it’s actually a marriage, just without legal notice of the name

    (in fact, such a union would inevitably be CALLED a marriage by those involved, no matter what the document said.

    partners would be introduced as “my spouse” not “my civil partner”

    People would say “we got married!” not ” we have joined in a civil union” and so forth.

    that’s why the church insists that they have something LESS than a marriage.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tammy-Rainey/100000188664077 Tammy Rainey

    read the thread, i answered that point rather specifically and completely last night

  • Anonymous

    Then stop asking for permission. There are consequences to these false permissions that many have not yet contemplated. How are your hunting dogs?

  • Anonymous

    That is what the subject is all about – forcing complicity to other people’s actions,

  • Anonymous

    Yep, Frankie, that’s what I called it: a matter of semantics (for me.)  Gay marriage, no.

    Civil unions for gays, si.

  • Anonymous

    Judge actions, not people. No one can judge a person’s soul. No one can condemn a person’s soul. Those who attempt to judge and condemn a soul are in grave error.

  • Anonymous

    Everyone has Free Will that no one can take away.

  • Suzanne McLennan

    I know we CAN all be saved by Grace from our sins, after we have have done all we can do  in repentance, restitution if possible and turn away not to repeat it and be faithful in keeping the comandments and offer a broken heart and a contrite spirit which aknowedges we were wrong in what we did. Don’t think I said anything about approving of sin…even in the least degree.

  • Anonymous

    Not very charitable. All of us belong to God.

  • Suzanne McLennan

    I don’t know in there anywhere that she repented. She was caught and drug in before Jesus for the purpose of tricking him into saying something to condem him, not for true judging, but he was much wiser. When he said let him without sin cast the first stone, he showed his wisdom, but when he told her to go and sin no more… she had not adequate time to truly repent, and since she hadn’t yet… she had not been forgiven yet.  With that being said, I believe she would be given every opportunity to fully repent and eventually she would be able to recieve his forgiveness in his own time.

  • Suzanne McLennan

    Simple, Those who commit the sin of Adultery and even Fornication acknowedge the fact, it is a sin.  They may brush it off as though it is not a big deal, but they don’t try to rewrite or interpret the Bible to convince us that it is ok with God.  They just do it anyway, knowingly.  That is it pretty much. An abomination, as the Lord calls it, of one kind or another is still a sin. That includes homosexuality.     

  • Lioness

    Here is a “deep thought”, perhaps a tad off topic but considering the conversation, may be relevant. Santorum used the phrase “rights to our own happiness” which I assume refers to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This is very individual and should not be controlled by the government. I feel conservative principles should not limit any one. Gender and race are both limited by certain expectations or stereotypes which limit all of us. Affirmative action for instance or lowering physical fitness standards for women in the military. Conservatives profess individual merit, yet do not live by it themselves. We are not equal individually, yet we all posses certain strengths not always expected by our outward appearance. We are as humans inclined to limit an individuals pursuit of happiness based on our outward identity or unorthodox beliefs, it may be the easy way, but it does not make it right.

  • Suzanne McLennan

    Learned men have been interpreting the Bible for a long time and coming up with a variety of interpretations of certain words to undermind the Bible. So that doesn’t really carry much weight with me.  Most of us know the Bible has ben translated and edited from it’s origional form. Many plain and precious things have been removed because of learned men and perhaps other reasons .  I look forward to the day it will all be translated fully and correctly.  I believe it will be much easier to understand then. But for now  it is the best we have. Leviticus 18: The Lord talks a little on the subject to Moses of appropriate family distance for marriages and in :22 don’t lie with a man as you would a woman…it is an abomination. and :23 neither beasts and the chapter goes on.  So I think the scripture is clear and it was here long before our country was established, so we didn’t decide it and look for it.  It has been there well over  2,000 years.   

  • Anonymous

    Yea, the cap lock thing is sort of taboo on this site.  You need to understand that that is considered to be bombastic.  About you rambling, it doesn’t work either.  Now, you are right about all sins being equal.  When we accept Christ we confess and repent from them.  Repent means to turn away from and to forsake them.  We ask Christ into our hearts and lives and we are born again.  That doesn’t mean we will never sin again.  It means that when we do sin, the indwelling Holy Spirit convicts us of our sins …”and He is faithful and just to forgive us of our sins, and to cleanse us fro all unrighteousness,” 1 Jn 1:9.  Once you have established that relationship with Christ, the deal is sealed.   Your sins are imputed unto him and His righteousness was imputed unto you.  But, one must have acknowledged sin to be sin.  Homosexuality is a sin.  It is no greater than any other sin, for sin is missing the mark of God’s holiness.  There are many born again believers who have problems with this particular sin.  But all Christians have troubles with sin.  The reason we know that we are God’s children is, that now, when we sin it bothers us.  Continue in prayer.  Seek out Godly counsel — not somebody who is going to tickle your ears, but some one who will challenge you from the word of God.  We all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.  If You are in Christ and Christ is in you, then you have eternal life.  Even the best of Christians are imperfect.  And, until that day when Christ gives us our Immortal bodies, some say spirit bodies, we will have to contend with sin on a daily basis.  As long as you are honest with God and yourself, ultimately, if we are steadfast in prayer, each and every sin can be overcome!

  • Lioness

    Truth is unobtainable when dealing with the metaphysical. Hatred enslaves your soul. Freedom is achieved through acceptance of others who may understand a different “truth” from yours.

  • Suzanne McLennan

    I completely agree that Adultery, Fornication, Homosexuality A-sexuality, beastiality, sins of commition or sins of omission, not keeping the Sabbath Day holy, abortion, Lying are alo sins.  There is an enless list.  The Lord does not look upon sin in the least degree, yet some somehow are considered to be more serious for some reason.  As for the other religions out there….I am not so sure I am ready to condem other religions I don’t agree with.  There is a war going on. The war that has been waged is a battle of pricipalities.  It all started before we got here and we are all either on the Lords side or are pawns unknowingly on the opposing side.  I believe my God is the One true God of all Mankind! I believe that one day everyone will know Jesus Christ is the Savior of the World not just of the Christians.  I believe one day all will be revieled.  It stands to reason the Lord will not hold it against Islams or any other group for them supporting their beliefs even if they are wrong…..because responsibility will fall on the heads of  their fathers who started the false teachings and the descendants know no different….. just as the many soldiers in the world who have gone to battle for their country for what they believe is a rightous cause, and fall on the heads of those responsible for the war.  WE ARE ALL GODS CHILDREN no matter what we think he looks like, no matter where we think he is, no matter what we think his name is and his teachings.  We may differ in what we believe about him, but eventually he will clear it all up for us.  Then we will be able to agree peacefully.             

  • Anonymous

    Sorry, you got that one wrong, atl.  The men of the town came for the strangers

    (men) that Lot had taken into his house.  He knew what their intentions were.

    Rather than having the townsmen use his guests in a perverse manner, he

    offered them his daughters instead.    I know, I know.  It’s not anything we would

    probably do, but you had to to have knowledge of the place and customs.

  • Suzanne McLennan

    If this were only an man’s world like it used to be or if it were of all rightous men, your point would be reasonable, but in this day and age, with abuse, ego and neglect. Marriages are more like a mini corporation.  Unfortunately coprorations must sometimes be protected and even litigated.  I agree there should be a limit though.  I can live with Civil Marriages and Civil Unions.  Marriages by Clergy and Unions by judge, but equal in legal rights to partnership, just not children. I think if that could be agreed on, it would reduced some of the nonsense hate stuff going on out there on both sides of the issue. 

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    Suzanne,

    Thank you. I apologize for coming off so aggressive. The level of contempt for people that don’t fit a cookie cutter image in here drove me up the wall.

    I didn’t initially intend to do so. But I ran out of cheeks to turn. In any event. I am not perfect either. I am and will always be a work in progress and felt the need to remind other of the same.

    Thank you again and good night.

  • Anonymous

    That puzzles me too, Ed.  Why do gays seek marriage?  And, with some, a ceremony?

    They live their gay life style and yet, they want to be like heterosexuals and have a

    marriage as well?  They are allowed to be ”coupled” through civil unions.  Don’t they

    receive the same rights and privileges as ”marriage” through the civil unions?

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    Christians are being demonized in the public square. Worse yet, pastor are being dragged into court for simply reading from the Bible!!! A man here in MA was fired for simply saying to didn’t believe in same sex marriage to a co-worker. a photographer in CA was put out of business for saying who wouldn’t photograph a same-sex wedding!! It goes on. Folowing the Bible is not a crime…yet.

    Where is the tolerance????

  • Anonymous

    I am glad there are so many happy marriages about. Homosexual partnerships are such gay affairs so one must be very happy to be queer. Isn’t that nice? Think on this: When he said, “Love one another as I have loved you,” he did not then stick one finger in the air and add, “Except for the queers.” Of course there are some queers that think this wording meant he was one of them, but I think not. 

    What I don’t like is the hi jacking of the English language. One may be homosexual or queer and also gay and or queer and happy and not gay.  I really dislike using the term “Gay,” for homosexual and I refuse to do it although I am fighting a losing battle.

    If some want to be bum bandits or lesbians I really don’t care. It’s their business and no one elses. I also don’t mind polygamy. If I was young enough I might like to try it. The Spartans were institutionally queer living in the Agogi with all those young boys. It was considered normal in Athens and Rome too. Contrary to Glenn’s and most of those who claim religious credentals, there is nothing in the bible against polygamy just the opposite in fact. And as I said in my earlier post, in biblical times among Jews, polygamy was the norm and not the exception, certainly, if you believe the bibles God had no problem with it. At least according to the Old Testament and the Talmud. Remember them? Those are the texts that Jesus taught and lived by. Moslems also believe in the four wives rules and guess from where Mohammed got that? The Talmud of course which is where Mohammed got all his rules including Hamam/Kosher. You guys really have to learn about the history of religion.

    Tony Pollock

    One wife is a Roman invention but in Rome prostitution was an acceptable profession openly conducted and they had their own prostitutes guild. Many had slaves as well. There was no shortage of legitimate sexual outlet for males.  Roman wives however could be killed by their husbands if cought but that didn’t stop them performing with favourite gladiators did it? Some of their exploits were notorious. Unwanted infants would just be left out in the fields to die or perhaps be picked up by anyone that wanted them. To understand the bibles one really needs to understand Roman law, Culture and civilisation of the time.  You guys really need to open your eyes and look at the times as they really were rather than as you would like them to be.

    Tony Pollock

  • Anonymous

    I too love Old Soccy. He taught that happiness comes from a fully understood mind which of course is why I am so unhappy. It also interprets as “Know yourself,” See yourself as others see you. I interpret it to mean always find out what you yourself know or feel about a given subject and carefully analyse otherwise you are in no position to question others or your teachers. Otherwise you really do know nothing.

    Tony Pollock

  • Anonymous

    You may recall that according to Roman Catholic dogma one should indulge in sex only for procreational purposes and not for pleasure.

    Rather spoils the whole thing don’t you think?

    Tony Pollock

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Clif-Courtney/100000729138004 Clif Courtney

    The left thinks it can pick & choose.  They have no logic.  I think that part of their brain somehow didn’t get fully developed.

  • http://twitter.com/rcwebb77 Rhea Webb

    What’s the big deal?  Just leave marriage alone and let gays get civil unions so the can have whatever benefits of the law they want.  I have nothing against gay people until they start pulling this crap. Get over it–some of us will always and I mean ALWAYS think it is wrong.  Gay marriage is an oxymoron.  You’re not going to change our minds so quit pushing.  In society today, most gays aren’t harassed or largely discriminated against even though we disagree with your lifestyle because we’re Christians and we believe in treating gay people with kindness and non judgment–we let God judge the behavior.  I thought that’s what gays wanted.  You’re not going to be seen as equal because you’re just not equal to one man and one woman who can procreate. You’re not going to be seen as equal in the church if you choose to live that lifestyle.  No one is forcing you to.  Marriage is really a religious institution but government protects and promotes marriage between one man and one woman because history has shown it is the best for children and society.  Christianity also promotes clean and healthy living can the government not promote that idea because it’s a religious idea? What about all of our laws based on Judeo-Christian beliefs?  Crack open a Bible.  Many of our laws today actually came from the Bible.  If this is really about gay people getting the respect they feel they deserve, please respect marriage and the fact that what you’re asking for will NEVER be marriage, recognized by the government or not.  This shouldn’t even be a battle if everyone could just respect one another.

  • http://twitter.com/rcwebb77 R. Webb

    What’s the big deal?  Just leave marriage alone and let gays get civil unions so the can have whatever benefits of the law they want.  I have nothing against gay people until they start pulling this crap. Get over it–some of us will always and I mean ALWAYS think it is wrong.  Gay marriage is an oxymoron.  You’re not going to change our minds so quit pushing.  In society today, most gays aren’t harassed or largely discriminated against even though we disagree with your lifestyle because we’re Christians and we believe in treating gay people with kindness and non judgment–we let God judge the behavior.  I thought that’s what gays wanted.  You’re not going to be seen as equal because you’re just not equal to one man and one woman who can procreate. You’re not going to be seen as equal in the church if you choose to live that lifestyle.  No one is forcing you to.  Marriage is really a religious institution but government protects and promotes marriage between one man and one woman because history has shown it is the best for children and society.  Christianity also promotes clean and healthy living can the government not promote that idea because it’s a religious idea? What about all of our laws based on Judeo-Christian beliefs?  Crack open a Bible.  Many of our laws today actually came from the Bible.  If this is really about gay people getting the respect they feel they deserve, please respect marriage and the fact that what you’re asking for will NEVER be marriage, recognized by the government or not.  This shouldn’t even be a battle if everyone could just respect one another.

  • http://twitter.com/rcwebb77 R. Webb

    What’s the big deal?  Just leave marriage alone and let gays get civil unions so the can have whatever benefits of the law they want.  I have nothing against gay people until they start pulling this crap. Get over it–some of us will always and I mean ALWAYS think it is wrong.  Gay marriage is an oxymoron.  You’re not going to change our minds so quit pushing.  In society today, most gays aren’t harassed or largely discriminated against even though we disagree with your lifestyle because we’re Christians and we believe in treating gay people with kindness and non judgment–we let God judge the behavior.  I thought that’s what gays wanted.  You’re not going to be seen as equal because you’re just not equal to one man and one woman who can procreate. You’re not going to be seen as equal in the church if you choose to live that lifestyle.  No one is forcing you to.  Marriage is really a religious institution but government protects and promotes marriage between one man and one woman because history has shown it is the best for children and society.  Christianity also promotes clean and healthy living can the government not promote that idea because it’s a religious idea? What about all of our laws based on Judeo-Christian beliefs?  Crack open a Bible.  Many of our laws today actually came from the Bible.  If this is really about gay people getting the respect they feel they deserve, please respect marriage and the fact that what you’re asking for will NEVER be marriage, recognized by the government or not.  This shouldn’t even be a battle if everyone could just respect one another.

  • Anonymous

    Tammy  and Tony  GOD  does  not love queers and lesbians  and sends all of you to HELL ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,— wrote:From: “Disqus” <>To: joszzzz@netscape.comSubject: [glennbeck] Re: Glenn’s take on gay marriageDate: Sun, 08 Jan 2012 07:06:31 -0000

    Tammy Rainey wrote, in response to slickzip: how very freedom loving of you. 
    Link to comment

  • John Burleson

    Aha! Finally! A battle of wits!!  But why do I have to battle the unarmed? Although your mention of “preface” did chagrin me a little bitty bit: the word “liar” should’ve been prefaced with the words “weasel and.” But I didn’t want to incur the wrath of those clamoring for weasel rights–it’s apparent I already miffed off an idiot. Try harder, Paul. Intellectual discussion occurs at levels just slightly above the ability you’ve demonstrated. And when you do try again, if your mommie hasn’t turned off the basement light bulb yet, be a bit more specific. Am I being called gay, untruthful, or simply a damned good comedian working for free.
     
    John Burleson

  • Robert

    When man puts his own opinion higher than God or His word which is also stubbornness, it becomes idolatry. 1st Samuel 15:23, For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolitry. So whenever man says its okay but God says it isnt, he is rebelling against God. God will have the last word. “Remember this, and show yourselves men; recall to mind, O you transgressors, remember the former things of old, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from acient times things that are not yet done, saying, My councel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure. Isaiah 46:8-10.

  • Anonymous

    Tammy, you are so ignorant, misguided and deep in denial I’m not sure why I’m even bothering to respond to you…but that said, here goes. My guess is either you are a Lesbian and/or you have a son or daughter who is gay and that is the basis for your deep denial of the truth. It’s because of your own immorality and acceptance of it that you need to deny the truth to try and assuage your conscience (I’m sure you are pro abortion too)  I am a student of world history I specialize in the history of great civilizations. I did not just read A book as you suggested. I have read hundreds of books and articles on the subject…have you? I have visited the ruins of many of these once great civilizations…have you? You can put your head in the sand and deny all you want but It is NOT someones opinion that the fall of EVERY major civilization was preceded by “rampant sexual immorality, moral decay, wickedness, Godlessness and acceptance of immorality” it is a FACT.   I challenge you to name ONE major civilization that this doesn’t apply to. There were also MANY people living in those civilizations, just like you who denied the truth, accepted and eventually embraced the wickedness immorality and they were destroyed. History has a nasty habit of repeating itself and those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it. When individuals chose to sin, be perverse, immoral and violate God’s laws and commandments they will bring God’s judgement on themselves. But when society accepts and embraces that immorality and perversion by changing the laws. (Like fundamentally changing the definition of the marriage and legalizing abortion) That will eventually bring God’s judgement and condemnation on the entire civilization. THAT’S how it will eventually hurt EVERYONE! 

  • Anonymous

    What you are forgetting is that for today’s liberals government is the new church.  Therefore, if gay marriage is not recognized by government, it hasn’t been recognized by their supreme authority.  This is despite that any church that wants to ‘santify’ a gay marriage may do so.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UQG6363FRERTLNXUV2AZKU3F2A john

    Now is that sarcasm!? Cause it almost sounds like sarcasm…if not, then you must be a progressive!

    The way i remember it…the Word of God was meant to be taken to the ends of the earth – to all men. I don’t remember it saying anything about theocracy’s being the required/desired form of government to implement the Biblical standards. I guess I missed that one.

  • http://twitter.com/RenegadeAV8R David Costa

    The gay marriage conversation falls apart when you consider a logical comparison.  If two men can marry, why not two adult first cousins, why not two adult brother and sisters, why not three men and one woman.  If the concept being argued is equality for adults, and elimination of discrimination then these next steps must be discussed. 

    The government should stay out of marriage.  It is the role of the church.  The church should have the final say as to who they marry and who they do NOT marry.  There should not be a government controlled “benefit” for anyone who is married or single. 

  • Anonymous

    years ago when the arguments started about changing the defination of marriage I said, okay then I will marry my pets my daughter,my son-in-law and my grandkids then I can put them on my health insurance at work LOL… I think once it is allowed we will eventually have all forms of sick bs…

  • Anonymous

    Truth is revealed and does exist.  We cannot create Truth.  Hatred is Lies.  We must tolerate the Lies and Deceptions others as we are all imperfect, but accept the Lies and Deceptions, no.  No one has the “right” to do Evil.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=704130538 Mitchina Soli

    If a gvt is to control marriage at all, it would be that of the states not the Federal gvt. is all he was saying. And I for one support freedom for all so I
    have a GREAT idea. Let’s just eliminate all marriage perks and loop holes completely and that should solve the issue. Now NO gvt can regulate being
    married or not, what marriage is or not. We would replace a “marriage” accepted by a gvt with prenuptial and/or living estates and wills. That would deal with only the “property” rights of another and leave religious beliefs out of the picture entirely where it shouldn’t be in the first place.

    Separation of Church and State would work the way it’s supposed to work – gvt can’t tell the Chursh
    what to do or take from them to gain control or gleen favor and the Church doesn’t have to recognize what the gvt deems as “legal” in the eyes of whatever law they make up. The ONLY one
    that would be affect is the Church in which you freely decide to associate with and THEY can unite whomever they want in marriage. If we strip the tax code of all such things relating to married or single, then this would be a moot point in our political landscape altogether.

  • Anonymous

    One step ahead.  Acts of Evil are everyone’s business.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GDU2Y6TX6RLF4ZAATSZ44I6SQU kyle

    It’s very simple… Government should never be involved in the profit from or the redefining of as marriage was defined by religion.  The separation of church and state is clear in the 1st amendment.  When a man and a woman get married it should only be done in a church setting because religion defined marriage and not government.  That being said the government should never try to redefine anything involving religion and religion should never try to redefine anything in government.  If a couple chooses to have a civil union whether they are gay or straight for tax benefits and to make sure their estate goes to the proper beneficiaries when they pass then I am ok with that.  Although it should not be called “marriage”… It should be called a “civil union”.  I am a left leaning centrist and the whole idea of “gay marriage” pisses me off.  The government should never profit from marriage or try to redefine it in any way because it should be none of their concern.  Although, I do think “civil unions” (which would only be done for gay or straight couples in a court house setting) should be legal because everyone should have the same rights to tax breaks, declaring beneficiaries, and making sure the ones you love whether gay or straight are taken care of when you pass and the government should not be allowed take more money from someone’s estate just because they decided to not get an actual “marriage” but instead had a “civil union”. 

  • Anonymous

    Joseph Smith only had children with one wife. Brigham Young had 40 kids with 40 wives. That is terribly inefficient when it comes to baby breeding. Polygamy does not multiply the race more efficiently since it requires one man to afford to care for more children. The only way polygamy can lead to higher birth rates per woman is if there’s a cultural reason that led them to have higher rates of births.

  • Anonymous

    I used to be LDS and am thus fully aware that the LDS church dissociates itself from it. I’m aware that Glenn and Mitt and Huntsman have only ever had 1 wife. I’m also aware that the LDS church practices spiritual polygamy, by which I mean even some of the current apostles are sealed to more than one woman (the second sealing happening after the first wife passed on) so they do believe at least some men (women can’t be sealed to more than one man, their first sealing has to be broken for a widowed woman to marry another in the temple) will be practicing polygamy in heaven.

    My designation was to note that Joseph Smith essentially introduced polygamy into America so it’s weird to see an LDS member like Glenn essentially condemn Joseph Smith as a means of getting to an argument criticizing gay marriage.

  • Anonymous

    what I meant by straight nations was “nations that did not condone homosexuality”. I was responding to someone who was implying that homosexuality helped spur the collapse of Greece and Rome. My argument is that every civilization from that long ago has since collapsed one way or another.

  • Anonymous

    Why does ANYONE need to “acknowledge” under any circumstances themselves to you Suzanne for a sin or ANYTHING else??  Are you going to ask me next to come tell you my sins??  How about your neighbors are they to tell you or make a newsletter perhaps of the sins,  they have committed.   AND YOU Suzanne are you going to do the same?  Or shall we look at this more realistically and just know that those of faith, YES  ALL people of faith, know how to ask forgiveness of sin and do so in their faithful way to GOD, NOT you Suzanne or any Christian groups that are appalled or me!  People do their repenting in the way they believe God leads them to.
    And your suggestion is “simply” superior minded not Christian and not in love, not to mention as a citizen of a (thus far) free Republic, it’s”simply” none of your business, you can tout all the reasons why it is all of you….but the facts are my business is my business, your business is your business.  If you break a law it’s the proper authorities business and if you break GOD’s law it’s His business. 
    If you feel, as a Christian that there are lost ones that you need to help find their way, then “simply” pray for them.  But a great many of you are overstepping your reach and sounding dangerously blasphemous, so check your own house as for me I will serve the Lord. God bless you and keep you America from all evil.

  • Anonymous

    There was no place to reply MITCHINA 
    but WELL SAID!!!!!
    Very Well Said!!

  • http://profiles.google.com/tuckerbutter Kirsten Tucker

    Freaking Hilarious ending there Glen!!  Here is the deal, if God didn’t want homosexuality, he wouldn’t have it built into us.  Not everyone has that proclivity, but since we are complicated creatures it is present.  Recognizing this as an probably unintentional side effect to us as sexual beings, God simply said, hey, can’t go forth and be fruitful if you are boinking the same sex.  As a bisexual woman, I have a choice and I have made mine to remain monogamous in a heterosexual relationship.  That is MY choice and one NOT influenced by my religious views.  Simply how I choose to live.  Being with an another woman is a great experience but not on a permanent basis.  Most cultures acknowledge homosexuality as a fact of life and the people are a part of the society with no ill favor held towards them.  Here is where Christians go wrong, they think they should force people to 1. become Christian and 2. to be hetero and monogamous.  Jesus NEVER emphasized the spread of a religion, only the sharing of experiences and the of God’s love in general conversation and PRIVATE worship.  No pushing, no forcing, and to accept ALL people as loved neighbors, regardless of their way of life, status, religion or country of origin. As is typical of people, we dun mucked up his original points and intents.  So here is it is sheeples.  STOP telling people they will go to hell and they are wrong for not believing the same as you and acting on their natures.  Not your place.  That is between the individuals and GOD.  Mind your own souls.  If we continue to be domineering, we become NO BETTER than the Muslims and their religious demands.  Muslim = religious government.  Not good.  Jesus said, render up to Caesar what is Caesars’.   Faith in the heart and hearth.  Christian’s need to keep the faith there and not try and legislate it.  Keep the Government out of Religion and Religion out of the Government.  Here in American we recognize that our Judao-Christian beliefs are a foundation for good society and government by following the basic ten commandments.  Do not kill, do not steal, do not covet neighbors wife or stuff.  Sooo darn simple, a cave man could do it.  That’s all the laws we need, and the penalties for those that break them.  This though does not make rape or pedophelia appropriate.  Those cross the line and I for one would prefer a bit more harsher punishments, ie, DEATH.  But that is for another debate.  

  • Anonymous

    Well Frankie at least Magnus didn’t use caps.

  • Anonymous

    Lets review the lies of Victor Tiffany and his hypocrisy:
    1). You never claimed the term “Yellow Propaganda,” yet you defended that claim for three days.

    2). There were 24 SEALs on the Bin Laden raid, not 39 Seals.
    3). There is not limit on the number of post one individual can place in a thread on this website.
    4). Your posts are not disappearing.

    5). Taxing the rich will solve the budget problem. Yet even taking 100% of their income will not do so.
    6). Glenn Beck was fired from Fox News. He refused to sign a new contract, and got released from the existing one.

    7). Fox News lost money on Glenn Beck. They had their highest revenues during his tenure there.
     
    8). You never made a joke about Jesus and sheep, and then had to later edit because you really did.

    9). I nor anyone else has threatened you on this website.
    Care to answer any of these and the many more lies put forth by you?

    10)You lie about me and say I am a racist. It’s not true. How quickly can I find a post where you have said as much?

    11) You claim Sandie has violated the cyber stalking law. It’s not true. That’s
    one you’ll need to prove. If it were true, and you had filed a 
    complaint, she would already be being prosecuted.

    12)You claimed you coined the phrase “yellow propaganda”.

    13)And you lie about not hating Beck.

    14)You lie when you use phonetic spellings of profanity. 

    15)You lie when you say Todd has no credibility.

    16)You lie when you say you are a media critic.

    17)You lie when you try to redefine things like spam.

    18)You lie when you claim ad hominem.

    19)You lie about Beck all the time.

    20)You lie about conservatives who align with Beck.

    21)You lie about Becks audience.

    22)You lie about Beck being fired.

    23)You lie about Beck’s support of gay marriage. 

    24)You lie about Van Jones.

    25)You lie about Beck’s intent on 8/28.

    26)You lie about Beck’s record of correction.

    27)You lie about how I “changed” the settings of Disqus to prevent you from 
    receiving notices in your email that I have replied to one of your 
    messages.

    28)And mostly, you lie about how smart and well educated you are.

    29) Lied that Sandie claimed she was a “good Christian”

    30) Lied that TEA Party are mostly racists.

    31) Vic claims Beck is a HOMO

    32) lied about allowing Todd to post on the bugsite.

  • Lioness

    Good ol fashion logic and common sense to me.

  • Lioness

    It starts by stripping off all the layers of influence and starting from scratch with every idea. All religious and political thought came from a source. I’m most interested in the source. Such as homosexuality, it’s been around for a long time, but certain religions deemed it unacceptable. But if you look at the times those words were written, it may have been appropriate. Propagation of humanity was important and homosexuality would have been a threat to that. But I think it was an unwarranted fear. There were plenty of hetero people doing it, and still are. Just look at the population. Perhaps more homo or non sexual people are required now.

  • http://facebook.com/frankie.ninja Frankie Ninja

    U know, get over the caps issue. If you are THAT sensitive, then MAYBE YOU SHOULDNT BE ONLINE! GOOD GRIEF YOU DROWN IN A GLASS OF WATER!

  • Lioness

    Relative truth is created by experience. If you place yourself in the shoes of another and experience their truth you may understand. Lies and Deception exist in various religions just as love does. Only through love can we determine the lies and deception present in ourselves, others, and the creations of others. And of course no one has a right to do evil, but how does one determine true evil? Does it affect you and your love ones physically, psychologically? If homosexuality effects you this way, why? If you cannot define the answer within yourself, with out the aid of religious dogma or the influence of others, than you have not actually discovered truth.

  • pauline nicholson

    Absolutely correct Mr. Allan.  Keep speaking the truth there is too much compromise today.
    IT IS AN ABOMINATION BEFORE OUR HOLY GOD.
    JUDGEMENT IS COMING.

  • Lioness

    I hope you do not indulge in vacuum pumps and extension pills to make your experience more enjoyable. If you do you wicked little imp I hope your god condemns you to that wonderful hot place. I’m sure that Victoria secret commercial really gets you going. I bet you have special days of the week to fornicate, all married couples do after all. (This is total sarcasm) (sarcasm continued) I’m the special one I don’t involve myself with your wicked little ways. I don’t even desire your dirty little activities in homo or hetero ways. So I’m sooo much better. Wait, doesn’t that sound awful? If’ you enjoy sex beyond procreation you are a hypocrite and should burn. At least that’s how I interpret it, but I guess Christians can make up the rules as they see fit. Or maybe these rules never existed at all.

  • Anonymous

    Morality is a construct by which entities involved in a social structure define rules that are ideally meant to minimize harm to themselves and provide comfort and security.
    Ultimately, morality is subjective. While many cultures may claim the idea of morality as an absolute standard, you would be hard pressed to find any consistent example of absolute moral standards throughout the history of any culture. Slavery is a prime example. Today, the concept of owning human slaves would not be considered moral, but several hundred years ago, this was the norm.
    This still doesn’t stop various groups and institutions from trying to claim a monopoly on the construct of morality, however inappropriate. Homosexuality isn’t immoral because it goes against your religion.

  • Anonymous

    *** This was suppose to be a reply to Frankie ***
    I was actually just making a joke that magnus was rambling..after he had just issued you a referendum against it. But he did it without using the caps while do it. it was a feeble attempt, but i was trying a little levity in friendly defense of you, certainly not to offend you.

  • Anonymous

    I accidently sent my reply to you to the wrong post.
    I just wanted to tell you that I was trying to be funny and stand up for you when magnus was scolding you for rambling, while rambling. It was a feeble attempt at levity. but it wasn’t to offend you, rather friendly defense. Ok then. God’s blessings to you.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Rogelio-Garcia/100001624264162 Rogelio Garcia

    The gay community are a minority,so why worry about small group of perverts,we know where the republican conservative party stands for,specially morals issues,so let those perverts bark all they want,we know that no nacion will survive if embrace the homosexual life style,the roman empire collapsed because of the pervert life style they embraced,so learn from history,amen!!!!!So far my vote’s going for Rick Santorum,and how about michelle bachman for V.P ,,,,

  • Anonymous

    Please Tammy if you truly knew the law’s we are expected to live by you would not even responded to my blog but instead you tell lie’s about my biblical knowledge !!!!
    Now as far as for someone else’s doctrines I personally would give my life for the truth it’s called FAITH !!
    How about you Tammy do you feel that strongly ! Now is that relevant  !!!
    How many men have had the MIRACLE of birth fall out of there anus !
    P.S. NOBODY and I MEAN NOBODY forces me to accept there small minded political correctness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Anonymous

    If your naive enough to think that the federal gov is not putting pressures on churches.  Wow!

  • Anonymous

    Glenn has been married twice.

  • Anonymous

    TO:  hope4more:

    the “link to comment” button does not work in my email so i am posting my response to you here:  

    i invoke the Ten Commandments and not the whole Bible because this is the template i believe in.  a person may take the Bible verbatim, word for word; i don’t.  it has to do w/my belief system.  so, i won’t get into any theological back-and-forth, now, but my general belief about the bible is that it is a great work of man, through divine inspiration…and i say the same for the Constitution.  the bible is a collection of teachings for guidance in life’s path for the individual.  i do not throw it away at all.  it is just that the big ten pretty much sums it up for me and if we all lived in accordance w/the Ten Commandments, we would not be where we are today.

    if you tie me too much to dogma or doctrine i get claustrophobic and it is not my nature to be bound to anything but that of my own choosing.

  • Anonymous

    Thank you for your testament.  You are a bright light in a dark world.  God bless you and your family.  Some would say you and I are wrong in our love and understanding.  And some would say vile words in condemnation of your son.  With a mother such as yourself, clearly your son is blessed, not cursed.  
    God’s blessings and prayers and your husband will too see the light.

  • Lioness

    I love how all the real thinkers come out with this particular topic. Religion can be wonderful but I’m certain God gave us a brain to differentiate between what is right and what is just plain illogical. Do on to others as you would want done to you. Like the Ten Commandments this works for most healthy, normal brains.

  • Suzanne McLennan

    Good for all of you taking the time and thought to talk this subject and many off shutes out.  It is part of the freedom we enjoy as Americans.   We have the free agency to choose what we believe and to act on it in a respectful manor.This is how it how it should be done.  Not blowing up parent centers, trapping people in or out of protests and threats.  Clear minded people with an appreciation for mankind with very different views of how to coexist in a society sharing their ideas and convictions.  

  • Anonymous

    Good post Lioness.  And I’m glad it was you that made the point that “The argument could clearly be made that good hetero sexual Christians doing it for any other reason than to procreate are behaving immorally also.”  And many do make that very point. I was going to say it before…but knew someone else would have been able to do it better.  And you did.  That is why I’ve been repeated the phrase for each of us to “look after our own houses.”  We are all sinners.  Some are just to sanctimonious and afraid to reflect on it.   

  • Anonymous

    I know a lot of people respect you here and I too have always enjoyed reading your posts.  But I have to say…you’re doing exceptionally well on your posts on this particularly.  I’m glad you’re here.  Great insight and honesty. Thank you.

  • Anonymous

    wrong.

  • Lioness

    Thanks for your kind words. It’s just personal to me. Although I’m not a lesbian, specifically because I just don’t like sex, I did have gender issues as a kid. Mostly brought on by society and it’s expectations for me. I met people with serious gender identity issues and realized this is not all as cut and dry as people want it to be. We need to have a better understanding of science when dealing with these issues, unfortunately some are just afraid that everything they were taught may not be as solid as they thought. Thanks again:)

  • Anonymous

    Thank you also moondoggie444.  I really appreciate your reply to me. I get the convictions of Christians.  I have strong Christian convictions but they don’t cause me to think that any and I mean any other good human being is evil.  I have Christian convictions that make it possible for me to rebuke evil, evil such as a person stating that God doesn’t exist and Jesus is a myth and the like.  But I would let the person too know that Jesus is only waiting to be asked and He will save said person from evil.  I would want the person to know that I personally did not have hate for them.  But here, talking about a whole group of people, that isn’t even speaking to any of the people here personally, and there are Christians who are not just saying that for instance..well I don’t agree with it because the Bible says it’s an abomination.  But I have nothing but love for the person.  No!  They say things like YOU R AN abomination and you have no right to live among us in this country. They’re saying things like..You will feel the wrath ect..and so fourth. I’m paraphrasing, but if anything I’ve toned it down from the actual.  My ONLY point is really…they’re going for the judgment that is reserved for God and they’re forgetting the love that has been taught by Jesus. How can people that have so much Christian background and learning have so much hatefulness in them.  It’s not that they have been wronged in any way by a particular gay person, it’s not that they even have a single person in mind that they have had a bad experience with, they just cast out an entire portion of the human population, created by the One Creator. They’re afraid it seems, they’re like the people in the old south I grew up with, that tried to tell me blacks were beneath whites, my father was so frightened if he didn’t get me in the whitest area he could that I might end up friends with a black.  Can you imagine being that sick with fear?  My father was so racist, that he never introduced me to my grandmother who was Cherokee. He never spoke as much as her name to me..I never met her, I never saw as much as a picture of her. 
    It’s the same kind of fear here to me as it was with my dad. I’m not trying to convince someone to be gay, I’m praying that people will love and understand each other..and praying that people will let God do the judging..and if a someone doesn’t care to know a someone, that’s they’re business.  But does the someone have to first damn the other someone to hell in order to feel justified for not caring to know that person?  My convictions say it’s not necessary to detach myself from another human out of differences, if the person is unreceptive to the love of God, then all I can do is pray for them.  But if the person has the love of God, I say THANK YOU GOD because love is something I can do without judgement.

  • Anonymous

    Nope!!

  • Anonymous

    Hey Mr. R. you probably don’t remember me, but just wanted to say hello.  I hope you and everyone have a good 2012.  I really do. 
    bye now:))

  • Anonymous

    Your welcome Lioness.  You always have such a good take on things, like I said..I’m glad you were here.  You obviously have a great deal of wisdom about a great many things.  I’m not viewed in the same light as you..you better not be seen talking to me. lol!!  Thanks again to you too.  :))

  • Anonymous

    And also, in the Treaty of Tripoli back in the late 18th century, it says that the government of the United States was not in any way based on Christianity. It was unanimously approved by the senate.

  • Anonymous

    After all this time, he is still singing the same tune from last year? Guess he has a problem with ‘making progress’ with his agenda. Pathetic. He is truly pathetic.

  • Matthew Davis

    Poor Rick is trying sooooo hard not to call these people idiots!

  • Matthew Davis

    I love you, Michael, in a strictly platonic, best buds, non-homo sort of way! You are AWESOME! (Totally serious, BTW)

  • Anonymous

    Differentiate between Right and Wrong.

  • Lioness

    Through love right and wrong will become clearly defined.

  • Anonymous

    Have to get the Correct words and context. Read the entire clause:

    As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense,
    founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of
    enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as
    the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against
    any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext
    arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of
    the harmony existing between the two countries.

    This was a clause clarifying religious freedom esp. in respect to Muslim – not declaring the exclusion of Christianity from the US Government. The key word is “founded”

  • Anonymous

    And have nothing to do with logic.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HMWJFO334E2STMDP5OEDM3IMZQ Back to Basics

    First just a quick comment, Glenn and Santorum pointed out that using the line of logic “that two consenting adults, of the same sex, in the pursuit of happiness should be allowed to marry” opened the door for the conversation that if this were true, then should it be legal for three or more consenting adults to be married if that is what they need to be happy.  Good question, I just wish they had not stopped there, because they could have also pulled in should it be legal for a brother to marry his sister or a father his daughter or a mother her daughter as long as they are all consenting adults and pursuing happiness?

    I have to admit, I often find myself confused at to how I feel about this subject.  One hand I agree with Glenn, we are country founded on Judeo-Christian values, end of story.  On the other, this is suppose to be a country for all religions, even none.  And someone with no religion, obviously could care less about the guidelines for marriage in the bible and so why should a government stop gay marriage, however, as Sanrotum pointed out, going down that path, logically opens many more doors. 

    But here is my question:  Why marriage?  Why do gay people so badly want to be considered married under law?  And I think Glenn hit it on the head…money.  After all it can not be the ceremony, because in reality, nothing is stopping two people from renting a ballroom, dressing up and conducting some sort of ceremony, minus the license of course.  I do not think it is day to day life, because to my knowledge nothing is currently stopping two men or two women from living together, sharing bank accounts and making the other beneficiary on retirement accounts or in wills.  I have heard some say that in cases of emergency not being married prevents the partner from making medical decisions – but, even though I am not an attorney, I am pretty sure that the solution to this ‘problem’ is some sort of power of attorney paperwork.  So as Glenn pointed out that leaves tax incentives, but in reality, why in the world is government encouraging people to get married?  When you think about it, and remove any personal motivation, it really makes no sense.  

    One other item, that just came to me, is health insurance, which in a way is also a reason based on money.  Unfortunately, Glenn’s solution, which I happen to agree with, of taking government out of marriage will not solve this problem.  However, there must be something that can be done on this front other than change the rules of marriage.

    In the end, I an still baffled:  Why marriage?  Am I missing something?  Or are people really just fighting this hard for a tax break and health insurance?  

    Sometimes I think this fight is really about gays fighting for social acceptance.  But here, I would just like to point out that abortion is a great example that just by making gay unions legal it will not do anything to change the way people view the lifestyle – people are still going to either support it or be morally against it.    

  • Anonymous

    Amen.

  • Anonymous

    I have had gay/homosexual friends. One gay man was even the “love of my life.” It has most always been a moral issue for people who believe in the inerrant Scriptures of the Bible. (There are some of us left out here). HOWEVER, this is not the main reason I love my friends…because of their gaiety….I love them for their loyalty to me, their warmth, their kindnesses, etc. and I find this gayness to be a secondary issue. I don”t always do what other people think I should do, but I want them to care about me anyway. I do get concerned that being gay seems to be how these people want to be identified…for just that fact….instead of the special qualities that they have to offer to others. So you are gay, so what?? And this is not me addressing the moral issue…..Jesus said “Take up your cross and follow me.” I have another friend who explained her take on this: Being homosexual is that person’s “cross” that they have to live with or accept, but NOT give in to it’s lifestyle. In other words, love but be celibate.

  • http://www.google.com Doodaddio

    It’s obvious that you are once again sliding down the slippery slope of your disease, Vivian. The only real extremist here is you, and your pathetically weak attempts at denigrating every candidate on the Republican side. This is particularly odd since you fancy yourself an obscure type of Republican.

    What you are is a narcissist authoritarian who can’t handle the truth of your own closeted existence as a liberal progressive bald headed old white guy who falls for every radical, freaky, strange, off-point liberal movement like you went all in for Occupy Ithaca. Ithaca is a backwater in western NY that no one except the residents care about. Of course it is a college town, which is why dim bulbs like you flock there to stir up the mud.

    You think because you have a piece of paper from a branch of the NY state university system that it makes you wise and all-knowing and people should admire you and hang on your every word. I have some shocking news for you, Viv, no one really cares what spews from your degree certified pie hole, because like Occupy, most of the effluent is nothing but sewage.

    You are one of the most ignorant fools with an education I have ever come across, you’re a king of denial, a paranoid and delusional boob who hasn’t figured out the parade left you standing on the curb a long time ago. You try to align yourself with today’s youth and their hip subculture, but you are everything they reject – the only one who doesn’t see that is you, and even you will eventually have to admit it. To Occupy, you are just another body to add numbers to their puny ranks; they only need you as filler.

    Your writing is an indication of your lunacy, Viv. You use the personal communication approach as if you actually had a hope of the addressee ever reading your ineffectual bull line. The truth is you are only interested in hearing your lips flap, and the only candidate you want to see nominated is the one who will hand the second term to your god Obama. As I said before you are a closet liberal, and that is apparent to all who have seen your posts in sufficient volume.

    “Here are four questions Rick Santorum must answer before voting there begins later this month”

    Just who the hell do you think you are, pronouncing this kind of garbage? You are an insignificant little man who stands on a street corner screaming, and the caustic nature of your rantings has stripped your voice from you. That’s why people merely walk around you and give you odd, quizzical looks. It’s like you imitating Marcel Marceau in full regalia shouting, but no sound is escaping your mouth, Vivian.

    Get back to your therapist, before the village sends out another search party for their idiot.

  • Ryan Frederick

    i have know idea if i can top that one. wow!

  • http://www.facebook.com/thedaryl Daryl L. Hunter

    Homosexuality will always be
    with us because I believe that it is either a Darwinian or divine way of
    keeping inferior genes from being passed to another generation.

     

    I believe that the reason it
    is a cultural taboo is our ancient forefathers made the observation that
    homosexuals died of disease sooner than the general population, complications
    of fecal contamination, therefore a social taboo started that found its way
    into the Bible, Qur’an, etc.

     

    Culturally the problem is
    the genetically inferior make every attempt to copulate with the genetically
    normal and the amoral, curious and oversexed comply.

     

    Although I believe that
    homosexuality is natural and good for gene pool providing all only copulate
    with the same sex, I believe that it is bad to culturally normalize unhealthy
    behavior because it will make it appear OK to experiment for those that don’t
    get enough orgasmic generosity the opposite sex.

     

    Our decadent culture will
    pay a price the reversals of our cultural taboos! 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C6AAO4YXWNA2KQ2ORAH7QWLZAM One_Man_Army

    http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html
    Here is cold, hard proof that ALL of our founding fathers, including the ones who were deists which were so few that they could be counted on just one hand, were, in fact, Christians.  They ALL belonged to one Christian sect or another.  Ever heard of Christian Deism.  They are Christians, as well, and the few deist founding fathers we had were Christian Deists.

    OK.  There’s the proof for you.  What more do you need?  Do I have to give you the actual writings from our founding fathers that support the claim that they were ALL Christians because I can?  Seriously, I get tired of the liberal lie that our founding fathers were not Christians.  It’s just that.  An outright LIE.  Such a lie makes me sick with how much history it distorts.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C6AAO4YXWNA2KQ2ORAH7QWLZAM One_Man_Army

    The boat may have sailed, but it’s not quite out to sea just yet.  That’s why we need to change course and get the government out of it.  We can do so with the right candidate.  It’s called reversing the tide.  It can be done if we try.

    The government’s involvement IS unconstitutional.  NOWHERE in the constitution even hints at giving the federal government to right to interfere with marriage.  That is an obvious point.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C6AAO4YXWNA2KQ2ORAH7QWLZAM One_Man_Army

    Ryan, I don’t think I can top it either.  Maybe if given enough time to think about it, but I don’t think there’s enough time to do so.  By then, it’d be too late.

  • http://www.google.com Doodaddio

    I do what I can, sometimes I just can’t hold it back, especially for one who deserves it so much.

  • thelionoftruth

       Sexual orgasmic activity as we all know is not Love! In an equal Sexual orgasmic situation
    it gives the feeling of closeness like singing in harmony with others Male or Female it’s a good
    fleshly feeling and when this becomes acceptable with two males or females it becomes an
    entertaining event. which was meant for male and female procreation.
    But Humans have turned this into a entertainment event that overpowers their being and it’s
    become their sources of things to exist for, and make it their priorities to compete with each
    others material lives that corrupts most human existence.
    The belief in God becomes secondary or even more in the background of these lives even
    though God is in your lives He becomes a secondary thought as compared to pleasing
    yourself. God does consider this sexual activity an abomination yet you think God understands
    your dilemma as you’ve should have been born of the other gender. The question is Who was
    your Creator Were you a creation of God? Does God make mistakes? If these answers are yes
    you do not believe in your Father you believe in a god. The god of your universe is your false
    belief and Jesus warns of this. The loving power of our Creator reveals almost all Himself to
    us humans and gives us His instructions and if we follow Him we can overcome these feelings
    and overpower ourselves to become a Godly Person. The Challenge is our own making in
    following our Creator We decide to trust God as our provider in all our lives to give us everything
    from things needed to the full revealed understandable knowledge of His purpose of us!
    His Created Beings. And He needs us perfect to exist with Him as our ruling King in His Kingdom.
      All things can be overcome if you make them so. Even entertaining Sexual activities for self
    fulfilling your senses as compared to  inheriting eternal presence with our Creator who
    knows all of our needs. But most will disagree because they allow their feelings to take control
    of their lives. Love is the true worship of Yahweh God for ever and ever! Amen.

  • Ryan Frederick

    i like to see him try to take that apart with out looking like an idiot. oh wait i forgot who i am talking about. poor Vicky Tiffy so stupid that he can’t fight his way out of a wet paper bag let alone his lies. i wonder how low we can get his IQ to.

  • Ryan Frederick

    he the master at this. i am hoping i can learn form his take downs. i am glad he did it to the guy needs to be nocked off his high horse.

  • Anonymous

    At issue with the dummy talking to Santotum is: Progress/lib/radicals want to force conservatives to believe & acknowledge that gay “marriage” is the SAME thing as God’s definition of marriage. It simply is not. God ordained marriage between one man & one woman. Have straight people defiled the institution of marriage? – YEAH. But that does not change the definition of marriage as given by God. I, also, believe that government has no place in marriage. I believe that all unions should be civil for government purposes & then those of us who are religious can choose to go to our house of worship & have a religious ceremony performed. Religious ceremonies as given by God would still be called marriage and LGBT & multiple partner unions could choose another name for their unions like: larriage, garriage, barriage, tarriage, &  parriage (just kidding, well kind of). But all the ProgLibRads would still cry foul – because what they really want is #1 their way & #2 the admission by God fearing conservatives that a perverse & Godless lifestyle is just the same as the heterosexual lifestyle. It simply is not & saying so does not make it so.

  • Anonymous

    Honey, you’re mixing the legal & religious. Ya’ll shout from the rooftops about separation of church & state, then when it serves your purposes you want to include religion to try & support your choice.God’s definition of marriage is clear. That has nothing to do with ProgLibRads involving government to perform a union of 2 people that is not based on God’s laws.

  • Anonymous

    “…for it is better to marry than to burn” (I Cor. 7:9) whether from lust or hell fire. Why?
    because sex within marriage is not a sin regardless of whether its between
    heteraosexual or homosexual partners. Deprive people of the right
    or priviledge to marry and you condemn them to commit moral sins or
    break civil and/or criminal laws.
     “What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two,
    saith he, shall be one flesh.” 
    “he” being understood as the “he” who instituted marriage in Genesis 1, and
    “one flesh” being understood and defined as “marriage” in Genesis 1.
    So by the definition of marriage in I Corinthians 6:16 the sex act itself is what
    actually consumates a marriage. So if a man is or has joined together sexually
    with a harlot, that harlot becomes his wife. Or if he has joined himself with ten
    harlots then he also has ten wives. And if you replace the word “harlot” with the
    word “another” (joined to another) it means the same thing. So, regardless of
    whether it is a man and a woman, or two men together engaged in the sex act,
    the sex act itself “saith he” makes them “one flesh” Therefore, any sex outside
    of marriage is a sin except with ones self. Masturbation is not a sin except if
    practiced exclusively to sex within marriage. And contrary to some un-thought-through
    thinking, “Onanism” is not a proper definition of masturbation.
      I realize both chapter 6 & 7 of I Corinthians basically applies to marriage between
    heterosexual couples, but it also says “to each his own” (compare Ch7: verse 7)
    “every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that”.
    And don’t forget for a minute that God is involved in every aspect of our lives and that he claims exclusive credit for the way he made us, straight or gay or deaf or dumb,
    seeing or blind. (Exodus 4:11).

  • Anonymous

    No one gets it. Sin is sin. Whether its homosexualty or whatever. We have lost our way and we  could argue about this forever. The Bible says that the government one day will be on Jesus’s shoulders, that is our only solution to sin. Lord come quickly!

    .

  • Anonymous

    The fact that it says that it wasn’t founded on Christian principles shows, that it was, in fact, not founded on Christian principles.

  • Anonymous

    And also they have the freedom to practice it, but they can’t make laws based off it.

  • thelionoftruth

       You appear to all enjoy playing the political games don’t you? that is the way of the world.
    this is the warning Christ reminds us about. If our country is God based shouldn’t we give God
    our priorities and Pray for the answers?  The intelligence of us humans does not have these
    capabilities without the intelligence of our Creator. Or are we more intelligent than God?!

  • http://www.google.com Doodaddio

    Vivian is not known for reason or courage. It is unlikely he will respond but if he does I will be ready. We have tangled in the past and he was barred from this site for threats he made to me. He picked the wrong Dood to try to intimidate.

  • thelionoftruth

    Have you ever played a virtual video or Just a plain video game? That sometimes
    becomes quite a challenge to survive or win! If you were given the opportunity and instructions to keep surviving wouldn’t you take it?
    If it were a reality based life!
    You See! there are no absolutes in Man’s
    lives But if you have hope and faith God will be our Absolute Truth
    because We believe He Created Intelligence of the Word for us also!
    Truth! No Man absolutely knows truth.
    Communication was given to us and we are the only animal
    with a moral conscience. We believe we were Created that way. Because Yahweh
    God wants His obedient Creation with Him for the rest of eternity.
    And it’s not dogmatic spirit but a logical thinking of
    practical analysis of God’s Word that reveals Him and all His ways along with the
    power of Yahweh’s Holy Spirit. It’s the spirit of your inner thinking
    in God’s thoughts that is acceptable in God’s eyes that shows you are
    willing to sacrifice your time and material things in agreement to be
    one with Him for His purpose! That also shows completeness in
    everyone’s life. and all things created by Our Father Yahweh God will be Perfect!
    Not OK, not alright, But Absolute! Everything else is Mans intellectual deception.

  • Anonymous

    Based on Webster’s definition of bigot,Nancy Pelosi,Harry Reed,Barney Franl,Diane Finstien and the late Ted Kennedy are all bigots. Why? Because they all had their names on the Hate Speach Bill of 2009.This Bill would have made talk like this a Felony.

  • Ryan Frederick

    oh i can’t wait to see it but he is a coward and most likly go to the stories that time forgot again.

  • Carol Dixon Klein

    You are right; if one part of the equation is changed it becomes a different equation. That is all there is to it. 1 Man + l Woman = Marriage….1 man = 1man = 2 men….l woman + 1 woman =
    2 women, and that is all there is to it.

  • Carol Dixon Klein

    I approve of Glenn’s math: 1 Man and 1 Woman = Marriage
    When you change one part of an equation it becomes a new equation: 1 Man and 1 Man = merely 2 Men!      l Woman and 1 Woman = possibly a fight, a talkfest, or a gossip session, but it still equals 2 Women.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7FL57VDHLQV7OL7PUMDWOLZXQ JoshB

    The constitution can answer this. I love it! It says that the government can’t prohibit nor promote any religion or opinion. So therefore, government is allowed to allow equal protection of civil union and benefits. However, they cannot pass any law that states promotion of gay marriage because it is a promotion of a pseudo-religion ideal or opinion. Gay values are a part of a community that derives opinions that are not equal in fairness and decided on a case by case situation. Gay rights in watered summed down ideas are considered civil rights obligations by the majority of the country. However, gay opinions are not ideas that shall be considered by government to be passed into law.

  • Anonymous

    Many years ago, I was very (physically) attracted to this man. He was a Harvard educated lawyer, a self made businessman (who later sold his business for multi-millions of $). He was also attracted to me. So many years later, I sometimes think of him & wonder what might have been. But when he pursued me I said no, Why? Because he was married with children!! I made a choice & it was the right choice, because adultery is a sin. God gives us free will. We can choose sin or we can try to do the right thing. I believe that even if you have homosexual urges, you still have a choice. A choice to act on those urges & to lead a sinful lifestyle or to abstain & be celibate. You have the choice.

  • Lioness

    I’ll be more detailed for you. Love is a very logical emotion. Lust is not. When you act through love you make choices that are carefully thought out. A loving decision means your doing what is right, not always for yourself and your own ego, but for the benefit of another. This is only obtainable if you truly know what real love is. When you do wrong, and you still will at times, you will know it and feel it. Logic and love work together quite harmoniously. If you cannot understand this, it may be possible that you have not felt true love (not the irrational movie type). Real love, of yourself, your family, and humanity.

  • Anonymous

    So anyone that is not a Christian or follows Judeo-Christian values and laws should not be allowed to be married? This would include, Athiests, Muslims, Buddhists, etc.. Think about it, if you are not following Judeo-Christian values and laws you should not have the same Constitutional rights as all the people who follow Judeo-Christian values and laws. No getting “married”, no freedom of speech, no right to liberty, no rights to be happy (gay=happy). Here is someone you can Google who helped you fight for your Judeo-Christian values and rights, his name is Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben. It’s appalling that an openly gay man could serve in the Continental Army to fight against the British so we could all have our Judeo-Christian values and rights.  

  • http://www.google.com Doodaddio

    It’s obvious that you are once again sliding down the slippery slope of
    your disease, Vivian. The only real extremist here is you, and your
    pathetically weak attempts at denigrating every candidate on the
    Republican side. This is particularly odd since you fancy yourself an
    obscure type of Republican.

    What you are is a narcissist authoritarian who can’t handle the truth of your own closeted existence as a liberal progressive bald headed old white guy who falls for every radical, freaky, strange, off-point liberal movement like you went all
    in for Occupy Ithaca. Ithaca is a backwater in western NY that no one except the residents care about. Of course it is a college town, which is why dim bulbs like you flock there to stir up the mud.

    You think because you have a piece of paper from a branch of the NY state
    university system that it makes you wise and all-knowing and people should admire you and hang on your every word. I have some shocking news for you, Viv, no one really cares what spews from your degree certified pie hole, because like Occupy, most of the effluent is nothing but sewage.

    You are one of the most ignorant fools with an education I have ever come across, you’re a king of denial, a paranoid and delusional boob who hasn’t figured out the parade left you standing on the curb a long time ago. You try to align yourself with today’s youth and their hip subculture, but you are everything they reject – the only
    one who doesn’t see that is you, and even you will eventually have to admit it. To Occupy, you are just another body to add numbers to their puny ranks; they only need you as filler.

    Your writing is an indication of your lunacy, Viv. You use the personal communication approach as if you actually had a hope of the addressee ever reading your ineffectual bull line. The truth is you are only interested in
    hearing your lips flap, and the only candidate you want to see nominated
    is the one who will hand the second term to your god Obama. As I said
    before you are a closet liberal, and that is apparent to all who have
    seen your posts in sufficient volume.

    “Here are four questions Rick Santorum must answer before voting there begins later this month”

    Just who the hell do you think you are, pronouncing this kind of garbage?
    You are an insignificant little man who stands on a street corner
    screaming, and the caustic nature of your rantings has stripped your
    voice from you. That’s why people merely walk around you and give you
    odd, quizzical looks. It’s like you imitating Marcel Marceau in full
    regalia shouting, but no sound is escaping your mouth, Vivian.

    Get back to your therapist, before the village sends out another search party for their idiot.

  • vieteravet

    The only reason these ‘packers’ want to marry is the benefits.  I think it’s wrong that they aren’t considered next of kin, SS beneficiarys, legal partners.  Give em civil unions, screw that love ‘BS’

  • vieteravet

    You’re right, God put them together and they procreated!  USAF 1973 to 1995.  Worked avionics on fighter jets.

  • vieteravet

    Go Army!

  • Anonymous

    I love your soul, if only every single human being had your gift.  It’s lost on those here Lioness.  Their all so busy being the smartest person in the room, they never learn anything.  What you wrote about “love being a very logical emotion” is so perfectly written, so beautifully beautifully written…I believe I was sent back here just to read it. 
    I’m so glad I did.  I was feeling very sad, I still haven’t been able to shake the disgust off me from yesterday’s posts here.  And I was so sickened by the realization that people are mean, not evil, just mean.  
    But I read your writing on love and I know that there are good people like you, I just hadn’t remembered to look for them.  So thank you Lioness.  And I can see why God gave you such a gift.
    Nini

  • Lioness

    Nini, you are so kind. I get that yucky feeling sometimes too, I totally understand. It’s kind of strange but when that happens It’s usually followed by a strange sense of understanding and enlightenment. You seek out other kind souls who will give strength to your thoughts. Some times it seems like everything is crazy, all it takes is one loving soul to put everything back into perspective. You see the world through love so you’ll be just fine. Thanks for putting things back into perspective for me:)

  • Rob N.

    1. Wow with all that said I hope you still don’t pretend to be for shrinking the power of Government because obviously you seem perfectly fine with the state being the only true arbiter of (subjective) morality.  Every groups morality may be very different and as soon as you transfer the power to decide what is and is not moral from the individual and hand it over to the state you’ll rarely if ever get it back.

    I am confused though since I was under the impression that this was the “free world” with individuals given the natural rights by GOD to pursue life liberty & happiness how they personally see fit?  Why do people care what other consenting adults do with their lives?  Using that garbage collectivist argument that what hurts the greater good is the business of the state is the same premise that communism/socialism works from. Where the rights of the individual are subjugated to the rights of what the elite or even a ‘tyrannical’ majority call the “common good”.

    Some of you guys are as bad as the progressive Democrats asserting authority over other citizens lives!  it disgusts me.  Except instead of giving the Government the authority over our wallets & property you want dominion over adult American’s interpersonal relationships.

    2.  “it doesn’t hurt anyone else” … Hmm so you believe the federal government is in the business of regulating moral decay and sexual immorality? I call BS.  You are a total hypocrite if don’t apply those same standards to everyone (esp. yourself).  Since now in your world the Government gets to decide what private and non-violent consensual activities lead to moral decay and the breakdown of society. Lets say the state decides that people should start putting their lives where their opinions are and make divorce illegal, premarital sex illegal, and adultery punishable with jail time or worse. [Leviticus 20:10 "If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the man and the adulteress shall be put to death."]

    And how about if we reinstate the prohibition of alcohol because it leads to more death, sexual promiscuity, and societal breakdown then anything else. That doesn’t sound like a free country to me… how about you?

    This is thankfully not a theocracy based on the bible regardless of the Founders religion.

    That was coming from a Catholic, HUGE fan of Glenn Beck, and liberty leaning (libertarian minus most of the foreign policy) conservative.

  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous

    Along the same vein…here’s a parody of “In The Navy”:

    IN GAY NAVY

    Where can you find pleasure
    Of gay or lesbian measure
    With sex aids or technology
    Where can you begin to
    Make your creams all come true
    In the air, on land, or sea
    Where can you unzip fly
    Play gay sports or muff dive
    Study sodomography
    Masturbate with big band
    Even in the grandstand
    Where both sides of the same team meet

    In Gay Navy
    There is no more DADT
    In Gay Navy
    Declare your G L B or T
    In Gay Navy
    They have support from F.A.G.
    In Gay Navy, In Gay Navy
    In Gay Navy
    Can’t you see we need your hand
    In Gay Navy
    Come on and flaunt your member, man!
    In Gay Navy
    Come on and lead them from behind
    In Gay Navy, In Gay Navy,
    In Gay Navy, In Gay Navy!

    They want you! They want you!
    They want you as a Gay Recruit!

    Let us thank Обама
    Not your Hetero Mama
    Let this celebration last
    Just do not come late
    There is no need to wait
    Let’s keep all the straights aghast
    You are truly so young
    But since you’re surely well hung
    Put that tool to work so fast
    Shove it in and then out
    They won’t care if they shout
    In the mouth or in the Vast….

    In Gay Navy
    There is no more DADT
    In Gay Navy
    Declare your G L B or T
    In Gay Navy
    Elena Kagan screams with Glee!
    In Gay Navy, In Gay Navy
    In Gay Navy
    Come on and do not be a wank!
    In Gay Navy
    It’s time to shag like Barney Frank!
    In Gay Navy
    Come on and lead them from behind
    In Gay Navy, In Gay Navy,
    In Gay Navy, In Gay Navy!

    They want you! They want you!
    They want you as a Gay Recruit!
    Who me?
    They want you! They want you!
    They want you as a Gay Recruit!
    But but but I’m afraid of homos
    Hey hey look
    I even get sick with lesbos on TV!
    They want you, They want you
    In Gay Navy
    Oh my goodness!
    What will I do on a submarine?
    Go down?
    They want you, They want you
    In Gay Navy

  • Scott Young

    glenn beck, your support of fags disgusts me.

  • thelionoftruth

       Know that the very Idea is not against religion! However it is the very God (if you believe Him) that has Made us and instructs us, since we believe God Created us we
    should obey His instructions after all He knows our needs for life and He also knows
    our fleshly wants and that is what humans turn to their flesh rather than the spirit of
    logical control over themselves, and His instructions are to take control over our
    emotions with His logic that He has provided us through His Holy Spirit. But this is
    a huge but— We in human frailty have to (Just like a lawyer) Learn How to overcome
    the nature of our flesh (Emotions) in the logic God teaches us in scripture, and yes at
    one time it was confusing because  this logic was not revealed to most of us. But now is and if we truly study or research it God is now revealing it all to us that obey and
    understand that He will send His son Jesus for this very correction of this for His
    purpose. For those that do understand and obey He will accept those as His servants in
    His Kingdom here on Earth. People still don’t understand God will not accept corruption
    in His Kingdom Government.

  • thelionoftruth

    Know that the very Idea is not against religion! However it is the very
    God (if you believe Him) that has Made us and instructs us, since we
    believe God Created us we
    should obey His instructions after all He knows our needs for life and He also knows
    our fleshly wants and that is what humans turn to their flesh rather than the spirit of
    logical control over themselves, and His instructions are to take control over our
    emotions with His logic that He has provided us through His Holy Spirit. But this is
    a huge but— We in human frailty have to (Just like a lawyer) Learn How to overcome
    the nature of our flesh (Emotions) in the logic God teaches us in scripture, and yes at
    one time it was confusing because  this logic was not revealed to most of
    us. But now is and if we truly study or research it God is now revealing
    it all to us that obey and understand that He will send His son Jesus for this very correction of this for His purpose. For those that do understand and obey He will accept those as His servants in His Kingdom here on Earth. People still don’t understand God will not accept corruption in His Kingdom Government.

  • thelionoftruth

    JUST WHEN YOU THOUGHT YOU KNEW
    We are! Children. Think! about it. We know no absolutes, but we think! we do.
    We don’t know how we can fix the world! But we think! we do! We truly don’t know how to love! But we think! we do!
    And! We think we can handle Evil! But we know we cannot!
    That sounds to me like we have to know the the one who! Knows. Our Father that teaches us everything. But! and this is a spiritual But. Yahweh Loves us to Honor Him for His Intellectual sharing within His REALITY to exist with Him!

       The other reality is to go on thinking you know how to do those childish things and…
    YOU KNOW?! 

  • thelionoftruth

    Tonight we will take a page out of Bro. Roberts book
    of life . .  . .

    ” GOD has permitted the recovery of the Truth in
    these latter days, and there is a liability that it might be lost
    again, through the inability of complacent minds of limited
    grasp to see its wide lying breadth, and through their tendency to sympathize more readily with the human than the Divine bearing of its doctrines.

    The doctrines of the TRUTH embody the thoughts of
    GOD,
    and the thoughts of GOD are higher than the thoughts of men, and
    therefore, the majority of men easily fail to rise to the height of
    them, or easily fall from the height when lifted up to them.

    The death of Jesus Christ has more to do with the
    exaltation of GOD, than the salvation of man. Most men take in the latter more
    easily than the former, and quickly get astray through the power of mere humanitarianism.”

    Robert. Roberts 1885

    Diary of a voyage . 

  • thelionoftruth

       2nd Timothy 4: 3,4.

    3 For the time will come
    when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts
    shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
    4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XJ6HK3JHHPVSVSJF7URFU42R6I the crazy betty

    yep.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jared-Myers/1177000219 Jared Myers

    A conservative, logical exegesis of the Mosaic Law and the continuity/discontinuity between the Covenants of Old and the New Covenant does NOT allow non-Covenantal civil government to regulate/define marriage.

  • Anonymous

    For the people who choose to close their eyes to the existence of perversion within these relationships, that’s fine…it’s your right and we do, so far, have a free country.

    For the people who understand this perversion: Wait, Watch and Pray, because it is out of our hands anyway.

    No matter what the people thought or believed they were entitled to at the time, Sodom and Gomorrah still happened. ;)

  • thelionoftruth

    The ultimate rule will be the Kingdom of Yahweh God’s rule with His Son Jesus Christ on the
    Throne!
    Politics will be done away with. More sooner than you think! We as the true worshipers of
    Yahweh God are warning mankind to do the research because His Son is coming back as a
    fighting Lion this time and you must prepare to  follow his commands or pay God’s reality of
    consequences to remain alive and properly worship the true AIL of all Creation Yahweh God!

       This should scare you!
    If you are not afraid you will be when Christ really returns. Then there’s
    no turning back. I know you think these are only words and words wont hurt you but when they
    turn to reality in all your lives your lives will be changed “in a moment in the twinkling of an eye”
    then
    all Nations will know that Yahweh and Jesus will reveal to all His
    Creation His plan and purpose to remain in his Kingdom or perish in your
    thoughts that are against Him.
    It’s pretty simple really! Bond with
    your Loving Father and Creator of all things Yahweh God! and you will
    exist forever! Or chose to perish if you like to continue existing as
    you are!
    You do have this choice because of the free will God has given you, as compared to a robotic
    existence where you would be unaware of a personal existence. Yahweh is giving you a choice
    to be an inherited Son of Him and again! Exist with Him for rest of His Eternal Life!
    But you must know and follow His Laws in commanding instruction! No if’s ands or buts
    Yahweh is our Father in truth! In Logical Love of His Beings! And He wants us all to return to
    Him! Blessed is he who overcomes and understands His knowledge for His reward is Great!
    His Grace is Just! and His Word Is the absolute Truth of Life! What more is there if you are
    in His light? The only other choice is darkness.

  • thelionoftruth

      I agree Government should not be in our personal decisions we should be responsible
    only for ourselves only to our Creator as our responsibility of knowing His will be done!
    In following His Sons examples, God will clarify how we should perform in our existence
    toward His kingdom reality. All else is mans imaginary invention of corruption.

  • Rob N.

    There are lots of rationalizations people have used throughout the course of human history to discriminate against others.  99% of the population could believe its moral to have the state put gay people to death, but it doesn’t mean its correct. Don’t forget that EATING SHRIMP, cross growing crops in one hole, working on the Sabbath, mixing nylon and cotton in a shirt, etc are all abominations in the eyes of the bible!  Tell me none of those things apply to you and i’ll call you a liar.

    And the only one defining it “only” as a sexual relationship is you!  The same demeaning comment can be said about your relationship with your wife/husband.  Oh you guys were only about sex and that’s the only reason you got together. I hope you never had sex for a reason other than getting the woman getting pregnant, since that would be pretty sinful of you.

    The premise is that two gay people in a marriage can’t be a marriage because they aren’t of opposite genders, well no duh they aren’t 1 man marrying 1 female.  If they were they wouldn’t be homosexuals and we wouldn’t be having the discussion?

    This whole argument is based on the misconception that people have a choice in which gender they are attracted to.  Did you have a choice? Why did you choose your heterosexual lifestyle. When you were young were you just as attracted to your dad/mom’s hidden playgirl magazines as you were playboys? Could you decide tomorrow to start living as a homosexual and be happy?

    If the answer is yes to any of those questions you should probably see a therapist.

    But if you couldn’t choose to be a homosexual and be happy what makes you think the reverse is possible.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TPYB7J2BTVYJ4JKBQZTMAU3BNQ Vinny

    What about the HUGE gay pride parade that goes on annually in Israel?  MILLIONS come out for this. 

  • SoThere

    I’m more interested in your so called Military career where you were on a secret mission for 9 years, were a NCO but quit the Army because you had a “change of heart” and drove a truck but didn’t drive a truck. Please tell me, what was Dallas? How much did your PA weigh? Where did you go to college? How many Iraqi children play volley ball?

    Why do you hate the Jews?

  • Private Private

    The Bible was written during a time where homosexuality was not acceptable. Now that we are in the 21st century over HALF of Americans support Gay’s. I think God would frown upon your statements. God would see anyone who loves each other to the death able to spend there lives in marriage. YOU know the bible also says for humans not to dictate other peoples lives, the tongue is evil. 

  • thelionoftruth

       Bible seekers would disagree. You see they study the depth of the Bible that
    has been God’s Word since the beginning (Genesis) of time that reads always the same instructions to life situations in following God’s commands, it is then as it is today God’s Word that never changes! Mankind always change things when they don’t follow His Son Jesus that spoke for our Father of all Creation!  The Only Bible changes come from men who wants to have it their way! And God warns us of that continuously.
    Better get back to study the truth of God’s Word if you want to follow God’s Truth!
    if you want to discuss God’s instructions! You need Yahweh God’s knowledge
    Not man’s blind instruction against the logic of Yahweh God’s Word for their own gain in emotional thought of covering their own selfish ways.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XUHNXJWURTTHDY36VTP36N6WB4 jennifer

    I just love you Glen Beck and God Bless you for loving God and confessing him no matter who it makes mad! You go go go! You are my no.1 man!

  • matt zweckbronner

    i believe marriage should be between one man and one woman period that’s my believes.
    homos & gays can have a civil union. people should read judeo -Christianity.   

  • thelionoftruth

       The only truth is Gods Completion of His Kingdom of heaven on earth! and everything leading
    to His purpose. All else is man’s fantasy and ends with their perishing if man does not turn to
    seek the truth of Yahweh God’s plan and purpose for us! His Created Beings.

  • thelionoftruth

    thelionoftruth, God is our Farther of all Creation He Should be our first priority
    ..16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?17
    And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but
    one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the
    commandments.18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do
    no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou
    shalt not bear false witness,19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?21
    Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou
    hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and
    come and follow me.22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.24
    And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the
    eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?28
    And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have
    followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the
    throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the
    twelve tribes of Israel.29 And every one that hath forsaken houses,
    or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or
    lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall
    inherit everlasting life….

  • thelionoftruth

    thelionoftruth, God is our Farther of all Creation He Should be our first priority
    ..16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?17
    And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but
    one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the
    commandments.18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do
    no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou
    shalt not bear false witness,19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?21
    Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou
    hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and
    come and follow me.22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.24
    And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the
    eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?28
    And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have
    followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the
    throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the
    twelve tribes of Israel.29 And every one that hath forsaken houses,
    or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or
    lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall
    inherit everlasting life….

  • thelionoftruth

    The reality in the belief of a creator is a personal one. It’s the
    humility of accepting we have a God that created us from the dust of the
    earth as a loving father to His Children for The rest of His
    Everlasting Life! To a belief in accepting we die and go to Darkness and
    never meant anything and exist! and exist not! Over and over till the
    world destructs and all is gone from existence.
    Which belief is a more plausible one? That is your decision! I believe God gave us
    this choice! of Life or Death. To continue living is what you need to search for to gain the
    treasure
    of continuing life! Of course with your Creator. Death is easy! Just
    beliveve the way you are. then become non existent. 

  • Anonymous

    First:  Actually, one would only be abstaining from fornicating or being adulterous in God’s sight.  Those are sins equal to that of performing homosexual acts with the same sex.

    Second:  Our country’s Freedom Documents say that our rights come from God; God’s Word says that marriage is one man and one woman.    Because of many factors, “wombs” were opened and closed in the Bible.  Abraham and Sarah were childless; how many 90 year old women have children today?  (God had a plan:  DO THE IMPOSSIBLE.)

    Third:  God gave humans a certain free will; Unbelief (in the Creator God) is the unpardonable sin.

    Fourth:  Yes, there are many “religions:’ however, the Creator God Himself came down to be the sacrifice for the soul’s redemption — a reconcilliation with God.  Man tries to make his own way to God; yet, Jesus, the Christ, is the only way to the Father.  ‘What will man give in exchange for his own soul?’ (Jesus asked.) 

    Fifth:  The government’s place is to PROTECT people; people have a conscience when they are born.  Along the way, the conscience is soiled and with continued sinning becomes seared — no longer able to be that ‘ still small voice within’ a person. 

    Thank you for listening.

  • Anonymous

    There is so little trust in God here.  So much fear from so many of you.  Do the bigger part of you here pray solely out of fear?  You certainly don’t appear to have any trust whatsoever in God. You fear what?..collective salvation instead of individual?  Well then, you better hide yourselves you cowards!  Don’t talk to this person or help that one…you might be seen committing an abomination just being kind and decent to a homosexual.   You people were so upset when Glenn went on (whatever show) and stated that the tea party must be “racist” if we’d vote for Gingrich and not President Obama, since they are both progressive.  There is plenty…plenty of written proof of racism among the many articles on this forum.  Glenn just forgot to mention that many of you are also bigots.  

  • Anonymous

    I didn’t say anything about race. Homosexuality is a choice and a sin. I have relatives and friends who are gay. I don’t hate them. I hate the sin. So does God. You sound hateful to me. But that’s is typical among gay agenda folks.
    Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T

  • Anonymous

    You sound scary.

  • Anonymous

    I’m real scary. I love God, my country,and my fellow man. Boo.

    Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T

  • Anonymous

    You conveniently forget the “America will incur the wrath of God and we will all pay” part there dougey.   You sound more scary than me talking about helping people, trusting God and being decent.  Yeh real “hateful.”  BLAH.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry you are so confused. God’s wrath and who I am are two different stories. Maybe were you to actually crack open the Holy Bible you could read for yourself how God deals with sin. If you don’t believe what is written there then you are a fool and there is no use arguing with a fool.
    Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T

  • Anonymous

    Oh I didn’t know the Bible talks about America???  You’re right, I’m no theologian..but that I think would stand out to me.  Of course I know you’re just talking about us sinners in America.  By the way, I’m not gay and unlike you I don’t have just piles of family and friends who are. yeh ok sure you do.  But yet you’re still so out of touch with reality about homosexuality that you still live the lie that it’s a choice.  
    But since you can state God’s intention with such fallacy..I think it’s my turn to help YOU out.  
    It would be egotistical for us to presume to know what God has planned for our judgement…to the point that is that we can call it like the odd’s of a football game.  
    It would be equally misguided to presume that God took all His care to make us each an individual creation..just to lump us all together at the end of this life, cause He doesn’t have the patience or the time care.
    I’m bettin’ odds that even you will have your surprises coming on judgement day..not the ones you’ve told yourself you’ll have…that would be like you are able to read God’s mind wouldn’t it..look read the Bible till you’re blue in the face..doesn’t give you privy to God’s actual judgement for any one of us. 

    Doug your the one with the agenda and it’s with God.  You condemn His children to hell thinking it’s going to keep YOU out.  Love and Kindness is Christs way buddy..well you’re the Bible expert you must know that.

  • Anonymous

    Unless you have repented and given your heart to Jesus Christ then YOU are not God’s child. His creation yes, child no. I didn’t write the bible. God did. Why don’t you argue with him ?
    Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T

  • Anonymous

    I have no argument with God Almighty at all.  If you could comprehend basic reading, that at least should have been clear.  My argument (your word not mine) is with you Doug…you still don’t have it figured out that you aren’t He. I don’t fear his judgement Doug.  You do.  You speak as though God has given you “power of attorney” and if you speak in condemnation of His children..you will be rewarded.  Keep telling yourself that, if it helps you feel more Christian.
    I stepped into the waters of Christ. And His message is LOVE.  

  • Anonymous

    If you stepped in the water then maybe you’re saved. Not my call. Now why don’t you find yourself a nice little church somewhere, start reading the Bible, and praying. Then maybe you will begin to learn the truth and won’ t have to be wasting yours and others time by spewing the filth taught by secular society that you hold as your dear truth.
    Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T

  • Anonymous

    I pray for us Doug.  It would appear you’re the one who’s been duped into the secular.  I’ll keep praying that you trust God enough not fear any of his children.
    God be praised and bless you always.

  • Anonymous

    Thank you. Sorry I don’t know yout name. I pray for us to and hope you will stay in touch. God bless you my friend.
    Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T

  • Anonymous

    Actually, there was a direct correlation between the spread of Christianity and the fall of the (Western) Roman Empire.  It’s been widely sourced for at least the past three and half centuries or so (see, for example, Edward Gibbon’s The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire).  As for ‘moral decay’ and ‘wickedness’, you leave those terms undefined and ambiguous.  What exactly do you mean here?  If by sexual immorality you are speaking specifically to homosexuality, then you are committing yourself to cultural relativism.  There are plenty of historical examples in which homosexuality, prostitution, polygamy, etc., run concurrently with the zenith a particular culture (Greece, Republican Rome, India, and so on.    

  • I LOVE LADYgagaTRON

    all of you people suck, except  for Tammy Rainey, you seem like a sweatheart. the truth is all of you meat heads and duch bags that think you have the right to step into another persons life with your shitty ass opinion is a fcking idiot. There is a Hell and he who cast the first stone gets to hop into the flames first

  • http://twitter.com/Jeus14 Jeus

    Miss, I would like to response on your third question. 
    Marriage is a religious term. It is union of one man and one woman in the sacred matrimony. It is called sacred because it is done within the religious rite instituted by God for the purpose of procreation.
    While civil union of two persons whether between a man and a woman or between a man and another man or between a woman and another woman conducted by the judge or any other government official can not called marriage or sacred, because it only done with civil authorities and not with religious rite. 
    Sacredness proceeded from divine institutions by God.
    Civil or legal union is not sacred and it’s only a contract between two persons done with the civil rite.
    Matrimony is not only sacred, it’s also legal. 
    Hope it will help you a little bit.
    sorry for my poor English command.
    joy

  • Anonymous

     You are illogical. LOL

  • frontline_diapason

    If gay marriage is legalized perversion, then what are you saying about the two male Catholic Saints that were married… to each other? Homosexual weddings were actually quite commonplace in the Christian Church up until the 14th century when homophobic feelings swept Eastern Europe.

  • Carl Bingum

    It amazes me how straight people want to decide what is best for gay people Who asked you peope? Nobody that is gay cares what straight people think about the subject. The bible says judge not lest ye be judged. To give an opinion on a subject is to make a judgement. Who knows why gay people become gay. There are so many theories nobody knows for sure. It just blows my mind how all these staight people have all these opinions about being gay.

  • Richard Hale

    *coughs and reads the first line of the First Amendment*

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

  • Anonymous

    What a dolt. Again w/the use of the Christian religion (or Christian+ in your case) to define something that is not purely a religious or purely Christian activity. YAWN.

  • Anonymous

    Thanks for supporting my argument that homosexuals are emotionally unstable creatures.

  • Anonymous

    It’s amazing the lucid and articulate arguments that are presented to defend inserting a mans reproductive organs in another mans craphole.

  • Lioness

    That comment was made two years ago!? I hope your not suggesting I’m homosexual, emotionally unstable perhaps, but definitely not gay.