Well that’s good. Especially since I wasn’t “baiting” you. I was quoting you.

So, since you just said, “There was no comparison to real marriage” I can only assume, as I did before, that your comment applied to only gay marriage and gay divorce. In which case, my original question to you, about marriage and divorce, still stands: What in particular, about gay people being involved, would make it any more “messy”?

“What in particular about gay people being involved would make it any more “messy”?”

I simply said both gay marriage and gay divorce are messy. There was no comparison to real marriage. I don’t fall for baiting, sorry.

“Today [gay] marriage is less about love and more about taxes and benefits. Ridiculous.”

Again, talking about gay marriage. What reason is there for two gays to marry? Love? Please. You can love and not be married just as much as you can be married and miserable. The purpose for gay marriage? The ‘real’ purpose? Health care benefits, tax breaks, and medical life decisions. Don’t buy me love.

When important decisions are made because of how somebody feels or because their good intentions, then it is already wrong. Don’t cry to me when we are all guilt-tripped into socialism over the next 10 years. Don’t say I didn’t warn you. We all need to get off the fence and get a backbone.

You are correct, just because something is specifically left out of scripture doesn’t mean it is wrong. I will grant you that. Without getting into a huge debate though, I think without too much effort there are plenty of other scriptures backing up this point. And I don’t think any of them are written in a way that is vague, uses a lot of imagery or leaves one wondering what was really meant.

Yes, God does teach love and tolerance. You are right again. God is love and he is pure and Holy and just. Which also means there are things that go against God that people do anyway. So, to say God is “discriminitory” is true in a sense. Everything is not allowed, which is one of the reason why he gave us the scriptures so we can know what he thinks is right and what is wrong.

I mean, as an example, do you think that someone who broke the law and was arrested and brought before a judge and the judge said, “I don’t care what this person did or didn’t do, dismissed!”. Would that be justice?

Sorry to ramble on but I think this is the basic Christian belief. I’m not perfect. I have broken the law. I deserve to be punished. That is why Christ came to be a sacrifice for me. He took the punishment that I deserved! I mean, how great is that?!?!

Straight marraige and straight divorce is messy. What in particular about gay people being involved would make it any more “messy”?

“Today marriage is less about love and more about taxes and benefits. Ridiculous.”

Not sure about anybody else, but I got married for love. If you (not YOU, Travis, but the collective you) get married for no reason other than tax/benefit perks, then you really shouldn’t be pissing and moaning about the “sanctity” of marriage to beginwith and it shouldn’t matter to you if a committed gay couple wants to have the same perks (be it declared, committed love or “taxes and benefits”) as a committed straight people.

Today marriage is less about love and more about taxes and benefits. Ridiculous.

If I’m paying to be married, what should it matter what song is played over the PA system when I walk in? If I want to have the theme from 2001: A Space Odyssey playing, does that make me any less committed of spouse? If I want to have that “You’re the best around” song playing, what difference does that make?

As far as Catholisism is concerned, I don’t know what gets handed down from Rome, but last time I read the bible it said: Genesis 2:22-24

22 The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23 The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”
24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

I also agree, if your using a Wrestling theme to enter the church on your wedding…well you probably aren’t ready to take the plunge. However I think some lawyers might want to attend that wedding for potential business in the next few years.

From an old article:

” In other words, domestic partnerships, if states elect to have them, should be nondiscriminatory and inclusive. They should be available to people based on needs, not on sex. The law certainly should not discriminate in favor of those unmarried people who are in sexual relationships over those with the same needs who, though committed to caring for each other, are not sexual partners. Widowed sisters living together and looking after each other, or an unmarried adult son taking care of his elderly father, may have the need for domestic partner benefits such as hospital visitation privileges and insurance rights.

A constitutionally sound domestic partnership law would not discriminate against such people by excluding them from eligibility simply because their relationships are not sexual–just as a nondiscriminatory and inclusive law would not undermine marriage by treating unmarried sexual partners as if they were married.”

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004356

I didn’t mean to imply that other unions are not families, or that marriages must result in kids, only that heterosexual unions can produce kids and that they are the fundamental unit to all other families. In other words, they are special and the common denominator to all others (even single moms, at one point, had a male-female relationship).

I am curious though, what are your views on polygamy? Polyandry? Where do you draw the line, and why? After all, I am sure they love each other too.