Supreme Court Should Not Redefine Marriage

On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the opening arguments in Obergefell v. Hodges, a case where the outcome will likely decide once and for all whether or not gay marriage becomes the law of the land. Referred to by many as the “Roe v. Wade of same-sex marriage,” the first day of the case demonstrated that the justices have not yet decided where they will land on the issue.

“Would there be any ground to deny a group marriage license?” asked Justice Samuel Alito, giving voice to the concerns of many conservatives who believe gay marriage is a slippery slope to polygamy.

Chief Justice John Roberts wanted to understand how the Supreme Court could be asked to change the definition of a word. “Every definition that I looked up prior to about a dozen years ago defined marriage as a unity between a man and a woman as husband and wife,” he said. “Obviously, if you succeed, that core definition will no longer be operable. You’re not seeking to join the institution, you’re seeking to change what the institution is.”

And then there was Justice Anthony Kennedy, who many legal experts believe could act as the crucial swing vote. He, too, questioned how the Supreme Court could turn its back on thousands of years of tradition. “This definition has been with us for millennia. And it’s very difficult for the court to say, ‘Oh, well. We know better.'”

But if the court rules the way most legal experts expect them to, that’s exactly what they’ll have to do. Their role here – as so clearly demonstrated by the tone of the opening arguments – is less about reviewing case law and interpreting the Constitution and more about deciding what’s best for the country. And that’s exactly why the Supreme Court should not be ruling on this issue at all.

The fact that there are only 13 states left with bans on gay marriage paints a skewed picture of the country. The vast majority of the states where gays can marry have been forced into legalization by court rulings, not public consensus. And while polls have shown that the majority of Americans favor gay marriage, that has a lot to do with how the questions are asked. When pollsters use questions that don’t seek out a particular answer, the statistics are much more evenly distributed.

The question before the Supreme Court is, in its way, no less absurd than if the case were about whether or not a dog could be a cat. Or whether a TV could be a couch. Marriage, as it has been defined throughout history, means the union of a man and a woman. It is nonsensical to ask nine judges to change that definition.

About Admin


  1. If there ever was a time to pray for Gods help and guidance, it would be now.

    • god forbid people who love one another actually be allowed to express that love. intolerance is so much more appealing to many who claim to follow christ. i find that confusing….

      • Hey fool, we DO follow the Messiah’s commands,..and here is one of them. Read !

        ““‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads”

        Is God intolerant?,….. fool?

        • your language suggests that you only follow the word, and not the spirit, of the messiah.
          but the real issue is that the gay community just wants equal protection under the law… not equal protection under God. They will work out their issues with God on God’s terms… and timing… but, while here on earth… living in a free society… they demand and should receive equal protection under the law.

          (not all who disagree with you are necessarily fools.)

          • Excuse me but Jesus, the Messiah, did not discard the law of His Father.
            It is not equal protection homosexuals want but intrusion. If you have any doubts read some of Hillary Clinton’s and the proponents of homosexuality remarks about Christianity and its application towards churches. She and many others see the right of homosexuals to be married in churches and the churches be forced under penalty of law to do just that.
            Where does this perversive attitude stop and its infiltration into society halted?

          • i hear you. i don’t support hillary or anyone who would push a church to perform any function against their theology. i am purely discussing civil unions… i don’t personally see a place in current religion for homosexual unions… and if they have a problem with that they should take it up with the churches and not the courts. but, that’s just my view… what do i know?

          • That is exactly what this is about , and that is what the homoagenda wants the court to do. To force churches to accept your ideas and force them as LAW in a church. Also what about those bakeries that had to close they dont believe what you believe? Such a frivolous lawsuit would have been thrown out by any rich and famous lawyer’s office. But guess what? They did not have the money for that. Sure, you want tolerance , as long as it only goes YOUR way.

          • by definition of tolerance… i am open to any and all comers SO LONG AS their views don’t stop me from being able to have my views. so, to the point, i would toss out those bakery law suits because that bakery should be able to do whatever they hell they want…

            you see… when faced with true, unadulterated tolerance like i have as a uber social libertarian… all those who pretend to have social tolerance but do not really reveal themselves. i am like a litmus test for intolerance…

          • Nobody stopped those gays from having their views and still sued the bakery for 135000 dollars. They could go to any other bakery and have their cake done, but no, they have to mess another person way of earning their living. That is not tolerance or setting an example. That is vengeance and what we get from all the supposedly “tolerant” homoagenda.

          • well… so here we are… worlds apart from one another… but we converge on this point. we both think that law suit was a mockery.

          • Hello Raziel71: Have you seen the video posted on the net in which a heterosexual man goes to Dearborn, Michigan. He takes with him a picture of his buddy and asks Muslim bakeries to make a same sex wedding cake. Several bakers refused his request. Why aren’t these bakers in court. Is it because the supporters of same sex marriage want to keep on living?

          • Yes, because we dont go to extremes as muslims and homosexuals do. Maybe all proper Christians should start suing the state regarding religious freedom and maybe our business should have a “only members” buying club type of model, so if you dont like the rules you cant not buy here. When we hit them where it hurts they will put attention. Also remember Obama the muslim and prime murderer is in direct war with God, so he wont allow the courts to bother his muslim brothers.

          • Hello Raziel71: Yes! Instead of Sam’s Club, we could call our group “Sanity Club”!! Raziel, have you ever wondered what will happen when I-S-I-S encounters L-G-B-T??? It should be interesting to say the least!!

          • Michael Dennewitz

            Gonna be a ton done away with, eh Larry? ROFLMFAO

          • yes,..isis will do what they been doing to everyone else that is not muslim.

          • It could be something as simple for bakeries as to charge something like 1 cent on the your first buy, and just make people aware by writing on the receipt that they are buying at a buyers club and they should abide by the rules of the club or not buy there. Just like those discount cards that CVS and Walgreens gives for discounts. Then if whoever is not happy with the policies , then they just dont have to buy there. SImple ,elegant and cheap. Plus you will guarantee yourself your amount of clients.

          • And he lesbians called their agony “mental rape” !???? What about the mental rape they caused the bakery owners???? It is a mental rape for homosexuals to force conscience minded people to violate their religious rights and freedoms? Turn the tables on the bigots to bite them in the behind. It’s a two=way street….

          • Thank you for this post. One only needs to follow the lives of the homosexual to see that they are of Satan and are totally controlled by Satan. I have written several articals on this subject and followed the lives of several homosexuals and homosexual couples. A few chose GOD and now live joyful homosexual free lives all because of allowing GOD into their lives. One couple that I know claims to be Christian but there lives show different and they are not joyful.

          • Michael Dennewitz

            You make it sound as tho QUEERS can “find” Jesus and continue to be QUEERS!! nottttt!!!

          • Thank you for your reply. I am sorry if that is how you understood what I said. NO HOMOSEXUALS CANNOT REMAIN HOMOSEXUALS AND BE FORGIVEN BY GOD JUST THE SAME AS FOR ANY SIN THE SINNER MUST TRULY REPENT OR THERE IS NO FORGIVENESS. Homosexuality is not the unforgivable sin.

          • If we continue in our sin, there no longer remains a Sacrifice for our sin but a sudden expectation of judgement.

          • Thank you Sister, my sentiments exactly. It’s sad when so many people quote the Bible but they not only don’t know God’s Word but they don’t know Him either.
            We’ve got a lot of praying to do!!

          • MY issue here is that their lifestyle is a sin and IS harmful to society.
            I don’t want their lifestyle forced down our throats as they continually try to do.
            There are millions of brimstone balls filled with high purity sulfur at the remnants of sodom & gommorah. That proves the bible event DID happen and God is clear that lifestyle is a abonimation to him.
            Marriage was defined by GOD. One man to one woman. period.

          • cultures evolve… ebb and flow. your views are deep and long-standing by many people in the world. the world is shifting beneath our feet and some of us will adapt to that change more quickly (or just differently) than others. i feel for those who struggle with that change… because it is inevitable.


            ” For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished”

          • Everyone already has equal protection under the law. Everyone is free to marry a person of the opposite sex regardless of your sexual proclivities. If marriage meant anything other than a man/woman relationship then we wouldn’t be using the term same-sex marriage, would we? You can use a term all you want like (e.g.) square-circle but that doesn’t mean it’s possible. To think so is self-delusion. For same-sex couples to ask government to unconstitutionally and illegitimately re-define marriage (nowhere does the constitution give government authority to redefine any word) is as absurd as asking government to re-define acute and obtuse triangles as right angles. In both cases there are 3 distinct sets of relationships, one set (angles) based on spacing, the other on biology. Equal protection is not the central issue. Reality is. Just as angles are identified more precisely by right, acute, obtuse, so unique terms should be used to name committed man/man and woman/woman relationships. Using terms other than marriage then, government can legitimately grant certain rights (medical, property, inheritance, etc.). To exist with integrity the law must never blur necessary distinctions. That is equal protection under the law.
            In addition, marriage (man/woman only) was an institution of society before civil government existed. Civil government, therefore, has no legitimate authority to re-define it. Government can legitimately create new unique terms for same-sex couples with attendant rights. In doing so, however, it cannot allow adult rights to supersede the inalienable right of children to have both a father and a mother.

          • sure. then call it a civil union or linoleum or puddywacker… semantics. just so long as civil unions come with equal protections/responsibilities… then we have equality. read the details of the court case in question… its not about redefining marriage… its about equal protection under civil law.

          • Michael Dennewitz

            You wouldn’t happen to be QUEER would you??

          • good question. if queer means that i don’t conform well to this nation where everyone likes to tell everyone else what to do, where to go, how to live, whom to love, what to think etc etc… well… then, i guess i am queer in that sense… because i have a “live and let live” mentality. you would happen to be coming on to me would you you sly little devil you.

          • Michael Dennewitz

            Folks, don’t ya just love the way a lot of people will work their way around a simple yes or no question? Has the whole damned world gone liberalistic? Sheesh…

          • So then is that a “yes”? You are coming on to me? Simple yes no question.

          • Michael Dennewitz

            Sorry dude, there’s not a “QUEER” bone in this body of mine. You may or may not be QUEER, but I’m definitely not a fudge packer and never will be one. That’s a path you travel on your own!

          • Copy that. Maybe i am a woman… Maybe you are the shah… That is an understated intrigue with these sites. Catch you around.

          • Hello PayTheMan: I think Dr. Ben Carson takes your view. Your idea would protect traditional marriage while offering equal protection under the law to same sex couples. I seriously doubt, however, that strong supporters of SSM would ever be satisfied with the legal implementation of such a good, common-sense idea.

          • actually, me personally? i don’t care what someone calls their relationship and if two gays (queers for michael) want to be married… i don’t care. but, i am also pragmatic and know we have a large religious community that has deep convictions on this issue. if the inequality is more of a religious construct and less of a governmental one… than let’s call it for what it is and NOT allow gay marriage. then, the gay population can place their angst in the right direction and the government can fall in line with their constitutional obligations. but, of course, the strongest on either side will never be satisfied… so as a pragmatist, i wouldn’t spend my time trying to persuade them. thanks for the thoughtful response.

          • Bravo! Very well said!

          • The Spirit and the Word never disagree.

          • except when interpreted by humans

          • No body but Humans are supposed to interpret them.

          • So speaks the ‘bigoted’ sock (from the EliseR sock farm) who ‘screams’ tolerance … yet doesn’t practice it towards Christians, Jews, and people with special needs.

            You ‘scream’ about equal protection under the law … but that’s not what ‘you’ practice you Jew, Christian, and Special needs hating Hypocrite!

          • isn’t it said, “don’t judge G-D by those who claim to believe in him? well… same can be said for people. if there are a few bad eggs… its not wise to throw out the whole group on their ear. If that were the case, i would have thrown out every group i know of on their ear as few if any are without a few bad eggs. i hope you feel honored for your service, for your disability and for your religion and beliefs. i can tell you that i honor you for all three… without even knowing you. i hope that helps.

          • Your interpretation is what got the whole human race in trouble with our God. If we allow
            the making of laws which are against God’s Laws we are as responsible as those who
            break them.

          • that is somewhat correct, but ALL THAT DISAGREE WITH THE WORD OF GOD ARE FOOLS!

          • okay… but are we not allowed to be fools both in the eyes of god and in the eyes of our own democracy? that is our ability (and responsibility). let gays marry gays if they want… and let god deal with them as appropriate? (note: if gay marriage actually and directly hurt another like murder does… that would change our obligations here on earth.) no?

          • GOD is judge and only GOD. But what homosexuals are doing hurts all people and there goal is to force all to bow to them and their perversion! That any Christian should not stand for. GOD does not like wimps!

          • no turning of cheeks?

          • We are not a democracy

          • i’ll take it one step further. we are neither a democratic republic. we are a plutocracy.

          • Michael Dennewitz


          • SO TRUE!!!

          • are you a hippie? a commie? you are the only one on this site who agrees with a word i say… you must be a libtard (as they say). i can smell one a over the ether as clear as day.

          • Don’t be deceived my friend, thats not all they want. You seem to be forgetting who’s earth this is!! Sodomy is an abomination. As people they have every right under the constitution which by the way was founded on God’s Word the Bible. As homosexuals they have no rights as it has nothing to do with civil rights.
            Thats the propaganda so many people have already swallowed.
            What about pedophiles do you believe they should be protected? I’m thinking you’re probably saying, “well no thats rediculous”
            Did you know that most pedophiles are homosexuals?? Probably not because you’ll never hear the progressive leftist communist liberal media say anything about it.
            These folks have the same opportunity to make the right choice as you and I.
            Bottom line it’s God’s way or the highway and that road leads to destruction.
            No human has the right to change God’s holy institution of marriage between a man and a woman.
            Read the B>I>B>L>E
            Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth!!!!

          • most pedophiles in this country also affiliate as christian. what does that indicate? after all, pew says that 78% of the nation affiliates as christian. that factoid doesn’t make christians bad folk… but some of them are. anyone who hurts another through their actions must answer for it. if a gay person hurts another… they must answer for it here and now. but, between two consenting adults, they only have to answer to god and that is between them and god… no?

          • Michael Dennewitz


          • i don’t get hung up on what other people want to call themselves… i just go with the flow. okay… queers.

          • Michael Dennewitz

            Has absolutely nothing to do with what you or I call them, or for that matter, what the rest of the world may call them! The word “gay” was used a lot in the middle and late 1800s, as in “the gay 90s,” meaning everyone was happy. A homosexual is a QUEER, meaning ODD! They stole the word “gay” to cushion the fact that they are QUEER, and yes, it’s terribly ODD to see one man “porking” another man in the ass. They’re QUEERS!

          • that is exactly what they call themselves… preferentially. queer theory is a whole body of academic study devoted to that subpopulation.

          • Absolutely true, but just because to adults consent to something doesn’t make that something right.
            I think standing before God is more serious than you can even imagine especially with sin on your soul. The soul that sins shall surely die, and thats talking about a living death an eternal death in a lake that burns with fire and brimstone, prepared not for men but the devil and his angels. But all who sin and die in their sin will spend eternity there.
            Eternity is not a short life here and then its just over, eternity is FOREVER!!!!

          • NO! Just because one says he/she are Christian doesn’t mean they are Christian. A person is known by their actions, certainly not by just what the say. Example, Pres. Obama says he is a Christian; yet he supports the murder of thousands of babies through abortion, he has supported the gay rights agendas, he has lied more often than not, he has support racism, he has supported islam, he has even attacked Christianity in speeches…. He most definitely is not a Christian..
            In most cases one’s sins doesn’t just effect those he sinned against… Case in point, again let’s consider the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, which were considered to be of good size.. Would not it also be consider that cities of good size would not have had children of all ages within them. Thus the homosexual sins of many caused the deaths of many children. Sin will most always cause the destruction of others…
            I get the feel you do not believe in the presence of an all knowing and loving God.

          • you could not be more on target with the notion that one’s actions speak louder than words. similarly to all those silent muslims who quietly condemn extremism, we have so many silent (majority) christians who allow our consumptive habits to destroy other cultures and lands (e.g., child slave labor in africa producing our chocolates; civil wars by despotic leaders whom we strongly support in countries that supply our diamonds and the list is endless). I wonder where all those “believers” are and why they are so quiet while others, who claim to follow their same lords/theologies do so much harm in the name of those same lords/theologies. i agree, most christians do not live as jesus would want or taught. And, regrettably, that ubiquitous pattern gives christianity (and, islam) a really bad name. As such, no i have not found it compelling the belief that there is an all knowing, all powerful and all loving god. given the world we have, i feel that ONE or more of those characteristics must be incorrect. just too much suffering and pain…

            but i can sense your own faith and how strongly it influences you and i, suspect and hope, to make you and all you touch better for it. if i had the faith to give blessings… you would have mine.

          • So, you have doubts of there being a God… Hey, there are hundreds of millions just like you. God is not surprised about the doubts that man has… Thomas, a disciple of Jesus’ certainly had doubts. I believe doubts are good because most always it will cause a greater investigation for the truth. Sadly most will give up on the investigation for the truth to early because of friends and the world’ condemnation.

            Just because someone doesn’t accept the belief of God nor the Bible as being the truth doesn’t make it any less true….
            The Bible says, The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” Psalm 14:1 But this old man would say that I believe it is the fool who doesn’t make a truly honest search for the truth, he accepts what others say without question.
            If anyone says there is no God than their wisdom would have to encompass everything there is to be known from the past to everything here in the presence…. But in truth, they know what they know but to have knowledge of God when they have no understanding of His WORD nor His ways is nothing less than mere speculations.
            Have you ever studied or read through the Bible?
            Scientists and Archeologists have discovered many facts written within the Bible which were proven hundreds if not thousands of years later as being true…. Here is a website that you should check out,
            I would hope this website would cause everyone who might read this to wonder how could this be that these facts were written 600 to 2500 years or more before the birth of Christ?
            Within the Bible there has been found several thousand prophecies which has already been fulfilled… 330 or so that were written approx. 600 to 1500 years or so before the birth of Jesus all speaking of the His birth, life, death and resurrection.
            You can think whatever you want to think, but if your thinking is not in line with the truth, than all the sincerity in the world will not change a lie into the truth…
            We all are born with the sin nature, so we all have or considering the new born all will sin…
            This is from God’s WORD -The wages of sin is death, whether it be a lie or murder the transgressor of just one of God’s Laws is guilty of having broken all of God’s Laws…
            For the man who thinks he knows all that there is to be known, is nothing but a fool unto himself. Knowledge is gained from what man has experienced in life, wisdom is what man does with this knowledge, but true wisdom is given by God.
            There is nothing in this life that man can say for a certainty, unless he has seen, or experienced directly or indirectly that which pertains to his statements, beliefs, or faith. In other words, for man to say, “I know God does not exist,” just because he personally has not experienced a life changing spiritual event is nothing less than pure ignorance.
            Even if a wise man claims he is wise or he displays his degrees from years of studying, without faith in God he still lacks the ability to comprehend or understand the existence of God, because his wisdom is that of the world’s. If you say you are wise then please tell me if you can, why should God reveal himself to someone that does not seek Him, or to someone that is not seriously wanting to know him in a personal way, much less to someone that does not believe in Him?
            God has chosen to hide Himself, but to those who fear Him, He will reveal His heart’s desires. In Psalms 91:1 He refers to His place of hiding as the secret place. Only those who fear God will find this secret place, as we are told: The LORD confides in those who fear him; he makes his covenant known to them. Psalm 25:14 NIV.
            I most always suggest to the non-believer that they should read, The Case for Faith or The Case for Christ both of which were written by a former atheist, Lee Strobel….
            I will also challenge you to read, “The Greater Message,” at and ask yourself how could this have happen it there is no God….
            I know that my sins have been forgiven… And He will forgive you as well if you ask for His forgiveness and accept Christ Jesus as your LORD and Savior…
            Now why would an old man such as I go to the trouble to try to open anyone’s eyes to the truth; I have seen what the love of Christ Jesus has done in my life and I wish to share His love with others.
            If you are not attending a church I would recommend an Assemblies of God Church and opening a Bible to begin reading the Book of John in the New Testament. I use the Bible Pathway Ministries Daily Guide (Google) and with 15 min of reading each day a person can read through the entire Bible within one year… If you are truly seeking Him with all your heart, you will connect with Him.
            May God bless you in all your endeavors.

          • Thank you watchman. You are gracious and kind and i appreciate your interest in a stranger. I will look to your links and always try to remain open to all the things in our amazing universe that i do not (and maybe cannot) understand. I know enough to know that i dont know much. I have training but training and deeply knowing can be distinct. Your kindness is welcome and i hope that you can continue to spread it on this site and elsewhere in your life. I will do that as well as i can too… And let us try to make this a more compassionate world. Until we meet here again.

          • Just google Larry Brinklin and Dave Lombard. Both famous “gay rights” protectors and both convicted pedophiles, abusing 2 year old babies and running a pedophile ring right from his home computer. Then google hoe Nambla(north american boy lovers association) do their parade during Larry Brinkln week in SF. Case closed. This is their agenda and what they REALLY want.

          • Wow thanks, I didn’t know anything about them. You see this is info people really need to have instead of believing the radical homosexual lies.
            But I guess thats near impossible with the media being in bed with them.

          • Michael Dennewitz

            Randall, you’ll barter with TROLLS til the moon falls from the sky and nothing will change for them.. lol

          • Michael Dennewitz

            You would almost have to be QUEER to have said that! (and they’re not gays, they’re QUEERS !!)

          • okay… and this great nation has room for every type of law-abiding citizen within its borders… we may not always be comfortable with that… but, hey… its a democracy. its sloppy and messy and wonderful.

          • We have never been a democracy. We are a Republic. I know the difference is way over your head but, try to catch up.

          • caught up. read about it in the interim… okay… so a democratic republic. a true democracy sounds like socialism the way of the socialist kibutzim in israel… fully of and by the people in benevolent collaboration

          • Sorry, you still got it wrong. NOT a democratic republic, we are a Constitutional Republic.

          • THanks… My learning curve on this is still steep. I will study up on these various terms.

          • Pay, I’ll go along with you on the “equal protection under the law,” but marriage is marriage. When the same sexes are classified as a “married couple,” it defeats the definition of marriage. Same sex unions, for “equal protection under the law,” should be called what it is: a union, not a marriage, and should have the same coverage. But, using a little foresight and imagination, if the SCOTUS approves the same sex union as a “marriage,” in time, we’ll be allowing owners to marry their pets, and then we’ll really be barking up the wrong tree.

          • me and my hamster were just wondering if we should have a nice quiet night in… or go chinese.

          • You have a great sense of humor!! LOL!!!

          • seriously, my hamster (joyce) is the cat’s meow. (we ended up going chinese. we were going to go to a peruvian restaurant until we released that might be too dangerous for a hamster (easily mistaken for a guinnea pig)). we are still very much in love… but our state does not recognize our love … it hurts me… deep down. but joyce is just taking it one day at a time. problem is, as a hamster, her days are numbered. i think we only have a few months left… just a few more jaunts around the running wheel as they (hamsters) say.

          • I totally agree with you. The gay community has every right to equal protection under the law, Which was given to all people by our Founding Fathers, not the bible. In this country we base our rights on The Constitution, not the ten commandments. So, you Christians need to get off your thrones& stop believing that the rights of Americans only pertain to you. Get over yourselves!! The gay communities are not going anywhere anytime soon!!

          • okay faye, now i am getting a restraining order… your stalking me (but i secretly love it). you are right… the church will have to someday enter the 21st (crap, the 15th) century. there are many well meaning folks out there… but the times they are a changing. they love their freedoms but struggle when others share that same love for THEIR (as in other) freedoms. its a challenge that they will need to dig deep to overcome… if they want to live calmly in a world of diversity. personally, i put my energies into more pressing issues such as the environment… take care… see you around.

        • That is what my Bible says. Repent of your sins and seek Salvation. Time is slippin into the end zone.

          • Only the King James Version Bible along with the Strong’s Concordance can one find out what was really said. The Kenites have messed with many further translations. Just like we were taught in grade school when you start a story and pass it around the room when it gets back it is nothing like it started. So are the other translations of the Bible. I have many bibles and I constantly compare what is said and for the most part they are OK but in crutiel areas the verses are changed so they become a lie.

          • I do agree with you Bruce. That is the only way to study GODs word. You seem like a carbon copy of me or vice versa. KJV is the last true translation and a first Govt. approved biblle by King James himself.

          • I prefer reading the Bible in today’s English. Thee’s and thou’s just don’t cut it. The Message , NIV, Century, The Clear Word are just a few. I would like those who live with the KJV point out all these errors that would cause folks to turn away from God and be ready to except all those “lies”. Study and learn Greek and Hebrew if you really want to get it straight and almost perfect. Only God is perfect.

          • The later translations have been messed with and can not be taken back to what was really said. With the KJV and the Strong’s Concordance we know exactly what GOD said and what was meant. In the bible there are a lot of Hebrew-isms and these are attempted in the newer translations however in most these are missed and in some they are so far off that the point is missed. It is important to know GOD’s word not mans word.

          • Don’t you believe God has the power to protect His word from generation to generation? When you read the Gospels for instance, you get four versions of what was happening and what Jesus said. Which of the Gospels do you understand in the KJV to be accurate?

          • All of them.

          • If you get a Concordance, you can understand what the difference is from a thou and a you, or a thee and a ye, among others. If we are created in GOD’s image, and HE is perfect, we indeed are a perfect creation. It is sin that separates us from GOD. It was hard for me to use a KJV at first, but now it is easy. I do have and use other versions to see and understand the subtle differences in language and meanings of wording. I hope this is helpful to you.

          • I posess several concordances prefering the good old Strong’s . I understand the wording style in KJV and occasionmally read from it. But, I read not to find error, or to find fault, but to understand God’s great love for His creation. There are those that will swear by the KJV and that is okay. I prefer reading in today’s language. May you have a wonderful walk with the Lord today!

          • If I may, what is the state of the dead and what in the KJV Bible informs us of such?

          • The dead are already living in eternal places, Heaven or Hell. JESUS said to the good thief, “Today you will be with me in paradise”.

          • Well, that’s part of the quote. KJV says “And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, to day shalt thou be with me in paradise.” The placement of the coma has critical meaning with far reaching effect. I am sure you know that there is no punctuation marks in the original language of Scripture. We use such to help us understand sentence structure . It changes the meanings and intentions of words . So, what if we move that coma to follow the word today? Could that be a KJV error that changes the status of death?

          • The world is full of “what if’s”. Trust in GOD and live life like your Salvation depends on it, for it does.

          • So, read that quote with no punctuation marks, as the “original” was written and what do you have?

          • How can the dead be living in eternal places when the Bible says “the dead know nothing?

          • Please type, “New World Order Bible Versions Full Movie” in the YouTube search bar to see the differences in several versions compared to King James Version.

          • Thanks, I will. But don’t have time right now. Later this afternoon.

          • I am back on line after experiencing a gaa-zillion replies dumped on my e-mail account from a facebook post. Will I ever learn?

          • The King James version was itself “changed” to suit the King because it went against his political beliefs.

          • Thank you for your reply, however it is apparent you have not read the KJV bible, with understanding. It’s also apparent you have not looked at the opining statements of the 1611 King James.

          • You are correct with your assumptions, because I find it so much easier to understand today’s language than King James’ . If the list of “mistakes” is too lengthy to mention, please tell me a couple of them found in, say the NIV.

          • Dead silence………………… I rest my case.

          • Cross referance with a Geneva 1599 version with a KJV. The biggest difference I found was JESUS’ words written in red.

        • In all actuality your comment is from the Old Testament, which is the Jewish Torah and the Muslim’s Quran. However, there is no actual reference to homosexuality in the New Testament. Yet those who oppose use the following as their rationale and interpretation: Your state, “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both
          of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” This statement comes from Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, which is from “The Old Testament.”

          None of the four gospels mentions the subject directly, and there is nothing about homosexuality in the Book of Acts, in Hebrews, in Revelation, or in the letters attributed to James, Peter, and John. However, there are four possible references to homosexual; and yet the text does not forthright declare homosexuality.

          Romans 1:26–27: 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. – May have some interpretate as having a homosexual undertone and yet no mention as to homosexual allegations,

          – The term shameful lusts could refer to perverted acts by men with women
          – The term lusts does not just refer to sex. One can have blood lust (murder, killing).
          – The passage men committed shameful acts with other men – again could have homosexual undertone or could refer to gang rape; slaughtering people with group of men; could be referring to gangs

          1 Corinthians 6:9–10,

          9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

          – Again no true reference to homosexuality

          – Only possible reference may be “effeminate” – though there are those who are effeminate who are not homosexuals.

          1 Timothy 1:9–10.

          9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

          Jude 1:7,

          7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

          – Again no true reference to homosexuality.
          – The only possible reference to homosexuality is “going after strange flesh.” This does not necessarily refer women and women or men and men. Strange flesh could refer to a married individual going with someone other than their husband or often interpreted as referring to homosexuality.

          Therefore the Messiah (Jesus) did not preach against homosexuality it is modern man who has made this interpretation of the citings in the New Testament.

          • wow… that’s super interesting. i am no biblical scholar as you appear to be… but i have read both testaments and their tone could not be more distinct. some of my comments reference an intuition that you support with verse. all that said, with the bibles written in ancient hebrew, some of these translations might struggle to remain pure (unless, as some would say, God oversaw the translations.) thanks for the lesson… i suspect i will be the only one to answer you. many on this site are just too angry and fearful to look deeply into their core beliefs as they butt up against cultural evolution within our fledgling democracy.

          • Thank you for your reply but You are not correct the KJV bible has the Old and New Testaments. There is only the Word of GOD! You must not be reading the KJV bible.

          • Your revolving ignorance about the subject and just playing with Bible verses as if you knew anything makes you look more ignorant that you are. First, the word “homosexual” came to be thousands of years after the Bible was written , so you wont find that word directly like you are assuming. But the fact that God condemned what is now today as homosexuality is clear all thru the Bible. Worst is that you are using the English language and not the original language of the scrolls which make it even more clear that homosexuality is not tolerated. Nice try by a very ignorant person about languages and meanings.

          • I can see you too are gay by how you write. Listen pal, save your nonsense & irrational thinking for some other lost soul.
            EVERYTHING THAT ENTERS YOUR EYES & EARS. and then repent before your silver cord is cut.

        • Michael Dennewitz

          Well, if none of the justices on the bench are QUEER or mooselum, God’s idea of marriage will prevail, but with the way this country is falling apart, I can almost see the decision going for the fudge packers!!

          • The court should not even be hearing this item, it is not a legal issue but a religious issue. The only reason government got involved in the first place is that they found out they could tax it by requiring a license to get married. The court needs to throw it out and let the churches handle it. They can make a civil union the legal relationship for ‘these’ people for the necessary legal matters. Leave marriage alone.

        • Did God command you to call someone a fool? See, you’re screwed up from the word go. Fool!

        • I wonder why you find it necessary to call another of God’s creation “a fool”. Have you not read “God loves the sinner, hates the sin”? Are you above sin?

          • You wonder why? Enough said,…but for the sake of the ignorant and uninformed, I’ll let you know God has plenty to say about fools and gives us warnings about them.
            Hillary and obama are also God’s creation. Are they not fools who have foresaken the living God and been given to a depraved mind? They are and they have been. Go back and read what I had replied to. A fool speaks like a fool, and what you write or say comes from your heart. Remember he hates the sin AND ALSO SAYS WHO EVER SINS WILL FACE JUDGEMENT. That means he is not happy with a man chosing to sin.
            I know you think of yourself “Holier than thou”,…worshiping your false God,…..but maybe one day God will grant you repentance and wake you from your western gentile slumber.

          • Your post is nothing but a lot of slander and false accusations. May I ask you, have you read Matthew 7;1-5 from your KJV or any other Holy Bible of your choice?

        • Sound intolerant and rather rough with those who might need help rather than to be discarded. I assume that is old testament… A bloody script to put it mildly. Jesus was a major,upgrade it seems to me in the second edition. Your use of the term fool may be used to incite but all it does is reveal your onw anquish. I hope you find peace my brother.

      • Your way off base on the God and the above posting, DUH!!!!! No one has ever – from what “Factual” is known, that anyone doesn’t want people “Who love each other and Not to be able to express that,” DUH again!!!!! It’s the matter of “MARRIAGE” – as established since the beginning of Time and Adam and Eve, “A Man and A Woman, duh, duh!!!!

        The issue is only THAT, call their Love of Attachment …”Something Else,” ….PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        Make up their “Own Gay Vows” and call it A Union or whatever the “F” they come up with…. BESIDES, Marriage …. Got it AH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        • hard to follow you through all the Duhs… but i think you are suggesting that we create a separate and essentially similar institution we can call “Warriage” instead of Marriage. Then, heteros can have the M word and homos can have the W word. but, in all other respects, they would provide the same protection under the law.

          do i hear you correctly that you would support such a new institution?

          if so, Amen Brother!

          • Maybe more like Gayriage – for Gay, Homriage – for Homo, Queriage – for Queer – the spelling could be arranged by them … what’s the “W” stand for, duh, lol! You were on the right track with “homos” but didn’t follow through with it! All I can relate “W” with is … Whores, then again maybe they are that, too! LMAO!!!!

          • the name doesn’t matter. W is just an upside down M. not all that clever. we can call it linoleum for all i care… just so long as it is non-discriminatory.

          • The Name does Matter!!!!!
            I don’t know about you but “Marriage” and My Marriage means something to me – 55 years to a most wonderful “WOMAN” and “MOTHER Of MY CHILDREN!!!!!!

            Something the Gay’s, Homo’s, Queer’s … of either breed, will EVER see, feel or be apart of Longevity of Human Life in the World!

            When the “Gay’s” take over the Earth … it will become extinct of Human Life or when and if they ever started breeding among them …. Evil will show it’s face with bazaar beings!

          • i don’t share your fear of the unknown… the unfamiliar… the different. i embrace those things. i am glad to hear of your marriage… i am sure it is the joy of your life. i wish you all good things with that into the future. i want others to share in your joy in whatever ways they choose/can. my position is really just that simple. good luck to you.

          • Michael Dennewitz

            Pay, you’re starting to sound like a troll, just like Razoo and Owens!!

      • Don’t know what you are talking about…
        No one is actually suppressing love here. That is just a misleading Progressive talking point.
        Progressive talking points are confusing to me too.

        • sure… i hear you… one can love outside of marriage… but there are ways of showing that love that are uniquely protected by marriage… such as visiting a dying partner in the hospital, getting their social security after death, joint custody over adopted children. those are real issues for these folks… that marriage (or some surrogate) provides and protects. at that more secular level of equal protection… the gay community has a cogent point.

          • Instead of waiting until your partner is dying in a hospital as one of the more than 7000 gay men who will die this year, despite all the triads of medications, according to Paul Staley, why don’t you join with Paul and with others in visiting the men who chose the gay life and its inherent risks and now are are dying? It is a very small number who visit these men at my local hospital, including a two family members, two Catholic priests, one Protestant preacher, one other volunteer and no gay men. Are you and the “gay community” in denial or just self-centered?

          • fascinating are you talking about aids?… obergefell’s husband died of lou gehrigs disease.

          • Those inequalities can and will be addressed without changing the meaning of marriage.

            In fact, most already have. Yet you ignore that fact.

          • precisely the opposite. precisely because those issues have not yet been satisfactorily managed… the current court case is filed. read the details of the case and the choice of case studies… it is all about equal protection under the law and nothing about the larger meaning of marriage. my source was a 15 minute summary of the SC hearings on NPR. if you find out i am mistaken, get back to me with a better reference.

          • I beg to differ, this decision WILL have a huge impact on the definition of Marriage.

            It will also have a huge impact on the Constitution.

            Nobody is talking about gays rights to visit their loved ones in a hospital.

          • Obergefell (the guy for whom the entire case is named) could not get his name listed on the death certificate of his husband who died from lou gehrigs disease until a court forced the name to be placed on … now its being threatened to be removed. (there are ramifications about not having one’s name listed as next of kin on a death certificate related to social security benefits transfer etc). that is the namesake reason of this court case.

            all the talk of redefining marriage is an artifact of this site (and others)… and has little to do with the particular case being debated.

            that’s about all i know on this… but its non-trivial. hope that helps.

          • And the LEFT takes this crisis to change the definition of Marriage.
            Amazing that dudes rights could have been expanded without changing the definition of a word that has been in place for ever…

            This is what the liberals, progressives, Alinsky Radicals, Communists (whatever you want to be called) is doing.

            In the book, “The Naked Communist” by Cleon Skousen 1958, there is a list of 45 agenda items that the Soviet Union has been following to set up a socialist state in the United States.

            # 16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

            Nailed it! Now what in the world are we going to do about it? You don’t want to live in a socialist state do you?

          • wow… super interesting. is christianity a basic american institution (like public education) or does it transcend national boundaries? i would say that our nation is deeply steeped in christianity but that it is not a uniquely or even basic American institution. Religious tolerance would be… but one one religion in particular. how’s that for a parry to your otherwise super cool response? (by the way, i am cool with socialism the way originally intended… just like i am cool with capitalism the way it was originally intended: problem is that what the world practices has next to nothing to do with the originally envisioned doctrines. (capitalism, for example, would never tolerate subsidies and incomplete information for consumers etc. etc.)

          • Wow… super predictable…

            I made a point you can not refute, and you deflect.

            You are a useful idiot if you think mankind can implement socialism as it is originally intended without removing evil from the world first.

            Our elite politicians are corrupt, the power that We the People have entrusted them with has corrupt them. That is why there is Crony Capitalism, and Crony Capitalism practiced by Democrats . What is the difference????

            Your utopia will fall to a dictator. That dictator will be just as cruel as Stalin. I suggest you wake up now, before America falls.

            Socialists and atheist can not control evil. You can not legislate evil. you can not remove evil, Capitalism and the Constitution created the greatest Nation on earth. Your efforts and ideology seek to destroy it.

            waiting for the next deflection. I am winning this argument you know.

          • i was thinking that that answer was more lame than the others but only because you neglected to notice that we are saying much of the same thing (at this point). neither capitalism nor socialism has been practiced (ever) as originally described. i agree with you that neither can be so long as humans continue to be the way we are (filled with greed etc.) i have no utopia (too fragile and illusory)… but i do wish that we can move closer to the capitalism of adam smith as i see that (e.g., full-cost accounting) as being a likely saving grace for our planet.

            you say socialists and athiests cannot control evil. i agree wholeheartedly because i can’t think of any group, no matter their assertions, that can effectively do that. however, i think that there are individuals who can. problem is those folks are so damned modest that they never aspire to higher office.. and, thus, those offices are left for the dregs of our societies.

            last thought: capitalism only created the wealthiest nation on earth… the constitution created the greatest.

            so… take THAT!

          • Interesting, I am guilty of kicking the dead carcase just like Will Smith did to the first dead alien he killed in the movie Independence day.

            And I must thank you for clarifying my post, as you are correct, first the Constitution created a Capitalistic environment that allowed the United States to be come not only the wealthiest nation on earth but the most sought after, equal opportunity environment, and greatest place to live on earth.

            I must also clarify one last thing. While we agree that the elite running both parties are corrupt, and it is hard to tell the difference between crony capitalism and crony socialism. There is a huge difference between Democrats and Republicans.

            First, the people of the Republican party have woken up and now see the corruption that rules their party and they are doing something about it. The Democrats on the other hand do not recognize the corruption and are doing nothing about it.

            Democrats have removed God from the party.
            Republicans have not.

            But the biggest difference between the two parties is that Democrats are now full blown socialists. Republicans are Capitalists.

            So the simple equation is:
            Democrats = Socialists
            Republicans = Capitalists.

            If the socialists win, they will fall to a dictator, and everybody will lose.

      • pattheman, You just defined what you are.Homosexual can’t seem to understand. be what you want to be, I don’t care and I don’t have to agree with your life style ,so do your thing I really could care less.

        • amen brother! live and let live! i agree with you completely. You do what you want… i’ll do what i want… and in this great democracy… we’ll do it in the same nation! what a great country. (clever… with the PAT the man)

      • I love my dog but would never ask to marry it although in the UK that is exactly what a woman applied to do.
        Love is not the issue in its specifics since it can be between anyone – a brother and sister, a mother and child, a multitude of variances but none in need of a legal license.
        Why is it that the homosexual community will not accept the term ‘Union’ without it being a marriage? If it is a tax argument that can be included under the auspices of a union.
        I for one will not ever accept a homosexual couple as being married. If they use the term marriage and allowed to obtain a marriage license I will simply see the license as a sodomy permit and nothing else.

        • i happen to agree… no point in pushing people’s buttons and usurping the term marriage for alternative purposes given the religiousity of our nation. but, a union of whatever title that provides equal protections/responsibilities under the law (not god’s law… but social law) would be just a okay with me. i just think in a non-discriminating democracy… we shouldn’t discriminate. your solution sounds blissfully logical to me.

      • Love another are one for GOD but love homosexuals mental ill are cursed by GOD, who was set man and women, and never forgive Homos. That are insane and evil grant right, grant a pass to a mental institution.

        • sorry… just can’t decipher this one.

          • Because you not real won. GOD won every one love to another no fight and live in peace, but that not mean love a pure evil homosexuals mental ill, who are sexual depredators. GOD are against homosexuals and transgender all who come from evil. But homosexuals with next President be will loose, blue left no have any chance. Are only one formula, man and women.

          • Michael Dennewitz

            Was that supposed to be English, or Creole?? You lost me!

      • You find it confusing because you don’t know Him, or His Character.

        • do you feel that all those are spew hatred, intolerance and resort to sophomoric name calling know him any better? perhaps the god of the old testament… a god of genocidal tendencies fits better with some of those around here who talk of violence in reaction to disagreement. but, the god of the new testament was a more loving god. grew up i guess…

          • EliseR considering how you attacked me in all your ‘sock incarnations’ for being the way G-d made me … via Jewish, and having Aspergers; you are in no position to be whining about ‘who is spewing hatred, intolerance, and resort to sophomoric name calling…”

            Because “my Dear” … that’s ‘you'(and your sock farm).

            And considering the fact that you told me to “get of of my country” … when I am a honorably discharged vet … you need to keep your hate mongering hypocrisy to yourself you hypocrite!

          • Apparently you have never bothered with Revelations have you? You know that in the end all the sinners that haven’t repeated and accept Jesus, will be thrown into the Lake of Fire. GOD has always been a grown up but he does tolerate Sinners. I will walk that road, as Jesus is my Savior. If anyone has a problem with that take it up with GOD. Because I don’t care about your problems.

          • i loved that book… my favorite.. but i admit that read it like i read Carlos Casteneda and did not look to it for wisdom or prophecy or guidance. its just too off the wall… a real outlier from the rest of the books.

          • As long as hatred is in line with what God hates we are good He hates a few things, hands that shed innocent blood is one of them…what do you make of that? Those in the streets of baltimore are both violent and intoerant..wouldn’t you say

      • EliseR, you mean the way Gays do in their targeting of Jews and Christians? How about the way fascist members of the Gay community ridiculed little children with special needs?

        G-d forbid, that hypocrites like ‘you’ … (how tout rights for Gays and Muslims … only) should ever have to be accountable for the Libstapo, Fascist bigotry of your ‘own’ community.

      • It’s not intolerance my friend, and it’s not love, at least not like God meant it to be, It’s the epitome of lust. God’s not willing any should perish but all come to repentance.
        God in His love mercy and grace made us all free moral agents each with the right to choose.
        God said sodomy is an abomination to Him.
        There is a loving way out and thats through Jesus!!
        But it’s gotta be God’s way according to His terms!!

        • that’s where a secular view of love struggles in the face of a theological view. no matter the merits of the more theological belief structure, is it right for one group in a democracy to tell another what and how to believe/behave so long as no direct (direct) harm is done to the other? but, more to the point… look up above at what 隖保罗 said… and see if you agree that those who follow the loving path of jesus are mired in the relatively vengeful language of the older of the two testaments. (I say that speaking as a jew… as a jew… i find the old testament to be filled with much ugliness and the new testament filled with much beauty.)

          • It’s all the word of God friend and who can fully know the ways of tThe Lord as His ways are past finding out.
            Bottom line is we live in a fallen world, not God’s fault but ours, and things will come to an end. Those ugly things were things that the human race brought on themselves because they decide to disobey God.
            God is Holy, He’s righteous and His sovereign and He is a god of love although for some that is hard to understand.
            He sent His only begotten Son Jesus ( He really is The Messiah) to die for us. God has always required a blood sacrifice. Ever wonder why that no longer happens in the synagogues? Without the shedding of blood there is no atonement! The only way God changed that was in the how, Jesus became the ultimate eternal sacrifice.
            Listen, in reading the Tenach who usually caused the people to go astray, wicked kings and even religeous leaders of the day. Why is it so hard to figure out that the religious leaders in Jesus day did the exact same thing because The Messiah wasn’t as they thought He should be. But everything that happened to Jesus was prophesied and all a part of God’s greater plan of redemption. Remember the prophecy in Genesis how women would eventually give birth to one who would bruise satans heel? Well that was Jesus.
            Having our spiritual eyes truly opened can only happen through a personal relationship with God through His Son Jesus Christ.
            How about Isiah chapter 53, that isn’t referring to Israel which really wouldn’t make much sense because it’s referring to a person and that person is Jesus.
            Anyway, please go to the WND website and listen to Rabbi Jonathan Cahn’s scathing rebuke and warning to the president, the government and all of America I think you’ll find it very interesting.
            God bless
            Oh and by the way, God is not through with Israel yet, I pray for her and her people every day!!

          • thank you randall for your heartfelt words. i can sense your integrity and good spirit. i’ll check out that reference and wish you all good things.

          • You as well my friend. There’s also a book worth reading.
            PLUNDERED, how progressive ideology is destroying America by Michael Coffman PHD
            I’ll tell you what, I’m no longer scratching my head as to how all this madness can be going on in America.
            It’s really worth the read.
            God bless you and keep you

      • Nobody is forbidding anyone from expressing love , you ignorant. Stop twisting the words and the intentions. of course, I could not expect less from a legalized mental illness.

      • It’s not confusing if you have a conscience before God. All of us will have to answer to Him for our fleshly demands sooner or later.

      • God does forbid the act of homosexuality sorry if you have a problem with that. Instead of bashing Christians take it up with God. By showing love for one another are you referring the Sodomy?

      • The type of love you refer to is condemned by the Commandments. I can not imagine what misery and pain the folks go through who have these unatural feelings and must face condemnation as a daily event. God loved them, died for them, and forgives them when they believe and ask for his forgivness, just as ALL sinners must do.

        • your heartfelt sentiments speak highly of your integrity and wish that all people live well in God’s light. But, for those who do not share your beliefs, they just want to be allowed to be themselves in whatever way they happen to be. but, at the deeper level, i hear that you care about them too… and that is a wonderful sentiment.

      • If only you could go back in time and speak with those that were living in Sodom and Gomorrah just before their destruction as told in the Book of Genesis.

    • AMEN, don’t worry though, no matter what happens, God is ALWAYS in control!!!

    • Absolutely! God please have mercy on this nation. Also by prayer and fasting, Matt 17: 20 & 21. It says we can move mountains, but can only be done through prayer and fasting. Read Matt 17 starting with verse 14 to understand verses 20 & 21, KJV.

  2. The Supreme Court has absolutely no business deciding anything about marriage!

    • why not? its a legal relationship that cuts to constitutionally defined elements of discrimination. religion aside, if there is systematic discrimination in this nation… it is precisely the SC that has jurisidction. no?

      • Surely, they have more important matters which need resolution. Marriage is essentially a religious entity, and the Supreme Court should stay out of it. If they insist on inserting themselves into the marriage debate, some of the members of the Court should recuse themselves from a decision because of their own personal behaviors regarding this issue. Having said that, it would be best that they did not rule on this matter. Marriage is not a civil union.

        • excellent… and there you find the crux of the situation> it has morphed into both a civil and religious union. the dreaded mixing of state and religion. if we can tease the civil parts from the religious ones… i think this whole shibang would be easier to navigate.

          • Yes, I tend to agree, but attempting to make a civil union the moral equivalent of marriage is inappropriate. Marriage is between a man and a woman–not the same sex of a civil union. This is why I firmly believe that this should not be ruled on by the Supreme Court, because it is not within its purview.

          • i hear you… i guess the fact that the SC is hearing the case means they see it as civil (and, presumably, also religious). my own marriage is a civil one given my secular philosophy… yours might be religious. its all a jumbled mess of conflating two things that should be separate. good to talk with an intellectual… sometimes i wonder how many there are on this site.

          • Thank you, PayTheMan, it is rare when I am able to exchange information with someone with different views than mine in a civil and intellectual manner. This is a jumbled mess, but my guess is the Supreme Court will treat a civil union as an equivalence to traditional marriage. All the very best!

          • i leave my ego at the door when i enter these sites. i search for people like you so that i can better understand your views… because we likely share only a few in common. but, clearly, you are a thinker… and i know i have much to learn from you. thanks.. i’ll keep an eye out for you. ugh… now i really have to get back to work.

          • I appreciate your compliments and candor. I think we have proven that we can agree to disagree and still learn from each other. No one has all the answers and no one should be too old or young to learn. Sorry about the work thing. I’ll keep an eye out for you. Take care, my friend.

        • Marriage IS a civil union (contract) between a man and woman that has been ordained and blessed by God. Most states also have a provision for civil union between 2 people that wish to be enjoined as a couple, it just is not referred to as a marriage.

          • billie, technically, you are correct, but over the years same-sex couples and heterosexual couples have been conflated, and that is why same-sex couples came to be recognized as a civil union in order to clarify the difference.

  3. let justice roll

    It’s not equal protection under the law that the liberal gay community is looking for, they already have that. It’s the destruction of marriage as an institution created by God that they want to destroy. Marriage has a Biblical definition that has been defended by Congress and liberals hate anything that is related to religion, Christian religion that is.

    • but that is exactly the core point: they do NOT have equal protection under the law. the particulars of the cases filed (and discussed) are about parents NOT being given custody of their own adopted children should one partner die… others NOT being able to visit dying partners in hospitals because they are not considered kin. THESE are the issues PRECISELY at hand. IF it was, as you say, that they WERE given equal rights… none of this would be happening except for a group of activists trying to just piss of religious folk. read up on the current case… it is specifically about INequality!

      • let justice roll

        All people on the Earth have a God given right to live their lives free of persecution. This article is solely about asking the Supreme Court to redefine the definition of marriage to include two people of the same sex. As I stated before that definition was made over two thousand years ago and the Supreme Court has no business getting involved in changing that. Having stated that I do believe that the gay community is entitled to all the same legal protection. The gay community is not satisfied with that scenario, they are insisting that their lifestyle be affirmed by everyone regardless of their religious beliefs.

  4. “is less about reviewing case law and interpreting the Constitution and more about deciding what’s best for the country.” This is not the Supreme court of old, in place to uphold the LAWS of the land. More travesty, less justice.

    • the laws of the land are that we cannot discriminate… how is their consideration of a discrimination circumstance that is wide-spread and idiosyncratic not part of the court’s jurisdiction?

      • fourth amendment GAY is not a RELIGION!

        • right… and it is not specifically mentioned in the constitution but the larger issue of spurious discrimination is… that’s why this is an interesting case. we’ll see how it turns out although the SC is so politicized, the response may not reflect our current levels of public view and understanding… but… it will be what it is until overturned another day. democracy… coming to a theater near you (some day).

          • This is a very gray area that has been forced upon CJ’s that probably do not even want the pressure of the Gaystepo.

      • Being a homosexual is a choice just like becoming a gangster is a choice. You choose bad lifestyles, don’t expect the public’s approval.

        • fascinating. its bad because you don’t pursue it… .but it is no more inherently bad that hetero marriage in which some are wonderful, some are terrible…

          if being homo is a choice… like, say, taking your kids to the playground for a day of sunshine… then that is the essence of america: we are ALLOWED to make such choices SO LONG AS they don’t hurt anyone else. so, the gangstas hurt others and so we frown upon them. gays hurt no one who is not meddling in their business and, as such, should be protected. no?

          • The gays are heII bent on destroying ANYONE who disagrees with them. They are vengeful, hateful freaks. Really….who the heII goes after someone and costs them $135,000 for not baking one damnn cake? What kind of sick person does that? But, they sure won’t go after a Muslim bakery….just the Christian ones.

            Fyi: If I had my children at a playground and two gays showed up, I would immediately remove my children. I bet you I wouldn’t be alone either.

          • super interesting. read that first sentence of yours… and then… can you imagine how they are saying the exact same thing about you?? you seem hell bent on destroying anyone (them, in this case) because you disagree with them. i don’t see any difference between what you critique and how you write. seriously… not trying to be a dick here…i just don’t see the difference.

          • You are trying to be a dick. I really don’t care what the little miscreants say about me. And, I really don’t care what they do in their own homes. I DO care about the amoral society being foisted on people over what is, in essence, perversion.

          • welcome to democracy. its ugly… its messy… but its what we love so much about this country. hey… ii don’t like it half the time either (for likely different reasons than you) but… i live with it and support it with all my fiber… because the alternatives scare the bejeezus out of me. thanks man… have to get back to work.

          • Why do so many people, wrongly, continue to call the United States a democracy? It is a democratic Republic, not a democracy. Some of our Founding Fathers warned against allowing it ever to become a democracy.

          • What’s the difference? (asked with sincerity… i don’t know)

    • That is a rather specious opinion of this article writer. The Supreme Court has always found support in the Constitution for any decision ever made.

  5. The simple fact is that there are no Constitution grounds for denying gay marriage – but there is a Constitutional requirement that all citizens should be treated equally under the law. I believe that this – will be essentially the verdict that they will reach.

  6. Why should we “straight NORMAL humans”, bow and scrape to the “gays” They are the ones who are screwed up not our Constitution. Go back to your closet or learn to live in peace under the Laws of the USA, OR go away to another country .

    • Why should you decide to dictate their rights ? After all – you will never have to mingle with them, or go to their weddings. God forbid you should ever find out that one of your own family is gay.

    • you got that backwards my friend. this is the country that does not tolerate discrimination. if you want to discriminate… you are the one who will need to migrate. sorry… its a messy and beautiful country filled with people who disagree with us… its a democracy… nothing better out there. hope you stick around… but if you can’t stomach it… you might feel more at home elsewhere. either way… good luck to you.

    • I think the concept of ‘normal humans’ is delusional. And in sexual habits it is probably the most diverse.

  7. The State has no business in regulating marriage… licensing it. The union of man and woman to become husband and wife …. as one flesh, is a spiritual union and in a Christian, Jewish or Muslim marriage it is God who sanctions the union and establishes the relationship and laws that govern that union. Once the State begins to assert its authority over marriage it may end up going anywhere… talk about marrying ones pets (animals) has already surfaced.

    • Whose God ?

      • Our Creator is God…. The answer as to who God is has been debated for over 5 thousand years and still has not been fully resolved for many. However, I assure you that on judgment day, you will receive a clear and profound answer to your quesiton.

        • Every religion that you listed has a God with different rules.

          • Wrong… the old testament and 10 commandments are fundamental to their religion and are honored, in one degree or another, by every religion I listed. You are ignorant of the Bible and the facts concerning the common roots of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

          • Not so fast. Islam condones polygamy. An there are many other differences. Judaism for example, does not guarantee an afterlife.

          • I didn’t say they were identical… I only said that the 10 Commandments were FUNDAMENTAL to their religion and honored by each of them.

          • A tangent which did not answer my allegation that each God has different rules for each religion listed.

          • An argument and statement I never made… what is it about liberals… do they always read things not there into their arguments? This is what I stated and it remains true:

            one flesh, is a spiritual union and in a Christian, Jewish or Muslim marriage it is God who sanctions the union and establishes the relationship and laws that govern that union.

            God sanctions the union of marriage for Christian’s Jews and Muslims… the fact that Muslims CAN take more than one wife doesn’t stop the fact that they must be married before God and that Allah sanctions their marriage.

          • Now you are waffling. Clearly the institution of marriage is actually different in each faith .

          • No, the institution of marriage is viewed basically the same… a union between man and wife. Try being a practicing homo-sexual in a Muslim country… see how long you keep your head. They consider it an abomination using the same basic scriptural passages to support that view as do Christian’s and Jew’s.

          • Having spent many months in three Muslim countries, I can tell you that homosexuality is probably as common as in any other society. While it is true that in some of the more repressive parts of these nations, homosexuals can be brutalized and even very very occasionally executed – the latter is actually very rare.
            But your issue is really not the convention of marriage – which as I said is viewed rather differently in each faith – and even within that in each nation – but it seems to me that you are seeing it through the lens of your own homophobia.
            Through the ages marriage has existed even when humans were pantheistic (believing in multiple Gods) and the sacrament of marriage has been inserted through moralistic philosophies and is more related to property than to any religious dictum.
            Until very recently, marriage in all faiths has been a very lopsided relationship – with a dominant male, and a submissive female – with virtually no rights. There was little room for the concept of a marriage based upon equality (which is implicit in a same sex marriage) – and now with an equal playing field where women and men are given equal rights in Western culture – you see the unanticipated effect of gay marriage rights

      • The one that is referenced on your coin…. Duhhh…
        One Nation Under God.

        Atheist are welcome to. That is a form of religion.

  8. Dolores Routzahn

    No gov’t or individual is above the one and only ultimate lawmaker and if that doesn’t influence you, check out the plumbing.I’m surprised at Roberts, I’ve read his book and just know John you know better Stop trying to be politically correct and stand up for your Best Friend.

  9. I am against the re-definition of marriage. Our Creator established the proper format at the beginning. He warned the Israelites not to practice those things which the surrounding nations practiced, such as a deviating sexually from Gods intended way to have sex. Then there are the punishments for that will come should we practice such. If one is married,
    I believe that one will have sex of a sort. If to one of the same sex, a deviation from Gods righteous plan.

    • Well – as long as you don’t do it – your conscience should be fine. Let God judge those who do – not you.

      • Morton 212, I struggle with sexual sin. More so heterosexual, but I’ve drifted, not too intensely, toward other proclivities. God will judge all of us. But to legitimate in ones mind by the government authorizing marriage between the same sexes, and hence to potentially lessen the prohibition in ones own life, actually can encourage such behavior. What if the practice of it leads one to hell? Our government would be somewhat complicit in that, as would I if I did not speak out in love about it. Hard to do, to speak out in concern and love, but I believe that is how it should be done. Thanks.

        • Your covenant is what you believe to be between yourself and your God. Look at the excesses of others as test of your resolve if you will.

          • Morton212, Really, here, though, one of a follower of Jesus’ role in life is to shed a light for the benefit of others. We are taught that by Jesus…”Who puts a light under a bushel basket….” But it is to shine outwardly. I do have that covenant between me and our Creator, and that is tough, and I am learning about it. As Paul taught, to work out your salvation with fear and trembling. But the outward shining comes from our success with God as we strive to live the life He wants, perhaps that covenant you talked about. Comparisons do take place, but for oneself, I think it is better to measure oneself against Jesus to know we must keep striving and understanding, and not get any comfort from comparing oneself with others of ones own ilk.

          • It is NOT your job to judge others. That is all. It would be different if they were actually harming you – but in this case they are not.

          • Morton212,
            Where, in my last statement, did I state that I am judging others? If the light of Christ is shed abroad, then He is the one who illumines a situation. God does judge.

          • Then I misspoke. While I understand that some may not find gay marriage morally sound – they should express their misgivings and finally accept the decision of the law.

          • Morton212,
            In some manner I will accept the law. It does not mean that one should not examine that law to determine if one thinks it sound. If you look at the Jewish prophets, they often spoke out about immoralites. Not only sexual, but about other rank behaviors, like not paying the laborer on time, like not taking thought of and helping the poor etc. The consequences to those prophets were often harsh, from those the prophet was speaking to. So to accept a law in some manner does not mean one must agree with it. Become obseques (sp?) before it. To stand up to certain evils and speak about it, one may take a risk and suffer from angry attitudes and things that flow from those. Persequsions (my spellng is atrocious!) beatings, jailings et. al. Thanks for listening.

  10. Get it Right …. Supreme Court, duh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Marriage: is between a “MAN and WOMAN” … in accordance with the Spiritual World!!

    Union: is the joining of “ONE’S” … together, in accordance Non- Liberal Ideas!!

    Unless you so “F’ing” Stupid Liberal … that you Stink, to say the least!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  11. The Supreme Court has a difficult decision to make, and unfortunately they feel compelled to listen to “the People”. Instead of complying with GOD’S law… one man, one woman… they have to listen to the screaming liberals and gay/lesbian community about equal rights, and in some cases, superior rights. Christian values have gone down the tubes. It doesn’t bother me if a man marries a man… if they choose to go against God’s will, it is THEY who will answer to Him on Judgment Day. If a woman marries a woman, it’s not MY problem either. JUST STOP SHOVING IT INTO OUR FACES, DAMMIT!!!!! And if a CHRISTIAN bakery or catering business refuses service to a gay wedding, it’s on the basis of principle, NOT discrimination.

    • You are mistaken about their role. They are required by the Constitution to interpret the Constitution, not any form of religious belief.

      • Honestly, do you think that our current government, OR the judicial system, is interested in the Constitution anymore? Look around you, see what’s happening. As it WAS, our founding fathers believed in “One nation, under God.”

        • Yes. If you study US history you will find that there is nothing particularly difficult about this issue. Slavery and civil rights, and the women’s vote were far more heated.

          • You’re absolutely right about that!!!!!! And thankfully, those got resolved!!

          • As will this one. I think everyone understands what the verdict will be – this is the time of wailing and ultimately of acceptance. When the verdict comes down, the whole issue will evaporate.

          • Let’s hope so…. because I’m sick and tired of hearing about it!!!!! This whole thing about gay marriage is old, tired news. And also this thing about racial prejudice when it comes to police dealing with black criminals and their feelings of being discriminated against…. duh… they’re dealing with CRIMINALS! Same stories, different people…

          • I read the article in the link you posted…. I seem to have missed the point he was trying to make. To me, it sounded more like “blah blah blah” but had no real direction or solution. Just words.

          • I thought the point was very obvious. We dismiss excessive destruction by rioting football fans – and a variety of other excesses – but think the world is caving in when we once again look at the effects of hundreds of years of racism.

          • I don’t get where we “dismiss excessive destruction”…. I’m INFURIATED with the rioting in response to anything that has to do with someone who’s black and commits a crime suffers at the hands of the law because they refuse to comply with “stop” or “freeze!” Guilty is guilty, no matter WHAT the color of your skin is.

          • You have the right to not be unlawfully searched or detained. It seems that the police in that city were pretty free and easy with what that means.

          • He was caught red handed! If the police can’t “search or detain” someone who breaks the law, why do we even have the police around??

          • Freddie Gray was apprehended for no legal reason that has yet been revealed. At the time he was apprehended they did not know his name even. The fact that he ran from them is not exactly surprising considering the horrendous record that has been recorded of Baltimore police brutality.

          • Similarly we get overheated about extraneous and rather irrelevant things – totally out of proportion to their importance in proper resolution.

  12. Isn’t the real problem legal responsibility and acceptance. Aren’t people just looking for ‘divine” acceptance of the means by which they get sexual pleasure. There is a passage in the Bible that says not to masturbate, “man shall not spill his seed upon the ground”. Why isn’t anyone contesting that one. There are a lot of things in Leviticus that we are told not to do, but nobody mentions them. It doesn’t say that homosexuality is the worse proscription, it’s just one of many which are conveniently bypassed. Maybe instead of marriage we should use the phrase, spiritual union. That doesn’t sound so bad. Maybe it sounds even better than marriage. The fact that people seem to get nuts about words is what keeps lawyers rich. If people were honorable and decent, lawyers would be unnecessary.

  13. It is all according to how many Homosexuals and Lesbian are on the Supreme Court if this passes or not.Our Government has gotten pretty CORRUPT and MORALS of an Ally Cat sense this regime windled there way in OUR WHITE HOUSE.I Don’t trust them any more either, they can be bought.NOT WHAT IS USE TO BE.

    • Do you really believe that the justices rule on self interest ?

      • Why not? It’s pretty obvious that the President and the Congress do. But then again, doesn’t everyone? Think about it.

        • We have an adversarial political system. The justices are constrained to ruling only on the Constitution. Of course the politicians have self interest – it is based on the mandate for which they were elected. If they deviate from that, then they risk losing their jobs next election.

  14. If the SCOTUS scraps traditional marriage then this will be yet on more nail in America’s coffin. Problem is, there aren’t many more nails left to hammer in America’s coffin… and we are doing it to ourselves from within courtesy of the Democrats, Socialists, Communists, Fascists, Progressives, Liberals and Muslims that call themselves Americans.

    The left uses every one of these victories to build upon to achieve their end goal. Total control. But to do that they have to destroy all vestiges of morality which in America predominantly comes from the Bible so that means, Christianity has to go. It has to be silenced in any and all forms. In the end the only thing tolerated and legal will be what the Left tells you can be tolerated and legal. If the Left has its way, first the Christians will end up having to wear yellow Crosses on their clothing in public… and you know what will follow that. History already showed us how well that worked out for the Jews in Nazi Germany.

    About all that remains to see is if America goes down with a whimper or if those who believe in what our Founding Fathers built and fought for, will rise up as Thomas Jefferson predicted.

    “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

  15. Marcia Schweisthal

    • Washington’s Prayer for the United
    States of America appears on a plaque in St. Paul ’s chapel in New York City as
    well as at Pohick
    Church , Fairfax County , Virginia , where Washington was a vestryman from 1762
    to 1784
    •Almighty God
    • We make our earnest prayer that Thou wilt keep the United States in Thy
    Holy protection; and Thou wilt incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate
    a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government; and entertain a
    brotherly affection and love for one another and for their fellow Citizens of
    the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served
    in the Field

    And finally that Thou wilt most graciously be pleased to dispose us all
    to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity,
    humility, and pacific temper of mind which were the Characteristics of the
    Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without a humble imitation of whose
    example in these things we can never hope to be a happy nation. Grant our
    supplication, we beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

    •–George Washington
    We were protected by God from our enemies until we as a Nation turned from Him.
    Pornography, sexual immorality,which includes homosexuality, destruction of the nuclear family, abortion ( the shedding of innocent blood), usury, failure to rotate crops and let the ground lie fallow every 7th year, failure to forgive debt, dishonest scales, cheating employees of their rightful wages, failure to put God first in the Nation and personal lives, Adultry, covetousness, greed, lawlessness, slander, lying ( this includes poitical lies(, denying Jesus Christ as Savior (who said, “If I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto me”).
    About 50 years ago we started eliminating Jesus from our public and private agendas and replacing him in the Church with chili suppers, ball games, psychological garbage, and anything except what we needed to hear. Parents got greedier and replaced family life with gadgetry, cars, bigger houses they couldn’t afford (which were not homes). In more recent times, the government and certain segments of society began to neglect and revile our armed forces(especially our veterans) and law enforcement. “Greater love hath no man than he lay down his life for a friend”, “There is a time for war and a time for peace”.
    God has given us warnings and we have not listened or repented. ” If my people, which, are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”
    “NOW mine eyes shall be opened, and mine ears attent unto THE PRAYER THAT IS MADE IN THIS PLACE (see Washington’s prayer at St Paul’s Chapel, which is at Ground Zero in New York)”
    “For now have I chosen and sanctified this house, that MY NAME may be there forever: and MINE EYES and MINE HEART shall be there perpetually.”
    “And this house, (the church where Washington uttered his prayer for THIS COUNTRY) which is high shall be an astonishment to everyone that passeth by it; so that he shall say, why hath the Lord done this unto this land, and unto This House?”
    “And it shall be answered BECAUSE they forsook the Lord God of their fathers, which brought them forth out of (heathen lands) and laid hold on other gods, and worshiped them, and served them; THEREFORE HATH HE BROUGHT ALL THIS EVIL UPON THEM.”
    We all need to repent and turn from our sins as individuals and as a Nation or we will receive the Judgement that is due us, which also includes me.

  16. TeaParty Patriot

    No, it will not decide the issue once and for all. When the sodomites lose the issue they will just find another tack to pursue their evil agenda of trying to gain acceptance for their decadent lifestyle. The issue is not redefining marriage, the issue is queers being accepted as being a normal life choice. noot tolerated but accepted as an equal. Got news for them no matter what the law says they will never be equal to a God fearing Christian.

  17. “IF”…….There are any homosexuals/lesbians, on the Supreme Court…….**They must recuse themselves from this decision!** It would be the “Honorable” thing to do! Do Homosexuals, & Lesbians…….”HAVE HONOR”? ? ? ? ? ?………………….:o{{{{{{{

  18. SCOTUS is corrupt.

  19. Nothing the Supreme court does will decide the same sex marriage issue. God has already decided that issue and He has not changed his mind.

  20. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Liberal Justices Kennedy, and Roberts sided against the 10th amdt saying Same sex was ok.

  21. Marriage has been between a man and a woman since God put Adam & Eve in the Garden of Eden. No one,
    man or woman, Priest or Pope, Judge or Jury have authority to change it. No more than they can change the

    Commandment “Though shall not kill”

  22. Who says it’s wrong to ban gay marriage? Not these folks. Some perspectives to consider going way back in the history of civilization:

  23. SCOTUS is leaning towards immorality, they will pass gay marriage as law, they will next accept obama’s sharia law that worships a prophet for raping a 9 year old girl, thus making pedophilia legal,
    nice going SCOTUS.

    • Now don’t get your hopes up. Tell me – why is it that conservatrolls just love to fantasize about sexual organs and deviant behavior ?

  24. In the book, “The Naked Communist” by Cleon Skousen 1958, there is a list of 45 agenda items that the Soviet Union has been following to set up a socialist state in the United States.

    # 16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

    Nailed it! Now what in the world are we going to do about it? You don’t want to live in a socialist state do you?

  25. Who can cite whether Jesus’s Apostles did not sleep with another man. s. Homosexuality was prevalent and common throughout the Ancient World.

  26. disqus_e1rjNMkUay

    Redefining marriage, is an attempt to promote the crime of sodomy, that is equally as much a crime as it is, to partake in the disgusting act

    • It is more just a small step towards socialism. Communists of old were following tried and true

      In the book, “The Naked Communist” by Cleon Skousen 1958, there is a list of 45 agenda items that the Soviet Union has been following to set up a socialist state in the United States.

      # 16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

      The Democrats have adopted the entire list.

  27. Robyn A. Goldstein

    When a lawyer tells a client don’t trust our institutions as far as real justice is concerned, you know there’s a deep and troubling problem across the board.So why should we trust the supreme court to do the right thing. I mean really!

  28. Just keep in mind that’s how Rome was wiped out. Homo’s can’t produce and they should not be allowed to adopt kids. Kids are so mixed up today they don’t need to end up more mixed up.

  29. The Supreme Justices do not need to rule on the definition
    of marriage. Nature has already decided. The idea of marriage lays in the
    ability of the married couple to join their flesh into one being creating a new
    person, thus “marrying their flesh into one”.
    When gay people can perform this miracle then they can claim
    discrimination if they are denied the “right” to get married. God and
    nature are the culprits that deny them marriage not the United States

    “If Sue loves Joe and Tom loves Joe, Sue can marry Joe and
    Tom can’t. Why isn’t that a straight forward question of sexual
    discrimination”? Well Sue and Joe and Tom and the Justices need to read the
    above comment. If they aren’t complete idiots they will comprehend that they
    can’t accomplish the impossible and that Homosexual couples can’t either
    regardless of what the “Court” decides.

  30. Their decision is IMPOSSIBLE because there is no such thing as a gay “marriage”. Redefining won’t create it either.

    It is quite possible you are filled with MADNESS now!

  31. Marriage; God said ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN. That settles it.

  32. Marriage is and always has been a union of a man and a woman, nowhere in history will you find differently. If gays really want “equality” what you need to argue for is equal access to a “Civil Union”. A “civil union” would give you all the “perks” that married couples get as far as taxes and such goes. You will get equal opportunity to divorce lawyers as well, good luck with your endeavor’s. Just leave marriage alone, it’s not yours to have.

  33. Why even redefine the ‘word’ marriage.? From beginning of time, it was between ONE MAN ONE WOMAN. God did not create 6 people and say “take your pick”. If same sex people want to be united….IT IS STILL A CIVIL UNION!!! So call it that and still have joint benefits. No way will they ever ‘marry’ in church and ask God to bless their union!!!!! Purpose of Marriage between man and woman was to procreate. Fat chance same sex can do that. Even if they adopt….it’s not procreation. God created Marriage with Adam and Eve. Jesus sanctified the union of man and women at the Marriage Feast in Cana. From Father to Son….And GOD IS NEVER WRONG, NOT IS HIS SON….!!!!

  34. marriage is a religious union. not a government union. the government should not have a say. they cannot vote on anything but a civil union.

  35. Heb 13:8 “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.”

    Lev 26:18 “And after all this, if you do not obey Me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins. 19 I will break the pride of your power; I will make your heavens like iron and your earth like bronze. 20 And your strength shall be spent in vain; for your land shall not yield its produce, nor shall the trees of the land yield their fruit.” Shabbat shalom!

  36. Believers need to understand what is happening here, Satan and his demon army have an agenda:

  37. God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!

  38. Believers need to understand what is happening here, Satan and his demon army have an agenda: Shabbat shalom!

  39. It would be better for the Justices to decline on redefining marriage on the basis that this should be left up to the voters of each state instead of by the courts. However, it is also understood that the gay community wants marriage redefined to include multiple arrangements of marriage partners.

  40. They are not going to pass that …Crazy if they do

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *