Thread: A Fuzzy Thread
View Single Post
  #52 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2009, 02:10 PM
cobra de capell cobra de capell is offline
Banned
Visit my Photo Gallery

 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Middle Of Nowhere, USA
Cobra Make, Engine: ERA 428 FE 4-speed CR "TL" heavy spline
Posts: 3,907
Not Ranked     
Default

Well, they are sodomits, right?

Besides, the introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead inexorably to polygamy and other alternatives to one-man, one-woman unions. Because there is no place to stop once that Rubicon has been crossed. Historically, the definition of marriage has rested on a bedrock of tradition, legal precedent, theology and the overwhelming support of the people.

After the introduction of marriage between homosexuals, however, it will be supported by nothing more substantial than the opinion of a single judge or by a black-robed panel of justices. After they have done their wretched work, the family will consist of little more than someone's interpretation of "rights."

Perhaps most important, the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be severely curtailed. The family has been God's primary vehicle for evangelism since the beginning.

The biggest secular danger homosexual civil marriage presents is the enshrining into law the notion that sexual love, regardless of its fecundity, is the sole criterion for marriage. If the state must recognize a marriage of two men simply because they love one another, upon what basis can it deny marital recognition to a group of two men and three women, for example, or a sterile brother and sister who claim to love each other? Homosexual activists protest that they only want all couples treated equally. But why is sexual love between two people more worthy of state sanction than love between three, or five? When the purpose of marriage is procreation, the answer is obvious. If sexual love becomes the primary purpose, the restriction of marriage to couples loses its logical basis, leading to marital chaos.

The gay marriage movement must be stopped.
Reply With Quote