lsanderson: (Default)
[personal profile] lsanderson
"Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman," Bush said in a statement. "If activist judges insist on re-defining marriage by court order, the only alternative will be the constitutional process. We must do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage."

Isn't the US Government profane by definition? I don't see how the government can make anything sacred. I'd swear only a religious institution can do that.

Some where in Texas, a village is missing its idiot. Let's send him back.

Date: 2004-02-05 01:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] saltygoodness.livejournal.com
Yeah, I seriously want to know who a marriage between two people hurts...
Somebody on the radio this morning was saying it would be nightmare for insurance companies (who are evil anyway) and for employers...I was sitting there thinking, "Any company worth working for already offers domestic partner benefits..." It's all so frustrating!

Date: 2004-02-05 01:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] scottscidmore.livejournal.com
Maybe they don't want him back. Maybe send him to Iraq...


What would happen if there was a religion that only allowed marriage between same sex couples, would not such a Constitutional Amendment be going against freedom of religion? Perhaps time for all the US homosexuals to stop trying to be Christians or Jews, seeing as the Bible does strongly forbid their behavior, and start a religion based on a new revelation.

Date: 2004-02-05 01:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] supergee.livejournal.com
You silly person, you think the First Amendment means what it says about religion. I'll bet you think it makes no sense to speak of "desecrating" the flag.

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 01:59 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] supergee.livejournal.com
Actually, there is a good deal of controversy over whether the Bible strongly forbids their behavior. At a hearing on same-sex marriage in Vermont, a Methodist preacher announced that he would enumerate everything Jesus said against homosexuality, and then remained silent.

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 02:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lsanderson.livejournal.com
I'm not sure how you desecrate cloth..

I'm dumping Dayton over his new-found religion of the flag.

Date: 2004-02-05 03:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] skylarker.livejournal.com
I think some people are just stuck in a primitive mind-set. Marriage evolved as a contract between males and females because it was all about having children and rearing families. But how long has it been since people have made more of it than that?

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 03:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lsanderson.livejournal.com
My issue is with the language. Government cannot sanctify crap. The US government is a profane institution, constitutionally devoid of religious powers.

The GOP has become a master at twisting language so that it apeals to people at a less than intellectual level. Bush is doing that here. That's the major crime. What he states is gibberish, unless you grant the government religious rights, which I don't.

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 03:34 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lsanderson.livejournal.com
It's not hard to start a religion...

Date: 2004-02-05 03:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] minnehaha.livejournal.com
And it's such blatent meaningless pandering. He knows that a constitutional amendment will go nowhere. But if he says this stuff, the religious right stays happy.

B

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 03:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lsanderson.livejournal.com
I'm not so certain that they could not pass such an ammendment. Granted, it would take a long span of days, and may fail.

Date: 2004-02-05 04:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cakmpls.livejournal.com
You're exactly right. Bush shoots down his own argument by saying that marriage should be defended because it is a "sacred" institution. The government has no business legislating sacredness.

Date: 2004-02-05 05:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] shsilver.livejournal.com
Of course, it is important to protect the sanctity of marriage, like Neil Bush did. Bush's father also apparently had an affair, but it was hushed up, and earlier in his [p]residency, Bush was sued by a woman in Texas for raping her.

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 05:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] marahsk.livejournal.com
Who was sued for rape, Neil, Bush Sr., or Shrub?

Bush Sr. had an affair?! The only reason this shocks me is that I can't imagine anyone wanting him.

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 06:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] shsilver.livejournal.com
Shrub.

He was accused by a woman named Margie Schoedinger, who filed a lawsuit against him on 2 December 2002. On 22 September 2003, she was found dead of a gunshot wound to the head, labelled (surprise) a suicide.

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 06:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] shsilver.livejournal.com
The actual law suit is here

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 06:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lsanderson.livejournal.com
Good companies do that? WoW!

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 06:49 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] saltygoodness.livejournal.com
Yeah, I refuse to work for companies that don't off domestic partners benefits...a lot do out of fear of being sued

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 08:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davidschroth.livejournal.com
I believe my company offers domestic partner benefits, and they're not even considered that good of a company...

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 08:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davidschroth.livejournal.com
Sure, just change your name to L. Ron Sanderson, and you're well on your way...

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 08:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lsanderson.livejournal.com
Mine does not.

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 08:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] scottscidmore.livejournal.com
It's all in the OT, not the NT. Leviticus 20, full of offenses with death as punishment. A number of moderate Christians seem to feel that Jesus set aside the laws regarding unclean or simply proscribed practices, but not those more severe ones that had death as their punishment and thus homosexuality, bestiality, and incest are still forbidden.

There's a list of Biblical death penalty activities at
http://www.islaminfo.com/articleview.asp?level=17&catID=1

so remember not to work on the Sabbath.

(why if an animal is a beast is the spelling bestiality ?)

Re:

Date: 2004-02-05 10:37 pm (UTC)

Re:

Date: 2004-02-06 03:25 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] shelleybear.livejournal.com
"Schoedinger's Pussy"
NOW I'm worried!

Re:

Date: 2004-02-06 05:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] marahsk.livejournal.com
Wow. Words fail me. These are the people who wanted to impeach Clinton because of a consensual affair.

Re:

Date: 2004-02-06 10:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] magentamn.livejournal.com
Actually, a number of Neo-Pagan religions endorse and perform same sex marriages, as do Unitarians. Of course, they aren't legal as marriages, but that's because the government endorses certain religions over other religions.

Profile

lsanderson: (Default)
lsanderson

February 2026

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 91011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 10th, 2026 02:07 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios