Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jpmac who wrote (4907)	9/23/1998 1:11:00 AM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Respond to of 67261

Gays are not free to co-opt the institution of Marriage, which is a covenant between a man and a woman. It is human biology which supports the male/female relationship designed to propogate the species, and the institution of marriage is for those who abide by the laws of nature, as found in the biological differences between the male and the female in the human species. Not for gays. I'm not apologetic about this: you'll have to settle for a "commitment ceremony" or something other than marriage. This continual clamor from the gay community for same-sex "marriages" is simply an indication of the desire of gays to force churches to change their views on homosexuality.

To: jpmac who wrote (4907)	9/23/1998 1:28:00 AM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

something for you to think about re your erroneous statement of >If you believe that your God sanction's only male/female marriages, that's fine, but don't presume to make that a rule for me, or suggest that I am co-opting an institution that is free to all who choose it, regardless of the feelings of others.<: The State, from a popular religous tradition which transcends the ages and supports a biological imperative, sanctions marriages, which is defined as a covenant between a male and female. It is not, as you suggest, "freely available to all who choose it." The government issues lots of things which are definitely not "freely available to all who choose it": I can't get cash AFDC payments from the government, because I don't qualify: I don't have a Dependent Child. My car doesn't qualify, and neither does my house, even though both of those things take money to support. The bottom line is, at least some gays want to co-opt and change the definition of marriage, in order to exact some kind of social statement that is contrary to the teachings of this country's dominant religion, Christianity. It's as simple as that.