Comments on: Gay Marriage In California – The Solution

By: http://www.passstylemusic.com/

http://www.passstylemusic.com/ — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:19:52 +0000

JÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¡ consegui liberaÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â§ÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â£o com a patroa, fiz o planejamento da preparaÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â§ÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â£o fÃƒÆ’Ã‚Âsica (mentira) e etÃƒÆ’Ã‚Âlica (verdade) e ainda nÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â£o responderam meu email!!!Estou comeÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â§ando a ficar preocupado…….

By: car insurance

car insurance — Sat, 04 Jun 2016 14:28:09 +0000

ALEXANDER WANG sie wirklich super sexy besonders wenn man das Outfit wirklich erhaben ist VerschleiÃƒÅ¸ ausgesetzt sind, ich Phantasie bin, habe ich gut kann sich vorstellen, auf dem Boden liegen, die Sohle des Pantoffel ruht auf der Brust, sehr spannend, dieses Modell werde ich Lassen Vergangenheit Schuh auf alle

By: Michelle Lasch

Michelle Lasch — Sun, 31 May 2009 17:28:24 +0000

You may be right… we have already lost.

By: bobby

bobby — Sun, 31 May 2009 06:28:27 +0000

Kevin – The post you sent? Nah. Did you leave a comment before? If so I didn’t get it.
And Michelle – you know I love you right back. Good thing we can love each other without always agreeing.
I like what you said at the end. Yes, Jesus did leave us His church. That’s why we should be concerned about what is happening in the church more than in the culture. The reality is we live in a post-Christian society. The church is no longer the center of society and our views don’t hold the weight in the secular arena that they once did.
Why go to father for an example? The point I’m making is we’ve already lost that battle with marriage. Yes. It is an important metaphor. And it’s not damaged any more in my opinion by people of the same sex being married than by a male and female living in total opposition to God. I reiterate, I just don’t know that we can really reclaim marriage if the state is the one defining it, and the church doesn’t have the right to define it for the state and those outside our faith.
Of course, it’s all just interesting conversation cause I’m pretty sure this would be a bit too radical a move for anyone to go through with anyway.

By: Kevin Marchessault

Kevin Marchessault — Sun, 31 May 2009 03:29:30 +0000

Dude, did you get the post I sent?

By: Michelle Lasch

Michelle Lasch — Sun, 31 May 2009 01:14:37 +0000

O.K., first of all, let me say you know I love ya, Bobby. But… you are guilty of what Thomas Sowell calls “First Stage Thinking.” It’s the tendency to come up with what sounds like a great idea, without the… “and then what?” part.
Well here’s the “and then what” part. If churches begin defining marriage, the Lutherans, the Episcopalians, the Methodists, and the Presbyterians define it as between two people, whatever their sex. So you have now just lost the debate. It is ended and gay marriage is instituted. Marriage as we know it is dead.
The problem you are missing is that this isn’t about rights or compassion or even love. It’s about one simple thing, the definition of a single word, the Webster’s Dictionary #1 definition. They want to change it. If it was about rights or compassion or love, those are already addressed with our current civil unions. As you can see, that is not good enough. They want the word.
Why is the word so important? Well, I offer it’s because it is a spiritual battle. satan has tried to counterfeit what God has created since the very beginning. He knows the importance of marriage, as you do. He knows God created it to be a picture of His love for us. He knows marriage is one of God’s most important metaphors. That’s why he want it. If he can steal marriage, he can hurt one of the ways God communicates His love to us.
Want an example? Look at “father” as a word satan has worked hard to destroy. God wants us to see Him as a father, yet satan has destroyed families to the point that most kids today grow up without a father or with a horrible example of one. How many people do you know that have trouble relating to God as their father, when their personal image of the word “father” is so warped.
If it was as simple as you make it, we could just create a different word for each situation: Garriage (gay marriage); Sarriage (marriage to a sibling); Parriage (polygamous marriage); Darriage (marriage to your dog); Tarriage (marriage between three people). Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. This is a spiritual war.
Is the church fighting it correctly? Probably not. After all, the church is made up of hugely fallible humans and ever since Jesus left the church in our hands, we have screwed it up. But that doesn’t excuse us from prayerfully trying to do what’s right. And Jesus DID leave the church in our hands. He must want us to humbly and prayerfully lead this thing, otherwise, He could have stayed and run it Himself!

By: Sarah

Sarah — Fri, 29 May 2009 19:13:05 +0000

I like it Bobby! I agree and have been saying for a long time that perhaps the solution is to create a separate but equal (as far as taxes, laws, rights, ect) word and process for gay marraige. I believe the government should not be involved in the situation that clearly belongs to the Church and those who are a part of it so I totally agree…weird…I am a Raiders fan and still agree with something you said!

By: Cole Hegwood

Cole Hegwood — Fri, 29 May 2009 06:53:45 +0000

that is a fantastic idea!

By: Ryan Lipert

Ryan Lipert — Fri, 29 May 2009 01:53:17 +0000

Couldnt have said it better myself. Oh wait… I did.