Don't give a hoot about  the supposed "rights" of Same-Sex couples. 

   The ad is not a characterization of American Law in any context.

/

  Now,  an Amendment to the Constitution to ensure marriage as a legal condition between man and woman,  would be just fine.

    [Oh,  I'm sorry!  Did I write something that was not Politically Correct?  Darn.]

 

/

All same sex marriage will do is increase the income of Divorce Lawyers. 

Geoff
Who figures enough said. 

I'm LDS.  I attend my meetings, hold a temple recommend, and subscribe wholly to the doctrines of the church.

When Utah had on Referendum the state constitutional amendment that would "define" marriage as solely between a man and a woman, I voted against it.  I know I'm in the minority but I stand by my decision.

I know that the family's under attack these days.  Lazy and hedonistic men will impregnate and evade, never taking responsibility for the rearing of their own offspring.  Cultural movements are pushing to deemphasis the two parent home model.

But you can't protect the family with government.  The government is inherently corrupt and has recently proven a massive inclination to capitulate to the whining of evil people.  By setting a precedent that legislature, votes, and courts can dictate the nature of something as sacred and as eternal as family, we open the door for corrupt and evil people to attack the family with total impunity from behind the protection of fancy badges, legal documents, and popular vote.

I have a duty to protect the family -- and most importantly, MY family -- from the evils of the world.  In order to do so, I want the state uninvolved with the anatomy and structure of my family.  No twisted bureaucrat is going to tell me how we live.

And whoever made that ad is a douchebag just looking for a fight.

I was in town when the Mormon mothers spoke up in opposition to "Prop 8."

The ad said one thing that was correct.  Members of the church donated money.  Not The Church.  There is a difference there.
That being said... I am against discrimination.  I also don't believe the goverment has a right to interfere with personal relationships.

Why you're my hero, Ogre.

The guys that made that ad.  I'd like to shake their hands and congradulate them on exercising their first amendment rights.  And then I'd kick them square in the balls. 

I never saw a man lifted three feet into the air by their crotch before.  Try to catch it on video.   

Neither the Church(es) nor the State should influence each other.

A legal civil union under government auspices is not the same as forcing a Church to acknowledge X marriage.

In my case, I, a Roman Catholic, have a lifelong relationship with a woman who had been divorced in the Mormon Church.

If I truly gave more than two fecal pellets about what the Vatican says about my everlasting union with her, then no marriage would be allowed to be legal.  But the Church is not law.  The Church can also kiss my hairy, pimpled white butt saying that I'm committing a sin for loving a woman who was dumped by a microcephalic, abusive sleeze.

Yes, steven, your logic is flawed. The issue they are looking at is legal marriage, not religious marriage. Churches won't be sued for refusing to marry same-sex couples because in the eyes of the law, the ceremony at the church is not legally binding. Couples still need a Marriage License from the government to be legally married.

Not necessarily true, most if not all marriages preformed at any denomination are legally binding. The churches are granted licenses from the state to preform a legal marriage. If a church then refuses to preform a same sex marriage, and the couple pursues it legally the government could potentially revoke the license for that church

Not necessarily true, most if not all marriages preformed at any denomination are legally binding. The churches are granted licenses from the state to preform a legal marriage. If a church then refuses to preform a same sex marriage, and the couple pursues it legally the government could potentially revoke the license for that church

I think this is the main worry of my Church, the LDS church.

Medikman, thanks for the info. I stand [sorta] corrected. Steven, the only other thing I can see that would protect churches from lawsuit is the separation of church and state. They can't tell people what they can or cannot believe, and most major faiths do not allow same-sex marriage as part of their dogma.

I think this is the main worry of my Church, the LDS church.

It's not a worry.  They will say no, and if a legal battle comes of it - they'll fight it.  That and any same sex couple that comes forward asking it, will be kicked out of the church.

Is that how the BATFE operates?

I think the Ad is flawed because those gentlemen identified themselves as members of LDS Church and not as government employees.  EVERYBODY knows about the separation of church and state.

In legal terms is a civil-union not the same thing as a marriage?  Or do the gays just want to be called Mr. and Mr.? 

Bingo, Nolo. Thats proper libertarian thinking. Keep the gummint out of my business, the LDS business, the gays' business, the gun owners' business, and everyone else's business.

   

Neither the Church(es) nor the State should influence each other.----Doug Wojtowicz

     Strange point Doug.  That would deprive  many Americans of their political rights,  and a representative government of its power to govern.

/