Kentucky Woman Sues Kim Davis for Denying License to ‘Marry’ Animal

Davis-compressedFRANKFORT, Ky. — A Kentucky woman has filed a lawsuit against county clerk Kim Davis after she was denied a license to “marry” an animal.

According to local television station WDRB-TV, Elizabeth Ording, 27, is additionally suing Gov. Matt Bevin and Attorney General Andy Beshear over the matter.

She asserted that a “marriage to an animal wouldn’t be that different than same-sex marriage,” the outlet writes. “Ording says the county attorney told her she could have a wedding, but the state wouldn’t recognize the marriage.”

The case, Ording v. Davis, et al, is docketed online and has been assigned to Judge Henry Wilhoit in the Eastern District Court of Kentucky.

Earlier this month, Mark “Chris” Sevier of Vanderbilt Law School filed a suit against Davis for being denied a license to “marry” his laptop computer. He has filed similar suits in Texas and Florida in an effort to show that same-sex nuptials is just as legitimate as tying the knot with an object.

“This lawsuit is frivolous,” Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, said in a statement. “There is obviously no right for a man to marry a machine. When you make gender irrelevant to a gender-based relationship you open Pandora’s box and make a mockery out of marriage.”

As previously reported, Davis had been in national headlines last year after she declined to issue same-sex “marriage” licenses as long as her name was on the documents. Davis, who attends a Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal assembly, said that she would do so if her name was removed from the licenses.

  • Connect with Christian News

Her refusal soon went to court via a lawsuit led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and in September, U.S. District Judge David Bunning ordered that Davis issue the licenses despite her religious identity. As she continued to refuse to issue the licenses without the accommodation, Bunning ordered that Davis be placed behind bars until she was willing to comply. In the meantime, the judge arranged for a deputy clerk to sign the licenses in her absence.

Davis was released from the Carter County Jail five days later after her attorneys filed an appeal of the contempt order, and also because Bunning was satisfied that her deputy clerks were providing the licenses instead. He stipulated her release on the condition that she not interfere with her deputies.

By the end of the year, new Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin issued an executive order for the Department for Libraries and Archives to release new licenses that do not cite the county or the name of the county clerk. Months later, the state legislature passed a law altering the licenses similar to Bevin’s order.

Davis consequently discontinued her legal proceedings as her request for accommodation was considered to be accomplished.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Reason2012

    Allow one perverse, unconstitutional redefinition of the religious institution of marriage, there’s NO basis to NOT allow them ALL.

    • Jalapeno

      Every restriction we have has a reason. We have restrictions on being able to legally consent, restrictions on family members and restrictions on only being able to have one marriage.

      None of those are based on religious reasons or morality.

      The same cannot be said for gender restrictions.

      • Reason2012

        So you’re not for “marriage equality for all”. Thank you for unwittingly admitting it’s a lie that you’re for “marriage equality”.

        And thank you for unwittingly admitting marriage IS about pro-creation, as that’s the ONLY reason to deny marriage between adult family members.

        Yes, gender restriction is also based on generic pro-creation issues, immorality and religious reasons, even though you claim it’s NOT religious reasons, NOT morality.

        Meanwhile welcome to becoming, as you activists like to put it, a bigot who denies others marriage equality.

        • Jalapeno

          “as that’s the ONLY reason to deny marriage between adult family members.

          Not at all. Remember…the protections for procreation are completely separate from the protections for marriage. Trying to keep incestual pregnancies by limiting marriage wouldn’t even make the slightest bit of sense.

          Estate laws and similar financial benefits / protections wouldn’t work if we allowed it to be combined with protections for marriage.

          • Reason2012

            // Trying to keep incestual pregnancies by limiting marriage wouldn’t
            // even make the slightest bit of sense.

            And yet you are against incest marriages. That makes you against marriage equality and a bigot, using your logic of course.

          • Jalapeno

            It doesn’t mean that at all.

            When people were fighting for ‘marriage equality’, they were fighting to remove the gender restrictions that didn’t have any legal basis. It doesn’t mean that they wanted to remove all restrictions that had ACTUAL reasons.

        • axelbeingcivil

          Alright, so, if your argument is correct that marriage is about procreation, what basis do you have for denying them to incestuous couples? They can, after all, procreate.

          Furthermore, would you be in favour of the dissolving of marriages under the following circumstances:

          -Where one or both partners are infertile
          -All marriages where the female partner is post-menopausal (i.e. pretty much every marriage where the woman is above the age of 50).

          -Where the couple have chosen not to have children (this would, naturally, include all marriages where children were adopted since that isn’t procreation; likewise for artificial insemination or children from a previous marriage).

          Because if marriage is about procreation, all those things are automatic disqualifiers. If you allow any couple under those circumstances to get married, you’re breaking your own rule.

          Of course, this also makes adoption difficult because, if marriage is about procreation, adoption doesn’t count. If adoption DOES count, you have no reason to deny homosexuals who adopt the right to marry.

      • Amos Moses

        “None of those are based on religious reasons or morality.

        The same cannot be said for gender restrictions.”

        Yes they are ………. and yes you can ……..

        • Jalapeno

          What actual reason is there for gender restriction?

    • [email protected]

      first of all marriage is not only a religious institution, rather it is also a civil institution. religious groups can define marriage for themselves in keeping with their beliefs, and at the same time there exists a separate civil definition of marriage in the law. this is why a church can have a more restrictive view of re-marriage then the state.

      secondly there are indeed reasons to keep other restrictions on marriage in place and removing one does not mean that they all must go. the restriction to only heterosexual couples was found to be unjustified and so it was removed and that is the extent of the impact of doing that, other restrictions remain in place and remain justified. you would have to show how other restrictions are unjustified to get them removed, simply saying that gay couples can marry does nothing for the case to marry an animal or object.

      • Reason2012

        // first of all marriage is not only a religious institution, rather it is also a civil institution. //

        No, the marriage license only dealt with legal aspects of marriage after the fact – it was never what defined marriage to begin with. Marriage existed long before any governments ever did.

        // religious groups can define marriage for themselves in keeping with
        // their beliefs,

        Please cite the religion that has marriage defined as two men or two women.

        // and at the same time there exists a separate civil definition of
        // marriage in the law.

        Except when Christian bakers say they only do Christian weddings, then activists pretend it’s the same thing. But then when convenient, act like there’s more than one type of marriage. Others notice the dishonesty and doubletalk.

        // this is why a church can have a more restrictive view of re-marriage
        // then the state.

        Except we’re not talking about RE-marriage.

        // secondly there are indeed reasons to keep other restrictions
        // on marriage in place and removing one does not mean that they
        // all must go.

        More hypocrisy. All this time they lie and claim to be for “marriage equality” while having reasons to deny marriage being also redefined to include other people’s perverse desires.

        All this time they claim Christians are hateful bigots for denying “marriage equality” while then being hateful bigots to deny others that right as well.

        And America notices that lie from the LGBT activists.

        // the restriction to only heterosexual couples was found to be unjustified

        When it’s God that defined marriage, not the government, it’s completely justified.
        When the generic function of a marriage in general is that most can pro-create and raise biological families, it’s completely justified.

        So why do you hate those adults who love another adult family member and want to marry them? And therein is the hypocrisy and dishonesty of same-gender marriage activists exposed.

        And if a person loves their pet and the pet loves them, who are YOU to deny them. “How does it affect YOU?!!” (another favorite lie of activists).

        America is waking up to how activists are using “equality” and other lies to force their own agenda on the rest of us, treating everyone else as criminals if they don’t bow down to the perversions. Now we have men walking into bathrooms and locker rooms with women and girls – so much for “wanting to be left alone”.

        • [email protected]

          simply false, marriage does not belong to religion nor is it bound by religious definitions. civil marriage is not just the legal recognition of a religious marriage and this is why it is possible to get married with 0 religious involvement or blessing. marriage can have a religious component but it does not have to. several christian denominations have decided to bless same sex unions as marriage so yes, it is recognized by some religious groups as valid, but again that fact has no bearing on its legal status as valid under the law. in the case of the bakers they can not say that they only do christian weddings unless they are a religious institute, not a public business. a public business needs to follow non-discrimination laws and those will go by what the law says marriage is, not a personal or religious definition of marriage.

          supporting “marriage equality” does not mean supporting the right of anyone to marry anyone or anything, rather it means supporting treating equal couples equally. the argument is that gay and heterosexual couples are equal and so they must be treated equally and both given marriage. that in no way then means that marriage must be opened up for anything.

          • Sharon_at_home

            So if the bakery was affiliated with a ‘religious institution’ the lawsuit would not have been won by the gay couple? Or does it have to be it’s ‘own’ religious institution?

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Ms. Kim Davis is being singled out and targeted for bullying by evil ones. Elizabeth Ording is committing animal abuses. Although it’s true that “‘marriage’ to an animal wouldn’t be that different than same-sex ‘marriage’,” animals have a right to refuse to associate with mentally ill humans who’d abuse them with a falsehood. (Read Romans ch. 1 and 8)

    • sangrita

      Marriage to an animal wouldn’t be that different than same-sex marriage?
      Can you explain what you’re talking about?

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        Read Romans ch.1. It’s all defilement of both mind and body. God’s design and will for human marriage is between one man and one woman, and sexual intimacy only within that marriage. (Genesis ch.1, Romans ch.1, Hebrews ch.13) All other forms do not differ much in that those are all sins. Polygamy( one man and multiple women) somewhat reduced human sufferings( such as starvation) in an illiterate, power-oriented, survival-scarce world of raw mankind, but God’s will is always the marriage between one man and one woman. If men and women have lust towards the same-sex members, they lust over a lot of different entities as well, practically boundlessly. That’s why Canaan was wiped out from the surface of the earth. ( Leviticus ch.18-20) Today’s De-christianized West and their mental-slave-like nations are the proof of moral collapse.

        • sangrita

          What are you talking about? Marriage to an animal, if legal would not be the same as marriage to someone if the same sex. Can I talk with an animal?
          Also marriage predates Christianity, so you don’t get to claim or define it anyway.
          And one more correction, men and women don’t have lust towards members of the same sex. What they can have is love. But more and more I am getting the feeling you do not know what that is.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Legality in Sodom means nothing. “Why should marriage partners be able to talk at all? Who are you to set up such a standard?” See? When people ignore God’s standard, there is no standard at all. Marriage does not predates Christianity. We are all Adam and Eve’s desdendants and Noah’s desdendants. The Jews just kept the best memories of mankind, as usual. Love is not marriage. One can apply lust over anything, but marriage is God’s holy institution for one man and one woman in the lifetime covenant.

            You are wrong on love. The LGBT people and their supporters are confused on romantic love with brotherhood, sisterhood, friendship, and loyalty. One can have romantic love on anything by simple pretence. In any case, no one must force falsehood( acknowledgment of same-sex “marriage”) on anyone. It is a crime against the truth and a human rights abuse, and that’s why today’s immoral Western notion is altogether wrong. The Western nations must stop being bored. Enough of atrocities by the rich pervs in the world.

          • sangrita

            “Why should marriage partners be able to talk at all?”

            Do you expect me to take this question seriously? You’re making marriage out to be everything except what it is, which is a partnership between two people. It wouldn’t be much of a marriage if people didn’t talk to each other. Where did you get the idea not talking was “God’s standard”?
            People don’t get married because of lust. They do it because they are in love. I was going to ask if you’re married but I guess I have my answer.
            You are VERY wrong when you say LGBT people are confused. They aren’t. They fall in love exactly the same as everyone else, and you can get your proof by asking them. And if that’s not good enough, ask their friends. And if THAT’s not good enough, listen to the mental health pros who have only been screaming at you about it for years.
            Same-sex marriage isn’t being forced on anyone. If you don’t want to marry someone of the same sex, don’t. But your church rules don’t extend beyond its walls.
            People have the right to believe you are wrong and to tell you, especially when you’re bashing homosexuals so hard with your bigotry.
            And your Bible doesn’t say ANYTHING like what you are insisting it says regarding homosexuality and same-sex marriage.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            So, this depraved individual is challenging the definition “a partnership between two people.” Who decided that definition? You? Your culture? The Western culture is throwing away Christian morality, and in such a world definitions of anything have no meaning. Follow God’s Word or nothing matters anymore. Marriage is between one man and one woman, defined by the Creator God. If you claim to fall in love with the same-sex member, people would fall in love with anything and everything in existence. The Western culture forces people to endorse same-sex marriage; that’s the current problem. Decades-long filthy drinking parties and nudism finally got their brain.

            Stop forcing dapraved immorality upon the world. Sin is sin and the fact cannot be changed. The secular West will have to ban most religions on earth especially the Holy Bible in order to pursuie its own immoral chaotic dystopia. People need Christian education to be moral and civilized. Telling a truth is not bigotry. You are the one who is confined in your own sexually immoral culture and forces submission to Sodomites because the powerful perv richs are funding your cause. No slavery to the Western pervs. Never again. You never read the Holy Bible and your claim is a lie. Read Genesis, Leviticus, Matthew, Romans, I Conrinthians, Jude, and Revelation, for example.

          • sangrita

            If the government sees marriage as a partnership between two people regardless of their gender, I’d say you’ve lost the battle, Grace. Who decided it? The courts did. And you have no choice but to abide by it. Or break the rules and be jailed, if you prefer.
            If by “Christian morality” you mean the kind of hatred towards homosexuals you keep pushing, then it’s quite correct that it be thrown away. It doesn’t sound anything like the Christianity I was raised with anyway. It sounds like hate.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Your government is wrong, Sangrita. Godless USA is going down today as a proof to the entire world. Everyone wanted to be like Americans decades ago, but no nation wants to be like USA today, knowing all the evils of greedy merchants and willful prostitutes. Becoming like USA means losing morality today. Your godly forefathers and foremothers were the only good thing USA had. I pity them that they had to work so hard only to preserve a shameful Sodom on earth which they never meant to work for. Telling the truth is a life-giving act of love. Stop hating the truth-telling Christians. You’ve been spoiled by the gentle Western Church, but the Sodomic authorities are harming children that no Christians should stay silent today no matter what the consequences are. I cannot bear the thought of submitting to perv wealthy Westerners again. You guys are normal only when you are Christian. Go back to the Holy Bible and regain lawfulness.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            P.S. Sorry I don’t use political correctness in my speech. I found that it never gets through to the core matter with secularists. Also, I really hate to see any Americans attacking Christianity for the love of their depravity. It’s like seeing spoiled bad kids trying to kill their own good parents who worked hard for them. Secular white Westerners need re-education on history. Too many liberal lies imposed within them. No species are so ungrateful to their own forefathers and ancestors, you know. I think today’s secular Westerners hate their own ancestors because they were all Christian-labeled. It’s utterly evil to repay the good with evil. It is also suicidal because no one respects those who bash their own parents and ancestors.

          • sangrita

            I don’t care how politically correct you are. It’s more important that you be correct, period. And you rarely are.
            It’s curious to me that when I say I have no issue with homosexuals falling in love and getting married, to you that constitutes an “attack on Christianity”. VERY dishonest of you. I won’t dignify your hateful language such as when you call it “depravity”.
            And my ancestors would be proud of me for taking this stand, not ashamed. And guess what – they were Christians. They just weren’t YOUR brand of Christian.
            If you are going to take it that personally then it is you who has the issue.
            My only interest in Christianity where homosexuals is concerned is when you try to suppress their human rights.
            I have no liberal lies. I merely point out your ultra-conservative lies.
            The Bible doesn’t say what you think it says on this subject. At all.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You haven’t read the Holy Bible, and you should. You are the one who is lying about reading it, though that’s a typical of most liberals. Being politically correct leads to lying; those who disrespect God would disrespect everyone and everything anyway. Political correctness is altogether vain because secularism dishonors God foremostly. The homosexuals are applying lust on human affections that must never involve sexuality, so they need Gospel-preaching and moral education by the truth for them to be saved and well. The Western culture indeed attacks Christianity by singling out the Christians for attacks. You have double standard against us. Read the news.

            Your ancestors are very ashamed of you that you uphold sexual immorality this century even to the point of persecuting the Christians. The Westerners of yesteryears were not baby-killers or sexual pervs or perv supporters. Read their letters and writings and records; stop imagining. Today’s secular West is a shameful prostitute and a betrayal to God and to the entire Christian West and to morality of all mankind. The LGBT people’s safety and certain rights( not marriage or access to children) should be granted, but no Sodomites have any rights to demand their sins to be acknowledged as anything normal. Such demand is a human rights abuse. You are too liberal to see any truth; your view is a product of Sodomic Western culture. Every culture contains deadly barbarism and needs a fix by the Christian Church to get civilized.

          • sangrita

            You don’t know me Grace and you don’t know what I have done. As it turns out yes I have read the Bible. It is what made me turn away from Christianity. You don’t know my ancestors either so you cannot speak on their behalf either.
            Homosexuals don’t lust, they love. Just like everyone else. And no amount of reading a

            holy book is going to change that.
            Again with the baby-killers, I don’t know why you say that, no one I know has ever killed a baby.
            Sodomites? You mean people who engage in anal sex, which includes many straight couples? You should choose your derogatory words more carefully.
            Being liberal ALLOWS me to see the truth.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            No, you never read the entire Bible. You only read Anti-christian gurus’ toxic trash for most of your life. Your ideology shows what you feed on. Homosexuality is a depraved lust, not love. If anyone truly loves anyone else, he’d let the person have truth and morality instead of abhorrent depraved immorality. Truth and love always go together. Sin has no love. That’s why “marriage” to self or children or animals or machines or buildings is also wrong and nothing of true love. Love of falsehood is the evil. Man must hate what is evil. The de-christianized Western culture’s eternal unconditional positivity for everything immoral actually brought an abyss upon the earth.

            True love between the same-sex member is expressed in brotherhood, sisterhood, friendship, and loyalty. Willingness to repentance can change anyone for good. “Repent,” “Sin no more,” Jesus said. You grew up in a culture where falsehood and human abuses are permissive; it can change. Not-opposing abortion is supporting the infanticide. “Sodomites” means anyone who practice or support any form of depraved sexual immorality. (Book of Jude ch.1) Being liberals means supporting blasphemies, infanticide, and sexual immorality. You need God’s Truth for salvation and right human conducts.

          • sangrita

            Please stop telling me what I have and haven’t read, you don’t know me. I’ve read the entire Bible, I was a Christian. I have no ideology. Homosexuality is a simple attraction to the same sex, it is NOT lust and certainly not depraved. And you don’t have a monopoly on truth just because you have a faith, so you’re not qualified to speak on that subject.
            True love between same-sex members is expressed in exactly the same way it is expressed between couples in opposite sex relationships. There is no difference. It is love and it is beautiful. And it is not sin, you’ll never convince anyone that it is, and there is nothing to repent. Your opinions are just those, opinions, and they are mired in narrow-mindedness, fear, hatred, thought control, and paranoia.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You do not remeber what the Holy Bible teaches; so it’s same as not-reading it at all. You were not Christian in your life, either. True Christians do not lose salvation or betray the Lord. You have ideology of filthy Western secularism. That’s what controls you. Let God’s truth be your master instead of the man-made dirty culture. The Creator God condemns homosexuality as something abhorrent and hell-deserving; therefore it is a sin. Homosexuality is a depravity and it is not love. You must read the Word of God and repent of your sin to get saved. Criminals say they did no wrong; but God says they are guilty. Homosexuals commit sins against their own bodies as all sexual immorality is that way. ( I Corinthians ch. 6) Suicide is wrong and so is homosexuality. Condoning homosexuality means denial of the existance of sin and that’s what Satan wants. The secular West and its mental servants must be ashamed of its nudism and homosexual inclinations. There is Judgment Day, Sangrita. Read the Word of God.

  • james blue

    This is an anti gay marriage woman abusing the court system to push her point. A self fulfilling prophecy

  • Michael C

    Anti-gay conservative Christians are attempting to force the “slippery slope” that they so adamantly insisted would take place. They’re intentionally trying to mock marriage because they feel that others have mocked marriage. They want to destroy marriage because they’re angry that people they don’t like are permitted to participate.

    What kind of sense does this make?

    • ComeOnPeople!

      Yes Yes Christians are pretending to be heathens and ask the courts to marry their dogs all to prove their slippery slope theory ahahaha . I have some land I want to sell you in Alaska if you believe that!

      • WorldGoneCrazy

        Maybe so, but my dog has that look in his eye that says “revolution!”

        • Guffman

          I’m a cat person.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            I’m for equal rights for dogs and cats, even though my dog can’t climb a tree and my cat won’t fetch a ball.

            Created equal but different. 🙂

          • Josey

            hahaha…me too…bwahahaha!

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            I thought you might like that, Josey. 🙂

        • Josey

          ahaha

        • ComeOnPeople!

          By the way I was being totally sarcastic .

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            And I was being totally silly. 🙂

          • ComeOnPeople!

            Yes I know but didn’t know if others knew I was only joking. I was poking fun but sometimes on these blogs people actually take sarcasm as agreeing with their crazy ideas about same sex relationships and gender confusion .

      • Michael C

        Mark Sevier openly admits that he’s only trying to sue the government for the “right” to marry his computer as some sort of argument against allowing gay couples to marry. He says he is a Christian. He is radically opposed to the governmental recognition of the marriages of gay couples. He doesn’t actually want to marry his computer. He’s just trying to make some sort of half-cocked point.

        I will readily admit that Sevier is not a “normal” Christian. What he and Ording are doing is truly bizarre.

        I am making the assumption that Ms. Ording is doing the same thing. I can’t find any information on an Elizabeth Ording, age 27, in the state of Kentucky.

        • Ambulance Chaser

          Hm, I see no responses to your excellent point. Naturally.

          • Oboehner

            Hm, I see no excellence or a point. Naturally. Troll on!

        • Reason2012

          You mean like Atheists who want to have a “prayer” to satan to open a government meeting? Suddenly this technique of making a point is “radical” when someone on the right uses it? Fascinating hypocrisy / double standard you have.

          And we’re talking about a person marrying their pet. If they love each other, and marriage supposedly has nothing to do with procreation or_sex, as same gender activists try to triumphantly claim, then what’s the reason for your, as activists put it, bigotry? What do you have against two living things loving each other wanting to get married?

          And what about two adults who are related wanting to get married? After all, it’s not about procreation or_sex, and they love each other? How do you justify your bigotry and denying marriage equality for all?

          Hence the same-gender marriage activists’ hypocrisy and lies exposed.

          • Michael C

            I see that you share the same thought process as Sevier.

            Unfortunately for the both of you, your assessment of the law is faulty.

          • Reason2012

            Unfortunately for you, you didn’t in any way prove my assessment was faulty. Feel free. You will not because you cannot. Thanks for proving my point.

          • Michael C

            you didn’t in any way prove my assessment was faulty.

            I didn’t have to. The courts do that for me when his clawsuits get thrown out.

          • Reason2012

            As I said, you will not prove my assessment is faulty, because you cannot.

            So “thrown out” is your answer? Lawsuits against same-gender marriage being denied were thrown out in the past as well, so it being “thrown out” proves nothing.

            Thank you again for proving my point.

          • Jo King

            > How do you justify your bigotry and denying marriage equality for all?

            Pretty much in the same way that traditionalists justify themselves. Gay marriage proponents do not support polyamory, incestuous or trans-species marriage anymore than traditionalists. That sort of makes SSM supporters and traditionalists more similar than different, right?

            Why is it so difficult to accept gay marriage, when it has a very, very narrow definition? All other prior tenents of marriage are still in place.

          • Reason2012

            // Gay marriage proponents do not support polyamory, incestuous
            // or trans-species marriage anymore than traditionalists.

            So using activists’ logic, that makes you a bigot, against marriage equality for all, and you do the very thing that you condemned Christians for doing. Behold the hypocrisy of the “homosexual” activists.

          • Jo King

            Stop with the “beholding” would you? you’ve not presented anything of merit yet.

            You are trying to lump gay marriage proponents and *-marriage proponents as one in the same. I JUST TOLD YOU that they have different goals.

            The fact that traditionalists and SSM supporters are much more closely aligned than opposed must be surprising, eh?

        • Reason2012

          Hey Michael, where were you when 50 LGBT people were slaughtered in Orlando? Defending islam / shariah law as the religion of peace?

          • Jo King

            What does the massacre have to do with the subject of this article? Whats with the strawman?

        • Oboehner

          Hey, if it worked for the fur-traders to sue the bakery out of existence to push their agenda…

          • sangrita

            “Fur-traders.”

            Classy guy.

          • Oboehner

            Fits.

          • sangrita

            How, are you a member of the Westboro Baptist Church? Can’t you just say lesbians?

          • Oboehner

            I can say many things such as emotionally and mentally challenged perverts.

          • sangrita

            Of course you can, which is why the majority of us don’t.

          • Oboehner

            Majority? Sure.

          • sangrita

            Yeah, most of us gave up the name calling after leaving junior high school.

        • JP

          She’s my friend’s ex girlfriend. She and Chris Sevier are together now.

      • Josey

        they are nuts

      • [email protected]

        that is exactly what is happening as stated by the people bringing the lawsuits. for example the guy suing to marry his laptop is a self proclaimed christian activists who is trying to argue agasint same sex marriage. these lawsuits are coming from people who do not like same sex marriage and becasue of that are trying to make the absurd argument that it is no different then marrying an animal or an object.

    • Amos Moses

      Not “anti-homosexual” ………… anti- LIE ……………… and not a “slippery slope” …… A CLIFF ……….

    • lorac odraned

      not so, no one is anti gay, just anti sin. Homosexuality is a sin. Marriage is a very sacred institution created by God between a man and a woman. His creation is perfect but godless men call God a liar to appease a minor, perverted and non-essential slice of humanism.

    • peanut butter

      Oh bullshit, you liberals are the ones trying to destroy the sanctity of marriage, not the conservatives. Always coming up with something stupid and then trying to blame it on the ones you are going against. I might be ugly, but I ain’t stupid!

      • sangrita

        People can fall in love with people of the same sex. It’s common, and those people are called homosexuals. We allow people to get married if they are straight, so why would we not allow it for homosexuals? What is being destroyed here exactly?

        • peanut butter

          Y’all are sick in the head. I don’t need to be questioned as to why YOU are nutty as a fruitcake. And fruity, too!!! Bwahahaha!!!

          • sangrita

            And here I was afraid you were going to say something stupid.

          • peanut butter

            And yet it s you who are still wrong.

          • sangrita

            Who are you trying to convince, you or me?

          • peanut butter

            Oh, I’m convinced… YOU are wrong.

          • sangrita

            Let me guess, you’re probably also “convinced” that the earth is 6000 years old, that evolution is a myth, and that Jesus rode a dinosaur?

          • peanut butter

            No, civilization has been on the earth for 6000 years, yes, evolution as far as the theory of Charles Darwin is a myth, and the last one is showing your atheist upbringing and just plain childishly silly.

          • sangrita

            Well then, I know everything about you that I need to know. I’ll be joining the sane people now, thanks.

          • peanut butter

            Good for you.

      • Jo King

        Not destroy, just change it and just one tenet at that. Otherwise, it is still the same…and it still leaves a host of other types unions on the outside looking in.

        • peanut butter

          That’s the way Marxism and Nazism works. Not buying that.

          • Jo King

            Enabling gay marriage equates to Marxism and Nazism?

            That’s a new one.

          • peanut butter

            Chiseling away at ‘just one tenet’ at a time. It never stops with one. Just like potato chips.

          • Jo King

            Except that personal rights were expanded, not contracted, with the SCOTUS decision last year. So that’s actually moving away from the type of rule you suggested.

          • peanut butter

            Glad you have an easy conscience about all of this. It looks good on you. You will go far.

          • Jo King

            …too kind, too kind.

            I hope you find that special grape jelly someday so that you can be complete. We should all be so lucky to enjoy the sandwich that is life.

    • D Sims

      We all have told you that this would happen. Open one door for a small group of people who practice their sexual preferences and it will open many more doors. Just hang on to your seat, it is only going to be worse.

      • sangrita

        Yes you told us this would happen. And when it didn’t, you started doing things like the person in this story to MAKE it happen. That’s a bad slippery slope argument. It’s never going to be legal for people to marry anything apart from other people. Read Michael C’s excellent post above.

  • Liberal Elitist

    “When you make gender irrelevant to a gender-based relationship you open Pandora’s box and make a mockery out of marriage.”

    Absolutely! Gender is relevant to both same-sex marriage and opposite-sex marriage.

  • Reason2012

    LGBT activists, like the ones that post here, actually hate the LGBT community. In Orlando when almost 50 LGBT were slaughtered by yet again someone following_islam / shariah law, these same activists said nothing to condemn the ideology of islam / shariah law but instead rushed to defend islam as the “religion of peace”.

    These activists are using LGBT people to attack Christianity and obviously hate them as much as they hate Christians. Once shariah law kicks in in America, you’ll see who gets targeted next. LGBT people are waking up to the lies of the LGBT activists.

    • axelbeingcivil

      Have you ever considered that carte blanche tarring if a billion or so people for the actions of one person, or even a few thousand people, might not be something everyone rushes to do after a tragedy?

      It’s why the whole rush to blame the mere existence of guns after every shooting is foolhardy as well. Big problems are complex things; they don’t arise ex nihilo. Nuance and appreciation of complexity should be universal, not only for pet issues.

    • [email protected]

      radical Islam very much is a threat and it needs to be addressed but that can happen without claiming that all Muslims are terrorists. as to your point if gay people did not have to spend as much time defending their rights from anti-gay christian activists then perhaps they would be able to spend more time fighting radical Islam and its opposition to gay rights. On the flip side though it is silly for Christians who are opposed to gay rights for criticizing gay people for not spending enough time being critical of Islam when A: those Christians could themselves be focusing on Islam and B they are the reason that the gay community has less time to advance gay rights internationally in Muslim nations.

      • Reason2012

        // radical Islam very much is a threat and it needs to be addressed
        // but that can happen

        It’s the ideology of islam / shariah law. And in 13 COUNTRIES, those into homosexual behavior are jailed and_killed. That’s not just “a few radicals”, that’s entire countries.

        // without claiming that all Muslims are terrorists.

        The ideology is terroristic: calling for the_killing of unbelievers, Christians and LGBT.

        // as to your point if gay people did not have to spend as much time
        // defending their rights from anti-gay christian activists

        No, my point is LGBT activists, not “gay people”. The activists are proving they hate LGBT, rush to defend islam / shariah law when 50 LGBT were_killed by the ideology of islam / shariah law, and say nothing about those_killed, except of course to blame Christians instead, just like you’ve done

        // then perhaps they would be able to spend more time fighting
        // radical Islam and its opposition to gay rights.

        In order to spend MORE time fighting islam / shariah law, you have to spend SOME time to begin with.

        By all means please cite any post by you within a day of the orlando attack condemning the ideology of islam / shariah law. Cite just ONE, unedited post.

        Interesting in your post even now you defend islam and attack Christianity instead, which proves my point.

        // On the flip side though it is silly for Christians who are opposed to
        // gay rights

        It’s not a “right” to hijack the religious institution of marriage and get the government to redefine it to be soemthing it never was.

        // for criticizing gay people for not spending enough time being
        // critical of Islam when

        Not “gay people” – LGBT activists who post their anti-Christian bigotry, defend islam / shariah law.

        // those Christians could themselves be focusing on Islam

        They do – I point out what I’ve said just now about islam / shariah law almost daily. You instead defend it, as typical LGBT activists who hates LGBT people as proven by this action.

        // and B they are the reason that the gay community has less time to
        // advance gay rights internationally in Muslim nations.

        You’re jailed and_killed in islamic nations that are hence ruled by shariah law – it’s the DEFINITION of shariah law. You don’t change it – you get_killed by those 13 countries following it. It’s that simple.

        When the islamic population gets high enough in a nation, shariah law takes over, and you know the rest.

        But keep defending islam / shariah law -it shows everyone else you only pretend to be an ally to LGBT but actually hate them.

        • [email protected]

          I know that in Islamic nations homosexuality is illegal and I oppose that and stand agasint it. I do not rush to defend shariah law nor do I support it or see it as a good thing or want it to be advanced. I am not defending Islam here. again here you are wanting the gay community to go after Islam in general when that is not the point. the point is to build support for gay rights to include changing religious beliefs on the subject. you argument again ignores that every ounce of attention that gets directed towards Christians by the gay community is 100% a result of anti-gay stances that are generating that response. the idea that I or we are okay with anti-gay positions or actions as long as they come from a Muslim is false.

    • sangrita

      No, LGBT “activists” do not hate the LGBT community. I’ve never heard anything so bizarre.

      • Reason2012

        It’s only bizarre because we think they ARE one of them. But when the goal is to attack Christianity, one way to do it is get people to pretend to champion LGBT rights.

        Yet when yet again someone following the ideology of islam / shariah law (something they hold DEAR along with their hate of Christianity) slaughtered 50 LGBT, what did they do? They said NOTHING to denounce the ideology of islam / shariah law that commands such things, that are also done in 13 COUNTRIES run by islam / shariah law (read: not just “a few radicals”), and didn’t have a word of outrage for the LGBT’s that were_killed. This behavior proves they hate the LGBT and use them as a pawn to attack Christianity.

        Other activists in these forums continue to do the same thing.

        • sangrita

          But the goal ISN’T to attack Christianity. Everything is cause and effect. If you don’t like the effect of homosexuals coming after you for bigotry, don’t be the cause, that is, don’t attack them based on what your religion teaches you. I guarantee you that if you would leave them alone to live their lives in peace, they wouldn’t take the slightest bit of interest in you.

          • Reason2012

            // But the goal ISN’T to attack Christianity. Everything is cause
            // and effect.

            Cause: 50 LGBT killed by someone following islam / shariah law
            Effect: LGBT activists rush to defend islam as the religion of peace, remain silent about the 50 LGBT killed, and continue to attack Christianity instead as if they’re the ones that_killed them, not the ideology of islam / shariah law.

            Cause: Leave the LGBT activists alone (because then they say they’ll leave you alone)
            Effect: LGBT activists go into all schools and indoctrinate EVERYONE ELSE’S 5 year and older kids and grandkids with images and ideas of homosexuality.
            Schools are forced to allow boys to walk into girls bathrooms and locker rooms.
            Businesses that have no problem serving those into homosexuality are now sued and tried as criminals if they do not now perform anti-Christian ACTS with their businesses, while islam / shariah law – following businesses are all but ignored.

            Even cause / effect exposes your kind to be an anti-LGBT anti-Christian bigot that only pretends to care for LGBT.

          • sangrita

            Omar Mateen was mentally unstable. He wasn’t “following Islam” which doesn’t instruct its followers to shoot up night clubs.
            Children in schools are being taught that homosexuals exist and hey can you please not kill them. You apparently have a problem with that.
            Everything else you posted smacks so badly of conspiracy theory I don’t even know where to begin to dissect it.
            I care about LGBT people in the sense that I think they should be allowed to be married. You don’t because your faith teaches you to hate them.

          • Sharon_at_home

            I’m sorry, but your last statement is wrong. Our faith teaches us to love everyone – and it should not matter what differences there are between the Christian and the LGBT community, we are to love them anyway. Our faith teaches us that God hates the sin, not the sinner, and we must follow that. The only thing that we, as Christians, are supposed to do is to try to discuss God and the bible with them to give them information about the difference between living a life following Christ, and living a life without Jesus.
            God will be the Judge of everyone in the end and He is the one that will look at each person’s heart to know what He needs to know. Humans can’t do that which is why we shouldn’t judge others (by the outward appearance) and should just do their Christian duty of turning people towards God and Jesus. The bible even states that if people don’t want to hear about it, they are supposed to leave them alone. If they are to follow Jesus it must be by their own free will.
            Unfortunately not all Christians follow the bible as closely as others do.
            Either way, who are we to judge when we are all sinners?
            If you want scripture references, I’ll be happy to post them.
            God bless!

  • robertzaccour

    Slippery slope…

    • Reason2012

      Just like these same slippery slope anti-Christians bigots will say “if you allow Christians at invocations, you must allow ALL” and then make a pretense at wanting to pray to satan.

    • Amos Moses

      CLIFF ………

      • sangrita

        No, slippery slope, it is a logic fail.

        • Amos Moses

          Nope ……….. CLIFF ………. and the homoagenda has jumped off it ………

          • sangrita

            I don’t know what “homoagenda” you are talking about, but homosexuals do perfectly all right as long as religious people don’t drive them to suicide.

          • Amos Moses

            Homosexuals will continue to die of self inflicted wounds ……….. even if every christian and every vestige of christianity is wiped out ……. because deep down ….. they still know they are wrong ….

          • sangrita

            Homosexuals don’t die of self inflicted wounds. They die exactly the same as everyone else.

          • Amos Moses

            “homosexuals do perfectly all right as long as religious people don’t drive them to suicide.”
            “Homosexuals don’t die of self inflicted wounds. ”

            What is suicide then ……………. how soon they forget their own words ……

          • sangrita

            I thought you were referring to AIDS or something when you said “self inflicted wounds”.
            If a homosexual is driven to ACTUAL suicide, it’s not because they “know they are wrong”, because they know they are NOT wrong.
            It’s because some religious person loaded them with a guilt trip and they believed it.

          • Amos Moses

            AIDS is a self inflicted wound ……… has nothing to do with christianity ……

            ” “know they are wrong”, because they know they are NOT wrong.”

            No …………… they lie to themselves …… and they know it is a lie ………… they are guilty because they know in their hearts they are wrong and lying to themselves ………..

          • sangrita

            AIDS has nothing to do with homosexuality, either, given the number of straight people who die from it.
            I’ve been best man at a gay wedding. It’s not a lie, these are people in love in exactly the same way as straight people. As any gay person will tell you. As any medical professional will also tell you.

          • Amos Moses

            “AIDS has nothing to do with homosexuality, either,”

            Yeah ……… just spread by them and the facts that the CDC bears out …….

            Regarding Homosexuality and health, of newly diagnosed HIV infections in the United States during the year 2003, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that about 63% were among men who were infected through sexual contact with other men.

            A 1997 CDC report found that among homosexuals who had unprotected anal intercourse and multiple sexual partners, 68 percent were entirely unaware of the HIV status of their partners.

            The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stated the following regarding syphilis in the United States: “While surveillance data are not available by risk behavior, a separate CDC analysis suggests that approximately 64 percent of all adult P&S syphilis cases in 2004 were among men who have sex with men, up from an estimated 5 percent in 1999….”

            The CDC reported the following regarding the United States and homosexuality: “CDC conducted sentinel surveillance in 28 cities and found the proportion of cases resistant to fluoroquinolone antibiotics (a first-line treatment for gonorrhea) increased from 4.1 percent in 2003 to 6.8 percent in 2004. Resistance is especially worrisome in men who have sex with men, where it was eight times higher than among heterosexuals (23.8 percent vs. 2.9 percent).”

            In 2006, The Medical Journal of Australia stated the following: “High rates of intestinal parasitism are found in MSM [men who have sex with men] throughout the world.”

            According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) both Hepatitis A and Hepatitis B disproportionately affects men who have sex with men (MSM).

            Lymphogranuloma venereum is a sexually transmitted disease that mainly infects the lymphatics. According to the recent medical literature, there have been recent outbreaks of lymphogranuloma venereum in Europe and North America and the outbreaks have been limited to the homosexual community.

            In June of 2004, the journal Nursing Clinics of North America reported: “One of the more pressing issues for gay men is anal carcinoma. Several recent studies have indicated the rate of anal dysplasia to be increasing in men with and without HIV. Ninety percent of men with HIV have the Human Papiloma Virus (HPV), while 65% of men without HIV have HPV. HPV type 16 is the most troublesome for developing cancer and is found in a significant portion of gay men.” (see also: Homosexuality and anal cancer).

            And far too many more to list ………….. but please ….. accept the delusion it does not ……

          • sangrita

            HIV is avoided by avoiding dirty needles and by safe sex. Those rules apply to everyone. You keep trying to put homosexuals in the crosshairs of your loving God in ways that are simply not the case. The issue is love, not disease. If you want to play that game, I can give you pretty ugly statistics right back.

          • Amos Moses

            Nothing safe about anal sex …………

          • sangrita

            Unless a condom is used.

          • Amos Moses

            Not even if …………

          • sangrita

            Yes. It greatly reduces risk. But I’m not sure your point since both homosexuals and heterosexuals engage in it.

          • Amos Moses

            It may reduce other STDs ….. but not cancer ………….. but nice try ……….. cancer is not an STD ……………. or did you not know that ………..

          • sangrita

            Anal cancer is caused most often by human papilloma virus which is an STD.
            Wearing condoms will reduce STDs and therefore anal cancer.
            See how it works?

          • Amos Moses

            “Seems” is the operative word …………… it is linked to HPV but so are fire departments linked to fires …….. one does not necessarily cause the other …………… HPV in the anus is an indicator of anal sex ………… not necessarily the cause ………….. see how that works ………

            Do we know what causes anal cancer? – American Cancer Society
            cancer org
            Jan 20, 2016 … The exact cause of anal cancer is not known, but most anal cancers seem to be linked to infection with the human papilloma virus (HPV).

          • sangrita

            Yes, and you will not contract HPV if you use protection. Get it?

          • Amos Moses

            “Yes, and you will not contract HPV if you use protection. Get it?”

            Because condoms are perfect ……………… WRONG …….. Get it? …… even SAYS SO on the package ……

            Because genital warts can be on parts of the genitals that are not covered by a condom, especially female condoms, HPV can be spread via skin-to-skin contact. What’s worse– there is no male STD test for HPV and many cases show no symptoms, so it is often passed on unknowingly to partners.

            Get it? ……………….

            Condoms and STDs – Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
            CDC ………..
            Condoms and STDs: Fact Sheet for Public Health Personnel. Consistent and correct use of male latex condoms can reduce (though not eliminate) the risk of …

            Condom Effectiveness | CDC
            CDC ……….
            Feb 19, 2016 … Using male condoms the right way, every time, can reduce (though not eliminate) the risk of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including …

            Get it? …………………………..

          • sangrita

            Sorry but no, just no.
            The people contracting HPV are not the people wearing condoms. They are the people not wearing them. Gay and straight alike.

          • Amos Moses

            And the SCIENCE says no …… and you are wrong ……

          • sangrita

            Nope, sorry. Science always wins. Hate always loses.

          • Amos Moses

            And i gave you the CDC and the American Cancer Society that says you are wrong so if you want to call them haters ….. or say they are not using science …… that is your business …………. but beyond that you are spreading lies ……..

          • sangrita

            The links you gave me are not wrong. I never said they were. You are using their information dishonestly though.
            Where does the CDC and American Cancer Society say for example that anal cancer is limited to homosexuals? Or that there are no monogamous homosexual relationships?
            You are tying in your bigotries to science in a dishonest way.

          • Amos Moses

            “You are using their information dishonestly though.”

            No …………. that would be you ………… HPV has shown no direct cause of anal cancer …… and you have nothing to show it does ………

          • sangrita

            From cancer dot org:

            “HPV is a group of more than 150 related viruses. They are called papilloma viruses because some of them cause papillomas, which are more commonly known as warts. There are many subtypes of HPV, but the one most likely to cause anal cancer is HPV-16.”

            Is cancer dot org an opinion site? No, I believe it’s a medical one.

          • Amos Moses

            and again ……………. no direct link between any of them and anal cancer …… which BTW, is not the same as colo-rectal cancer …………….

          • sangrita

            And again, “There are many subtypes of HPV, but the one most likely to cause anal cancer is HPV-16.” So if HPV-16 is the one most likely to cause anal cancer, then YES there is a direct link between them and anal cancer! It’s right there in print! from cancer dot org!

            What are you NOT GETTING here?

          • Amos Moses

            “What are you NOT GETTING here?”

            most likely ………….. but not proven ………. and again ……… condoms ……… NOT A BARRIER ….. and anal sex as a vector ………… the culprit ………..

            What are you NOT GETTING here?

          • sangrita

            So we have established that some people will still get anal cancer via anal sex, even with condom use. What we haven’t established is that those would all be homosexuals. You do understand that anal sex is practiced by straight couples as well?

          • Amos Moses

            So what? ………… does not make it any more right ………. and homosexuals ……….. predominately practice it ….. as there are no female genetalia involved …………..

          • sangrita

            Homosexuals do not prominently practice it. Half the homosexual population is lesbian for one thing. And many gay men don’t practice it.

          • Amos Moses

            sure ……….

          • ShemSilber

            Brother Amos, I like how you point people in the right direction, and that’s all we can do, point. What the hearers do with the witness is their choice, and it’s sad that wise words often fall on deaf ears. But there is joy in the heavens, as you know, if even one pays heed and turns to the Master to learn His Way, so please keep on pointing for those who will respond, in Yahushua’s (Jesus’) Name, omein.

          • Amos Moses

            Amen ……….

          • Amos Moses

            And you left out multiple partners of suppoesedly “monogamous homosexuals” ….

            Statistics on sexual promiscuity among homosexuals | homosexual …
            28% of homosexual men had more than 1000 partners: “Bell and Weinberg reported evidence of widespread sexual compulsion among homosexual men.

            The myth of male homosexual monogamy — ADvindicate
            Mar 21, 2013 … One homosexual writer admits that “trying to locate monogamy … of white male homosexuals had had sex with 500 or more partners, and …

            Gay Male Relationships are Inherently Unfaithful — Joseph Nicolosi …
            Today, with same-sex marriage being hotly debated, the promiscuous nature of … sexual behavior among gays as “an average several dozen partners a year” …

            How many sexual partners does the average homosexual man have …
            Sep 24, 2013 … Typically more than straight men, but that’s less because of the promiscuity of gay men than it is to do with the selectivity of females as a whole.

          • sangrita

            If they cheat, then they’re not monogamous. Pretty basic. And once again, not limited to homosexuals.

          • Amos Moses

            Agreed ….. not limited ………… but to be homosexual is to pretty much abandon any idea of order ……….. and despite the lies being told ….. they are by definition not monogamous ….

          • sangrita

            I know many monogamous homosexual couples.
            You can even look at Hollywood. George Takei and Lily Tomlin. Both have been with their partners for many years. I think the lies are all yours on this issue.

          • Amos Moses

            “I know many monogamous homosexual couples.”

            So what ………… that is a personal observation ………. may be a part of reality ……….. but it is not all of reality ……… and just because they seem that way ………… does not mean they are …… part of being against the order God established …… is to be against all of it …… and just like homomarriage is not marriage ………. homomonogamy is not monogamy and most homosexuals will admit it …………….

          • sangrita

            It only needs to be a part of reality to disprove your claim.
            And no homosexuals set out to be disobedient to God.
            They just fall in love, that’s all. Like everyone else does.

          • Amos Moses

            They do not set out to be disobedient ………….. they are from birth ………. as are we all ……… they fall in love with their chosen sin ………..

          • sangrita

            They are born to a sexual orientation not if their choosing.

          • Amos Moses

            There is no evidence that is so ………….. and sorry ……… “feelings” ARE NOT EVIDENCE ….. if you have a pathology for such nonsense ….. then present it ………… but there is none …… again ………….. “feelings” are not evidence ……….

          • sangrita

            There is a pile of evidence.

          • Amos Moses

            There is a pile of “feelings” and it is not evidence ……….

          • sangrita

            The APA is a body of highly respected science. They do not deal in “feelings”.

          • Amos Moses

            “feelings” are not science ……….. as i said …… show the PATHOLOGY ….. or go home …………… BTW ….. the “P” in APA …… is for Psychology …… COMPLETELY all “feelings” ……. and it is not REPEATABLE science ……. it is psuedo-science …… and you lie again ……….. or you believe a lie ……….. same difference ……

          • sangrita

            Psychology is a branch of science, sir.

          • Amos Moses

            Psychology is at best psuedoscience ………. again ………. show the pathology ………. or go home ………. FYI ………… there is little to no pathology in the DSM-V ………….

          • sangrita

            “Psychology is at best pseudoscience”
            This, from a non-scientist.
            I can’t offer any further comment. Your own comment does you a greater disservice than anything I could say.

          • Amos Moses

            This from a medical professional with 20 years experience ………… case you did not know ….. that entails a knowledge of science …………….

          • sangrita

            You’re a medical professional with 20 years experience and you are calling psychology a pseudoscience? In what sense are you either medical or professional if that’s your belief?

          • Amos Moses

            “In what sense are you either medical or professional if that’s your belief?”

            makes no difference ……… you made a claim ……..

            “This, from a non-scientist.
            I can’t offer any further comment. Your own comment does you a greater disservice than anything I could say.”

            when in fact in have a career history of being in science …… and that makes you at best uninformed ……….. and at worst a liar ……

            SCIENCE …… is repeatable ……….. and for the most part ………. psychology ………. as a science ………. is not ……… and so therefore NOT science ……………… at best pseudo-science …………..

          • sangrita

            Sorry, I simply don’t believe you’re a scientist given some of the strongly anti-science things you have said. Should probably terminate this discussion.

          • Amos Moses

            i am not anti-science ……….. i am antipsuedo-science paraded/passed off/presented as if it was science ……….. when CLEARLY it does not meet the test of being science ……. and that is ……test-ability, observe-ablity, repeat-ability …………. and most of what is presented as “pschological science” does not meet those tests ….. and is much closer to belief and divination …………… and NOT science …………

          • sangrita

            It is testable, observable and repeatable.

          • Amos Moses

            No ……….. not …..

          • Amos Moses

            Landmark study suggests most psychology studies don’t yield …
            Aug 28, 2015 … “Credibility of the claim depends in part on the repeatability of its supporting evidence,” said Brian Nosek, a professor of psychology at the …

            100 psychology experiments repeated, less than half successful …
            Aug 28, 2015 … Since November 2011, the Center for Open Science has been involved in an ambitious project: to repeat 100 psychology experiments and see …

            Scientists Replicated 100 Psychology Studies, and Fewer Than Half …
            Aug 27, 2015 … How hard is it to replicate results in psychology studies? ….. psychology is not a science, i repeat not a science. it is similar to beliefs like …

          • sangrita

            Source please.

          • Amos Moses

            “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science,” – Science Magazine

          • Sharon_at_home

            Wouldn’t it be feelings of lust – a sin – that they feel if by definition Sexual Orientation is about the “attraction” to someone? Heterosexuals also feel lust for the opposite gender they are attracted to, and that often leads to having sex.
            If a LGBT gets married, then Yes I believe they will end up having sex. It’s unlikely that someone today would bother getting married if sex wasn’t involved in some way. Unless they just wanted to feel the “equality” of having a piece of paper that says they are married.
            Why do the LGBT insist on troubling the faiths that don’t believe in it, when they could just go to City Hall and have a secular wedding?
            They are not likely to be religious and by insisting people of faith marry them, it causes problems that wouldn’t exist if the LGBT didn’t want to just screw around the churches (and Christian owned businesses)

          • Amos Moses

            “Wouldn’t it be feelings of lust – a sin – that they feel if by definition Sexual Orientation is about the “attraction” to someone? ”

            it is not about attraction to someone ……… it is about rejection of God and Sin ……….. their only attraction is to sin ……….

          • Sharon_at_home

            I don’t think I exactly agree with you; LGBT people are attracted to people of the same sex, and they love them, but IMHO they are confused by the love that you can have for the people we call friends. They want to be loved (desperately – especially if they have been made to feel “different”) and when friends are close the love for one another is very strong. I just feel that they are being led by Satan and because they are not believers, they will not follow Jesus and be redeemed. Which is the reason we, as Christians, need to show these people that God loves them, not the sin, and they should learn about God so they can make an informed choice that they can’t make without knowing God. Regardless of how we feel, introducing them to God is the way we are supposed to be towards them.

          • Amos Moses

            “desperately – especially if they have been made to feel ”

            i agree they have a desperate need ………… but they have made a choice ………. they are not made to feel anything by external sources ……. God has placed a sense of what is right and what is wrong inside of each of us …………… they have chosen to listen to the wrong ….. and they know they are wrong …………

          • Amos Moses

            Meningitis outbreaks among gay men have experts puzzled…

          • sangrita

            And you think that’s God’s punishment?

          • Amos Moses

            Homosexuality is Gods punishment ……. homosexuals are not homosexuals and so they are lost ……….. they are lost and so they are homosexuals …… the punishment for the abandonment of God and His order is to be a homosexuals or other deviant …….

          • sangrita

            Homosexuality is God’s punishment? Well, since we know that people are either born with their homosexuality or it forms in early life, God’s doing a very strange thing in punishing people who aren’t in a position to do anything about it, isn’t He?

          • Amos Moses

            “Well, since we know that people are either born with their homosexuality or it forms in early life,”

            We are all born sinners ………. homosexuality is a sin ……… we all choose different sins …… rejection of God carries a penalty ……….. one of them is homosexuality …….. homosexuals are in a position to alter their choices ………… as we all are …… claiming “i am not responsible” is a lie ……………..

          • sangrita

            Homosexuality cannot be a sin because it isn’t an action, it’s a state of being. You can be homosexual and never have sex. So that’s ridiculous. Thought police territory.
            Maybe stop trying to look for sins where they don’t exist.

          • Amos Moses

            Homosexuality is an action ………… it is a decision to sin a particular sin …………the state of being is that of sinner …………

          • sangrita

            Incorrect. It is an orientation or attraction.
            Look it up in the dictionary. It does not involve an action.
            Which is maybe why so many people tell people belonging to your faith that you are maybe just a little bit over the top with your judgement.

          • Steen Goddik

            Yes, that newborn baby is a sinner. Wow, if there ever was an argument for abortion, that is it.

          • Amos Moses

            Yes ……. we all are ………. from even BEFORE birth ……… even BEFORE the womb ……….. in our existence BEFORE we were conceived …….

          • Steen Goddik

            Before we are conceived? What scripture supports that inane claim?

          • Amos Moses

            Jeremiah
            1:4 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
            1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

            As were we all …………..

          • Steen Goddik

            Ok, by now we much claim your statements delusional

          • Amos Moses

            Speak to Christ ……… his assessment of His creation ……… His judgement of abandoning Him ………

          • Amos Moses

            These “Medical Professionals”? …………..

            A June 2004 , Canadian Community Health Survey of 83,000 people reported the following:

            “The results indicate that, for some health-related measures, there are important differences between the heterosexual population and the gay, lesbian and bisexual population.
            Among individuals aged 18 to 59, for example, 21.8% of homosexuals and bisexuals reported that they had an unmet health care need in 2003, nearly twice the proportion of heterosexuals (12.7%). Homosexuals and bisexuals are more likely than heterosexuals to find life stressful.

            In addition, 31.4% of homosexuals and bisexuals reported that they were physically active in 2003, compared with 25.4% of heterosexuals.

            Yeah ………… right ……… none at all …………

          • sangrita

            Big deal. Promiscuity occurs in heterosexuality too and there is no “gay disease” – diseases strike all people equally. If you’re promiscuous and don’t take precautions you’re asking for a disease. But that disease doesn’t ask if you’re gay or straight.

          • Sharon_at_home

            Unless they leave a note saying it was because of a fear of God, it didn’t have to be a religious person that drove them to kill themselves.

          • Sharon_at_home

            Not only religious people – to a lot of people it’s just hate, nothing at all to do with God or religion.

    • [email protected]

      only not at all because there is zero substance to the argument. allowing same sex marriage in no way means that we must allow marriage to an animal or an object.

      • TheBottomline4This

        Whether it’s gays or animals or objects…none of them are real marriages.

        • [email protected]

          so what determines if a marriage is a “real marriage” what form of recognition is needed for the marriage to be a real one?

  • Amos Moses

    Just keeps getting better and better ………. /SMH ……….. Reprobate mind ……

  • axelbeingcivil

    Folks, the last time a lawsuit like this happened, it was because someone who opposed same sex marriage wanted to try and make a point that gay marriage was equivalent to marrying an inanimate object. Something tells me this isn’t all that different.

    • Oboehner

      You’re just a bestophobe.

      • axelbeingcivil

        Am I? Explain how.

        • JP

          This is exactly the same as that previous case. Chris Sevier, the plaintiff in the case you’re thinking of, is Liz’s new boyfriend. She just got super christian all of a sudden and has started being like this out of nowhere.

        • Oboehner

          You are casting dispersions on the above case, are you not? Bestophobe.

          • axelbeingcivil

            Dispersions? What am I dispersing?

          • Oboehner

            Troll on!

          • sangrita

            Looking really hard for signs of trolling but I’m not seeing any, are you referring to axel’s perfectly rational post above?

          • axelbeingcivil

            You’re the one pretending to adopt a stance you don’t believe in as a sarcastic attempt to elicit a response from me.

          • sangrita

            “Aspersions” is what I think you mean to say, but it’s hard to read through all the anger.

          • Oboehner

            Hard to read through all of the “it’s perfectly normal” BS as well.

          • sangrita

            Oh, you mean the science?

          • Oboehner

            Slap the “science” label on any old crap and *POOF* it is magically true, even though there is no proof.

          • sangrita

            The science label is applied to science. That’s how it works.

          • Steen Goddik

            You don’t seem to know what science is

          • Oboehner

            Further demonstrating that all evolutionists have is “You don’t seem to know what science is”. You could make that a drinking game, scroll down (or up) the page and drink every time that stupidity is posted – you won’t get too far.

          • Steen Goddik

            Since you keep making crazy, lying claims about Evolution, yes you don’t understand the science. Repeating that fact simply is more Establishment of that fact. If you don’t want to be called on your lies about Science, stop lying. It is that simple.

          • Oboehner

            Take a drink…

          • Steen Goddik

            Really? Your solution to things is to drink? Well, now I am not surprised over your posts.

          • Oboehner

            Figures you would get that out of it.

  • https://disqus.com/home/channel/fakethoughtsandprayers/ Chip01

    Oddly. This is actually more a homophobic act by this lady Elizabeth Ording than anything else.

    So, I guess some are applauding Elizabeth Ording… I find her actions /reasoning offensive

  • lorac odraned

    There’s no “right’ for a man to “marry” another man either because all rights come from God. We will be hearing more of bestiality and polygamy because man thinks he knows more than God.

    • [email protected]

      There is a right for a man to marry another man becasue we have a right to equal treatment under the law and no, rights do not need to line up with your religious understanding to be rights. For example the Bible says we are to have no other gods then the God of the Bible and yet we have religious rights that allow for the worship of other religions. Having rights and freedoms will always mean being able to do things that would not be allowed under a certain religious code becasue religious moral codes are designed to give up some freedom in order to limit ones self to acting in a moral fashion. So even if you see homosexuality as a sin there can still be a right for gay people to have access to marriage and this is becasue we are talking about a right to civil marriage which is based on gay and heterosexual couples meeting the same requirements for marriage.

      • TheBottomline4This

        Equal treatment as an individual in getting a job, housing, medical. Not in a marriage which is ONLY between a natural born man and a natural born woman. Gay “marriages” are nothing more than a gov’t saying you are “married”.

        • [email protected]

          civil marriage is whatever the law says it is. there is no pre-existing thing that “is” marriage in the eyes of the law, rather civil marriage is defined by the law and if the law says two people of the same sex can get married then they are married. the government saying you are married is the same thing as being married. now you might say that they are not married in the eyes of God but even then that is not required to be married in general. clearly marriage is not only between a man and a woman becasue gay couples are in fact married. you could say that it should only be between a man and a woman but “should” and “is” are often not the same thing.

          now when it comes to civil marriage equal treatment means giving the same recognition to couples who are able to meet the same requirements. thus as long as gay and heterosexual couples can both meet the same requirements for marriage they must both be given access to it. denying access to marriage simply becasue they are of the same sex and without any justification for that restriction is a denial of equal treatment in the eyes of the law which is why the bans fell.

        • Liberal Elitist

          So when a government says you’re divorced, and you really still married?

        • uninvitedguest

          Not anymore. Marriage equality is here to stay.

    • Steen Goddik

      So you reject the US Constitution. Yes, I always knew you anti-American Christians are traitors

  • TheBottomline4This

    All of the idiots who support SSM were told that stupid stuff like this would follow. They said, no that’s crazy. You’re just saying that so you can deny us.
    Bull you fools.
    Marriage is ONLY between a man and a woman. Sadly today we need to add…marriage is ONLY between a natural born man and a natural born woman.
    Anything else is NOT a real marriage. It’s basically shacking up together with the gov’ts stamp of approval. LOL

    • Liberal Elitist

      And since no one has come forward to honestly and legitimately demand such bizarre marriages, members of your tribe had to make it happen. Not very bright, are you?

      • TheBottomline4This

        There are a lot of stupid “marriages” out there that people have come up with. You are just choosing not to see them or admit it. So therefore, as usual, you’re wrong Liberal one.

        • Jo King

          Please list some of the stupid marriages to which you refer.

    • [email protected]

      we never said that some idiot would not try to make the case, rather we said that these dumb attempts would never work and they are not working. same sex marriage did not, does not and will not serve as the basis for marrying an animal or an object. there is zero link there and these legal cases will fail because they have no substantive backing. they are stunts and nothing more and have no backing in reality.

    • uninvitedguest

      Just your opinion. Marriage licenses for gay couples are just as legal as they are for straight marriages. Comes with
      All of the benefits too.

  • [email protected]

    the lawsuit is as absurd as the argument and it will go nowhere. A same sex couple can do all the things a heterosexual couple can do and hence they both get access to marriage. on the other hand the same is not true for a man and an animal or a man and a computer and thus there is no valid claim for equal access to marriage. this is nothing more then another poor attempt to draw a comparison that does not exist.

    • Overcome Evilgov

      Really? A same sex couple can do the same as a heterosexual couple? A female can make another female pregnant?
      I want you to visualize one man inserting his penis into another mans anal cavity, the part where crap comes out, that’s normal. I wonder if he farts while performing that pervertef act it’s the guy having an orgasm.
      One must have a reprobate mind to think that is normal. The people I find more of a reprobate are Christians, not non Christians. A Christian has the word of God. One cannot be for same sex marriage and call themself a Christian.

      “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.”
      ‭‭Romans‬ ‭1:18-32‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

    • peanut butter

      That’s a terrible analogy which is flawed tremendously. You can’t argue with a lie as your basis. Two men or two women cannot have children together, no more than a man with a computer or a woman with a dog. That is the whole point of marriage, which you unnatural pushers of perverted sex can’t seem to get through your heads. Men and women were created to join together for procreation, to replenish the earth, not just because it felt good. You people erroneously equate something that feels good with marriage, one of the holiest bonds known to God. And you make sacrilege out of something that was meant to be sacred. No matter how much you push it, no matter how much you argue, you will never be right in this matter. Oh, yeah, you’ve gotten your way because of the notorious barry soetero, but that still doesn’t make it right. If barry is for something, you should know by now that it is incorrect. And you can spend eternity arguing this and you will still be wrong.

      • sangrita

        So then you are opposed to the elderly and infertile couples marrying? If that’s your logic?

        • peanut butter

          As long as the parts fit, it is not sacrilege. Not two old or infertile women or men together. Old people need mates, too, but not one that doesn’t have the parts that fit by design. And those who are barren were made that way by our creator. But once again, not two barren men or two barren women together. If the parts don’t fit, YOU need to quit… arguing an invalid point.

          • sangrita

            Too bad you aren’t the one who invented marriage.
            It predates Christianity by centuries so it isn’t yours to claim.
            Basing it on how body parts fit together is as insane as basing it on whether they have the ability to create offspring.
            I’d say get off your high horse.

          • Steen Goddik

            The old people are also “barren,” so you are still lying.

      • [email protected]

        Reproduction is not the whole point of marriage, it is a point of marriage but it is not the only point or purpose of marriage, rather the purpose of marriage is bigger then that. this is why we let heterosexual couples who are not able to reproduce get married. if the point of marriage was limited to reproduction then we would not let those couples get married and yet we do. yes reproduction is important and needed but not everyone needs to do it for it to happen. for those who do not have the potential to reproduce marriage still has a point and a purpose. but bottom line, if you are going to turn gay couples away becasue they are not able to reproduce then you also need to start turning away heterosexual couples who are not able to reproduce. if you do not then you have a discriminatory system that is clearly not operating on the basis of reproductive potential but rather on the basis of excluding gay people. and this is exactly what the bans were which is exactly why they did not stand but rather were struck down.

        • peanut butter

          Read my comment above to sangrita, and drop your irrelevant stance.

          • sangrita

            Your comment to me made no sense.

          • Steen Goddik

            Yeah, you lied in that post as well.

      • Steen Goddik

        Another lie. Lots of people get married when they cannot have children. But no people get married if they cannot express consent.

  • SFBruce

    This is an absurd lawsuit. The argument that marriage between a human an animal is the same as same sex marriage is farcical on it’s face. Under the law, two competent adults are able to consent; animals are not. The argument that same sex marriage renders marriage gender less is equally absurd. I’m a gay man, which means when I experience physical attraction the object of that attraction is a man, rather than a woman. If gender doesn’t matter to me, I wouldn’t be gay. If gender doesn’t matter to trans individuals, they wouldn’t experience the extreme conflict between their biology and inner sense of their own gender. I’ll be shocked if this case isn’t dismissed.

    No one is forced to marry someone of the same sex; no one is forced to like or hang out with gay people, no one is forced to attend or bless a same sex wedding. Everyone who rejects same sex marriage is still perfectly free to voice that opinion, and try to persuade others. But please, leave you toaster and you pets out of it.

    • Sharon_at_home

      This post is well said. May I re-post it on my Facebook page? I think it explains the matter very well.

      • SFBruce

        Thanks very much, and of course you can re-post it on your Facebook page.

    • Kelly Samuelson

      ‘Everyone who rejects same sex marriage is still perfectly free to voice that opinion’?
      What about Davis? She went to jail for refusing to ‘bless’ their union.
      What about that couple who refused to participate by making a cake and got sued over the matter?

      • SFBruce

        Kim Davis went to jail for refusing to do her job, not because she voiced an opinion in opposition to same sex marriage. Her job as county clerk is not to determine whether couples who apply for marriage licences are worth of blessing, it’s simply to determine if the couple before her meet the legal definition. She refused to do that.

        Bakers who have businesses in areas where sexual orientation discrimination is prohibited will face legal problems if they choose to deny a service to gay people which they provide to straight people. They’re still free to worship as they wish, and to voice whatever opinions they hold regarding same sex marriage, but they still have to obey the law.

      • Steen Goddik

        Kelly, you are lying. Ms. Davis didn’t go to jail for voicing disagreement. She went to jail for not doing her court ordered job. It is so sad, that Christians lie so much.

    • D Sims

      I understand how comparing what you desire to an animal would be degrading but please do not throw out the fact that there are some out there in this world that desire to have sex with animals. Just like every other sexual practice of man it has been around since the beginning.

      Currently in Europe animal brothels are popping up everywhere. It is one of the movers and shakers in the sexual revolution around the globe. Zoophilia is real as Homosexuality to some.
      Please also remember, that many generations ago I could take your post word for word and simply change the topic to same sex marriage and it would ring true. There was a time that no one would have dreamed that a man could actually legally marry another man. I would have been laughed off the stage for even suggesting it.

      I agree this lawsuit is absurd. But no less absurd for same sex marriage. I understand your desires and how no one is forcing you to feel the way you do. I agree. No one is forcing how I desire and feel either.

      Some day, some time in the future, a small group of people will campaign to change the definition of “consent” and this will open up legal rights to all kinds of activity that for us today seems absurd, ridiculous and beyond reason, just like we used to think many years ago about a man actually standing before a judge and being legally married to another man.

      • SFBruce

        I appreciate the empathic tone of your comment, but I disagree that any court is likely to entertain doing away with consent when it comes to laws regarding marriage and/or physical intimacy. Liberty for all has been a bedrock American principle from our very beginning, and without consent regarding the most intimate acts, there is no liberty.

      • Steen Goddik

        Sims,, I would love to see how you propose the animal gives concentrate. Or are you for forced marriages?

        • D Sims

          In the same way the courts have redefined marriage, one day they will redefine consent. Keep in mind, this would not just apply to animals, but as robotics technology increases the future holds many things that man can easily defile and conform to their own desires.

          • Steen Goddik

            Slippery slope argument. Okay, if you just wanted to post nonsense to be contrary, why didn’t you just say so?

  • Overcome Evilgov

    I’ve performed a few weddings in the past and both the MAN & WOMEN must sign the license. Can she get the animal to sign it’s name? Now I’d like to see that. I’m sure if it’s a dog all it needs to do is put its paw on an ink pad an give its paw print but that’s still not a signature.
    I’d like to claim my three dogs as independents on my income tax. I adopted them and see to their doctor bills and feeding them. I think I’ll try to claim them and see what the IRS does.

    • TheBottomline4This

      Would you perform a same sex wedding?

      • Overcome Evilgov

        Not in a million years. I follow mans laws till it violates Gods laws. Romans 1:18-32 you will see rampant homosexuality in a country is Gods judgement on a nation. There are three stages of Gods warnings on a nation and the last is the country is turned over to a reprobate mind. We have passed that point.
        “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.”
        ‭‭Romans‬ ‭1:18-32‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

        • Steen Goddik

          So you will follow God, over the US Constitution. Good to know that you are an anti-American traitor.

  • Overcome Evilgov

    “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.”
    ‭‭Romans‬ ‭1:18-32‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

  • Liberal Elitist

    If a “slippery slope” never materializes, simply invent one.

  • 1luisa

    Masha Gessen said that they do not want to change marriage, but destroy it. She, an open homosexual says marriage shouldn’t exist and that she hated lying about her true intentions.

    • Jo King

      I think she is a fool. Marriage isn’t going anywhere. It may change, but it won’t disappear.

      • 1luisa

        Good Morning Jo. Marriage was created by God out of love and compassion for mankind. Between a man and woman. God gave Adam a woman, a wife. God made a woman for Adam cause that is what he needed. Not a group of guys, not parents, not siblings, etc. Because marriage is God’s design He has the right to define it. We live in a society where we are living out the children’s book “The Emperor’s New Clothes”. We are not dealing in reality, but creating our own “reality” based on non-truths and fantasy. We are so unsatisfied and depressed that we try to escape through make believe like children do. 1+1 = 2 and always will. It is reality. Marriage is heterosexual and for human. It is monogamous. Always was and always will be. Anything outside of that is a caricature. I find it interesting that the apostate West is partaking in this and not the rest of the world. When nations have the light of the gospel and reject it chaos and confusion on a fundamental level ensues. We are bound by debt we can’t pay, families are broken, plagued by violence, corruption in government, the weakest among us legally slaughtered and celebrated. I could go on, but won’t. Christ is the answer. Not the fake Jesus taught in most US churches. The real Jesus found in scripture. Jo, may you be found in Him in the last day clothed in His righteousness. Blessings to you from The Most High God. Take care.

        • Jo King

          Thanks. I can not agree with your viewpoint as a whole, but I do appreciate your amicable response and thoughtfulness nonetheless. I will try to adopt your approach as well.

          • 1luisa

            Thank you for your kind response. My prayer is that Christ be honored and by my life and that all who have any contact with me see His love, power, mercy, and forgiveness. Hope to see you in Glory one day.

        • Chrissy Vee

          Amen. ♥

        • Steen Goddik

          Since you can get married outside of the church, your claim is blatantly false.

          • 1luisa

            Good morning Steen. Hope all is well with you today. May I humbly ask a question? If a concept is developed by someone at a particular time and location does it mean it cannot be adopted and practiced somewhere else? Pervade and be transcultural and transcontinental? Of course. We see that in the world. You, I, and others can give examples. Marriage is one of those phenomenons. Now, it has been tinkered with by man since Cain. He was the first recorded Polygamist in scripture. He also was unrepentant about murdering his own brother though God mercifully sought him out to repent. Cain walked away for good. There is good news Steen is you don’t have to go away and stay away. You can return. You can have the forgiveness, cleaninsing, peace, joy, and satisfaction found in Christ. All sin leaves us feeling unsatisfied and wanting more. Yet it never satisfies. It leaves us restless, a feeling of worthlessness, guilt, and hopeless. Even when we try to stop it always overpowers us, gives us that temporary high, then we crash. No so with The Beloved. Call on Him. He will save you from the bondage of sin. Give you peace and satisfaction you have never had living in sin. I know and by His undeserved mercy can attest to this.

          • Steen Goddik

            Hmm, Pascal’s Wager. Okay the. And….?

    • Michael C

      There are tons of straight people that oppose the institution of marriage. They form groups and organizations and have websites and write articles and books and give lectures etc etc.

      I, being a rational person, understand that they do not represent the views of all straight people.

      • truth_seeker

        How do you know you’re a rational person? Did someone tell you that? Every psychotic is behaving rationally in their delusional world. That’s why we read the Bible. If it makes sense to us then we are rational. You can;t decide that for yourself any more than you can lift yourself by your bootstraps.

      • Chrissy Vee

        Some Christians, like me, hate that the states are involved in marriages. The Bible doesn’t read ‘What therefore “the state” hath joined together, let not man put asunder.’

        • Steen Goddik

          Funny. Until these issues arose, Christians loved marriage and the blending of church and state. It has only been since they didn’t get their way, that they suddenly want the state out of marriage.

          Such is the hypocrisy of fundamentalist, christofascist, hate-mongering Christians.

          • Chrissy Vee

            Oh Steen… If only you chose wisdom over foolishness. You have been duped and indoctrinated like the rest of the sheeple. Quite a pity. It’s not too late, However, you are not promised another tomorrow. Seek God while he may be found. Repent and trust in Jesus. He is your only hope.

          • Steen Goddik

            More of Pascal’s Wager. That makes posters seem so incredibly ignorant.

          • Chrissy Vee

            The wages of sin is death.

      • 1luisa

        Hi Michael. Tis true, hence the unashamed embracing of fornication, high illegitimate birth rates, soft and hard porn use, sex used to sell merchandise, shacking up, divorce (though an innocent party may exist), and adultery. God’s design in Eden is they way. Man has rebelled and gone his own way. The results are STD’s, children growing up without fathers (a plethora of problems there), exasperated mothers, higher risk of poverty in fatherless families, guilt, since of insecurity in relationship, multiple sex partners, etc. Because man is a sinner he goes his way which is not God’s and there are always hard consequences that can persist the rest of your life. Those consequences grow and can be seen more as time rolls along….then eternity. Michael, what has man gained in his rebellion? Honestly look around you. Look at yourself and ask that question. I did by God’s undeserved mercy. My way gave moments of pleasure and delight, but afterward left me weak, unhappy, hard consequences that persisted. I had to admit I was wrong. I was rebellious. I hated God’s way, therefore in reality I was hating Him. He can change you too and put you on that narrow road that leads to Him. He is gentle, kind, and forgiving. His way brings inner peace and upon death glory. He wants to share His glory with His children. His love never fails and is perfect. Our love can fail and be fickle. Not so with Him. When all others forsake you and everything is going wrong He is there. Always and will be with you in death and go with you. No one in the world can do that. Call on Him. Much blessings to you in His name. Have a great week.

  • sangrita

    Frivolous lawsuits such as this should be thrown out immediately and the person behind them should be fined.

    • Steen Goddik

      Court cost and filing fees.

  • mizzy

    I bet the psychologists are loosing a lot of money these days. As scripture says..people will call
    evil good and good evil. All the stuff going on in this world today and people are going
    nuts. BUT these kinds of people will be the first to scream why they can not get food..and such
    when the poop hits the fan!

  • peanut butter

    I think Mr. Staver’s got it right. “When you make gender irrelevant to a gender-based relationship you open Pandora’s box and make a mockery out of marriage.” And so does putting two people of the same sex together and calling it a ‘marriage’. Two people of the same gender can’t make a baby by themselves, so there is a breaking of the sacred bond that is called marriage. If the parts don’t fit, it’s because they were not made to be put together as a unit. By the way, you can’t make a baby with a computer either. These frivolous lawsuits used to would have been thrown out of court.

    • sangrita

      No, it’s only when you make species irrelevant to a species-based relationship you make a mockery out of marriage, which is what the woman in the story is obviously trying to do as a means of protesting same-sex marriage.

    • Steen Goddik

      That raises a troubling aspect. You are saying that unless you can have babies, you can’t get married? Infertile people can’t get married? What about seniors? What about those who had vasectomy or their tubes tied?

      Your argument is suddenly limiting a whole bunch of people from getting married. On the other hand, the state certainly allows such marriages, so rather it must be, that your argument is silly and void of reality.

  • Steen Goddik

    Odd,as laptops and dogs can’t voice concent.con. On the other hand, homosexual women and men certainly can give consent.

  • Watch man

    U.S.A. is satan’s guinea pig for the test running of the anti-Christ beast system. I am surprised they have not started marrying their television, trees, stones, sand, electric bulbs, faeces (human and animal dung), etc. It is not enough to marry laptop and animal; you do not need license to do this, after all the animal and objects will not sue anybody. Useless Sodom and Gomorrah! U.S.A. is a guinea pig! Nonsense!

    • sangrita

      “U.S.A. is satan’s guinea pig for the test running of the anti-Christ beast system.”
      Well, that has to be one of the most unbelievable lines I’ve ever read on a discussion forum.

    • Jo King

      Lol!

    • Chrissy Vee

      One girl here “married” a tree… not through the system of course. The powers that be have poisoned us and dumbed many down. Results? Absolute chaos! May God protect those of us whose eyes are opened.

      • sangrita

        And who recognized the marriage to the tree as valid? The church? No. The government? No.
        Therefore, she didn’t really marry a tree.

        • Chrissy Vee

          Right, that’s why I put the word married in quotes, and then followed it with ‘not through the system of course’. But thank you for your input.

    • Steen Goddik

      No consent is possible in those cases. Guess Christians are now for forced marriage. Sad.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Gay people have a choice. Homosexuality is a choice.

  • Overcome Evilgov

    if you ever studied what our founding fathers said that without God our constitution can’t stand. They also said that our rights are God given.
    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…

  • joe

    There is no Biblical statement about marriage or even sexual relationship with machinery. I would guess that such would be provided with self-contained punishments, what with all of those gears and such.
    As for “marrying” an animal, just as with same-sex sexual relationships, there is a Biblical prohibition on bestiality.
    These lawsuits and other such frivolous court actions are designed to clog the system and cause extra bad relations between liberal and conservative sides; it is one of the steps in Alinsky’s playbook,