Obama thinking about supporting 'Gay Marriage' as a platform.


Brave said:
lol...sorry I had to laugh

@ CEE me & My brother was just talking about that...how we as a people refuse to speak up about the Black KKK. If you gon be one way...be that way all the time. You can't pick when its ok for you, then speak on it. You have to call it what it is regardless of situation.

I made status on my facebook about the Black KKK, not one comment. So far about the Obama on Gay issue I've got about 10-12 responses...its sad.
Click to expand...

:confused:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oymK60EmzyU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
bluedog said:
I feel sorry for you if you're so limited that you would allow a person opinion to make you not vote for them.

Not an act...an opinion :rolleyes:

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

Don't feel sorry for me , the only reason I voted for him in the first place is like why most blacks voted for him because he is black and a democrate. it is a political move that he didn't have to make.
 



jsupop33 said:
All of these issues play out the way they play out now because the govt got involved in marriage. A person can still put together a will and give property to whom they want to. Kids should be able to get property from their parents.

If there is no legal marriage, there will be no need for a legal divorce. If you want to be divorced, simply proclaim that you are divorced and leave. If you remove the govt incentives for marriage, I believe you will get less bullcrap marriages to begin with....

To answer your question about who is your wife, the govt shall not recognize you as having a wife, you are an individual, you can claim how many wives you want.
Click to expand...

Pop, the state has always been involved since the time of the Mesopotamians and Hebrews. Marriage is a legal contract sanctioned and recognized by the state. Don't confuse the ceremony with the contract.
 
Can someone tell me why the government restricts you to one wife/husband? Why can't you have as many as you want as long as they are willing?
 
J C said:
Pop, the state has always been involved since the time of the Mesopotamians and Hebrews. Marriage is a legal contract sanctioned and recognized by the state. Don't confuse the ceremony with the contract.
Click to expand...

I understand and I fundamentally disagree.
 
jsupop33 said:
I understand and I fundamentally disagree.
Click to expand...

But, Pop, it's almost impossible to run a society without the government being involved.

The only way I can see what you're saying working is in countries where the religion is the state. Islamist countries, for example. Where Islam is the only religion and is essentially the law of the land.

In America, where you have freedom of religion, I don't see how that could possibly work. If the state can't define what is a marriage, then the justice system would be at a loss and chaos would reign. There are too many legal issues that require a specific definition of marriage in order to find justice for people who have disagreements. Divorce, child custody, bigamy ... all these things and more require some clear definition of marriage from the state.

In your scenario, what's to stop someone from marrying children?
 
SUJagFan said:
But, Pop, it's almost impossible to run a society without the government being involved.

The only way I can see what you're saying working is in countries where the religion is the state. Islamist countries, for example. Where Islam is the only religion and is essentially the law of the land.

In America, where you have freedom of religion, I don't see how that could possibly work. If the state can't define what is a marriage, then the justice system would be at a loss and chaos would reign. There are too many legal issues that require a specific definition of marriage in order to find justice for people who have disagreements. Divorce, child custody, bigamy ... all these things and more require some clear definition of marriage from the state.

In your scenario, what's to stop someone from marrying children?
Click to expand...

You can marry children right now. You can go find a 7 year old girl, have a ceremony and drive around calling her your wife.

Now, it would not be a legal marriage and it wouldn't be under my proposed system either. Do you think the state has the right to certify a contract between man and God.
 
jsupop33 said:
You can marry children right now. You can go find a 7 year old girl, have a ceremony and drive around calling her your wife.

Now, it would not be a legal marriage and it wouldn't be under my proposed system either. Do you think the state has the right to certify a contract between man and God.
Click to expand...

The state HAS to. That's part of the function of government.

The Bible says, and I'm paraphrasing, "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's". The Bible recognizes that government has a role to play in society.

In your scenario, how would you prevent 7 year old girls from being married without the government being involved?
 
SUJagFan said:
The state HAS to. That's part of the function of government.

The Bible says, and I'm paraphrasing, "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's". The Bible recognizes that government has a role to play in society.

In your scenario, how would you prevent 7 year old girls from being married without the government being involved?
Click to expand...

You can't prevent them from being married now. People take illegal child brides now. I know the render under the ceaser's verse and I don't think marriage is something that should be rendered unto ceaser.
 
All Obama did was just compromised his faith, which is more important (faith that is) to me than politics. If he can sleep good at night, then that's on him. But I know I'm not compromising my faith for anything, cause once you do you start to question why do you need to repent. You have nothing to feel sorry for. And once that happens, then your dependency on God changes.
 
I am pretty much indifferent on the issue of "gay marriage.". My problem with the President is that he took a stand before the last election. Now we are six months from another election and he makes a formal announcement that he changed his mind on this issue. He is looking more and more like a political opportunist than a man of principles. He has no leg to stand on if he wants to make Mitt Romney look like a flip fliopper on any issue.
 
549174_10150801437906275_177486166274_9968025_1414859704_n.jpg
 
G Lion said:
Don't feel sorry for me , the only reason I voted for him in the first place is like why most blacks voted for him because he is black and a democrate. it is a political move that he didn't have to make.
Click to expand...

If those are the only reasons that you voted for him then nothing has changed. He's still black, and he's still a democrat.
 



Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% heterosexual. However, when we live in a population where more than half of marriages end in divorce, why should that same population have a say in who other people marry?
 
SUJagFan said:
:confused:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oymK60EmzyU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Click to expand...

I call all these thugs ruining our communities, robbing us, killing our family members, promoting ignorance, promoting thugging dropping out of school the Black KKK. They are doing the job of the old KKK...it has been delegated to them. The black KKK is doing a great job too...they have silenced us when wrong is done in our communities, they keep us in 'our place'. the real KKK doesn't have to do anything anymore.

And yet we as black folks don't speak out about it.

This is one of the things Obama can do now, he has no excuse not to address the inner city problems. Has he even been in the hood? Why not? Has he been to these schools & addressed the issues of how poorly run they are. Has he addressed the issues of why there is a continued discrepancy of black & white education? Has he addressed the safety of our communities? Has he addressed why all of this is ignored as not being relevant to our society. Has he addressed why Black unemployment is the highest in the nation? Why is none of this a campaign issue? Are our votes not important anymore? Are they taken for granted? The more I'm thinking about this the angrier I get.

If he doesn't start to do any of this now...why should I not stay at home in November?. He could take up just one of these issues, that's not asking for alot but he didn't feel inclined to speak out about them. He's 'us' right? these are the things I expected out of a 1st black president. To atleast use the bully pulpit to shine a light on some of this stuff even if a policy wasn't created. We deserve at least that from him.
 
Last edited:
SUJagFan said:
Oh, I see. You want to get rid of the piece of paper from the government that validates marriages.

Okay.

When it comes to beneficiaries and heirs, when it's time to distribute the property of the deceased - land, real property, life insurance proceeds, retirement fund proceeds - how will those things be decided if there is no document declaring what is a legal marriage?

What about bigamy? What if I married in Louisiana Perfect and Precious Baptist Church and then went to California, restarted Charles Manson's cult, called it a church and married five flower children? Who is my wife?

What about divorce? Would divorce also be the realm of the church? What if I started The Church of Women Who Leave Me Don't Get Shat? Married a woman and divorced her according to my beliefs. Would the government stay out of that situation?

I'm not trying to be funny. I'm just wondering how it would work.
Click to expand...

LOL. I bet Romney would like that. He is Mormon. They used to believe in all those wives.
 
Blacknbengal said:
All Obama did was just compromised his faith, which is more important (faith that is) to me than politics. If he can sleep good at night, then that's on him. But I know I'm not compromising my faith for anything, cause once you do you start to question why do you need to repent. You have nothing to feel sorry for. And once that happens, then your dependency on God changes.
Click to expand...

For believers, the bible is clear on what to do in this situation: When government intrudes into God's realm of morality and religion, believers must obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29; also see Daniel 3:6).


And that is why I have an issue with this BB. I don't believe in compromising my faith for anything or anybody. None of us are perfect and we all have sinned, but to support and stand on a platform for something that the bible forbids is not right. I was never an Obama supporter mainly because I did not agree with his education platform during the first campaign. Maybe I will just vote for Ron Paul this time around :)

There should be no compromising on your faith and values. The Word is the Word. The bible also tells you to support your elected officials (which many of us fail to do). Romans 13:1-7 tells me to support and respect the government and those in authority because God placed them there and He is ultimately in control anyway. That fact alone gives me comfort in this matter from a spritual standpoint, but I will not be voting for Obama. This may be the first time I have not voted in an election since I was eligible to do so.
 
JagHammer said:
I love how bigots use the bible to justify their hate.
Click to expand...

Who said anyone hated anybody? I don't hate anybody, including those who are the topic of this discussion. God gave each of us free will to do as we please and the bible tells us that not everyone will believe in God's way. As Christian's we all should accept that and the lifestyle they choose to live. If I have a son and he is gay, I am going to love him like I love anyone else, but I will not support his lifestyle. My bible teaches me to condem the sin, not the sinner. There is a keen difference in that JagHammer. I don't agree with the people that march and condemn others to hell. That's not anyone's place. All I am saying is that at this point, I am not sure I could vote for a president that already flip-flopped on this issue to begin with and then was willing to compromise his beliefs and his faith to win an election. If I offend anyone, I aplogize, but I would rather lean on the side of caution and do what is right in God's eyes than risk compromising my faith and relationship with Him. To me that is more important than an election. That's coming from someone who loves election season and politics.

I also agree with jsupop's comment about government and marriage. Marriage is a morality and religious matter that should never have had governmental mandates. Remove that and this would have been a religious matter than individuals could determine among themselves. But since that happened centuries ago - here we are.
 
Killer Bees said:
I am pretty much indifferent on the issue of "gay marriage.". My problem with the President is that he took a stand before the last election. Now we are six months from another election and he makes a formal announcement that he changed his mind on this issue. He is looking more and more like a political opportunist than a man of principles. He has no leg to stand on if he wants to make Mitt Romney look like a flip fliopper on any issue.
Click to expand...

KB, Some consider Obama newly define stand on this issue shows he has "principles". Going against the spiritual leadership in our black churches is a gamble and shows he has backbone. This could turn into his "Sister Souja" moment. Remember Jeremiah Wright! Knowing his judicial background, made me feel his former position was politically motivated.

Pop, from 1819 to 1850 only the state legislature could dissolve a marriage in Alabama. The divorce rate was less 1% in the state.
 
TSUGIRL07 said:
For believers, the bible is clear on what to do in this situation: When government intrudes into God's realm of morality and religion, believers must obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29; also see Daniel 3:6).


And that is why I have an issue with this BB. I don't believe in compromising my faith for anything or anybody. None of us are perfect and we all have sinned, but to support and stand on a platform for something that the bible forbids is not right. I was never an Obama supporter mainly because I did not agree with his education platform during the first campaign. Maybe I will just vote for Ron Paul this time around :)

There should be no compromising on your faith and values. The Word is the Word. The bible also tells you to support your elected officials (which many of us fail to do). Romans 13:1-7 tells me to support and respect the government and those in authority because God placed them there and He is ultimately in control anyway. That fact alone gives me comfort in this matter from a spritual standpoint, but I will not be voting for Obama. This may be the first time I have not voted in an election since I was eligible to do so.
Click to expand...

Unless Ron Paul switches his party affiliation to Libertarian, he won't be on the ballot since he's currently running as a republican. With Ron Paul's racist background, you'd seriously consider voting for him?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top