The Impossibility of Gay Marriage.

[handmaiden]

Another key point against the notion of Gay "marriage" is that no marriage is fully legal and binding until it is consumated. And by consumated, the Bible is Very Clear that it involves the man going into the woman. That is a literal phrase that the Bible uses.

No other arrangement of parts constitutes a consumation. And without a consumation, you don't have a marriage.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Oh, it's just all so awful to even think about, dear Sister Mary. Those homers stick their things into other homer's things and then they — oh, where is my Pepto Bismal?

The Christian way to label this is "Gay-This-Isn't-a-Marriage." We Christians know that for any couple to be married there must be a blessing from God. God has never blessed a marriage of homers and never will.

[Isabella White]

Even after all these years, the Liberals and Communists can't come up with any workaround. Marriage is sanctified by the LORD, whereas gay stuff is just gross.

Oh, it's just all so awful to even think about, dear Sister Mary. Those homers stick their things into other homer's things and then they — oh, where is my Pepto Bismal?

[Mary Etheldreda]

Even after all these years, the Liberals and Communists can't come up with any workaround. Marriage is sanctified by the LORD, whereas gay stuff is just gross.

[Russell Holbeck]

Re: The Impossibility of Gay Marriage.

I would not go to a house that had two women who are married to each other. I was married to one woman for many years and one grown woman for one house is plenty.

The Bible does not talk about two women getting married. I would remember that.

My wife has gone to her Reward. It is quieter.

Thank you.

Rusty

[Thaddeus Allerton]

Re: The Impossibility of Gay Marriage.

It is my understanding that in a homosexual relationship, one member is usually designated as the "wife," and generally wears female clothes and does the housekeeping and whatnot while the "husband" is out earning a living, hopefully not as a schoolteacher.

I too have heard similar things regarding these unholy unions. One is the husband and one is the wife. Im not sure how this would work. Is it a full time position or do they swap every other week? Also, I hear some queer couples can now adopt?!? REALLY?!? Who is the Dad and who is the Mom? Are they both Dad? Are they both Mom? I suppose since they aren't really adopting children so much as Satan's little bastards that it shouldn't be any of my concern but it makes me want to vomit

Leviticus 18:22

[John North]

Re: The Impossibility of Gay Marriage.

I think the whole concept of Gay Marriage is ridiculous and just as Pastor Bathfire explains, it’s not even theoretically possible. The problem (as I see it) is that the queers have chosen a name for their God mocking relationship that is confusingly alike the name of the covenant of marriage as we know it. They took something beautiful and made it ugly by adding the word gay. It would be way better if they picked a more distinct name that would also better describe what it’s all about, like Abomination Union.

[Nobar King]

Re: The Impossibility of Gay Marriage.

Gay marriage is basically indentured servitude, and a couple of lezbeans together, well, what they really need is a man to show them how to do it right.

[Faith_Machine]

Re: The Impossibility of Gay Marriage.

It is my understanding that in a homosexual relationship, one member is usually designated as the "wife," and generally wears female clothes and does the housekeeping and whatnot while the "husband" is out earning a living, hopefully not as a schoolteacher.

[Pastor Isaac Peters]

Re: The Impossibility of Gay Marriage.

That's only the beginning of the problems that arise when two queers or two queeresses get "married." How do they decide which one will be the head and be entitled to the other's submission as though he were Jesus Christ (Eph. 5:22-24)? Do sodomites propose to redefine marriage from what God commands into some sort of two-headed monster?


I, Rick, take thee, Steve....

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

I was sitting building a model of the Pentagon out of Oreos and I thought about the Service of Marriage – and the words “Who giveth this woman…” and half the time some toothless ass will stagger forward with a look of anticipated pleasure at the relief of ridding himself of the burden, and he will say, “I do.”

Although it is usually the father, no one questions who this person is as it is equally possible that the woman to be given away is his property by other means – his sister, some woman he found, etc.

No one says, “Who giveth this man…”, do they? That would be stupid because men own things; they are not owned.

Those of you who were homeschooled will also know that correct grammar is that a man marries a woman (to marry – verb transitive - And what do transitive verbs do? They take an object! In this case, the object is a wife.) and a woman is married to a man (to marry – verb intransitive.) You can see how God and the Language He speaks defines the master-servant-property relationship and how this has been carried forward to this very day.

This brings me to the real difficulty of queers marrying – there is no one to give anyone away; there is no one “to be married to someone”; there are only two people, who cannot possibly own one another.

On the other hand, and I am assured they exist outside certain websites, there are lezbeans. Now these are women, so what can they own? How can you “give something to someone who can’t own things?

Think of it – “I have given the cat to the table.” Garbage isn’t it!

So in any law that purports to “marry gays of both sexes” is open to constitutional challenge as being in direct conflict with the Christianity upon which the US was founded and nonsensical before the law.


Checkmate weirdos!