The Mormon and Homosexual Agenda

[_subgenius]

Is a man marrying a footstool really a big problem or threat to society?

Who cares?

if there is no care then why have marriage license at all?
government not only discourages problems and threats but also encourages virtue....except in the case of SSM of course.

[_subgenius]

Is polygamy prohibited by the US Constitution?
Does the Federal Government have the right/ability to prohibit polygamy?

If the Fed cannot declare marriage as between a man and woman, then they certainly may not limit the quantity....and for that matter, by what law can they prevent a man from marrying a footstool?

It's very difficult to get a footstool to sign a marriage certificate. A writing desk might manage it (yes, that's a pun).

so discrimination against persons who cannot "make their mark" is now acceptable??

[_subgenius]

Is polygamy prohibited by the US Constitution?
Does the Federal Government have the right/ability to prohibit polygamy?

If the Fed cannot declare marriage as between a man and woman, then they certainly may not limit the quantity....and for that matter, by what law can they prevent a man from marrying a footstool?

Here's the problem, 'marriage' is a process for gaining a piece of paper that grants people legal access to certain things that people without that piece of paper cannot get. That's it, that's all 'marriage' really is.

not true.

If a man wants to cohabit with another man and exist as a betrothed couple, they can.
If a man wants to cohabit with several women at the same time and exist as a betrothed polygamous group, they can.
If a man wants to cohabit with a footstool and exist as a betrothed couple, well, that can happen now also.

thus degenerating the entire concept. Legal access not only includes but it necessarily must exclude...and currently there is no logical basis for the latter...thus making the entire exercise meaningless.

So, the Mormon agenda is about stopping access to legal rights for gay couples (I think they frown on furniturcest as well) as they believe God doesn't want them to have those rights. (If God didn't want to allow people to be homosexual He wouldn't have created same sex attraction).

interesting how people in your LLC always seem to rely on the "well then why did God.....?"
a seemingly obtuse disregard for the doctrine of agency.
By your argument, murder is ordained of God and therefore it is futile to consider it illegal.

Now the Mormon Church has had its ass kicked on Prop 8, including a massive negative reaction from it's income stream, it has capitulated on its strategy of fighting against same sex legislation and is now treading a softer, inclusionary style of strategy aimed at keeping homosexuals in the Church and not offending members who pay tithing. If it wasn't about maintaining income then the Church would be fighting same sex legislation tooth and nail all over the planet. Why isn't it doing so? Because that would negatively affect the fiscal bottom line. Church decisions are best understood when viewed through the lens of finical impact.

CFR on negative reaction from income stream
CFR on homosexual tithing
CFR that you are not intoxicated during this post

[_LittleNipper]

Homosexuality is based on the misapplied use of human organs for sexual acts that are both unhealthy and tend to glamorize violence. Their actions are for heightened sexual arousal without procreation as its goal or result. Marriage for the establishment of a father and mother as a means to bear, raise, and set the example for children --- is the only reason marriage was ever promoted by governments and society at large. The exception to this is were religious societies followed God given regulations in pure obedience to His will.

[_just me]

Homosexuality is based on the misapplied use of human organs for sexual acts that are both unhealthy and tend to glamorize violence. Their actions are for heightened sexual arousal without procreation as its goal or result. Marriage for the establishment of a father and mother as a means to bear, raise, and set the example for children --- is the only reason marriage was ever promoted by governments and society at large. The exception to this is were religious societies followed God given regulations in pure obedience to His will.

So what? Not that I even agree with what you've said here. But, for arguments sake, so what?

How does it hurt you if someone else marries whomever they want?

We allow infertile couples to marry. We allow couples to marry without asking for a declaration of intent to procreate.

Marriage has evolved a LOT since it was first invented.

[_Quasimodo]

It's very difficult to get a footstool to sign a marriage certificate. A writing desk might manage it (yes, that's a pun).

so discrimination against persons who cannot "make their mark" is now acceptable??

Just footstool people. They can't be trusted. Anyone who has lived in a neighborhood with footstools knows what I'm talking about.

They pretend to be comforting, but they are just waiting to trip you up when rising from your favorite chair. How many elderly people have been injured or even killed while tripping over a traitorous footstool?

They smell like dirty socks after just a few years working at their disgusting profession. The worst ones wear nagahide. How many good Nagas had to die over the years to provide these miscreants with their gangsta clothes?

They should be rounded up and sent back to footstoolland where they came from.

I can understand wanting to marry a china cabinet. At least it brings some good dinnerware to the marriage.

[_just me]

so discrimination against persons who cannot "make their mark" is now acceptable??

Just footstool people. They can't be trusted. Anyone who has lived in a neighborhood with footstools knows what I'm talking about.

They pretend to be comforting, but they are just waiting to trip you up when rising from your favorite chair. How many elderly people have been injured or even killed while tripping over a traitorous footstool?

They smell like dirty socks after just a few years working at their disgusting profession. The worst ones wear nagahide. How many good Nagas had to die over the years to provide these miscreants with their gangsta clothes?

They should be rounded up and sent back to footstoolland where they came from.

I can understand wanting to marry a china cabinet. At least it brings some good dinnerware to the marriage.

Greatest post of the day!!!

[_subgenius]

Homosexuality is based on the misapplied use of human organs for sexual acts that are both unhealthy and tend to glamorize violence. Their actions are for heightened sexual arousal without procreation as its goal or result. Marriage for the establishment of a father and mother as a means to bear, raise, and set the example for children --- is the only reason marriage was ever promoted by governments and society at large. The exception to this is were religious societies followed God given regulations in pure obedience to His will.

So what? Not that I even agree with what you've said here. But, for arguments sake, so what?

virtue that is what

How does it hurt you if someone else marries whomever they want?

it doesn't hurt me just like it doesn't hurt you if they don't get to marry whomever they want. Ultimately your argument here is based on selfishness, which is contrary to the benefit of society....unless you are Ayn Rand.

We allow infertile couples to marry. We allow couples to marry without asking for a declaration of intent to procreate.

you are arguing the exception, not the rule. We also allow people to get a drivers license without the having to own a car.
But we still hold them to certain qualifications.

Marriage has evolved a LOT since it was first invented.

not really...recent years has seen it devolve and become degraded by the selfish argument stated above....which is, ultimately, contrary to the "invention" of marriage.

[_just me]

So what? Not that I even agree with what you've said here. But, for arguments sake, so what?

virtue that is what

That is your opinion.

How does it hurt you if someone else marries whomever they want?

it doesn't hurt me just like it doesn't hurt you if they don't get to marry whomever they want. Ultimately your argument here is based on selfishness, which is contrary to the benefit of society....unless you are Ayn Rand.

Actually, it is pretty selfish to keep equal rights from others. It is pretty selfish to deny others the benefits that married couples enjoy just because of your own personal preference.

We allow infertile couples to marry. We allow couples to marry without asking for a declaration of intent to procreate.

you are arguing the exception, not the rule.

Prove it. And there are no questions asked regarding intent to procreate. It is not a requisite for marriage.

Marriage has evolved a LOT since it was first invented.

not really...recent years has seen it devolve and become degraded by the selfish argument stated above....which is, ultimately, contrary to the "invention" of marriage.

It started out as a way of proving ownership of a man's children. He wanted to make sure he wasn't passing inheritance to children that were not his own. Women and children were regarded as property of the man. People did not originally marry for love.

I have a feeling you don't really know anything about this topic other than your feelings.

[_Bazooka]

By your argument, murder is ordained of God and therefore it is futile to consider it illegal.

Have you not read the Old Testament?
Have you not read the story of Laban?

Murder, according to scripture, is not only ordained of God, it is actively encouraged!

If God created the capacity for opposite sex attraction, then He can't very well dodge the credit for creating a persons capacity/inclination towards same sex attraction, or footstool attraction for that matter. Remember, He created us, warts and all.