Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Email exchange with a fundie cool aid drinker.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
flamin lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 01:11 PM
Original message
Email exchange with a fundie cool aid drinker.
Ive got this running electronic conversation going with a fundie cool aid drinker. His hearts in the right place but he generally has his head up his ass. Anyway Ive been kind of hard on him since Tucker Carlson said out loud that Republicans dont really like evangelicals and makes fun of them behind their back. It got even worse since Kou wrote his book, TEMPTING FAITH. I volunteered to buy him a copy but cant get him to tell me where to send it.

Anyway he sent me this email from one of those family web sites, you know the ones. The ones that rail against liberals and sell t-shirts proclaiming righteousness and prayer cloths guaranteeing prosperity. The email says that the Democrats are on the record in support of homosexual marriage. The brief exchange, so far, follows:
====
RE: Democrats Go On Record In Support Of Homosexual Marriage

Yes, CN, and I for one, am damn proud of it. Like it or not Marriage is a legal relationship. You can show up in church and have a preacher wave his hands over you and guess what? You're not married in the eyes of the law. On the other hand you can go the local JP and sign a simple declaration and you're joined to your partner by law but the church doesn't see you as married.

The Catholic Church does not recognize divorce. The State does. The laws of the State divide the property between separated spouses, not the church.

If you've got a problem with that, take it up with Christ. Jesus said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." Mark 12:17
=====
RE: RE: Democrats Go On Record In Support Of Homosexual Marriage

Wrong Flamin, or at least in teaxs(sic) and Fla. where common law marriage is accepted. Two people ( Guy and Girl ) can go to the local courthouse and make the declaration and the State does accept it. So do the non-denominational church s and the lutheran church both synods.
=====
RE: RE: RE: Democrats Go On Record In Support Of Homosexual Marriage

CN, you just said exactly the same thing I did--that marriage is a LEGAL relationship recognized by the state and, by your admission, only a very small minority of Christian churches without the ecumenical blessing. There are TWO aspects to marriage; legal and religious. Ours is a nation of laws. The law must apply equally to all people. The legal rights granted by the civil ceremony of marriage must apply equally to all without discrimination. Just so the legal responsibilities must apply equally to those who dissolve that civil contract. The Catholic Church does not recognize divorce, yet the State will force the division of property and the legal independence of the divorced parties. Why can't you see the difference?

What about polygamy? The state does not recognize multiple marriages not because of any moral issue but because it pretty much hoses up the laws governing inheritance. The Church of Latter-day Saints on the other hand does recognize multiple husband/wife unions. That Church is careful to ratify only the first marriage with the state, all the others are viewed by the state as "shacking up" and without legal standing.

No one in the GLBT community or the Democratic Party wishes to force any church or religion to recognize gay marriage--that would violate the establishment of religion clause. Besides, there are any number of churches that will perform the matrimonial service for same-sex couples and provide them the sanctity of religious acceptance. They don't need YOUR particular church's blessing and aren't asking for it.

This is not a religious issue, it is one of equal protection under the law.

In 1895 the intermarriage of races was prohibited by Texas Penal Code, punishable by two to five years in the state penitentiary. It's only a matter of time before the US emerges from the dark ages of theocracy on same sex civil rights as well.

Peace be to you . . .
====
Waiting for the next reply, but not holding my breath.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC