Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Gay Marriage At Scotus: One Wedding Ring Thread To Rule Them All...


Recommended Posts

Posted

Up next: Reintroducing polygamy.

 

To quote the Huffington Post article - "it is legal for all Americans, no matter their gender or sexual orientation, to marry the people they love."

 

So if you love two women or two men...or one of each I suppose.

 

I agree. And if it's even possible, I think this result would be even more challenging for the church than today's ruling.

Posted

I fully expect that church definitions of marriage, including in the temple, will be adjusted to make clear the church's view that gay marriage is not acceptable even if lawful.

 

Perhaps the law of Chastity will be changed back from "lawful" to "given by the holy priesthood", putting the emphasis back on God's law and not on the law of the land as the most important part of marriage.

Should have left it that way to begin with.

Posted

I no I said I would withdraw, but one quick comment. There is little doubt that Prop 8 sped things up. Looking back, however, I think the Church was wise to take the position it did, not so the world at large would take note, but so that members of the Church would have no excuses to be ignorant of the Lord's position when they openly and actively rebelled against and rejected it.

 

We needed to mount a political campaign that removed civil rights from a minority in order to communicate the "Lord's position"?

Posted

Perhaps the law of Chastity will be changed back from "lawful" to "given by the holy priesthood", putting the emphasis back on God's law and not on the law of the land as the most important part of marriage.

Should have left it that way to begin with.

 

Wouldn't that mean that couples not (yet) married in the temple are still breaking the law of chastity?

Posted

The word is that the Lord has packed his bags.

 

He's on his way!!

 

All I can think of is "as in the days of Noah"...

Posted

Perhaps the law of Chastity will be changed back from "lawful" to "given by the holy priesthood", putting the emphasis back on God's law and not on the law of the land as the most important part of marriage.

Should have left it that way to begin with.

 

No, that would make non-Mormon straight married couples into "sinners" - I don't think they would word it that way

Posted (edited)

Wouldn't that mean that couples not (yet) married in the temple are still breaking the law of chastity?

 

Yep.  But that original was given when the endowment and marriage ceremony usually went together.

Nobody was placed under that covenant (or very rarely) without being sealed the same day.

 

Basically, you get placed under that covenant then sealed to your spouse.  So no violation.

 

No, that would make non-Mormon straight married couples into "sinners" - I don't think they would word it that way

 

It used to be worded that way, but you are probably right.

Edited by JLHPROF
Posted

All I can think of is "as in the days of Noah"...

 

Well, it has been raining cats and dogs in Ohio this year (though oddly it just let up).

Posted

Well, we had a good run and we lost. Probably inevitable but at least we had some fun on the way and made friends with some interesting people.

Now we get to find out if we are getting mandatory gay marriages or whether forced temple marriages are next on the agenda. Exciting times. Should we start a pool?

We also should get group marriages soon. Woohoo!

We may be going to literal hell in a proverbial handbasket but at least it will be a fun ride.

Posted

"Another purpose is to reaffirm that the Church has a single, undeviating standard of sexual morality: intimate relations are acceptable to God only between a husband and a wife who are united in the bonds of matrimony."

 

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/the-divine-institution-of-marriage

 

I agree, but speaking of the Law of Chastity covenant is not the same as speaking of the Church official position.  One can be argued (although it shouldn't be able to be argued) and the other really can't.

Posted

SSM has been legal in Canada for a long time now and nothing has changed, honestly. The Church is, to me, the same as it was 10-15 years ago. 

Posted (edited)

Well, it has been raining cats and dogs in Ohio this year (though oddly it just let up).

 

Any rainbows?  Cause if there aren't...

Edited by JLHPROF
Posted

SSM has been legal in Canada for a long time now and nothing has changed, honestly. The Church is, to me, the same as it was 10-15 years ago. 

 

I think the course of mankind is going along exactly as it always was going to.

I lived in Canada for a decade too, and SSM never caused the Church there any issues.

 

But SSM is a violation of God's law, and sooner or later the end times are going to happen.  Not really anything to argue about.

Posted

Well, we had a good run and we lost. Probably inevitable but at least we had some fun on the way and made friends with some interesting people.

Now we get to find out if we are getting mandatory gay marriages or whether forced temple marriages are next on the agenda. Exciting times. Should we start a pool?

We also should get group marriages soon. Woohoo!

We may be going to literal hell in a proverbial handbasket but at least it will be a fun ride.

 

Literal hell is in Michigan (http://www.gotohellmi.com/) Trust me, I'm from Ohio.

Posted (edited)

Well, we had a good run and we lost. Probably inevitable but at least we had some fun on the way and made friends with some interesting people.

Now we get to find out if we are getting mandatory gay marriages or whether forced temple marriages are next on the agenda. Exciting times. Should we start a pool?

We also should get group marriages soon. Woohoo!

We may be going to literal hell in a proverbial handbasket but at least it will be a fun ride.

 

I'm not gay, but you can be my polygamous husband if you like. We could use more sarcasm and jokes at my house. Plus, that lawn isn't going to mow itself. 

Edited by Gray
Posted

I'm not gay, but you can be my polygamous gay husband if you like. We could use more sarcasm and jokes at my house. Plus, that lawn isn't going to mow itself.

Do you have a pool? And don't you have any kids? I thought lawn mowing was the one activity surviving from the farm days when children were extra workers that was still solved via having children. I can save you time on vacuuming. I have a roomba.

Posted

I agree, but speaking of the Law of Chastity covenant is not the same as speaking of the Church official position.  One can be argued (although it shouldn't be able to be argued) and the other really can't.

 

When read together (or even alone), the Chastity covenant is perfectly clear to all except the willfully ignorant.

Posted

Do you have a pool? And don't you have any kids? I thought lawn mowing was the one activity surviving from the farm days when children were extra workers that was still solved via having children. I can save you time on vacuuming. I have a roomba.

 

We have one kid, not big enough to mow the lawn. No pool, but we have a tire swing. You have a roomba? Sold! I'll send you some sample color swaths for the wedding. 

Posted

SSM has been legal in Canada for a long time now and nothing has changed, honestly. The Church is, to me, the same as it was 10-15 years ago. 

 

It can't be.

 

I think you're mistaken.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...