Good for N.H., and congratulations to the 23 couples. Good start for 2008!

Apparently a happy way to start the year.

It’s always good to start the new year with good news.
Blessings on everyone involved in these civil unions. I expect that a few of these folks will also ask to have a blessing ceremony at a church or with a clergy person involved. Blessings on them too, and I hope their congregations are supportive and appreciate the significance of these events.

YEA! for NH and much happiness to the couples who were united in the civil ceremony.

That is wonderful news. I hope all states can get their acts together and give every one the same equal rights.

Yes, congratulations to NH! It moves a step closer to real equality for gay and lesbian people. It is still not marriage…but, NH is closer than most of the other states.
Peace!

This sort of union will never be blessed no more than surgeons can really change the sex of a human being. Vanity, it’s all vanity, foolish vanity.

“Vanity, it’s all vanity, foolish vanity.”
cknuck I don’t recall whether you are married, but let’s assume you are. When you are home enjoying an evening with your beloved wife is that just vanity? When she can share the benefits from your job and later your social security to help her live if she survives you is that just vanity? When you can stay at her bedside in a hospital if she’s sick when others can’t is that just vanity?
No it’s not. Open your eyes, man. Your bible has blinded you to the real world.

cknuck-
“Vanity, it’s all vanity, foolish vanity.”
In couple of years I would like you to explain this to our children. I am sure they would like to understand why you believe that their fathers desire to have the same rights and benefits as their aunts, uncles, and neighbors.
cknuck, I am sincere with this. While we often have disagreed….I always respect your pov and your sense of genuineness. That said, I do not really understand why you want to deny people equality. I do understand that you have a belief that the Bible condemns homosexuality. However, I do not understand why you let that belief trump all of the verses on social justice.
Peace!

This whole civil union/marriage issue (IMHO) is going to go away faster than most believe.
My son in in kindergarten this year. There are four kindergarten classes at his public elementary school. Each of the classes has at least one child with same-gender parents. My son’s class has two…he and another boy.
While I am quite sure this is not the case in all schools around the country, I also know that this is not the only school with student who have same-gender parents. We certainly do not live in a gay ghetto.
As more and more same-gender couples adopt kids….as more and more lgbt people live open lives….as more and more churches actually treat all God’s children as equals, I believe that prejudice-supportive people will have so few followers….they will loose the limelight.
Peace!

Now we can add Uruguay (!) and Australia to the list of countries that now offer civil unions.
Bigotry is dying one country and one state at a time, slowly but surely, and thank God for that.

“Now we can add Uruguay (!) and Australia to the list of countries that now offer civil unions.”
I have nothing against Uruguay….but, it does seem sad that third-world countries such as Uruguay, Mexico, etc….as well as our neighbor to the north lead the world on equality issues. I do not think there solace in the fact that the USA leads the world in military and war issues…while taking a back seat to justice issues.
Peace!

cknuck:
It’s happening, going to continue to happen and this country and the world will be the better for it. No one is going to “hell in a handbasket.” Vanity has nothing to do with it….
JohnQ.:
“I do not think there is solace in the fact that the USA leads the world in military and war issues…while thaking a back seat to justice issues.”
Agree totally!

Vanity, vanity, vanity cknuck says, about same-sex marriages and transgendered people. Well he’s not alone in his Bibical “word for word” understanding. Most all the Republican contenders for President of th U.S. would agree with him. Very scary, very ignorant; no ability to look at life with their own intelligence and hearts. Sad, sad, sad.

“Vanity, it’s all vanity, foolish vanity.”
Surely, I could not miss all the fun and sex talk here!
ck, beware of using these words – they are a two edged sword. They can also apply to anyone (not that I am refering to you or anyone who looks like you) that is trying to fashion church, community, and life itself in their own image of things. Let’s face it, in many ways Church (in all its many forms) is a vanity. Our task is not to curse and deny it, our task is to confess the vanity and to look to God for a new Way. For some that new will mean including people who they may not want to include – be they gay, conservative, darker skin, or different generation.
It is time to look up to the sky and across the expanse of humanity, not look down at our waist (waste?). God has new and greater things for us to do – and that includes ALL people.

John Q, no offense but there is no way you could produce a son or a daughter with another man. Nor could it be a family under normal circumstances
jestrfyl you confuse me in how you can lump in dark skin, and conservative, or different generation with homosexuality, think about it.
H22 my very scary, very ignorant no ability to look at life with their own intelligence and heart , although sad, sad, sad to your name calling standards have served this country and many people outside of this country very well.
It is vanity because despite man’s arrogance there is actually no such thing as a transgender any more then there could actually be a holy union between the same sexes.
nnmns Jesus describes my marriage in his words,(one man one woman) so you cannot compare it to something He never recognizes as holy. There have been many people who took the time to leave their belongings after their death to a friend and even a pet so it does not justify your argument because you think to same sex people should be recognized the same as a holy matrimony for inheritance purposes, that’s just silly. When you take into account the whole nature of a homosexual or same sex relationship it does not make sense it’s an anomaly, abnormal. Bodies are not physically designed for the event.
Just goes to show if you saturate the public enough with anything they will go for it and try to make it a norm.

“Jesus describes my marriage in his words,(one man one woman) so you cannot compare it to something He never recognizes as holy.”
Once again, cknuck, you are hamstrung by the fact Jesus is not recorded as having said anything about homosexuality. So you have to try to build a case about whatever he didn’t talk about as being bad. Well he didn’t talk about computers but I notice you use them. He didn’t talk about heart operations; does that mean you wouldn’t have one of them? He didn’t talk about Republicans so I hope you’ll avoid them like the plague. The world is full of things he didn’t talk about (which is strange given the claim he was the living embodiment of an all-knowing god). To make a case against one group he didn’t talk about and ignore all the other things he didn’t talk about suggests bigotry, not logic.

cknuck-
“John Q, no offense but there is no way you could produce a son or a daughter with another man. Nor could it be a family under normal circumstances”
What are you saying? Are you suggesting that my kids don’t count because we adopted them? Should they just sit in an institution as victims without a family? My kids are products of a heterosexual marriage. You know, that “gold stadard” type heterosexual marriage that you often hold up as the only acceptable form of marriage.
Their bio-mom along with their bio-dad produced 4-children and for whatever reason the kids were neglected over a three+ year time period. BTW, their bio-mom also produced 4-other children with three other prior husbands. Their bio-dad produced another child with another wife. So, four heterosexual men and two heterosexual women produced 9-kids. At the time of conception, each child’s parents were married to each other. So, here is the fruit of heterosexual marriage(s).
What are “normal circumstances”? My partner and I are products of loving parents who had children….loved them….cared for them….and, taught them well.
My partner and I have adopted two children that through no fault of their own, did not any longer have a family. We love them, we provide for them, we care for them, and we are teaching them about responsibility, as well as respecting and care for all people.
BTW, my son’s school has four kindergarten classes. All four have at least one child with same-gender parents. My son’s class has two children with same-gender parents. My son and one other boy. We do by any sense of the words live in a gay-ghetto.
Also, btw, when my partner and I committed to having a family….we talked about having a surrogate mother birth bio-children for us (using our sperm). However we decided to adopt becuase there were so many children (products hetereosxuaul marriages) that needed families to love them.
Peace!

Quote from cknuck: H22 my very scary, very ignorant no ability to look at life with their own intelligence and heart, although sad, sad, sad to your name calling standards have served this country and many people outside of this country very well.
Actually that is my point cknuck, literal understanding with every word in the Bible has not served our country, outside our country, with the love and direction from the Trinity. Men have used it for their own desires; control, punishment, and a great way to make money.
My standards do not include ‘name calling’, just truth that hurts perhaps, nothing else.

Henrietta, I’m glad you could make some sense out of that. I couldn’t, though I didn’t like the smell of it.

cknuck:
JohnQ’s children are HIS children (and his partners). Does it really make any difference whether they used their own sperm to make them? NO! Were they breaking any Bibilical rules? NO! Where in that book you use as a total, blinding guide to your life, does it say that JohnQ, his partner or any other same gendered couple aren’t parents just because they didn’t “mate” with some one of the opposite sex?
Heterosexual couples don’t necessarily mean “good parents”. Can they reproduce? Sure. Parents are the ones who raise with love, care, and guidance, children. Parents can be male/female or male/male, female/female. Ideally children will have 2 parents, no matter the combination. Unfortunatley that doesn’t happen always either.
It’s great that now same gendered couples can be “legally” united, and in some churches, “married” also. It is right!

nnmns get your facts right I based my argument on what Jesus said (need I repeat the scripture that describes marriage?) not what he didn’t say that’s the homosexual argument for ss unions. I do not find myself hamstrung at all as long as I honor scripture.
JohnQ to capitalize on other’s misdeeds is age old it still does not help the sin in which people indulge, like homosexuality it only seeks to perpetuate it.
H22 If I ever heard the truth from you then it certainly would not hurt.
I just happen to disagree with all who promote homosexuality because I can see the sin in in and the sin the Bible says about it.

cknuck, get your facts straight. This article is about civil unions, not marriages. Since the Bible says nothing whatever about what is a proper civil union you apparently can’t have an opinion on it; certainly not one based on what the Bible says about marriage.
Not, of course, that I’m impressed at all about your particular interpretations of a book for which I have zero respect as a source of wisdom or direction about how to live.

cknuck-
“JohnQ to capitalize on other’s misdeeds is age old it still does not help the sin in which people indulge, like homosexuality it only seeks to perpetuate it.”
I am truly sorry for you it you really look at our adoption of two darling children as “capitalizing on other’s misdeeds”. I doubt very highly that our kids will look on it in this manner.
My only reason in continually posting about my life is so that people like you realize that this is not a theoretical conversation. This is not about some “lifestyle”….rather this is about things that effect real people in real ways.
My point in even posting about the bio-parents of our children and their siblings is not an attempt to diminish straight people (many of whom are wonderful responsible people) but rather to demonstrate the falacy of:
heterosexual marriage = good
homosexual marriage = bad
There are irresponsible straight people just as there are irresponsible gay people and vica versa.
I am still taken back by your suggestion that in adopting our children we are somehow “capitalizing other’s misdeeds”. The reason we decided to form a family and include children is that we have an abundance of love to share, the resources to raise children, and the desire to make the lives of our children very special while raising them to be responsible…caring…loving people who will endevor to make the world an even better place.
Peace!

nnmns you sound like a lawyer, and that’s what this whole thing is about using the law to promote homosexuality. That’s legal no matter if it is right or not, but my life is based on biblical principals and I have the right to it.
JohnQ I am sure you are a good person, but it is a fact you are capitalizing on those misdeeds of the heterosexual parents who are incapable of raising the children they produced so you can feel more like a couple. I understand the need to legitimize your homosexual relationship, its important and the children will probably survive being in an abnormal family situation. But it still does not make it right, and it will definitely more likely than not have an negative affect on their lives.

cknuck:
You’ve decided that since JohnQ and and his partner can’t physically have children, and they have a family thru adopting 2 children, that they are NOT a family??? Why aren’t they a family? Because the children have 2 men for their parents? 2 men can’t raise children or 2 women can’t raise children just because the adults are the same gender? There are many, many, versions of “family” other than your version of only Mommy,Daddy and their 2.1 children, that you feel is the only NORMAL family. The bible is too outdated to be the “rule” on what a family is.

cknuck, you sound like you feel that JohnQ and his partner should have left their children for the state to raise, instead of giving them a stable home with love and protection. And to say that the children will “probably survive being in an abnormal family situation” is,IMHO insulting to anyone who has happens to be in a same gender relationship and has children by adoption.
Who are you to judge what is a normal or an abnormal family? No, the answer that the bible says it is wrong is not acceptable.

“The state the world is in is because of continual purposeful sin, church splits, violence, hunger and purposeful lack of education.”
I’d have said it’s because of greed, stupidity, lack of foresight, bigotry, bad luck, shortage of vital resources and inability to care about others like we should, for starters. I’d have placed church splits so far down the list I doubt I’d have ever gotten around to them. And while I’ll probably call some things sins it’s a lot fewer and different things than you would I think.

I can’t believe a Christian, as that is what you say you are Cknuck, could say such mean things to John Q. To even infer that he and his loved one adopted children to make them feel more like a normal family is unbelievably bad spirited. You must not understand love as we do, or as Jesus did. As far as indirectly accusing me of not telling the truth, my husbands advice was, just ignore him. So I will.

I can’t beleive a Christian with the love of Jesus could say anything different. You can love someone without supporting the sin.

cknuck your imaginary version of Jesus has caused/let you be nastier than I hope you naturally are. I sincerely hope you’ll give thought to finding a gentler, kinder version of Christianity or something.

Henrietta22-
Thanks!
cknuck-
I do not need to legitimize my relationship beyond the need to protect our children and insure they have the same benefits as children of straight people.
I have no problem with your thoughts on homosexuals….I do have a problem with your desire to deny lgbt people equal rights. I have no problem with straight people. I do have a problem with straight people having special rights. Lgbt pay their taxes…just like straight people…we support our churchs and communities at least as much as straight people…we abide by the law at least to the degree of straight people.
We have already started teaching our children that some people have different beliefs than we do….and, that this alright. As they become older, we will teach them about prejudice and how we must have empathy for those who hold prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry as values. However, that does not mean we ourselves should embrace prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry.
Peace and God Bless!

If you mean to be gentler or kinder is to lie to folk for feel good reasons then no I won’t tickle ears. Homosexuality is a sin plain and simple, there is no such thing as a transgender or such a thing as homosexual marriage, they are both the creation of man and not of God.

There are some versions of Christianity that simply don’t seem to follow the “love thy neighbor” path that most Christians tell me is a very big part of their beliefs. How can a person say they are Christian and then turn around and say that same gender relationships are “sinful” and then claim that they do still love those people but not the “deed” that is part of a loving relationship. Also how can a Christian say that a same gender couple can’t provide a child or children a loving family?

cknuck-
Children who are abandoned by their blessed legally married hererosexual parents are not misdeeds. They are the little children Jesus was talking about in Matt 18:5. How shall you recieve these little children, cknuck? Think seriously on this as you prepare to cast more stones at those who took them in.

I’m not saying the children are misdeeds it’s clear that I am saying the act is the misdeed. No one has more compassion for children in these situation then I, I was one and I see and love children in the same situation as I was everyday. I take the subject seriously and I have committed my life to bringing solutions to the problem. But I do believe the solution is not to farm these kids out to homosexual couples. I’m sorry if I offend anyone but I am firm in my belief and I have good reason to be.
Of course these are the most vulnerable and needy people on earth and to subject them to experiments like homosexual parenting is insensitive. It is a proven fact that the system will give these kids to just about anyone. As I said I know I was one.
I hope you see why my passion in this area will never die.

Of course, to the prejudiced, it makes not a bit of difference that the FACT is that the major Paediatrics Associations in Canada and the U.S. have published studies confirming NO negative outcomes associated with gay parenting.
You know, “My mind is made up. Don’t confuse me with the facts.” Sheesh. Plank meet beam. You probably shouldn’t be driving.

cknuck,
The system will give these kids to just about anyone because horny Christian young adults were not provided with proper information on contraception and who would rather marry than burn make so many of them. A loving couple that God sends to adoption centers rather than chosing to produce genetic children of their own needs no God forsaken bigot haranguing them on line or in person about whether their love is appropriate for parenting.
Their choice to accept the most vulnerable into their loving home as beloved members of their family brooks no comment from a Christian but a prayer of thanks that another child of Jesus has found a home.

My parent weren’t Christian, so don’t blame it on Christians that makes no sense.

Bette, you can get a study on just about anything to serve an arguement, doesn’t mean they are right. I’ve been to Canada, lol.

Conspiracy theories notwithstanding, cknuck, I’d consider it something of a challenge to imagine an agenda-driven collusion between U.S. and Canadian agencies, lol.

You’re saying that JohnQ. and partner are an “experiment” in parenting, because they happen to be a same gender couple? And other same gender couples are also experiments in parenting? You’re incredible. As I’ve said in several posts above, that thinking is unreal! You claim that you care about children and their need for homes, but heaven forbid that they be given to a same gender couple who will love them, and protect them and raise them to the best of their ability….just like some heterosexual. Heterosexual couples can love and protect bgetter then same gender couples? NO. Research has shown that the outcomes of same gender parenting is no different than hetersexual parenting.
Rather than have children “farmed” out to homosexual couples, let’s just leave them in state care! They’d be much better off! NO!
BTW, what is your opinion of allowing single people to adopt? Is that wrong too? OR just heterosexual couples are acceptable. Would it matter if the single person was gay or straight? ( I know your answer to that, but thought I’d throw that in there).

I think this argument gets unnecessarily complicated when we start to debate whether or not gay marriage is “holy.”
They could find a missing piece of the new testament today that quotes Jesus as saying “I hate gays – don’t ever let them marry” and it wouldn’t change my opinion in the least. They have just as much right to all the LEGAL benefits of marriage as heterosexual couples.
It’s a church’s perogative if they don’t want to bless a homosexual union, but they certainly deserve the same legal standing as any hetero married couple. To say that children raised by homosexual couples grow up disfunctional is statistically unsupported, and claiming that allowing gay unions undermines the fabric of civilization is just plain stupid. Frankly, I don’t see why two hetero roomates can’t get the same legal treatment as a married couple as long as they sign the right documents declaring that they want to share everything they have equally.

cknuck,
I was not talking about your parents. I was talking about your attitude.

cknuck,
“no offense but there is no way you could produce a son or a daughter with another man. Nor could it be a family under normal circumstances”
So WHAT??? I hve a heterosexual sister and she’s been married twice and didn’t “produce” a son or a daughter with EITHER of the two men she was married to. Sorry but your so-called “normal circumstances” aren’t “normal” for a LOT of heterosexuals.
“you confuse me in how you can lump in dark skin, and conservative, or different generation with homosexuality, think about it.”
Ok, I thought about it. They are all human traits. Sorry, you lose.
“It is vanity because despite man’s arrogance there is actually no such thing as a transgender any more then there could actually be a holy union between the same sexes.”
You seem more ill-ingormed with everyu post you type.
“you think to same sex people should be recognized the same as a holy matrimony for inheritance purposes, that’s just silly.”
Hmmm, even George W Bush and jerry Falwell disagree with you. They BOTH said we should have the same legal benefits as you betterosexuals, just not the word “marriage”. Not “silly” at all, it seems.
“When you take into account the whole nature of a homosexual or same sex relationship it does not make sense”
It makes sense for homosexuals. DUH!
“it’s an anomaly, abnormal”
Wrong. It’s merely a variation – one of the many that exist among human beings.
“Bodies are not physically designed for the event.”
LAFFF! My husband’s body and my body are PERFECTLY “designed” for the events in which we mutualy participate. Thanks for your ‘concern’ anyway.

ck,
“subject them to experiments like homosexual parenting is insensitive”
Gay people have been ‘parenting’ since time immemorial, and have done a pretty darned good job of it. The “experiment” works. “Insensitive”??? Not at all. Certainly not in John Q’s instance.
“the system will give these kids to just about anyone”
This is just plain false. What does yer Bible say about bearing false witness, ck???

cknuck
You sound a lot like Lucy from “Peanuts”. When someone asks who will be in charge, she responds “I’M IN CHARGE”.
It is all fine and good that you are not homosexual, do not approve of homosexuality. But why must you prevent anyone else from protecting homosexuals’ rights, from creating their own version of “home”, and from living fully and happily? Just because you don’t like it don’t make it so. In the same way, just because you read scripture in one way, doesn’t mean that is the ONLY interpretation.
Neither you, nor anyone of your pursuasion is “in charge”. Nor is anyone in opposition to you “in charge” The very purpose of government is to mediate differences and protect all people’s rights. The purpoe of church is not simply to affirm what we already think, but to expose us to new, more mature thinking and to open us to new, wider possibilities.
So, rather than condemn someone (not that your condemnation means any more than mine), why not try to learn about them and from them.

I’m not in charge nor have I tried to convey that I am but I do have a opinion which is shared by others and that’s all I need to be heard. My opinion must have merit considering the response. fortunately jest you are not in charge either, that’s why we can debate.
Mystery poster I know nothing about you and your “husband but I am curious why use the term husband and are you both husbands? Just curious.
I am confident that there is no such thing as a transgender it’s impossible to do and is it really a word. No matter how much a surgeon that is willing to cut on a person they can never change that person’s gender and the fact that people buy into the concept just shows how people are given to foolishness to the point they embrace it.
The one comment that is correct is that the argument is unnecessarily complicated when you try to debate homosexual unions as holy. They could never be holy, acceptable yes, even legal in some states but never holy.

“They could never be holy, acceptable yes, even legal in some states, but never holy.” cknuck
That isn’t true, as many churches marry same gender couples and that would make them “holy’ as well as legal.

holy do not churches make

Love is holy. It has no gender.

I feel inclined to add to my last statement – I say that holiness overcomplicates the issue because for the most part, being accepted by society seems to be the major issue surrounding gay marriage. I see no precident for denying them all the legal and social perks of marriage that heterosexuals get.
But for some, being accepted by the christian church is a matter of great importance. To them I would say that if you go by the spirit of the religion as most christians describe it (loving,accepting, forgiving, etc.), your god will very likely bless your union whether or not it is overseen by a clergyman in a church. Those who call it sinful disregard the spirit and go straight to the letter of the law, but even then they only have two or three (at most) bible verses to support them out of 35,000+. It would be a sad and petty god indeed that could construct the universe but rejected its own creations because of how they loved one another – the minions of such a pathetic creature would be lower still, I imagine.

Sin goes to the very spirit so to say it is not sin by the spirit of the law as it may be by the letter of the law shows lack of knowledge of God.
And while it is true holiness has no gender, people do and God designed, so that holiness is most certainly attached to how we honor God in our genders.

“holy does not a church make” mystery writer”
So what is the point of churches if they are not “holy ground?”
cknuck:
“….so that holiness is most certainly attached to how we honor God in our genders.” What the heck does that mean?

Let’s not forget that the letter of the law is not always the best advice. Need I quote Leviticus?

cknuck,
“John Q, no offense but there is no way you could produce a son or a daughter with another man.”
Reproduction is not a requirement of either marriage nor of civil unions. And you seem to have forgotten that JohnQ HAS children – through adobption.
“Nor could it be a family under normal circumstances.”
His circumstances ARE normal – for him. Do you practise being mean?
“there is actually no such thing as a transgender”
That’s nothing more than sheer delusion on your part – denying reality. Again.
“any more then there could actually be a holy union between the same sexes.”
More delusion. It doesn’t help your cause to be show such ignorance of the real world.
“There have been many people who took the time to leave their belongings after their death to a friend”
We aren’t discussing mere friends; we’re talking about our SPOUSES. Your continual diminishing of us and our relationships does not reflect well on your soi-disant Christianity.
“it does not justify your argument because you think to same sex people should be recognized the same as a holy matrimony for inheritance purposes, that’s just silly.”
Not according to BOTH Jerry Falsewell AND George W(armonger) Bush – they both say we SHOULD get ALL the same rights as betterosexuals.
“When you take into account the whole nature of a homosexual or same sex relationship it does not make sense it’s an anomaly, abnormal.”
No it ISN’T – niot for homosexuals. DUH you make this SO easy.
“Bodies are not physically designed for the event.”
BWAHAHAHA. Now you’re showing your ignorance of biology too.
“it still does not help the sin in which people indulge, like homosexuality”
You admantly refuse to admit that not everyone believes being homosexual IS a “sin”. Whatever happened to freedom of religion? You don’t seem to actually believe in it.
“what this whole thing is about using the law to promote homosexuality.”
In ACTUALITY (not that you’re familiar with it), it is about using the law to promote EQUALITY – something supposedly ‘guaranteed’ by the Constitution.
“JohnQ I am sure you are a good person,”
Then how come you treat him like sh!t? Ever hear about charity (as in, “The greatest of these is charity.”)? You should try it sometime.
“I understand the need to legitimize your homosexual relationship”
You don’t seem to actually “understand” much at all. His relationship already IS legitimate.
“the children will probably survive being in an abnormal family situation.”
It’s only “abnormal” to you, ck.
“But it still does not make it right, and it will definitely more likely than not have an negative affect on their lives.”
Demonstrably FALSE. Boy are you ever mean-spirited, and you continually bear false witness about your gay neighbors. That’s not a trait normally associated with Christians. In fact, I beleive the Bible calls it a SIN.
“No one has more compassion for children in these situation then I”
Pure and utter B.S. You called them the oproduct of “misdeeds”, you called their family “abnormal”. That ain’t compassion, it’s hate. Pure and simple. Gosh, you give Christians a bad name.
“I am curious why use the term husband and are you both husbands? Just curious.”
Of course we are both husbands. We are men and we are married to each other. We are each others husbands. Thanks for PROVING how ignorant you are on this topic. Ignorant or stoopid.
“I am confident that there is no such thing as a transgender it’s impossible to do”
Yet again with a display of utter ignorance.
“when you try to debate homosexual unions as holy. They could never be holy, acceptable yes, even legal in some states but never holy.”
Odd, considering I was married in my Church. Our vows were made before God and our community. Just because YOUR “church” doesn’t perform them doesn’t make YOUR “church” right – OR “holy”, just bigoted. More ignorance, more delusion, more false witnes, more hate. It is so easy to expose every thing type as a lie.
Yes I’m angry. I cannot believe your mean-spiritedness, your vicious treatment of other posters, your false witnesses, etc. are even allowed on B’net. It goes WELL beyond mere “opinion” (as if we don’t have ours). Your example is NOT a Christian one, imo.

Only if you’re going to remind everyone that Leviticus also says we should deny communion to the disabled, and put both disobedient children and the victims of incest to death, and that eating lobster is an ABOMINATION.

“there is actually no such thing as a transgender”
That’s nothing more than sheer delusion on your part – denying reality. Again.
Well, I hate to poke the hornet’s nest here, but it’s not often I agree with cknuck on an issue. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with getting a sex change if that’s what you want, but making a penis look like a vagina or vice versa isn’t really turning one sex into another. If they could give a man a functioning uterus and ovaries or give a woman working testicles I might change my stance on this, but at the moment I see the operations as body modification, not true gender transformation.

Thelemite,
You are misreading cknuck’s statement – he “beleives” there is no such thing as “a transgender”, i.e. a person who’s genitals do not match their psychological makeup. There ARE indeed MANY such persons, and I know quite a few of them. He isn’t addressing the process, but the PERSONS who have the process. Those PERSONS exist, whether he likes it or not, whether he approves or not.

OK, Thelemite, what would you do for a person who had a male body (penis, testicles), but female hormone levels (breasts and monthly hormone fluctuations)?
It seems that, beginning in vitro, there is no absolute guarantee that chromosomal gender and hormonal gender will match.

Forgive the misunderstanding – I tend to confuse the terms “transgender” with “transexual.”
BetteTheRedde-
I won’t deny the difficulty someone in that position would have to face, and if a sex change makes them happy I’m all for it – I would even refer to them as “her/she” if they wanted. In a “practical” sense, however, as a heterosexual male I would see a person with a penis and testicles as a man, and a surgical procedure wouldn’t change my stance on that.

To put a finer point on it, I also wouldn’t say that a woman who got a double mastectomy & a hysterectomy or a man who had his penis & testicle removed are sexless. Altering the genitalia doesn’t change your sex.
But again, that doesn’t mean I’m against someone getting a “sex change” operation.