[Vision2020] 07 05 05 Ny Times: United Church of Christ Backs Same-Sex Marriage

[Scott Dredge]

Maybe you didn't understand my comment.  At one point
in this country not so long ago (around 1950), many
states outlawed interracial marriages...something like
38 states banned them.  Some had bans within their
state constitutions.  The reason why I bring this up
is that it is a direct parallel to banning same sex
marriage.

Roughly 60 years ago in this country, interracial
marriages were banned.  A black man marrying a white
woman was illegal.  A white man marrying a black woman
was illegal.  You claim this isn't the same thing as a
man marrying a man or a woman marrying a woman.  Why? 
If at one point, there were laws against interracial
marriage and same sex marriage, what's the difference?
 They were both considered illegal marriages.

Married can mean between a man and a woman.  However,
same sex couples in a civil union deserve the exact
same rights as married couples.

-Scott

--- donald toogood <dtoogood at email.com> wrote:

> Black men and white women or white women and black
> men marrying isnt' a
> man marrying a man or a woman marrying woman.It's
> different.  How can you
> say it's like that? Whites marrying blacks was still
> marrying a different
> sex, not like they want to do now. It's not bashing
> anybody, it's just
> not calling getting together with the same sex being
> married. Married
> means between a man and a woman and that's all.
> 
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: "Scott Dredge"
>   To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>   Subject: Re: [Vision2020] 07 05 05 Ny Times:
> United Church of Christ
>   Backs Same-Sex Marriage
>   Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 12:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
> 
>   >
>   > Churches will adapt. It wasn't very long ago
> that
>   > interracial marriages were banned. It's bad PR
> for
>   > the churches to continuously bash homosexuals
> and it's
>   > a losing battle.
>   >
>   > -Scott
>   >
>   > --- donald toogood wrote:
>   >
>   > > That headline says the church did it. But if
> you
>   > > read on down it was just
>   > > most of 800 delegates. The people in the
> churches
>   > > didn't have any say in
>   > > it. No wonder churches like this are losing
> their
>   > > members. The big shots
>   > > in the churches are making it so they don't
> stand
>   > > for anything at all.
>   > > They'll go ahead and do something they know is
> wrong
>   > > just so a few people
>   > > won't badmouth them. Well maybe it makes them
> feel
>   > > better, but pretty
>   > > soon they'll be preaching to empty churches.
> Just
>   > > like it says in this
>   > > article, some of the churches are probably
> gonna get
>   > > out of that religion
>   > > if they let this gay marrying thing go.
>   > >
>   >
>   >
>
_____________________________________________________
>   > List services made available by First Step
> Internet,
>   > serving the communities of the Palouse since
> 1994.
>   > http://www.fsr.net
>   > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>   >
>
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> 
> -- 
>
___________________________________________________________
> Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
> http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
> 
> >
_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step
> Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. 
>  
>                http://www.fsr.net                   
>    
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>