5 thoughts on “Legalise gay divorce!”

  1. 2Some Pharisees came up to Jesus, testing Him, and began to question Him whether it was lawful for a man to divorce a wife. 3And He answered and said to them, “What did Moses command you?” 4They said, “Moses permitted a man TO WRITE A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY.” 5But Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 6“But from the beginning of creation, God MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE. 7“FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, 8AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH; so they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9“What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

  2. Reed, my political concerns are moral. (Did you mean to hit me with a false dilemma?!)

    I pretty much agree with what Tim said here. (I’m not even convinced that homosexuality is a perversion. Jesus is not on record as saying so.)

    I think homosexuality is a perversion, yet dont oppose Homos getting legally married. That does not compromise me at all. I am still free to maintain my personal opinion.
    God is not mocked either. He will judge all things in his good time.
    I am to live in peace with my neighbours in liberty and equality, not impose my values on them via the State.

    I think what the State calls marriage and what the Bible calls marriage are two quite different things.

  3. Did you mean to hit me with a false dilemma?

    No, it’s not a dilemma.
    Are your gay marriage concerns political concerns?
    Are your gay marriage concerns moral concerns?

    … [gay marriage legislation] does not compromise me at all.

    Nor me.

    I am to live in peace with my neighbours in liberty and equality, not impose my values on them via the State.

    I agree.
    Is accepting gay marriage one of your values?

  4. Reed, Louisa Wall’s Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill seeks to

    make it clear that a marriage [for the purposes of the Marriage Act] is a union of 2 people regardless of their sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

    This (re)definition is meant

    to ensure that [the Marriage Act’s] provisions are not applied in a discriminatory manner.

    On the one hand, I fail to see how such a (re)definition is either necessary or desirable. On the other hand, I don’t have a problem with it as such.

    Is accepting gay marriage one of your values?

    I think I don’t understand the question.

Leave a Reply to Richard Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *