Re: Anti-gay-marriage amendment
- From: rich hammett <bubbarichau@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:19:23 -0000
Minun olisi pitänyt tietää, olisi pitänyt tietää,
olisi pitänyt tietää KUKA SINÄ OLET, John O'Conner:
rich hammett wrote:
My understanding of the church's belief is this:
The church believes that marriage is a holy relationship among man,
woman, and God. Any effort to change that relationship is a threat to
the basic definition of the relationship. Words have meaning, and it
appears that the church is determined to maintain the meaning of
"marriage" that it has used up to this time. If man-man or woman-woman
relationships similar to marriage become "marriage" then traditional
marriages between man and woman are no longer "marriage."
I think this describes some portion of the church's interest in the
issue. They are trying to protect a sacred institution called "marriage."
So, we shouldn't call "man-woman-woman" relationships "plural marriage"?
We're gonna have to change a LOT of mormon history books!
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ The Bill Clinton of RSFC
.
- References:
- Anti-gay-marriage amendment
- From: rich hammett
- Re: Anti-gay-marriage amendment
- From: John O'Conner
- Anti-gay-marriage amendment
- Prev by Date: Re: Anti-gay-marriage amendment
- Next by Date: Re: Anti-gay-marriage amendment
- Previous by thread: Re: Anti-gay-marriage amendment
- Next by thread: Re: Anti-gay-marriage amendment
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
