Shared publicly  - 
 
I'm not terribly political, but some days you just have to write a meme.
446
189
Drew Kidder's profile photoMcKenzi Cherry's profile photoAlec Wisner's profile photoTori Lutz's profile photo
210 comments
 
I agree... sometimes, memes have to be shared!
 
Share away, buddy. This one, I've been waiting to write all morning.
 
So true!!!! Marriage is not between two persons of the same sex. It's common sense, people!!!
 
All right Great Great Grandpa Mitt! Too bad today's Mitt isn't his own grandpa!
 
and you bet they all huddle up together to keep warm and in the morning......we all know
 
the world stage can be daunting: one must be prepared
 
The Law of Marriage is between one Man and one Woman. Only a doomed generation would change that.
 
Why does it matter if its a man or woman? Its a union. And there IS another way weather you like it or not. We are all human.
 
"I'm not terribly political but" your meme was terrible, politically.
 
Not impressive. Humans have been around for 5 million years... 3K is weak.
 
I might run for office so I can find out more about myself. :D

I'm anti-abortion and pro choice. Am I wrong for this or if I vote for either? Just curious.

Mitt needs to hire a democratic historian to assist his aids in creating his messages...to make sure contradictions don't confuse the message. Let's face it, he should just say, "I'm anti-gay or against sharing taxpayers' money with anyone not like me."
 
I cant stand the guy, but he cant be held responsible for what generations did before hand. He's a phony, but the meme is unfair.
 
if his great great grandfather married 12, what has that gotten to do wif his personal view of one man to one woman? this is hw it shld be.
 
he is not responsible for his great-great-grandfathers past...only his!
 
I am confused on why religious beliefs and government don't allow it's people the freedom to choose their own lifestyle. It is also strange to me that the same people that say they are true patriots are the ones that make sure both religion and the government rule our lives in this country, yet they are afraid of a socialistic society.
 
Oh, come on, +J.C. Kendall how is it unfair? He's saying something that's untrue. "3000 years" is what he said, and it's demonstrably untrue in his own family! I'm not saying he's a horrible person, or that he isn't entitled to his opinion, I'm just saying he's factually out to lunch, and his own not-too-distant ancestry is proof of that fact.
 
Scarry - remember Americans are strange at voting time, they voted for Bush big time, Reagen!! another weird choice, Arnie Schwazzzzzz, there are mumerous bad choices, that is why it is scarry - if they vote Obama out, we may as well consider all our social welfare and fairness gone as Reagen and Maggie Thatch did - destroyed NHS, Rich got richer......... Current probs can be traced to that time.
 
Laws are meant to be changed Joseph. Whose says we are doomed? I believe it's a move towards a non-religious enlightenment. An understanding that we are all different and need to acknowledge those differences. Myself, just celebrated 23 years of marriage to the SAME women. I've grown enough as a human to realize that's not for everyone.
 
Actually, I think it is relevant, as it highlights how blinkered and unrealistic the "marriage has always been one man, one woman" idea is. In many places and many times (some of those places and times pretty close), it's been something else altogether, and you know what? Society did not collapse.
 
This is a logical error. Just because someone in his family a hundred years ago believed something like that, doesn't mean his belief is automatically disqualified. Furthermore, Romney's beliefs and code of morals are not debunked by one mans life choice... just because one person did something doesn't make it right. 
 
Agree Jean wright (comment about 10 above), but with the Cons-Libs, it will be an uphill struggle, I see the elderly and vulnerable suffering terribly over their term in power - question is How can these people be prepare? Not easy for them, we must help them as a society, vote this lot out ASAP.
 
HAHAHAHA!!!! the irony of this is too awesome!
 
+Sean Archer When talking about "3000 years", he is referring to societal norms, not the history of his own religion. You are mixing the two, when he did not. You can juxtapose them, but you did not make the distinction. You asked, dude. Like I said, I cant stand the guy, but I just thought you took a bit of licence.
 
I didn't type this somebody else got on this and said it
 
+Kyle Emrick it isn't a logical error in the least. His belief isn't what's at issue here. What's at issue is his assertion that "marriage has been one-man-one-woman for 3000 years." That's what he said, and that's what is made hilarious by his ancestry. I don't give a damn what he believes. He believes that Joseph Smith was given golden plates by God himself. I think that's a bit far-fetched to say the least, but he's welcome to it. What he's not welcome to do is define what marriage has historically been while ignoring his own family's recent history.
 
Come on you guys, get real, this guy is truly weird, if he has the time to think about such deep things (irony, in case someone thinks I mean it!!!), what will he doo with real issues that matter in the world as a whole, the globalisation and destruction of social fairness started by Reagen and Thatcher, now we have Cameron-Clegg, if this guy get power, we are in trouble.
 
HE TOOK MY COMPUTER AND SAID IT I'm SERIOUS I would never say something like that
 
Just telling' it like it is!
 
his really words? tech I smell.
this word is real but is he real?
 
Romney is definitely NOT the sharpest knife in the drawer. 
 
Anyone who's read some of my recent posts knows that I am about promoting rational debate over issues like this, and not becoming just two sides screaming at each other, while nothing gets accomplished, because minds close over the insult. How many more years are we going to practice this "the other guy sucks, so vote for me" kind of politics? I dont know about you, but I dont pay much attention to people who insult me. You cant open minds with vitriol, you gotta be willing to hear them out, and expect same. Causes like Gay Marriage are hurt, when we come at the other side as neanderthals, instead of human beings with a simply opposing point of view.
 
So Greg are you afraid of the "unknown"? non-religious enlightenment you say? Really? So you are not really all that mature as to put your faith and trust into something that you cannot see with your "own eyes"? It that takes faith to believe in something that you cannot see evidence of. You haven't matured at all sir.
 
Hahaha funny cause it's true.
 
+J.C. Kendall I see where you're going, but he too didn't say, "3000 years of societal norms, my own family and all of Mormonism excluded because we're a wacky crew." I just think it's funny. And I didn't expect a hundred zillion people wading in here. I'm happy to see you all. I just didn't expect it.
 
yes ooooooooooooooooooo
 
had 12 wives...

Not Husbands. Just sayin'.
 
+J.C. Kendall is right about civility. Let's keep it upbeat and civil. Anybody slinging personal insults is going in the Ka-Block machine.
 
I discussed this post with 2 people in a hangout.
 
1 Woman, 1 Man, 1 Marriage, simple.
2 Fagellas = abomination!
 
+Sean Archer i believe it IS his belief he's stating. i haven't seen his original quote, but when someone says something like this they're usually referencing the bible or the book or mormon (which contains the bible) or whatever religious book they go to. and in the new testament of the bible (which has been around for over 2000 years) the way it "has been" is that marriage = one man + one woman...
 
Please help as I can never get an answer. Please know that I am gay, but I don't really care about getting married.

If two folks of the same sex did get married, what would it do to you? How will your daily routine of your life be impacted? Please be specific. IMO, it just seems silly to be against something that makes no difference. I don't like country music, but I don't have to ban it from the airwaves. I just change the channel.
 
Coming from the viewpoint of one who believes in God and follows what is taught in the Bible, marriage was originally established by God to be between one man and one woman (Adam and Eve). Throughout history God also allowed, on certain occasions for reasons unexplained, that a man take more than one wife (many of the Old Testament prophets had more than one wife). However, never was it allowed to be between two men (or multiple men) or two women (or multiple women). Therefore, those of us who believe in God revere marriage as a sacred ceremony to bring together a man and a woman.

So, why does it matter if same sex couples are allowed to marry? If same sex marriage is legalized, who's to say that laws would not require, by some form of punishment, that religious establishments recognize that marriage also be a union for same sex couples? You are then forcing a belief on those who don't share that belief. Does this mean that we, as religious individuals who believe marriage to be a union only between a man and a woman, are against providing some means for same sex couples to enjoy the same legal status as married men and women? NO! Everyone deserves the same opportunities, no matter what your sexual preference may be.

All States need to do is provide civil unions (or whatever other term same sex couples can agree upon) that allow the EXACT same legal benefits as marriages. The only difference, these civil unions allow for same sex couples. Then, there would be two separate definitions: one (marriage) for differing sex couples, and one (civil unions) for same sex couples. Doing so eliminates any potential future implications of forcing religious institutions to recognize and perform same sex unions because they can choose to only perform marriages, not civil unions.

I, personally, may not agree with the act of homosexuality (love the people, they are wonderful!), but that in no way means I think homosexuals should be discriminated against in any form.
 
"3000 years doing something make it right" can be applied to other things, like the prohibition to eat pork, or slavery. Should we push for those too?
 
I almost went for the hat, but I don't have my laptop with me and hence no photoshop.
 
I think Justin Hicks (racist comment above) is really Romney, same level me reckons, and Americans....
 
+Gustavo MacIntosh again, traditional marriage isn't right because it was done 3000 years ago. It was in place 3000 years ago (and longer) because it was right. According to the Bible.
 
What damage can gay marriage possibly inflict on any country? Tend to your glass houses stone throwers.
 
+Kevin Remley By stating that you are someone who believes in God I appreciate your open-mindedness on the subject. How would you feel if the 'marriage certificate' was replaced with a 'civil union certificate' for all couples gay or straight? Then you could go and have the religious institution of your choosing perform a marriage ceremony.
 
Ok. Checking out for now, folks. Gotta run. Enjoy your bickering. Today's fun was brought to you by the letter "M."
 
Way to pull up information from the distant past. Seems a bit immature. I bet Obama's great great grandfather could've been a murderer or a rapist. So what? That doesn't matter anymore.
 
+Alex Gillett such as...?? And I never said its correct because it's old. But if it were correct it wouldn't matter how old it is.
Keith B
 
umm, +Steven Bowser, read the quote. Or do you think it takes over 3000 years to get five generations? (HINT: it does not)
 
+Stephen Holst That would be fine by me! In fact, in my religion (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints [LDS], same as Mitt Romney), in many countries couples are required to first be married civilly, then a marriage in our Temples can be performed because those countries do not recognize marriages in the LDS Temples. That may happen in other States in the US, too, but I'm only familiar with Utah's laws, where the State recognizes a marriage in a LDS Temple, so couples only have to be married in the Temple, not civilly first then in the Temple. Just as long as the two unions are defined completely separate so that religious groups would never be faced with litigation because they refuse to perform a union of a same sex couple.
 
That iz way to many wives. That man iz nasty.
 
He will say whatever he needs to get elected. He has no backbone to stick up for what is right.
 
+Steven Bowser - the point isn't that Romney's great-great-grandfather was a polygamist who fled the country so he could continue being a polygamist...it's that Mittens is either too stupid or too deceitful (you choose) to recognize that this very fact contradicts every ridiculous thing he says about the institution of marriage.

it's called hypocrisy, and that does matter.
 
+Barack Obama 's father had 3 wives. Two Americans and one Kenyan. No, not his great great great grandpappy.... but his own father! #dreamsfrommyfather
 
I find it funny that a lot of people here did not reply to +Kevin Remley post above. Did it make too much sense? Or do g+ posters just like bickering?
 
The GOP: factually inaccurate and proud of it.
 
+Vincent Chiarella nope. it would be hypocrisy if romney had more than one wife, or was in support of gay marriage. which he hasn't and isn't.
Translate
 
It's not like he could have controlled what his great great grandfather did..it isnt hypocritical. He is his own man and makes his OWN opinions and decisions like everyone else! It's dumb to even put this.
 
My parents were heavy smokers - put me off smoking for life! Why not look to the person and not his ancestry, crikey I'm sure if you went back far enough we would all have skeletons in the cupboard. Ummm... native American Indians spring to mind!
 
This is ridiculous. The fact that Romney's ancestor had 12 wives should not color his remarks any more than the fact that a random man in the middle east today has 12 wives. Why are we held accountable or deemed responsible for the actions of our ancestors? That is antithetical to the American way.
 
whether 12 women and 1 husband
it was still man and woman NOT man -man, can u imagine 12 men marrying one man?
marriage is not American football game or NBA!!!!
 
I agree between a man and a woman. But lately Hollywood makes a joke out of marriage (I.e. Kim k.) Ultimately we need to stop discriminating.
 
Lunacy. Marriage is a state function. It means what we say it means. It does not exist as a sacrament until after the reformation. The puritans and their ethic need to stop running and face the truth: There is no certainty, save what ye find for yourself. That is the message. No dogma. None.


 
+Sean Archer, I think what +J.C. Kendall and a few others are saying is that, his statement is that the 'Definition' of marriage has been one man and one woman, which has nothing to do with unions that don't follow that norm, whether it's in his own family or not.

Right or wrong or whatever, I think that's what he's saying, not that all 'marriages' in the past 3000 years have been between one man and one woman.
 
Lonnie, what are you even talking about? Seriously...
Just because Obama sucks shouldn't mean we ignore the hypocrisy of his opponents. Please learn to logic.
 
He didn't do it himself! But at least he has the right thought process down! One man and One Women were meant to be together through marriage, but sadly we have had it differently.
 
Personally I think there should be two marriages. One is seperated from the church and religious ties. Marriage A (or what ever you want to call it) is more like a civil union, but you have the same benefits and legal clasification as people who are married today. Marriage B is completly optional. Marriage B is the ritual and spiritual foundation dictated by whichever religion you follow. So you do Marriage A if you want to be married in the eyes of the government, and Marriage A and B to be married in both the eyes of the Government and God.
 
+Nick Sena I get that. I really was just having a bit of fun, because it seemed rather ironic, and I do think that his ancestor 'defined' his multiple-marriage as a legitimate marriage, despite what society's definition may have been. He ran to Mexico in order that he might continue to define it thus. So, to me, it seems pretty silly that he is saying, "This is how it's been for 3000 years, and this is how it ought to be," when he likely wouldn't be here if not for his polygamist progenitor.

Also, Polygamist Progenitor is the name of my new band. We'll be playing at the Double Door this weekend.
 
I think God intended it always to be one man and woman. Even our "great-great grandfather" had 12 wifes... sure they did, but read some of the bible stories about the people who had multiple wives, such as David. David had many wives, and concubines, but if you read further he had a lot of problems in those marriges, God didnt bless them because of their sin. Then read further to the story of David and Bathsheeba, Bathsheeba was Davids "general", well while the general was in war, David slept with his wife, after getting her pregnant, he demanded that his general also a good friend to be killed, so David could have Bathsheeba to himself. I personally dont want to have to be married to two people, how stupid is that! I want to be loyal to one person, and one person ONLY! I dont want to make the same mistakes that my "great-great grandfather" made.... I mean how many times do you hear that we're suppose to learn from our mistakes, well from the looks of it, we arnt learning at all...

But that's just my opinion.
 
And your point would be? If everyone had had 12 wives, that would be one thing.

Taking one case out of billions to prove a point. Classic liberal.
 
and does the world need any more dumb population, that destroys the earth continuously?
 
i was raised gay, but it often does not work out, it´s a small meme, which not many people support. i have no problem with being not gay anymore,
but i still think it good to find out with what one feels good. but to be not supported makes it so much harder, that i might try it again in 70 years
 
+Alex Gillett I wanted you to list at least one thing that was done 3000 years ago because 10 to 1 it would have been a one time command from God in the Bible where he told people to kill others, etc... those kinds of "examples" are a little off because they weren't made as a general rule. Anyway it IS relevant because Romney DOES believe in the Bible so therefore he DOES believe marriage to be defined as he stated. Not because people had been doing it but because it was set up this way by God.
 
Wow, can't believe all the Bible thumpers on here... I have an idea, you guys follow your Book, and the gay men and women can follow their hearts. Nobody gets hurt. Religious folks need to understand that they are following THEIR beliefs, not everyone's beliefs. How absolutely arrogant of religion to but-in on this topic. And don't even start the, "The next thing will be certain people wanting to marry their cat or dog." Remember, that is your brain thinking up this rubbish. Maybe you need to look inside yourself as to why you have this fear. This probably is totally in YOUR minds thumpers!!!
 
Romney is a hypocrite and a manipulator, a liar and a bully.
 
You can believe whatever you want to believe but it doesn't mean it's true.
 
I would like a few comments about the message I previously posted. I believe it will take this discussion in a different direction.
 
The Great Great Grandfather was a sinner then
 
Having multiple wives was never a sin unless it led someone to worship other gods.
 
But not a single husband!! Focus, stay on point.
 
Like most other religious leaders and their sins, this only applies to the people they preach to, not themselves.
Translate
Translate
 
Christians completely ignore the 10 commandments... and then they freak out about gay marriage!? Yeah, right...
 
+ All Americans. When the time comes pls don't vote this guy in, give Obama a chance to finish what he has started - this guy is bad for the whole world - the poor and vulnerable especially. pls pls, don't make the same mistake as with Bush, etc. We will hope to make amends here in the UK and remove Conservatives and Lib-Dems, and Cameron/Clegg, by that time though the poor and vulnerable here wll need much help, so we should work together, let us do it, we can and must.
Translate
 
Marriage is a term I have heard it used in ways other then two people like in food so if two people are in love they should be able to commit to each other and if we are defining it with words I would have to say marriage fits. As for god and religion I an sure god is fine with it too, he told me so.
 
Technically speaking, Romney's Great Great Granddad didn't marry all 12 wives at once. Each marriage consisted of one man and one woman. While I like the intent, execution of this meme was poor.
 
Prakash, but we Americans are kind of stupid with an attention span less than an infant's. If Romney says a lie often enough, he is given "the benefit of the doubt". Huh??????
 
I PERSONALLY PUT IT IN THE LORD'S HANDS, BECAUSE IN HEAVEN THERE IS NO GENDER ANYWAYS, BUT TO BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY GOD ABOVE CREATED MAN AND WOMAN. AGAIN, I PUT IT IN GOD'S HANDS, AND I AM DONE WITH THIS ISSUE. WE ALL SHOULD BE EQUAL, YES BUT, IN ORDER FOR THE HUMAN RACE TO EVOLVE THE CORRECT WAY IS GOD'S WAY! NOT HUMAN WAYS!
 
+Owl Jones If Christian's would keep their beliefs to themselves I would have no problem. No gay person is asking you to marry another man. This is personal decision and not our (the people not involved) business. That was my point. It's as if Christians think their beliefs trump everyone else's beliefs. If the law is 'yes' it is not forcing you to do anything. But if the law is 'no', then it does force your code of ethics on everyone else. So you can accuse liberals of any juvenile thing you'd like, but you still haven't given me/us any reason why your beliefs should be forced on someone else with differing world views.
 
God can use anyone and anything - look at the people He used in the Bible - no one is perfect.
 
Oh, dear god, please use me to have 12 husbands!
 
God wrote in the Bible that a marriage should be a woman and a man!!!!!
Translate
 
any person who breaks Gods law will be judged whether on earth or after they die!
 
Who cares about Mitt Roney? I am not voting for him!
 
Lets just cut to the chase and make it Marriage = whoever, with whatever, and as many as you like. Will that satisfy everyone?
 
Yea, and obama really tells the truth. He is nothing but a "sock puppet", president zero!
 
hahahaha, did ObAMA YO MAMA really say that.... thats messed awp
 
how can he control what his great great grandfather did? he can only control the way he thinks and be consistent with it, but I guess that you will use anything to judge him, it doesn't matter that he wasn't even born then...useless...
 
What does Jesus have to say about gay marriage? After all I'm pretty sure things changed a little once he came around. I don't think he even mentions the topic tbh.
 
+Sean Archer — disregard the haters. this meme is funny. and, yes, i think it is pertinent— not because someone should be considered in light of their great-grandfather's choices, but more simply, because what he says is so blinkered and patently false that it's hilarious to disprove the statement using anecdotal evidence from the man's own family. straight hilarious, yo.
 
that was rude of him to say that
 
Aaaand, that's how you get blocked, folks. Yes, you. The one calling 'libs' termites. This is my house, and personal attacks don't fly. I may have missed a couple in this flood of comments, but if I see it, you can bet it's gone and you're getting blocked. "Whose house? Run's house." Real close to closing comments because I don't have the time to police this crap right now. You're welcome to you opinion, but if you spew venom you're going to get blocked/deleted. We're not libs or conservs. We're people, and we are all just doing our best to get by on this planet. If you want to spout off hatefully, then do it on your own page, not mine. I don't mind debate, and I don't mind opinions that vary wildly from my own. I called out some ironical thinking that seemed rather amusing to me. That's it. This is not an excuse to brow-beat someone with another point of view.
 
Cracking Meme, shame the religious nuts are all over it yet again.
 
what his 'great great grandfather' did years ago has nothing to do with his view or opinion today.
 
we need to stand up for the word of GOD not man. the bible says its not in Gods will that man should lay with man an woman with woman ck it out.
 
The crime of homosexuality is one of the greatest of crimes, the worst of sins and the most abhorrent of deeds, and Allaah punished those who did it in a way that He did not punish other nations. It is indicative of violation of the fitrah, total misguidance, weak intellect and lack of religious commitment, and it is a sign of doom and deprivation of the mercy of Allaah. We ask Allaah to keep us safe and sound.

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) Loot (Lot), when he said to his people: ‘Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?

81. ‘Verily, you practise your lusts on men instead of women. Nay, but you are a people transgressing beyond bounds (by committing great sins).’

82. And the answer of his people was only that they said: ‘Drive them out of your town, these are indeed men who want to be pure (from sins)!’

83. Then We saved him and his family, except his wife; she was of those who remained behind (in the torment).

84. And We rained down on them a rain (of stones). Then see what was the end of the Mujrimoon (criminals, polytheists and sinners)”

[al-A’raaf 7:80-84]

“Verily, by your life (O Muhammad), in their wild intoxication, they were wandering blindly.

73. So As‑Saihah (torment — awful cry) overtook them at the time of sunrise.

74. And We turned (the towns of Sodom in Palestine) upside down and rained down on them stones of baked clay.

75. Surely, in this are signs for those who see (or understand or learn the lessons from the Signs of Allaah).

76. And verily, they (the cities) were right on the highroad (from Makkah to Syria, i.e. the place where the Dead Sea is now)”
 
+1'd, because this meme doesn't state any opinion of the topic.
However, it's not like he had any control over the actions of his grandfather. I don't believe this was meant to start some terrible religious, sexual, or other debate, it was simply a humorous observation.
tl;dr: Shut up about politics, religion, and sexual orientation and enjoy a good observation.
 
I do not think it is a religious question. For example in the former communist state and in the remains one, gay marriage is illegal also.
Marriage is a social institution aimed to benefit the society by his probability to procreate and rear children. In return Society confers special benefits to people married, and those benefits are precisely what gays people are after of. I personally do not think that to love and be loved you need to be married I know countless people that are not married and very happy. The question is the reduced to the benefits.
I sincerely dont have any position on this.
 
Ahh yes, compare a man's current beliefs to those of an ancestor that he had zero control over. Perfectly logical.
 
+Michael Jeffries For the last time, it's not his beliefs. It's the fact that he's stating something is true that's demonstrably not true within the recent past and within his family. His beliefs don't enter into it even a little.
 
Marriage was never religious to begin with it was an economic device!
and with our changing society - the purpose of it is not to provide benefits to child rearers as many couples go throughout life happy and healthy without children.

Plus if you view it as a religious institution, well then why the hell is government involved at all. They shouldn't be touching the concept even with a 12 foot pool. let various institutions create their own definition if they must the government is responsible for providing us all the same rights.
 
The legal definition of marriage is one man and one woman. The generally accepted definition in normal language is one man and one woman. To force change the definition of something to mean something else is just silly. If 2 men or 2 women or more, or any combination for that matter want to come to an arrangement in their domestic lives, let them. As long as they're not harming anyone. Just don't call it marriage because it's not. 
 
Yes , 1 man , 1 woman. Any other is way is sin. Cannot tolerate same sex marriages. Look what happened to Soddom and Gomorrah!
 
Ignorance is alive and well in America. Marriage of the heart, mind and soul is blind to gender. You bible-thumpers are the biggest hypocrites on the planet. God made all of us...the way He intended "us" to be. I'm straight, and could care less who marries whom. Get over yourselves and focus on your own "sins"...From the dictionary, section 3, after 1 and 2 define a man and woman: "the legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of two PEOPLE to live as a married couple, including the accompanying social festivities".
 
Here is the problem as I see it. Part of religion is the understood responsibility to "help spread the word", whatever that word may be. I always take note that Christians come under assault for their views, but followers of Islam do not, though their views are orders of magnitude more extreme.

There is nothing in religion about "mind one's own business" because if that ever happened, there would quite soon be no practitioners. No religion survives without peer support or pressure. Left to our own devices, we generally tend to get over such belief systems and become better at living and let others live.

A "good" Christian or Muslim is going to share and try to persuade via their own devices. Members of belief systems are simply the majority, regardless of what many of us want to believe. It serves no purpose to attack these people, for their positions do not come from an evaluation of what these issues mean to them individually, but how their attitudes will be evaluated spiritually.

So the attacks, the "bible thumper" stuff, might make one feel better for the release of anger, but it is not going to persuade anyone, and will likely cause others to dig in and not listen. I am not a Christian, and when I evaluated the issue based on MY belief system, which favors the individual, I could not defend Marriage for some and not for all, regardless of gender or orientation.

The point is, any suggestion that disagreement on a point means that one side is less intelligent, less capable of reason, or does not deserve their own opinions serves only to divide, which is exactly how ineffective politicians cause us to vote knee-jerk for one party or another. When we can begin to address each issue for its individual impact upon us, without demonization of where one stands, we might actually see progress with respect to these rights.

I will remind each of you that Obama has been President for 4 years. His stance changed the day AFTER a poll (of likely voters, not registered voters) was released that shows that as of now, he simply cannot win. Anyone who believes that he had an epifany on the issue is sadly naive, but in keeping with what I said above, they are entitled to that view without coming under assault from me.

I was not always civil on this forum, something I greatly regret, but I am now, and I invite others to give it a chance.
 
+Nate Cook Said I might not catch all of them. I missed it on my phone. I'll go nab that one too.
 
As far as I can tell after a little genealogy research, Mitt’s great-great-grandpa had eight wives, three of which he actually polygamously married (after expatriating to Mexico), and five of which were siblings of his plural wives and whom Helaman Pratt married by proxy after they died in adolescence so they could have “spirit children” in the hereafter. Given the history not only of his own family, but of Utah generally and the LDS Church in particular, it is patently absurd -- or dangerously uninformed -- for Mitt to say it has been one man and one woman for 3,000 years. Did he never read Mark Twain’s account of Salt Lake City in “Roughing It”? Would he say that Brigham Young only had one true wife and the twenty-something others with whom he had children -- as well as Brigham himself -- were sinners? Many Old Testament prophets (e.g., David) had multiple wives.
 
My apologies. I'll delete my earlier post.
 
Bill Johnson... But then, God also created gay people right?
 
It's ironic that the Mormon church opposes legalizing gay marriage, guess they didn't learn anything from the experience of being denied equal rights and religious freedom.

Then again they are trying to whitewash their history rather than learn from it.
 
Yes, cause he obviously decides for his great-grandfather.
 
+Nellie Otoupalik I completly agree with what you said, marriage should ONLY be between one man and one woman, but no, that is not just your opinion, the is the truth of the bible :)
 
well you cant hold someone back on what there past relatives did , when they had nothing to do with it , pretty hypocritical if you ask me
 
If all of your parents in the family tree, would have been of same sex, non of you would have born to them...!
 
However there were many instances of gay relationships a long time ago. Maybe he has never read Plato's Republic... Or any literature for that matter.
 
+Greg McAteer That's an angle I've never thought about before. Thanks for the insight, as I didn't know about that aspect of the Mormon church (following the law of the land). Still, the declarative statement he made about 3000 years of marriage being defined by one-man-one-woman stands, and there's still no way to square that with the facts, or with his own family's history.

And with that, I think I'm done. This was a cool day for me, watching this thread bubble and boil, and I thank you all for weighing in. Even if I think some of you are way off, and/or completely disregarding what was written in order to push your own agenda or spout off about the word of God. It was a real microcosm of the internet for me. I got some good honest discussion mixed with some idiocy, mixed with a touch of fervor and one or two crazy mis-spelled R U A RAPE-PELICAN comments. Who could ask for more. I'll not be commenting anymore, as I've definitely said anything I have to say on the subject (plus repeating myself a few times for good measure). I'll check in tomorrow to make sure nobody's calling anybody else a "boyband rapist" or a "Liberal Urbanite from Gomorrah." But I'll refrain from engaging anymore on the Mitt-ster here. Hope everybody has a lovely Mother's Day, and anybody who has two moms or two dads, I hope you give them both a hug on Sunday too and tell them how much you love them. G'night G+
 
I'm a very proud Canadian. I am a heterosexual and am in complete awe and baffled by the fact that this issue a matter of controversy in the US. There are many more things on this planet that warrant genuine concern. Ridiculous. Just be kind and love!
 
Sean, this post was great in several way. One way was that it exposed homophobes & bigots. They were immediately BLOCKED. I thinned the herd ;-)

 
yes marriage is b/w man n woman
 
Adamu Ali, you're next. Kiss your ass goodbye.
 
In reply to David Cloutier on May 11th...God did NOT create gay people; He loves all people enough to give us a free will. Read the Bible and disagree with thousands of years and thousands of people all led by and proclaiming the same message by the same Spirit of Truth...doesn't that make you want to at least think twice about how sure you are of yourself?!
 
it is just common sense,
nature teaches it, animal practice it
who do u want to deceive, i wonder why they want to adopt babies.
 
The Dinosaurs all turned gay...look where THAT got them! :)
 
I'm Mormon, and the "polygamy" argument is so old and tired that it shows how desperately misinformed the world still is about the history of Mormon practices, polygamy specifically. Greg McAteer above is the closest to understanding the truth on this whole comment chain. Historically, all throughout the Bible God from time to time commands certain people to practice polygamy, for the purpose of building up the population of God's people more quickly. Our beliefs are that God commanded his prophet, Joseph Smith, to have some of the men practice polygamy (only after permission from their first wife, I might add), in order to build up the population of His people. When that was no longer necessary, the commandment was revoked. So don't criticize the historic practices of the Mormon people. They were simply following what they believed to be God's word, which is what we continue to do today. If you have a problem with our belief in a prophet receiving revelation from God, then address that. That is the root concern. Because if Joseph Smith was a prophet, then his revelations from God really were revelations from God. If he wasn't, then they weren't. And I believe he was. And before you go attacking him as a person, be sure that you know your history, because I've heard just about every attack there is.
 
My comment and big-time wish: Americans, please learn from history, and do not repeat the Bush era - if you vote for Rom, then the World will never take Americans to be intelligent - MUST MUST vote for B. Obama, please, we are all pleading, and hoping Americans do the correct thing.  History does not bode well though,the dementia-Alzheimer's patient, Ronald Wilson Reagan, then Bush, and another Bush, who had not been abroad in his life, apparently!!  So, if this reflects even 10% of the what the world will think if Americans oust Obama, then trust me, you will very soon become the World Second Power, China will be laughing, all the way to thier banks - they have already taken over half of Africa while America slept - Chinese influence is greater than American in MANY parts of Africa.  Left as is, we will be in deep trouble again.
 
Still getting plusses, after all this time...
Thanks, Mitt!
Add a comment...