And . . lest we lose track of what *I* originally posited, I believe that there should be a civil union seperate from religious marriages to avoid these issues.

Polygamists?

Before reading this, I was in favor of the government recognizing same sex marriages, but I think Zubaz brings up a good point that the government should not involve itself in marriages and should simply recognize civil unions for both same sex and heterosexual couples as that way it doesn't have to involve itself in any religious matters and is more neutral.

I'm no biblical scholar so I can't speak for Sodom and Gomorrah but I have heard from some sources that the story may have been mis-interpretted.

As for Greece and Rome they didn't fall because they accepted homosexuality, they fell due to corruption and other reasons, homosexuality was NOT the cause of their demise.

How sacred is the institution when the divorce rate hovers around 50%?  I'm sorry but I just don't buy this argument at all.  I don't see how homosexual relationships are going to affect the stability of the family.

So what?  Why does that mean that it isn't time to change.  Convential thinking for centuries was that the earth was flat, so why not expand our horizons by allowing gay marriage?

You call it an aberration but for homosexuals it isn't.  For nature it isn't, chimpanzees (genetically very similar to humans) tend to be bi-sexual.

None that have the same legal ramifications as marriage which is where the real argument here lies.  Why can't someones life partner be in their hospital room when they are dying?  Why can't they file taxes jointly?  Why can't they automatically inherit the others estate upon their death?

huh?  They don't want to redefine marriage as only being between two members of the same sex, they just want it to be between to consenting adults.  How is that discrimination?  Only allowing heterosexual marriage is discriminating against homosexuals.

So by this argument I am not married because I don't believe in god, is that correct?  If so then why am I bestowed the same rights and privileges of a married couple simply because I am with someone of the opposite sex?

I understand what you're saying and you actually have hit on an ongoing debate amongst Christians.  There are some who believe we should stay out of any type of government business or lawmaking and just concentrate on the word of God and being good citizens of the Kingdom of God.  We are representing the King in heaven, not the kings of the earth.  I know some religious groups that actually frown on voting.  Jesus said we are to be in the world but to be separate from the world at the same time.  They take that to the extreme I guess. 

Then there are others who believe that we need to use our influence and knowledge of Godly things and try to engage our culture by being on boards and in government and all that goes with that. 

My husband is a strong Christian man and separates himself from the culture of the world and says..."let them do whatever it is they want because we're not called to be political."  As a preacher he stays out of the political fray. 

Jerry Falwell and James Dobson started their own persepective ministries The Moral Majority and Focus on the Family years ago because they saw Christians were, in their minds, not engaging the culture and being in their minds, too passive when it came to politics.  They saw more and more of our Christian rights being trampled on coming out of the sixties and early seventies so they became leaders of the Christian right to help influence the Christians to action. 

I tend to vaciliate between the two sometimes.  I look at Christ and see how he wasn't political in the least and said basically to bring the world the good news. If they listen to you, you've gained a brother and if they don't move on.  He never insisted we become political zealots.  But then on the other hand if we don't speak up in a democracy such as ours our children will be force fed a belief system that is far from where God wants us to be. 

And the law of man does affect everyone.  If we are living in a culture that is perverted (and we are fast becoming universally perverted) of course it's going to affect us.  We can't live in a dirty neighborhood without getting some dirt on ourselves as we walk in and amongst the filth. 

Afraid so.

Why not? Hospitality is a duty towards others, homosexuality is, if anything, a sin against G-d alone. I find it far more likely for a loving god to destroy a city for failing its duty towards others than for that god to destroy a city for failing its duty towards the god.

I'm afraid it's the traditional rabbinic viewpoint. And I am positive that it makes a lot of sense to anyone who doesn't have an irrational fear of homosexuality.

"Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fullness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw this."

Rabbi Nachmanides wrote in the 13th century CE:

"According to our sages, they were notorious for every evil, but their fate was sealed for their persistence in not supporting the poor and the needy."

Hardly. The Talmud tells us more of the cities and it specifically says that it was about hospitality (or lack thereof). This is hardly revisionism. The Talmud was compiled between 200 and 500 CE.

The modern meaning (in the last few centuries) is "deviant sexual intercourse", its original meaning was "acts of wickedness" and it referred to all the wicked acts of the people of Sodom.

I believe Islam believes in the same connection between Lot and homosexuality as you do. But I'm afraid that is the revisionism. The original tale just speaks of inhospitality, it took hundreds of years to make it into a story about homosexuality and another thousand to change the meaning of the word.

(In modern German "Sodomie" refers to sex with animals. Another way of reading the story, perhaps.)

But you are applying todays values to the story.  Maybe at the time that it "happened" it was more wicked to be inhospitable.  Like I said I'm not biblical scholar but just a thought on another possible interpretation.

Sure the laws of man affect everyone but who are you to tell us what is perverse and what isn't?  Perversion is a very subject thing much like morality.  What is perverse and/or immoral to you is not to someone else.  It is NOT the governments place to dictate what is moral and what is not.  Homosexualtiy between two consenting adults does not harm anyone so the government shouldn't restrict it.  If the government allows homosexual civil unions that does not force you to recognize it as a marriage, it merely grants the same benefits as marriage to the couple from a legal standpoint.

El-D....let me ask you this and please answer me honestly...have you read Chap 18 (end of)  and 19 of Genesis in context to get the plain meaning of the text? 

It has nothing about applying today's values one twit.  The text has NOTHING to do with hospitality unless you want to say "gross inhospitality" meaning they wanted to "know" them way too well. 

We've gone a bit off track  . . but theses things do happen.

Interestingly, in California similar disscussions are going on.  I still think it would be nice if the state stayed out of God's business and vice versa

Court hears Prop. 8 arguments

Attorneys trying to persuade the California Supreme Court to overturn the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage began making their case to the justices this morning.

Shannon Minter, an attorney representing same-sex couples who sued to overturn Proposition 8, told the justices that their decision last year legalizing gay and lesbian marriages was "a resounding and eloquent affirmation of our Constitution's foundational guarantee of equal citizenship. It is today's case that will determine whether future generations of Californians can continue to count on that guarantee."

The state's voters overturned the court's 4-3 ruling when they approved Prop. 8 in November. Attorneys for same-sex couples, local governments led by San Francisco and state Attorney General Jerry Brown are in court this morning urging the court to overturn the constitutional amendment, which declared that marriage only between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

[More]

To prevent confusion:

While my rabbi too told the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gamora as the result of the cities' lack of hospitality and egoism, rabbi Machmanides actually lived in Israel in the 13th century when he said the same thing.

First of all I'd love to hear more of you officiating at marriages, Zubaz! How wonderful! Amazing how much I learn every day (Thank you, G-d).

I believe we're all hobbled by terms: Holy Matrimony, Marriage, Civil Union all denote something different to me:

1. Holy Matrimony: A voluntary wedding held between 2 individuals in keeping with the Laws of a specific religion and complying with the law of the State in which it is licensed by a person holding the required status by that religion and the State to perform the act.

2. Marriage: A voluntary wedding held between 2 individuals agreeing to abide by the laws of the licensing Stae and any additional contractual agreements (rules) mutually agreed upon officiated by a licensed State or other, mutally agreed upon official duly licensed to perform the act.

3. Civil Union: A voluntary, contractual union/association between two individuals performed by a mutually agreed upon licensed individual.

To me, category 3 is a legal catch all for folks not wishing for whatever reason to marry.

To be clear: I absolutely favor Marriage in all it's forms as a stabilizing Societal influence.

I do not believe the Creator of the Universe has anything to do with our human folly and prejudices. The opposite. Homosexuals (male and female) have equal rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  More: In Americas, we have the obligation (all of us) to fight to the death for our fellow citizens and their EQUAL rights. And to keep religion FAR away from our legal processes.

Don't quote sections of the Gospel/Tanach/Qur'an, etc. Quote it's Spirit.

This Republic, OUR Democracy is not for the faint hearted nor the hypocritical.

It is a fierce, vibrant and driving force which exposes and expunges the double standards and prejudices which hobble us all.