subgenius wrote:1. Maintain that marriage occurs between a man and a woman adheres to its Divine nature. Just because a couple does not belong to a church, believe in God, or practice any religion does not exempt them from compliance...by default they are adhering to the design, and arguably drawing nearer to God (knowingly or unknowingly).
MeDotOrg wrote:.So the 'divine nature' of of marriage allows heterosexual Satan worshipers to marry because ' by default they are adhering to the design, and arguably drawing nearer to God (knowingly or unknowingly)'? The divine nature of marriage is not tarnished by worshiping Satan, because at some point the couple might draw nearer to God? The divinity of your marriage is not defined by who you are and what you worship when you enter into the marriage, but rather what you might do sometime in the future?
subgenius wrote:nope...i knew that if i typed slow you might get it...and you are getting closer....so i will type even slower.
If the same Satan worshipers choose to "not kill" in any particular circumstance then the same concept applies.
Notwithstanding the absurdity of your example.
subgenius wrote:And yet you say "i have stated that it was of a divine nature...you have stated that it was God-given...do not confuse my position with yours, mr. straw man."
MeDotOrg']Well at this point I must admit I am a bit confused. If the raison d'etre for allowing heterosexual Satan worshipers to marry is that they 'are arguably drawing nearer to God', could you please explain to me the difference between the divine nature of marriage and marriage being God-given?[/quote]
[quote="subgenius wrote:The difference is lost to your reason, so i am comfortable using your concept for the purposes of this discussion.
My response and criticism remains the same. My proposed legal remedy remains the same...and my assertions, having yet to receive response from or rebuttal from you, also remain the same.
The difference is lost to my reason? How convenient for you. The easiest way to defend your position is to say it is lost to my reason. It saves you from actually having to advance a logical argument. The easiest way to not expose your reasoning to scrutiny is to hide your reasoning.
If you're uncomfortable with the phrase 'God-given', I would be happy to use the phrase 'Ordained by God', which is the description most commonly given in LDS literature. If you mean something different by 'divine nature' please summon the courage to say what you mean.
My argument remains the same: If marriage is an institution 'Ordained of God' or 'God-given' why shouldn't it be against the law for agnostics, atheists, Satan worshipers, Buddhists, or anyone who does not accept the definition of marriage as 'Ordained by God' to marry?
Marriage exists as both a secular and religious institution. No one is interfering with the rights of the Mormon Church not to marry homosexuals, just as no one interfered with the right of the church to allow black men to join the priesthood. We allow divorce in our society, even though Catholics (with rare exceptions) do not. But the Catholic Church is not forced to grant divorces.
As for your 'Thou Shalt Not Kill' argument: Yes, there is a religious command against murder. But are you claiming there are philosophies and cultures that have prohibited murder which have never heard of the Ten Commandments? Sorry, but the taboo against murder is not exclusive to traditional Judeo-Christian values.
Personally I would prefer to live next door to a homosexual Episcopalian couple than a heterosexual Satan worshiping couple. But because that is my preference does mean not it should be yours. If you want to believe that homosexual marriage is an abomination, that's your right. Just don't interfere with my right to hold different convictions. I just find it remarkable how tolerant this society is of heterosexual Satan Worshipers and how intolerant of homosexual Episcopalians or Reform Jews. It seems morally disingenuous.