Let the Joyous news be spread: New Jersey votes yes on Gay civil union!

Carlene · November 6, 2006

Betsy...

I have a really great CD that explains just about everything there is to know about Catholicism. Would you like me to burn a copy and send it to you?

gadgetlady · November 6, 2006

The issue here is one of informed consent.

In your opinion and judgment. Certainly not in hers, or she wouldn't have been party to the wedding ceremony!

Betsyjane · November 6, 2006

Carlene- I really appreciate the offer. I'm not ready at the moment. I'm enjoying the wonderful speaking, without any dogma. I think I'll keep it clear for now. He is an amazing priest....... But thanks. Betsy

TruBlueSue · November 6, 2006

"As to the Song of Solomon, depending on the translation you read (I never liked any translation until I read the NIV, primarily because I hated Shakespearean English and didn't understand what I was reading -- and I think there are a lot of problems with a lot of translations not being true to the original text), it can be a very steamy book. I've kept my kids away from it until they're older because of the questions that might arise!"

__________________

Gadgetlady, I guess my bible that's in hebrew and aramaic isn't valid since its not a european language translation. My bad.

gadgetlady · November 6, 2006

"As to the Song of Solomon, depending on the translation you read (I never liked any translation until I read the NIV, primarily because I hated Shakespearean English and didn't understand what I was reading -- and I think there are a lot of problems with a lot of translations not being true to the original text), it can be a very steamy book. I've kept my kids away from it until they're older because of the questions that might arise!"
__________________

Gadgetlady, I guess my bible that's in hebrew and aramaic isn't valid since its not a european language translation. My bad.

Oh, goodness no Sue! If it's in Hebrew and Aramaic and you understand those languages, more power to you! I don't read either of those (or Shakespeare LOL) so I needed something written in English that I could actually comprehend. KJ and NKJ (and many others) are almost as unintelligible to me as Hebrew and Aramaic. There are a lot of things I totally missed or misunderstood in the Bible, even though I attempted to study them, until I started reading the NIV. I would love to go back to original text if I had the linguistic ability.

TruBlueSue · November 6, 2006

I was being a little silly, but you get my drift - all translations are just that - not all concepts, not all phraseologies that are in current use AT THE TIME THE TRANSLATION WAS DONE necessarily capture accurately the tenor or the idiomatic meanings of the text translated. That's why its SO hard to find good literary translators..mediocrity can come in all forms, and this is no exception...

and yes, I'm jewish, and did study Arabic and Aramaic in college...got the hebrew from good old fashioned hebrew school with a couple of semesters in Israel to boot...

If you're really interested in looking at biblical hebrew, you can call your nearest synagoge/temple/shul and ask if they offer a course...there's usually one being run all the time so that people who know modern hebrew can get into the source documents...

Peace,Out all! Got to get my daughter Sarah down to bed..not to mention I have to be at work at 0600...<grin>

Sunta · November 6, 2006

SHOULD IT BE LEGAL? And the POINT of all of this is illustration; for those of you who think it should be illegal, that WE ALL DRAW LINES SOMEWHERE. Some of you seem to draw your lines at polygamy, some at beastiality, some at homosexuality, some at not allowing civil marriage altogether. But you ALL draw lines. And you attack others for where they choose to draw theirs.

I've never met anyone who didn't draw the line at consenting adults. Consenting adults, period. Anything or anyone below the line of consenting adults, no, I would not condone, because honestly, I would view that as abuse. (For example marrying a dolphin.) I do not view Gay people as abusing each other, do you?

I've never heard an argument for inter-species marriage from anyone. Sure there are kooks out there who want to marry a dolphin and no, I absolutely do not condone animal abuse, nor do I condone any behavior that harms anyone or any animal that cannot consent. However, Gay unions do not harm anyone.

What I am curious about, is how Gay unoins threaten straight ones? Will my wedding ring that binds me to my husband suddenly disappear when Gay unions are legalized? I say if, not when, because progress will happen, just like it happened for interracial marriage, desegregation, and many other civil liberties. As humans evolve ever further, progress will occur. I just wish it was sooner rather than later.

Morsaille · November 6, 2006

Dolphins are much too intelligent to get wrapped up in all this nonsense. Can we use platypuses? :tape: :doh:

beversman · November 6, 2006

I must say, to the people that keep bringing up ANIMALS.

The consitution is not written to include animals.

We are dicussing people. Humans.

My dog I suppose has the right to bear arms? Remind me to make him a key to the gun safe.
My dog posseses the freedom of speach? So, if my neighbors complain about his barking... I guess I tell them its his constitutional right?
I believe my dog is a Buddist. I caught him meditating last weekend. Thank goodness for HIS first amendment right.
My dog also growls loudly when I try to reclaim my newspaper from his dog house. But... Oh YES, he is protected against unreasonable searches and seizures -- So, I supposed next time I will need to bring a warrent.

OK, the point here is... constitutional law does not apply to animals.

New Jersey's vote had nothing to do with animals.

This US law is for human beings. No clause needed. Unless we all need clarification that "Rover" can't carry a concealed weapon.

If you understand the 5th amendment doesn't apply to "Fluffy" the Pomeranian, then you are cpable of understanding this vote does not apply to you marrying "Fluffy" either.

gasp :omg:

(ha)

Betsyjane · November 6, 2006

Er, let's see. Yes to gay adult humans. No to animals and minors. Debatable for poygamy (although I enjoyed that commune in the 60s). So...How hard was that?

green · November 6, 2006

Er, let's see. Yes to gay adult humans. No to animals and minors. Debatable for poygamy (although I enjoyed that commune in the 60s). So...How hard was that?

Seems to me like Betsyjane has got it, eh. (By the way, congrats on your upcoming band surgery.)

lisah25 · November 6, 2006

Yep, "Consenting adults" would take care of a lot of those slippery-slope arguements I see.

Betsyjane · November 6, 2006

Thanks. A week from today, I should be just getting home from the surgery, and whining at my husband.

gadgetlady · November 6, 2006

Yep, "Consenting adults" would take care of a lot of those slippery-slope arguements I see.

So everyone agrees, then? Gay, yes. Polygamy, yes. Brothers and sisters, so long as they're adults, yes. Fathers and daughters or mothers and sons, so long as they're adults, yes.

Did I get everything right? Any objections?

lisah25 · November 6, 2006

So everyone agrees, then? Gay, yes. Polygamy, yes. Brothers and sisters, so long as they're adults, yes. Fathers and daughters or mothers and sons, so long as they're adults, yes.
Did I get everything right? Any objections?

Did I say that "consenting adults" was my only criteria? I was addressing the idea that allowing gay marriage would lead to women marrying dolpins, or people marrying under-age kids.