XPost: alt.law-enforcement, alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns   
   XPost: alt.survival   
   From: mygarbagecan@verizon.net   
      
   "Alex W."  wrote in message   
   news:1mhrz4oerenz8.1hmrfvu6y122n$.dlg@40tude.net...   
      
   On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 10:18:44 -0700, Wayne wrote:   
      
   > "David J. Hughes"  wrote in message   
   > news:w2PVv.315284$y33.307835@fx28.iad...   
   >   
   > On 9/27/2014 10:41 AM, Wayne wrote:   
      
      
   >> # To restrict a person's rights by virtue of their anatomy is as   
   >> primitive   
   >> # and indefensible as restricting their rights by virtue of their   
   >> religion   
   >> # or skin colour.   
   >>   
   >> Funny you mention religion.  You know damned well that same sex   
   >> "marriage" is a direct attack on religious beliefs.   
   >   
   >   
   > # How do you figure that?   
   > # As along as Bob and Bill, or Jane and Amy, aren't married in your   
   > # church, how does that affect or harm you, your church or your beliefs?   
   >   
   > It equates homosexuality with hetero marriage.  Some churches object to   
   > that.   
      
   # As long as these couples do not insist on getting married in   
   # those churches, why should they be bothered?   
      
   Do you really think that homosexual activists would stand for churches to   
   NOT perform homosexual marriages.   
      
   The goal is to force all wedding planners, photographers, bakers, churches,   
   etc. to accept homosexuality.  It is NOT about rights.   
      
   Universal legal unions without the government ever using the word marriage   
   is the only fair way for all.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)