tcbear said:

---

Quash - you mistakenly believe that God ordained all people should have the right/freedom to engage in sexual intimacy. The bible actually teaches that sexual intimacy is reserved for the limited circumstance of enriching a marriage between a man and a woman. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals are commanded to abstain from sexual intimacy outside of that circumstance. Once again, classic false logic from the gay lobby playbook. You assume God ordained that all people must have complete, unlimited sexual freedom, and then you complain that the Word expressly limits the exercise of that freedom.

In addition, your argument conveniently ignores the fact that many (if not most) people who identify as homosexual are actually bisexual and can indeed enjoy sexual intimacy in a heterosexual marriage.

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

quash said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

quash said:

---

tcbear said:

---

It is not "certainly unclear" how the bible addresses people who are born homosexual. In fact, it is abundantly clear in Scripture that we are all born with a sin nature. The fact that we all have a propensity to sin does not mean our sin ceases to be sin.

How we battle against our sin nature via reliance on the Lord is what matters.

You have swallowed the false logic of the gay lobby hook, line, and sinker.

---

Why would a deity create a person that lives the same gender, and then tell that person that intimacy is an abomination? That God says "thou shalt not be fully human"?

---

answered a thousand times over for you

---

Not once. And certainly not by quoting the bible.

---

you claim there is no deity. For grins, let's say you are correct. Where then would you want this answer to come from?

Be honest, no answer will satisfy you so, therefore, no source will either.

ps...thanks for setting the rules for me. I'm not sure how I've made it this far without you.

---

tcbear said:

---

Quash - you mistakenly believe that God ordained all people should have the right/freedom to engage in sexual intimacy. The bible actually teaches that sexual intimacy is reserved for the limited circumstance of enriching a marriage between a man and a woman. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals are commanded to abstain from sexual intimacy outside of that circumstance. Once again, classic false logic from the gay lobby playbook. You assume God ordained that all people must have complete, unlimited sexual freedom, and then you complain that the Word expressly limits the exercise of that freedom.

In addition, your argument conveniently ignores the fact that many (if not most) people who identify as homosexual are actually bisexual and can indeed enjoy sexual intimacy in a heterosexual marriage.

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

quash said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

quash said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

quash said:

---

tcbear said:

---

It is not "certainly unclear" how the bible addresses people who are born homosexual. In fact, it is abundantly clear in Scripture that we are all born with a sin nature. The fact that we all have a propensity to sin does not mean our sin ceases to be sin.

How we battle against our sin nature via reliance on the Lord is what matters.

You have swallowed the false logic of the gay lobby hook, line, and sinker.

---

Why would a deity create a person that lives the same gender, and then tell that person that intimacy is an abomination? That God says "thou shalt not be fully human"?

---

answered a thousand times over for you

---

Not once. And certainly not by quoting the bible.

---

you claim there is no deity. For grins, let's say you are correct. Where then would you want this answer to come from?

Be honest, no answer will satisfy you so, therefore, no source will either.

ps...thanks for setting the rules for me. I'm not sure how I've made it this far without you.

---

An honest answer would be quite satisfying.

---

This question has been asked and answered repeatedly going back into BaylorFans. You just don't happen to like the answer.

Then counselor, you shout down your own statement that it's not been answered by saying "certainly not by quoting the Bible" referring back to those previous answers. You're usually much sharper than this.

( psssst.....If this were a courtroom, this is the point you would withdraw the question)

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

tcbear said:

---

Quash - you mistakenly believe that God ordained all people should have the right/freedom to engage in sexual intimacy. The bible actually teaches that sexual intimacy is reserved for the limited circumstance of enriching a marriage between a man and a woman. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals are commanded to abstain from sexual intimacy outside of that circumstance. Once again, classic false logic from the gay lobby playbook. You assume God ordained that all people must have complete, unlimited sexual freedom, and then you complain that the Word expressly limits the exercise of that freedom.

In addition, your argument conveniently ignores the fact that many (if not most) people who identify as homosexual are actually bisexual and can indeed enjoy sexual intimacy in a heterosexual marriage.

---

One, I chose my words purposefully. I did say anything about unlimited sexual freedom. I specifically limited it to a couple.

Two, we have the terms " homosexual " and "bisexual" for a reason. Because one is not the other. You could just as blithely State that many heterosexuals are bisexual and can enjoy sexual intimacy in a bag marriage.

---

You are correct in those statements, quash. The distinction I raise is the point that we are discussing christian relationships.

Like it or not, Christians are limited by scriptural prohibition not only to heterosexual intercourse, but only within a monogamous marital condition. Pre-marital and extra-marital sex is also sin.

This is difficult for a lot of people to accept, but scripture is clear.

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

tcbear said:

---

Quash - you mistakenly believe that God ordained all people should have the right/freedom to engage in sexual intimacy. The bible actually teaches that sexual intimacy is reserved for the limited circumstance of enriching a marriage between a man and a woman. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals are commanded to abstain from sexual intimacy outside of that circumstance. Once again, classic false logic from the gay lobby playbook. You assume God ordained that all people must have complete, unlimited sexual freedom, and then you complain that the Word expressly limits the exercise of that freedom.

In addition, your argument conveniently ignores the fact that many (if not most) people who identify as homosexual are actually bisexual and can indeed enjoy sexual intimacy in a heterosexual marriage.

---

One, I chose my words purposefully. I did say anything about unlimited sexual freedom. I specifically limited it to a couple.

Two, we have the terms " homosexual " and "bisexual" for a reason. Because one is not the other. You could just as blithely State that many heterosexuals are bisexual and can enjoy sexual intimacy in a bag marriage.

---

You are correct in those statements, quash. The distinction I raise is the point that we are discussing christian relationships.

Like it or not, Christians are limited by scriptural prohibition not only to heterosexual intercourse, but only within a monogamous marital condition. Pre-marital and extra-marital sex is also sin.

This is difficult for a lot of people to accept, but scripture is clear.

---

I think you are correct as to the what. I don't get the why.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

tcbear said:

---

Quash - you mistakenly believe that God ordained all people should have the right/freedom to engage in sexual intimacy. The bible actually teaches that sexual intimacy is reserved for the limited circumstance of enriching a marriage between a man and a woman. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals are commanded to abstain from sexual intimacy outside of that circumstance. Once again, classic false logic from the gay lobby playbook. You assume God ordained that all people must have complete, unlimited sexual freedom, and then you complain that the Word expressly limits the exercise of that freedom.

In addition, your argument conveniently ignores the fact that many (if not most) people who identify as homosexual are actually bisexual and can indeed enjoy sexual intimacy in a heterosexual marriage.

---

One, I chose my words purposefully. I did say anything about unlimited sexual freedom. I specifically limited it to a couple.

Two, we have the terms " homosexual " and "bisexual" for a reason. Because one is not the other. You could just as blithely State that many heterosexuals are bisexual and can enjoy sexual intimacy in a bag marriage.

---

You are correct in those statements, quash. The distinction I raise is the point that we are discussing christian relationships.

Like it or not, Christians are limited by scriptural prohibition not only to heterosexual intercourse, but only within a monogamous marital condition. Pre-marital and extra-marital sex is also sin.

This is difficult for a lot of people to accept, but scripture is clear.

---

I think you are correct as to the what. I don't get the why.

---

That's where prayer and contemplation matter, I'd say.

Outside the faith, the decision seems one of pure self-interest. Other priorities drive the believer.

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

tcbear said:

---

Quash - you mistakenly believe that God ordained all people should have the right/freedom to engage in sexual intimacy. The bible actually teaches that sexual intimacy is reserved for the limited circumstance of enriching a marriage between a man and a woman. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals are commanded to abstain from sexual intimacy outside of that circumstance. Once again, classic false logic from the gay lobby playbook. You assume God ordained that all people must have complete, unlimited sexual freedom, and then you complain that the Word expressly limits the exercise of that freedom.

In addition, your argument conveniently ignores the fact that many (if not most) people who identify as homosexual are actually bisexual and can indeed enjoy sexual intimacy in a heterosexual marriage.

---

One, I chose my words purposefully. I did say anything about unlimited sexual freedom. I specifically limited it to a couple.

Two, we have the terms " homosexual " and "bisexual" for a reason. Because one is not the other. You could just as blithely State that many heterosexuals are bisexual and can enjoy sexual intimacy in a bag marriage.

---

You are correct in those statements, quash. The distinction I raise is the point that we are discussing christian relationships.

Like it or not, Christians are limited by scriptural prohibition not only to heterosexual intercourse, but only within a monogamous marital condition. Pre-marital and extra-marital sex is also sin.

This is difficult for a lot of people to accept, but scripture is clear.

---

I think you are correct as to the what. I don't get the why.

---

That's where prayer and contemplation matter, I'd say.

Outside the faith, the decision seems one of pure self-interest. Other priorities drive the believer.

---

I've done plenty of contemplating, I think you are correct that it comes down to faith.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

tcbear said:

---

Quash - you mistakenly believe that God ordained all people should have the right/freedom to engage in sexual intimacy. The bible actually teaches that sexual intimacy is reserved for the limited circumstance of enriching a marriage between a man and a woman. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals are commanded to abstain from sexual intimacy outside of that circumstance. Once again, classic false logic from the gay lobby playbook. You assume God ordained that all people must have complete, unlimited sexual freedom, and then you complain that the Word expressly limits the exercise of that freedom.

In addition, your argument conveniently ignores the fact that many (if not most) people who identify as homosexual are actually bisexual and can indeed enjoy sexual intimacy in a heterosexual marriage.

---

One, I chose my words purposefully. I did say anything about unlimited sexual freedom. I specifically limited it to a couple.

Two, we have the terms " homosexual " and "bisexual" for a reason. Because one is not the other. You could just as blithely State that many heterosexuals are bisexual and can enjoy sexual intimacy in a bag marriage.

---

You are correct in those statements, quash. The distinction I raise is the point that we are discussing christian relationships.

Like it or not, Christians are limited by scriptural prohibition not only to heterosexual intercourse, but only within a monogamous marital condition. Pre-marital and extra-marital sex is also sin.

This is difficult for a lot of people to accept, but scripture is clear.

---

I think you are correct as to the what. I don't get the why.

---

That's where prayer and contemplation matter, I'd say.

Outside the faith, the decision seems one of pure self-interest. Other priorities drive the believer.

---

I've done plenty of contemplating, I think you are correct that it comes down to faith.

---

Hardly.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

tcbear said:

---

LQuash - you mistakenly believe that God ordained all people should have the right/freedom to engage in sexual intimacy. The bible actually teaches that sexual intimacy is reserved for the limited circumstance of enriching a marriage between a man and a woman. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals are commanded to abstain from sexual intimacy outside of that circumstance. Once again, classic false logic from the gay lobby playbook. You assume God ordained that all people must have complete, unlimited sexual freedom, and then you complain that the Word expressly limits the exercise of that freedom.

In addition, your argument conveniently ignores the fact that many (if not most) people who identify as homosexual are actually bisexual and can indeed enjoy sexual intimacy in a heterosexual marriage.

---

One, I chose my words purposefully. I did say anything about unlimited sexual freedom. I specifically limited it to a couple.

Two, we have the terms " homosexual " and "bisexual" for a reason. Because one is not the other. You could just as blithely State that many heterosexuals are bisexual and can enjoy sexual intimacy in a bag marriage.

---

You are correct in those statements, quash. The distinction I raise is the point that we are discussing christian relationships.

Like it or not, Christians are limited by scriptural prohibition not only to heterosexual intercourse, but only within a monogamous marital condition. Pre-marital and extra-marital sex is also sin.

This is difficult for a lot of people to accept, but scripture is clear.

---

I think you are correct as to the what. I don't get the why.

---

That's where prayer and contemplation matter, I'd say.

Outside the faith, the decision seems one of pure self-interest. Other priorities drive the believer.

---

I've done plenty of contemplating, I think you are correct that it comes down to faith.

---

One way to look at this, I think, is to recall the account of David and Bathsheba. The Old Testament says that one day David was walking around his balcony enjoying the view, and the view that day happened to include Bathsheba bathing herself. David got a woody and decided he wanted her. Bathsheba, however, had a husband, and that meant David had a problem.

So David ordered Bathsheba's husband, Uriah, to go to battle. A very nasty one, from which Uriah did not return.

Technically, David was authorized as king to order Uriah to go into battle. And technically, there was nothing with the king comforting a widow. And since Bathsheba was a widow and not divorced, there was technically nothing wrong with David starting a relationship with her.
But if you recall the incident where the prophet Nathan spoke to David, God was not placated by technicalities. In God's eyes, David was guilty of a lot of sins, including having Uriah murdered so David could chase Uriah's wife.

What does this have to do with homosexuality? It matters, because God's view of sexual conduct is built on integrity and God's purpose, not technicalities or our personal preferences. The Bible makes clear that while sex is meant to be pleasurable (read the Song of Solomon sometime if you doubt this), it is also clearly meant to be within marriage, between one man and one woman.

So what to say to those who have sexual desire for people of the same sex? It would be the same thing we should say to those who do not want to wait for marriage, or who think an 'open marriage' is OK, or any other digression from the scriptural standard. As long as the participants are able to make a genuine decision of consent, we should not hate the decision but cannot bless it as approved within or by the Church. I say this, because I believe Jesus encountered a number of people who engaged in sexual sin, seeing as he met with prostitutes, soldiers, and various Romans. On the one hand, Jesus did not treat those people as vile, but neither did He excuse such behavior as acceptable within the Church. I would say we should follow that example.

In the broader view, we each should be careful to stay true in our own behavior there is nothing in scripture to suggest God is going to treat heterosexual lust with a different standard than he applies to homosexual lust. And it's easy to blame someone else for a sin we do not see ourselves committing, and in so doing to ignore our own offenses of arrogance and personally dishonorable behavior. If you have eyed women in the Victoria's Secret show, maybe you shouldn't tell God how bad the gays are in their desires.
The final point I would make, is that I believe we are all meant for great things, and to have a relationship of some kind with every other person we meet. Since Jesus ran into enemies, that means that some of our relationships must be adversarial, but even then it is important for us to be patient and forgiving, which is difficult for some people, as many here know I struggle to do, as one obvious example. Other people may be passing acquaintances, but respect and courtesy help the day be fruitful in being a blessing as we have been blessed ourselves. But it's also important to understand what we once knew as children that sex is not really that important, or it should not be, compared to everything else we are meant to do. It's also important to understand that you can love a person without having a sexual relationship with them. Many of us are able to accept that kind of relationship within families, but certain friendships can be vitally important to our lives in ways that even romances cannot do. Certain men who have been together in battle know this, as do people who have been police or firefighters at the same station. Some teachers know this bond, as do certain other classes of work and service. Keeping sex out of the relationship keeps motives pure and helps focus on the mission. We understood this an instinctive level before we hit puberty, but it got lost for many of us after that.

Part of the journey to self-discovery and true identity depends on discarding useless distractions.

---

tcbear said:

---

It is not "certainly unclear" how the bible addresses people who are born homosexual. In fact, it is abundantly clear in Scripture that we are all born with a sin nature. The fact that we all have a propensity to sin does not mean our sin ceases to be sin.

How we battle against our sin nature via reliance on the Lord is what matters.

You have swallowed the false logic of the gay lobby hook, line, and sinker.


True we are all born to sin but homosexuality is not a sin. The Bible only knows homosexual behavior and only in the most idolatrous since - temple prostitution and the Roman and Greek party scene.
Those are abhorrent. Homosexual behavior anal and oral sex outside of marriage is wrong just like for heterosexuals but, like straights, anal and oral sex are ok.
And no Mark is about divorce not the marriage of one and one woman. The Pharisees begin the discussion with a question divorce a man and woman so naturally Jesus answers that question.

---

quash said:

---

I've done plenty of contemplating, I think you are correct that it comes down to faith.

---

Coke Bear said:

---

quash said:

---

I've done plenty of contemplating, I think you are correct that it comes down to faith.

---

What is the primary purpose for our sex organs?

---

Coke Bear said:

---

quash said:

---

I've done plenty of contemplating, I think you are correct that it comes down to faith.

---

Have you considered looking at what the Natural law states about our sexuality?

What is the primary purpose for our sex organs?

It's obviously for reproduction.

Same-sex actions can never be procreative.

Of course not. I have vasectomy and my wife has a hysterectomy. Can we no longer have sex?
Sex is more than procreation but also recreational and intimidate, a loving act. Gays have that same need as straights - intimacy and fun (within marriage of course)

---

Coke Bear said:

---

quash said:

---

I've done plenty of contemplating, I think you are correct that it comes down to faith.

---

Have you considered looking at what the Natural law states about our sexuality?

What is the primary purpose for our sex organs?

It's obviously for reproduction.

Same-sex actions can never be procreative.

---

cinque said:

---

If love and justice occupied the imaginations of Christians as much as the perceived sins of others, we'd all be better off.

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

cinque said:

---

If love and justice occupied the imaginations of Christians as much as the perceived sins of others, we'd all be better off.

---

If only God's word occupied the imaginations of those with a secular worldview.....

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

tcbear said:

---

Quash - you mistakenly believe that God ordained all people should have the right/freedom to engage in sexual intimacy. The bible actually teaches that sexual intimacy is reserved for the limited circumstance of enriching a marriage between a man and a woman. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals are commanded to abstain from sexual intimacy outside of that circumstance. Once again, classic false logic from the gay lobby playbook. You assume God ordained that all people must have complete, unlimited sexual freedom, and then you complain that the Word expressly limits the exercise of that freedom.

In addition, your argument conveniently ignores the fact that many (if not most) people who identify as homosexual are actually bisexual and can indeed enjoy sexual intimacy in a heterosexual marriage.

---

One, I chose my words purposefully. I did say anything about unlimited sexual freedom. I specifically limited it to a couple.

Two, we have the terms " homosexual " and "bisexual" for a reason. Because one is not the other. You could just as blithely State that many heterosexuals are bisexual and can enjoy sexual intimacy in a bag marriage.

---

You are correct in those statements, quash. The distinction I raise is the point that we are discussing christian relationships.

Like it or not, Christians are limited by scriptural prohibition not only to heterosexual intercourse, but only within a monogamous marital condition. Pre-marital and extra-marital sex is also sin.

This is difficult for a lot of people to accept, but scripture is clear.

---

I think you are correct as to the what. I don't get the why.

---

That's where prayer and contemplation matter, I'd say.

Outside the faith, the decision seems one of pure self-interest. Other priorities drive the believer.

---

I've done plenty of contemplating, I think you are correct that it comes down to faith.

---

Hardly.

---

What are your thoughts on this, Sam?

---

There are a number of evidence-based arguments supporting Scripture or refuting the popular wisdom on this issue. Homosexuality is neither innate, immutable, nor interchangeable with heterosexuality in the sense that it's an equally stable orientation. There is a strong tendency toward heterosexuality not only in the general population, but also in the gay population. So while one could blithely say that straights are equally able to enjoy gay relationships, it's nowhere near true.

On the larger societal level, it's also untrue that gay marriage is interchangeable with traditional marriage. Almost everything we consider essential to marriage - exclusivity, permanence, etc. - is based on the fact that heterosexual relationships produce children. The experience of other cultures tells us that same-sex relationships are a whole other phenomenon, with their own structure and their own rules. The invariable result of encouraging them is that they are more common, women are less valued, and birth rates are low.

Kyle brought up polygamy, which is another example of the problems with non-traditional arrangements. The principle of "one man, one wife" is radically egalitarian, especially in societies that are otherwise unequal. Where polygamy is allowed, the wealthiest and most powerful men always acquire most of the women along with everything else. This is why polygamous countries are among the most violent and unstable.

I could go on, but you get the idea. The state has always concerned itself with marriage because marriage matters to society in real, measurable ways.

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

tcbear said:

---

Quash - you mistakenly believe that God ordained all people should have the right/freedom to engage in sexual intimacy. The bible actually teaches that sexual intimacy is reserved for the limited circumstance of enriching a marriage between a man and a woman. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals are commanded to abstain from sexual intimacy outside of that circumstance. Once again, classic false logic from the gay lobby playbook. You assume God ordained that all people must have complete, unlimited sexual freedom, and then you complain that the Word expressly limits the exercise of that freedom.

In addition, your argument conveniently ignores the fact that many (if not most) people who identify as homosexual are actually bisexual and can indeed enjoy sexual intimacy in a heterosexual marriage.

---

One, I chose my words purposefully. I did say anything about unlimited sexual freedom. I specifically limited it to a couple.

Two, we have the terms " homosexual " and "bisexual" for a reason. Because one is not the other. You could just as blithely State that many heterosexuals are bisexual and can enjoy sexual intimacy in a bag marriage.

---

You are correct in those statements, quash. The distinction I raise is the point that we are discussing christian relationships.

Like it or not, Christians are limited by scriptural prohibition not only to heterosexual intercourse, but only within a monogamous marital condition. Pre-marital and extra-marital sex is also sin.

This is difficult for a lot of people to accept, but scripture is clear.

---

I think you are correct as to the what. I don't get the why.

---

That's where prayer and contemplation matter, I'd say.

Outside the faith, the decision seems one of pure self-interest. Other priorities drive the believer.

---

I've done plenty of contemplating, I think you are correct that it comes down to faith.

---

Hardly.

---

What are your thoughts on this, Sam?

---

There are a number of evidence-based arguments supporting Scripture or refuting the popular wisdom on this issue. Homosexuality is neither innate, immutable, nor interchangeable with heterosexuality in the sense that it's an equally stable orientation. There is a strong tendency toward heterosexuality not only in the general population, but also in the gay population. So while one could blithely say that straights are equally able to enjoy gay relationships, it's nowhere near true.

On the larger societal level, it's also untrue that gay marriage is interchangeable with traditional marriage. Almost everything we consider essential to marriage - exclusivity, permanence, etc. - is based on the fact that heterosexual relationships produce children. The experience of other cultures tells us that same-sex relationships are a whole other phenomenon, with their own structure and their own rules. The invariable result of encouraging them is that they are more common, women are less valued, and birth rates are low.

Kyle brought up polygamy, which is another example of the problems with non-traditional arrangements. The principle of "one man, one wife" is radically egalitarian, especially in societies that are otherwise unequal. Where polygamy is allowed, the wealthiest and most powerful men always acquire most of the women along with everything else. This is why polygamous countries are among the most violent and unstable.

I could go on, but you get the idea. The state has always concerned itself with marriage because marriage matters to society in real, measurable ways.

---

Love to see an unbiased source for the claim in the bottom half the first paragraph.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6605886_Prevalence_and_Stability_of_Sexual_Orientation_Components_During_Adolescence_and_Young_Adulthood

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6605886_Prevalence_and_Stability_of_Sexual_Orientation_Components_During_Adolescence_and_Young_Adulthood

---

Thank you Sam. As much for the tone as for the support for your position.

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6605886_Prevalence_and_Stability_of_Sexual_Orientation_Components_During_Adolescence_and_Young_Adulthood

---

Thank you Sam. As much for the tone as for the support for your position.

---

Youre the last person on earth who should be talking about tone.

---

Kyle said:

---

I too would be curious on Sam's perspective, but I agree with OldBear that there is a difference between Christian marriage and civil marriage. I have never opposed gay civil marriage, and I do not oppose any type of civil marriage: bigamy, trigamy, etc. Once we re-define, hard to justify any restrictions.

---