Weddings For those in Maryland..same sex marriages?
- Thread starter dunlopj
- Start date
If it's actively promoted, you stand the chance of offending almost 50% of the general population. Maryland voters approved the bill by a 52 to 48 margin.
So I won't be changing anything and while I 100% approve of same sex couples, I just wanted their unions (and all the legal ramifications it comes with) to be called something other than a marriage.
I believe that title is reserved for a heterosexual couple.
Having said that, I have no problems performing at a same sex couple event. Heck I've done them already.
Some things maybe shouldn't be shared openly on this forum!!!
:-(
Please tell me why my statement is so controversial!
Are you against doing a same sex couple event?
Is gay money less green than straight money... Does it fill the wallet less... Do other merchants refuse gay money... If no than who cares...
Gay marriage is only opposed by ignorant bible thumpers who think it has anything to do with religion... They are just trying to impose religion on government and are also the first to cry foul when government tries to impose itself on religion... Take the recent contraception vs the Catholic church issue... Gay unions are about equality in legal terms not godly ones.
Gay marriage is only opposed by ignorant bible thumpers who think it has anything to do with religion... They are just trying to impose religion on government and are also the first to cry foul when government tries to impose itself on religion... Take the recent contraception vs the Catholic church issue... Gay unions are about equality in legal terms not godly ones.
SemiRetired DJ
DJ Extraordinaire
No, the color of the money does not change; however, if the DJ is of a "moral" bent he/she should be prepared for some things that may cause him/her to rethink the ability to do these types of events.
I only did one in my DJ career and I came in with the thought that the money is still green, who cares. I wasn't even of a moral bent at that time. I had seen ladies dancing with ladies at other events so that did not shock me. I had even seen guys dancing with guys as a joke so that part did not shock me. But some other things... Well, they just turned my stomach.
The DJ doing these types of events needs to be prepared. That's all I am saying. I am kind of glad I did the event because it gave me an education on myself and what I could handle.
That is not a fair statement to make. If you know me, and I think some of you do, I am a Bible thumper these days but I base it all on faith not religion. Religion is man's way of creating a god in his own image. Faith is trust in the true God.
What the Bible says is that if a man lays with a man as a woman or a woman lays with a woman as a man then it is an abomination. It is talking about the sex act. It says nothing about cohabitation or even marriage. We humans leap to sex being a part of marriage.
Now, personally, if two folks of a gay bent want to cohabitate and be considered as a married couple in the eyes of human law, fine, but call it something other than marriage. Let's continue with the traditional definition of marriage and call the gay thing a civil union but with all the rights of marriage.
Now, for the DJs in Maryland that choose to not perform DJ services for these types of union ceremonies based on moral or religious feelings, you may still be able to get away with turning them down with that argument but be prepared to be sued at some point. The courts in Maryland are becoming overwhelmingly liberal and may uphold the argument that you cannot turn these down. I'm just saying.
The problem Tom is now you have the ACLU involved and it seems your personal beliefs and convictions are worthless. Things are takin place all over the country where people don't want to do said events and they are being accused of discrimination so people have to be careful in the steps they take in the interview.
The bible was written by man and is interpreted by man... Don't make religion part of my government... This country was founded on separation of church and state... It was important to our fore fathers that religion not affect government and government not to interfere with religion... Keeping gays from being able to be legally bound and able to obtain the same legal status and benefits of a man and woman based on a religious writing is wrong.
DjDennis
RIP- My Dad (2011), Sister (2013) and Mum (2017)
SemiRetired DJ
DJ Extraordinaire
Jacob, Exactly.
Rob:
This we can agree to disagree on but consider this.
It is a matter of faith. My faith says that the Bible was penned by man as inspired by God; in other words, God lead them to pen what they penned.
The Bible does not need to be interpreted by man because it interprets itself. To make a long lesson short; if you read one verse in the Bible that does not seem to make sense, keep reading, you will soon see it explained.
Actually religious expression was the basis of the founding of the United States and the Bible was openly taught in schools funded by public taxation. The foundation based on the separation of church and state is a myth. The reality is that the government cannot tell anyone what their religious beliefs are to be and the church cannot tell anyone what their political beliefs are to be. There is nothing in the constitution that says that the Bible cannot be taught in school or part of the expression of a political body. There is nothing in the constitution that prohibits prayer or other forms of faith expression on government grounds. It is only certain modern laws that do this; but they were not part of the basis of the formation of this country.
You are correct about the non-interference part; the government is not to interfere in your religious beliefs and the church is not to interfere in your political beliefs; but that does not mean that time cannot be set aside to allow people that choose to pray to say a prayer of their own choosing; those that do not wish to pray can just observe a moment of reflection.
I don't have a problem of two people that are of the same sex that cohabitate and want to be considered as having the same rights as married people having those rights; just don't call it a marriage. Reserve marriage for heterosexual unions. Call the gay thing a civil union.
Rob:
This we can agree to disagree on but consider this.
It is a matter of faith. My faith says that the Bible was penned by man as inspired by God; in other words, God lead them to pen what they penned.
The Bible does not need to be interpreted by man because it interprets itself. To make a long lesson short; if you read one verse in the Bible that does not seem to make sense, keep reading, you will soon see it explained.
Actually religious expression was the basis of the founding of the United States and the Bible was openly taught in schools funded by public taxation. The foundation based on the separation of church and state is a myth. The reality is that the government cannot tell anyone what their religious beliefs are to be and the church cannot tell anyone what their political beliefs are to be. There is nothing in the constitution that says that the Bible cannot be taught in school or part of the expression of a political body. There is nothing in the constitution that prohibits prayer or other forms of faith expression on government grounds. It is only certain modern laws that do this; but they were not part of the basis of the formation of this country.
You are correct about the non-interference part; the government is not to interfere in your religious beliefs and the church is not to interfere in your political beliefs; but that does not mean that time cannot be set aside to allow people that choose to pray to say a prayer of their own choosing; those that do not wish to pray can just observe a moment of reflection.
I don't have a problem of two people that are of the same sex that cohabitate and want to be considered as having the same rights as married people having those rights; just don't call it a marriage. Reserve marriage for heterosexual unions. Call the gay thing a civil union.
SemiRetired DJ
DJ Extraordinaire
This thread is sooo gay...
If I saw two guys making out on the dance floor, I'd probably puke.
If it were two chicks, I'd join them, and do both.
Queer words from you Rick.
I have done several same sex marriages in Iowa....who would have thought Iowa..... Usually the biggest issue is how the want to be introduced.... Mrs. and Mrs.. Mr. and Mrs... stuff like that. Other than that they have normal receptions. Granted I think all that I have done have been a little on the conservative side when it came to showing public affection. I have only had to look away a few times.
I'm with Thomas (JHC That's twice today ) The couple of gay weddings I have been involved with were very conservative.
Now I just typed a long rant about hypocorasy in relegion and the bible but I changed my mind on that can of worms. Like Dennis says well then have a nice day
) The couple of gay weddings I have been involved with were very conservative.Now I just typed a long rant about hypocorasy in relegion and the bible but I changed my mind on that can of worms. Like Dennis says well then have a nice day
