Don't worry, Torrent. I'm a Christian and a member of the Socialist Party.

Believer: You have a perfect right to take a stand against what you perceive as sin, but we don't make laws in this country based on religion. When it comes to ethics (which is what we try to base our laws upon) no one has yet been able to demonstrate how they are harmed by allowing same-sex marriage.

So many of you act like gay marriage affects you directly. If you don't want gay marriage, then don't marry someone of the same sex as yourself. And if gay marriage actually affects anyone negatively, then why hasn't anyone sued the state claiming damages? . . . Well????

For those of you who keep insisting that our laws be based on religious texts, (i.e. prohibiting gay marriage) are you willing for your descendants in the U.S. to live under Sharia law? If not, then it seems you'd be working tirelessly to keep religion from influencing our law-making process.

Fine. Then all the undocumented workers will flee Georgia, none will immigrated there, and big business execs in Georgia won't have the cheap labor force that they've been so used to exploiting. Serves them right.

Rlelln and Rule - - wow, those are excellent points. I get tired of their claim that sex and marriages are for producing children. Fine. Then if one really believes that, then ONLY have sex if you want to produce a child. If not, then be celibate. Put your money where your mouth is.

Hyperion, I was being facetious precisely for those who claim that bestiality is next. Have you not the capacity to recognize clever satire when it's presented? (Apparently, Believer does)

Now that gay marriage is becoming normal, I plan to petition the court to marry my chocolate Labrador, Portia. (But don't worry - - it won't be a same-sex marriage.)

Her audience probably consisted of a lone, quizzical golden retriever.

Rlelln: I couldn't have said it better myself. The conservative heterosexuals want to "protect the sactitiy of marriage" but have we ever seen them implement any laws to do so that might affect THEM? No way!

Online - - good for you. You've done your homework and have identified the main point of contention regarding Christian Science with orthodox Christianity. (The substitutiory atonement.) But I have a problem with your statement that "nothing" in CS represents historic Christianity. As far as atonement, in all my theological studies, I have found nothing that explains how Jesus' death on the cros...more

Online - - good for you. You've done your homework and have identified the main point of contention regarding Christian Science with orthodox Christianity. (The substitutiory atonement.) But I have a problem with your statement that "nothing" in CS represents historic Christianity.
As far as atonement, in all my theological studies, I have found nothing that explains how Jesus' death on the cross atones for our sins. How does it do that? What's the efficacy of his crucifixion toward our sins being forgiven?
Anyway, for me, CS has a lot more truth to it than any other denomination. For me anyway. (Believe me, I've done my homework)less

Sorry, timland. A badly-written blog is hardly a source of facts.

What teachings of Christian Science do you believe to be false? I'd like to know. Thanks.

I'm disagreeing with your figure of 270 million. Please cite your source for this. Thanks.

Typical Southern Baptists: Always proudly touting "American freedom" and "freedom of religion" - - - that is, until it applies to someone who's not white, male, upper-middle-class, heterosexual, Protestant. Then, they suddenly lose the ability to put words into action. It's a good thing Jesus didn't act like that.

Yes, there’s all this evidence out there that if we allow Jim and Matt to marry, it will lead to dog weddings, betrayed children, obscene curriculum, 50-wife families, jailed clergy, earthquakes, floods and socialism. Wow! If only we had kept Jim and Matt from marrying . . . .

Let's see. The U.S. began by stealing the land of the Natives, committing genocide against them, then building its economy on the backs of hundreds of thousands slaves for a couple hundred years, then engaged in two world wars by carpet bombing hundreds of cities and innocent people, has been the only country to use nuclear weapons (on innocent people, too) and then catered to the selfish greed of...more

Let's see. The U.S. began by stealing the land of the Natives, committing genocide against them, then building its economy on the backs of hundreds of thousands slaves for a couple hundred years, then engaged in two world wars by carpet bombing hundreds of cities and innocent people, has been the only country to use nuclear weapons (on innocent people, too) and then catered to the selfish greed of big business and spent half its wealth on offensive military forces. . . . Yep. I'd definitely give it an F when it comes to morals.less

Mr. Mohler, If this couple had been allowed to discriminated due to their own religious beliefs about sex, then I, as a Roman Catholic could have refused married couples if any of them had planned on using contraception while having sex. Even the married ones. Even YOU. That's how precedence works. Is that the precedent you want to be established?

Ooops - - I meant "with" contraception.

I think that any member of congress that voted for the repeal should have to live out their term without health insurance. And having no pre-existing conditions covered after that. After all, that's what they're advocating for millions of others. Maybe living in someone else's shoes for a while would give the GOP a bit of empathy.