Bishop Malone: Love the sinner, no their civil equality

[EPR89]

Wow, what an idiot.

[1r1shCath0l1c2]

To maine4marriage,

He is not discriminating -- you simply don't like his views.

Just as a side note: I'm not sure what Youtube's copyright laws are, but in my opinion you really shouldn't be using the Bishop's videos if your intent is to trash him.

[defenddoma]

@1r1shCath0l1c2 Wait -- You're seriously suggesting that a church message should (a) be prevented from fair distribution and (b) above scrutiny? That's pretty telling.

And yes: He is backing discriminating in civil law. Most every LGBT person could deal with "simply not liking his views," with the choice of whether or not to follow his views made via church enrollment and attendance. What pro-equality people don' like is that he is pushing those church views into public policy.

[1r1shCath0l1c2]

Friend, it's not discrimination -- not the kind you're thinking of, anyway. Gay marriage is not a matter of civil rights, as many have claimed; it is a matter of personal choice. Also, if you have an issue with a Church message and want to talk about it in the form of a civil debate, that's one thing; but you are making the Church out to be an institution of pure evil, bigotry and oppression. Forgive me if I take issue with that.

[1r1shCath0l1c2]

I don't know exactly what constitutes "fair distribution," having not read the content of fair use laws. I know materials can be used in educational settings and such, but beyond that I'm not too familiar with the rules. Anyway, my concern for fair use applies to ALL intellectual property, not just videos from within the Catholic Church.

Finally, I submit to you that there is a huge difference between forcing one's views into public policy and speaking out on what one knows to be essential ...

[1r1shCath0l1c2]

... to the health, survival and well-being of societies -- ALL societies, at all times and in all places. This is an ethical issue, not a religious issue, and we Catholics have just as much of a right to make our voices heard as anyone else. If the Bishop ever tries to have a law passed that requires everyone to practice devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, THEN you can talk to me about someone trying to impose a Catholic theocracy.

[buddy51]

The god you worship - Yahwee - does not appear in the historical record much before 1000 BC. Yet, Egyptian and Sumerian gods predate him by about 2000 years.

[ericelectric]

You pompous asshole bishop. Your church (house of superstition) is rife with sin. How many boys did you touch this week? Your hypocrisy makes me want to vomit.

[LifterwiII]

Seems to me that this old bastard would focus on the immorality in his own church rather than worrying about who marries who.

[TVWriterGuy]

It is preposterous that any priest would think himself a beacon of morality. 

[LifterWill]

Seems that this old bastard would spend more time taking care of his boy screwing priests and get his nose out of other people's lives. The Catholic Church is becoming increasingly irrelavent .. and I, for one, am most grateful. I pray that the law suits never end until these bastards are standing in their own soup lines.

[kaioshy]

Hey stupid parasite priest , your words are poison. Drop dead

[Jessymandias]

100 years ago Catholics were treated like second class citizens.

Now that they're mainstream, apparently they have fogorot what it is like to face irrational hate in discrimination.

[Dominofrost]

12 years ago I didn't get married via clergy. I am about ready to tell the religious they can shove their "holy" word.............

[mejercit]

I have no objection to same-sex couples having equal rights in a separate institution.

[cmdrkoenig67]

Says the man wearing a dress...Not everybody is a "Christian" on this planet, Bishop Malone.

[cmdrkoenig67]

We're not taking away marriage from you, Bishop Malone (not that Catholic Priests marry all that often...)...

All we want is the right to a legal marriage under the laws of the State with all the benefits that legally married couples have.

[equalityusa]

We don't want your bullshit christian marriage... we are asking for a CIVIL MARRIAGE that will grant us the 1000+ rights that your bigotry has taken away from us.

[mejercit]

@equalityusa

You can have those rights in a separate institution.

[equalityusa]

@mejercit We pay taxes too...we want nothing less than EQUAL rights. We only want what you have. We are NOT asking for anything special.

[spiffythealien]

@mejercit Brown V. Board of Education

[mejercit]

@spiffythealien

Brown dealt with segregation on the basis of RACE.

[spiffythealien]

@mejercit Separate but equal inherently unequal. Take a basic Government class.

[mejercit]

Must be why gender-based draft exemptions are unconstitutional.  Must be why segregating public school sports programs on the basis of gender is unconstitutional.

[spiffythealien]

Segregating sports programs based on gender is enforced because we don't want 6'2" 250lb teens ramming into smaller, lighter girls which increrases their risk for harm. I feel the same thing applies for the Special Olympics. We discriminate against 4-year olds driving because they are not capable of doing so safely. Show me how two grown consenting adults having equal protection under the law harms ANYONE.

[gregorvonkallahann]

As far as I know, the concept of "sacramental marriage" is primarily a Catholic one. The bishop risks alienating other Christians by defining marriage in such terms. He would have been savvier to speak of it as a 'sacred covenant' or some such. In any event, he does not really state much of a case against same sex civil marriage.

[ChelseaSpink04011]

bishop malone obviously DOESN'T know what separation of church and state means...

although, it just goes to show you that he listens to someone that was a nazi youth....

what the hell do they want to do??!! ..bring back the inquisition and the crusades?!!

I'm bi, and i want to have the freedom to marry another girl if i want... "all are created equal" love is love! let us marry who we want and just stay out of our lives!

~former christian Proud Wiccan~

[johnozed]

"A same sex union can never realize the unique and full potential that the marital relationship expresses." But someone in a robe who lives only with other men, gets fed and clothed by other people, follows his orders from a former Hitler Youth living in a golden palace in Italy and leads a "celibate' life knows? EPIC FAIL OF BIBLICAL PROPORTIONS. Signed Former Roman Catholic, PROUD ATHEIST.

[lttlancientone]

If 90% of gay people have straight parents, does that mean that 90% of children of gay and lesbian parents will grow up to be straight.

[rainbowheartgirl]

Tone, that seems about right. There have been lots of studies on children of gay and lesbian parents that seem to bear that out.

[lttlancientone]

God doesn't force his will upon us, so what right does Malone have to say we can't get married. Anyone that tries shows there true face- that of evil- the most evil deeds were done by the insane that believed they were doing right (Hitler/Pope)

[lttlancientone]

He comes to me with a smile, gives me a firm hand shake, and puts his arm around me and says " I love you, I want to help you, I want to be your friend, please trust me." My reply is " If what you say is true than why are you sticking that large knife in my back.

[lttlancientone]

The catholic church started the witch hunts, the hunt for sodomites, and spanish inquisition because they felt there authority ( power ) was being threatened and they blamed natural disasters on them and used them as an excuse to commit murder.

[lttlancientone]

The way he says what he says must be like the way Lucifer talks. Makes me sick and to be honest scares me. Probably the same way these guys talked when they were burning so called witches, heretics, and gays at the stakes. ( We're burning the sin out of you but saving your soul )In this country in the late 1600s into the late1700s it was legal to kill gay and lesbian people, sometimes they would also kill the daughters of lesbians just in case.

[FrMartyKurylowicz]

With all due respect, Malone would not be able to pass graduate exams on human sexuality, sexual orientation, and gender identity or biblical studies. Prove me wrong!!!
If he cannot pass these exams, than before God he needs to publically retract what he said against Marriage Equality. People against Marriage Equality would do better to spend their money on studying human sexuality and the bible. Children need the truth not ignorance and fear.

[cryan71]

So I should believe that the expert on marriage is someone who has never been married?

[aurykl]

What a twat, this bishop is! It's heartbreaking, what he's saying

[rg0057]

If the defense of marriage is important, then people should vote against repeal of the marriage law.

In this case, the real people who are pro-marriage are those same-sex couples who seek marriage. Not the jerk in the video.

[Rexcetera]

Religion when used to hurt others is one of the worst inventions of humankind. This man is one of its worst perpetrators.

[drouse28]

small, evil man

[jesusrules2000]

This is tantamount to racism...

What a despicable person. The scary part is that for thousands of people this man is a supposed "moral compass".

[MattressGallery]

A child-molesting, Mary-worshipping pervert is telling me that I don't deserve equal rights? OH I am so offended!

[homerth1555]

Yeah right, a supposedly celibate man telling the rest of us who and how we should marry. This man is one of the reasons I am an atheist.

[rg0057]

Happy Blasphemy Day!

[rextrek]

hmmm, when people get married in Vegas by an Elvis Impersonator thyat's NOT religious...or by a Justice of the Peace....that's NOT religious..this Bishop Mofo needs to STFU! ..on a side note..anyone see the preview to the new movie 2012...? Ahh what Bliss watching the Vatican building Topple over and ROLL OVER ALL the Religious Sheeple! SQUISH!

[kern0099]

Blah Blah, broze age, Blah Blah your soul is my used car, waddya got?

[billk700]

Dude, you are using your religion as justification for trampling on the civil rights of others. NOT cool. NOT OK.

A tangent: Check out videos of Bishop Fulton Sheen, if you aren't already familiar with him: He will remind you of Paul Lynde, while donning religious garb instead of a leisure suit. Bishop Fulton Sheen was obviously - I mean OBVIOUSLY - gay.

I don't know, and don't need to know, about this Maine guy's sexual orientation. But Freud might have quite a bit to say about his behavior.

[Insanedonut]

lol this guy is such a goddamn idiot i almost shit

[tiponeill2]

The French had it right when they had their revolution - they got rid of the meddlesome priests.

Our revolution didn't do as good a job because we didn't have that many Catholics back then.

[IIIIFile13IIII]

What does the legal status of marriage have to do with a religious marriage? Nothing, they simply share the same name. Maine isn't talking about granting religious marriages to homosexual couples, just legal marriages, this is outside of the realm of the church so would you politely FUCK OFF!

[ShowMeNoHate]

When did America become a Catholic Theocracy? Who cares what this cleric says? In America there is a separation of CHURCH and STATE. The people that fled England was because of government and religious tyranny!

[flight04]

so wait. if i had a different religion or no religion at all... why am i subjected to this religions beliefs? i know of several churchs that do bless same sex unions. so i guess those religions are good enough to have the same seperation of church and state. Someone Please Please go read the bill of rights. PLEASE!!

[aTuWitty]

Ahh, wonderful to read all the happy, tolerant, non-hateful comments from the tolerant side!

Judging the Catholic church on the actions of a few would be like judging the No on 1 crowd by your comments. Sure, there are people out there who do things that are wrong, just like there are people who will insult and ridicule someone to no end for their personal beliefs (read: almost everyone who has posted on this video), but that doesn't mean that the entire group of people fits the stereotype.

[flight04]

well your side is attacking our way of life... its more than say just a law... its our lives we are fighting for and we will do our damnest to make sure we are repressed anymore!

[aTuWitty]

I disagree. I have no problems with homosexuals. My sister was a lesbian. It's not the way of life we're attacking, it's the definition of marriage we're defending. If you listen to the last portion of his message, he calls for respect to be given to EVERYONE, as they all deserve it.

[cockyz]

Wrong! Malone has no respect for homos. He respectfully demands that all same-sex marriages already performed be annulled, ignored, or otherwise, and that no further advances be made in LGBTQ rights because that's the orders from the Vatican. Rome and Salt Lake City will pay millions to manipulate the outcome of elections in other states and countries. Mormon and Catholic bishops have zero respect for homosexual/queer people. They hate us and excommunicate us.

[rainbowheartgirl]

Witty, if you don't want to change the definition of marriage *within your church* that's totally fine, but why do you get to decide for the rest of society? That's why we have separation of church and state.

[aTuWitty]

I'm not Catholic, but I've had the pleasure of working with them over the past year and some on this issue both in Maine and California.

Now I'll ask you the same question. Why do YOU get to decide what marriage means for the rest of society? The Church isn't what is deciding this issue. People may have religious views, but they're not any less important than secular views. Religion, just like school, shapes and molds who you are. You can't leave religion at the door when you vote.

[rainbowheartgirl]

Witty, whatever your religious beliefs are.. that's fine as long as they do not impinge on other people's civil rights. Marriage is a civil right, as decided by the Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia (1967). Why would restricting marriage by gender be different from restricting marriage by race?

[aTuWitty]

Restricting marriage by race was designed to separate and limit lifestyle choices. In some places, it was actually illegal to date someone of a different race. With or without marriage, one can choose whatever lifestyle they wish. It is not designed to separate. The idea of comparing the struggle for gay marriage to the civil rights struggles is insulting to every black person I have spoken with in depth on the issue. And yes, I say black, as that is what most prefer they be called.

[rainbowheartgirl]

Witty, restricting marriage by gender is not the same attempt to separate and limit choices? There's absolutely no difference. It was illegal for a black man to marry a white woman and vice versa, in many states. It's the same situation for lesbian and gay couples today. They can't marry and thus they lack the same rights and benefits. And this is not insulting to any of the black people that I know. I was very involved in the "No on 8" campaign and met many people who saw the parallels clearly.

[aTuWitty]

Not at all. Restricting by race was designed to keep separate, to segregate, to oppress. That's different than changing the fundamental definition of marriage. Nowhere was it ever understood that marriage was only between black men and women and white men and women, no mixing. There is a huge difference. Telling the world that 2 women together is the same as 2 men together is the same as a man and a woman not only dilutes the difference in gender, but begins to impinge on religious liberty.

[aTuWitty]

I will stand for freedom wherever possible, and have supported efforts to promote equal rights for all people, gay or straight. My sister was a lesbian. However, while I agree that marriage is a civil right, the definition of marriage is man plus woman, nothing else. How far down this road will you fight? Will you support my Muslim friend who is in love with 3 women but can only, under the law, marry one? What you color "discrimination" will still stand against him.

[rainbowheartgirl]

Witty, my parents have been together for over 25 years. They have raised 3 children together. Yet they were unable (until last year) to legally marry. Why such a restriction/division? Simply because they are two men instead of a man and a woman. And then all of us had to watch voters go to the polls and *vote to take away* their legal right to marry. Marriage is a civil right, as I have said, decided by the Supreme Court. There should be no restriction based on gender...

[rainbowheartgirl]

...anymore than there should be a restriction based on race or religion. Whatever your individual church decides is fine, but we are a secular society with sep. of church and state. The government should not discriminate and divide and restrict the rights that couples get based on gender. And just so you know, there is no definitional conflict. Just as the law was changed to allow interracial marriage, so it can change to allow same-sex marriage. And, it has in many places.

[aTuWitty]

The "laws" created to prevent interracial marriage slapped in the face the institution of marriage, the union of a man and a woman. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the government should not discriminate in any way, shape, or fashion. But, you say, you are opposed to gay marriage... Yes, and I am opposed to plural marriage, and I am opposed to other concepts of marriage that are false.

Abraham Lincoln said, "If you call a tail a leg, how many legs has a dog? Four."

[rainbowheartgirl]

Witty, I agree that banning interracial marriage was bad, that's not what people who banned it believed. For them, it was serious. They used the Bible to support this exact kind of discrimination. It is a slap in the face to people *now* but back then, to white mainstream Christians, it was natural for the races to be apart. Interracial marriage was unthinkable and it was wrong to them. My point is that the exact same situation exists now for gay and lesbian couples who wish to marry.

[rainbowheartgirl]

And, Witty, I'm in favor of equal marriage rights for gay couples and straight couples. As for plural marriage, marriage in America is a dual-party system. BTW, the two topics are completely unrelated to each other. Surely you know that some of the most homophobic countries in the world allow plural marriage.

[aTuWitty]

They are not unrelated. Massachusetts allows the opposite of the situation you have described. Gay marriage is legal, plural marriage is not. Do you not see how the argument is one of definition? You are convinced that I am within my box, and you are in a more enlightened place outside of the box I am in. However, my friend would say the same about you. You are thinking in an archaic 2 party system, while he is more enlightened and stands for equality.

[aTuWitty]

He defines marriage as being the union of a man and up to 4 women. You define marriage as the union of any 2 persons. I define marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Up until recently, every state defined marriage as I do. But, you say, there were no laws specifically stating that! True, because NO ONE HAS EVER HAD TO DEFEND MARRIAGE FROM THIS '"any 2 people" CONCEPT! (italics not available, so caps it is)

If the definition can change from man/woman to 2 people, it can change again.

[aTuWitty]

And, using this concept of equality in marriage, it SHOULD change again. My friend is no less a person, nor are his would-be wives. Why can they not marry? Why will the state not redefine marriage to give equal protection to them?

[rainbowheartgirl]

Witty, I already said that marriage in America is a *dual*-party system. If plural couples want to try to fight for extra laws, they should go ahead, but I don't think they'll be successful b/c the laws get exponentially more complicated the more people you add. As I said, your friend in the plural marriage has *nothing* to do with gay marriage. Egypt allows plural marriage, and it doesn't allow gay marriage. There are many homophobic countries that allow plural marriage and not gay marriage.

[rainbowheartgirl]

And, Witty, similarly, there are many countries that allow gay marriage and not plural marriage. Denmark has had gay marriage since 1989. That's 20 years. They do not allow plural marriage, just like Massachusetts does not allow plural marriage. My point is that the two topics have nothing to do with each other. I'm not advocating for plural marriage. If people want to advocate for that, let them, and we will evaluate their claims the same as anything else.

[aTuWitty]

Yes, it is a dual party opposite gender institution in the majority of America. And the laws do not become more complicated- extending marriage benefits to 3 parties instead of 2 is not difficult.

I'm not sure where you don't see that this is a definitional question. I say one man one woman. You say any two parties. He says one man and up to 4 women. The ideas are all related; they are all different views of what marriage is.

[aTuWitty]

The idea that you would push for a redefinition of the word on your own behalf but not on the behalf of others, while at the same time affiliating yourself with the side of the issue that brands itself the "equal rights" side, is immensely hypocritical. The two topics have everything to do with each other. Both are based on what one believes marriage is.

[rainbowheartgirl]

Witty, it's not difficult? Okay, well, then when massive groups of people involved in plural relationships get together and try to advocate for their cause, then we'll see what the government has to say. I don't think it will ever happen. But whether it happens or not, it really has *nothing* to do with same-sex marriage. This is like people arguing that extending the vote to women is going to lead to extending the vote to tables or chairs or dogs. It simply does not follow. They're unrelated.

[rainbowheartgirl]

And, Witty, I'm not hypocritical! I have absolutely no feelings about plural marriages -- either for or against. If this ever turns into a big issue, then I will look into it, but it has nothing to do with legalizing same sex marriage just like legalizing interracial marriage has nothing to do with it. Both are unconnected to plural marriage.

[aTuWitty]

Comparing plural marriage to voting rights for animals is absurd. Plural marriages involve people. People deserve equal civil rights. People can think and talk. Just because they aren't screaming about the issue doesn't mean they don't deserve equal treatment. That's like saying "No one is making a big deal about the problems of Child Protective Services in Maine (no one is, really), so we shouldn't do anything about it. If they start making a big deal, we'll see."

[rainbowheartgirl]

Witty, I used that example to point out how silly it is to use your "slippery slope" argument. Yes, it's ridiculous, because the two topics are completely unrelated to each other. I already said I have no problem with people in plural relationships arguing for their rights. I am more than willing to consider their point of view. But that argument is completely and totally separate from same-sex marriage. It's like the difference between legalizing abortion and legalizing marijuana.

[rainbowheartgirl]

And, Witty, legalizing abortion and legalizing marijuana are two very interesting questions. You could have a very involved debate about both propositions. It's just that they have *nothing* to do with each other. Voting rights for women and voting rights for non-citizens, also, have *nothing* to do with with each other. You see? Why are you dragging plural marriage into this debate when it has nothing to do with same-sex marriage?

[aTuWitty]

Since when does marriage have nothing to do with marriage? Your logic falls flat right out of the gate. Definition of marriage, that's what I'm talking about. Whether it be two men, three men, one man and two women.

[rainbowheartgirl]

Witty, it's like voting rights. You can debate about giving voting rights to women, and you can debate about giving voting rights to non-citizens. But the two are different propositions. They have different prononents, different arguments, different concerns, etc. You could have a debate about both propositions, but there's no reason to lump them together. You're seriously using this "plural marriage" thing as a distraction.

[aTuWitty]

No, not at all. Plural marriage is a definition of marriage that has stood for millennia amongst certain cultures. Gay marriage is an extremely new concept. However, both are different definitions of what marriage is. And to say that I'm using it as a distraction is ridiculous; there are consequences to every action, and this is on that list of possible consequences.

[rainbowheartgirl]

Witty, I've already addressed that. I've already pointed out that same-sex marriage has not caused plural marriage in any country that has legalized it, and that there are many homophobic countries that have plural marriage yet would not dream of legalizing gay marriage. Most importantly, look at Denmark. They've had 20 years of gay marriage, and no plural marriage on the horizon. One does not cause the other.

[dketche2]

and how many young gay Catholics in Maine have slit their wrists after being forced to listen to this during the Holy Mass? You don't know. What a moral disgrace this is, it shames me to say I am Roman Catholic.

[aTuWitty]

Marriage between a man and a woman is at the heart of society. It has been tried and tested; nations have been built upon it. When the government puts its hands in to change things, marriage and the family are undermined. The introduction of no-fault divorce has created a back door, making couples think they have an easy way out if things go sour. I am opposed to no-fault divorce as well- does that mean I am discriminating against those who get divorced? Certainly not.

[rextrek]

aTuWitty - Obviously HAVE NOT read the writings,nor listened to Corretta Scott King or JuLian Bond...who together TRUMP whatever fools you have talked too......Look it up idiot.

[aTuWitty]

Hey, a personal insult? WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT? There's something new from your side.

[darcymayberry]

Personally, I prefer to call them Negroes or Colored Folk. But I merely believe in Old Fashioned Values, so you can't chide me for that.

[darcymayberry]

Exactly, aTuWitty! How dare these homosexuals be intolerant of our intolerance for them! How dare they they try to curtail our freedom to pass laws curtailing their freedom to marry. How dare they hate our negative beliefs about their heathen lifestyles. HOW DARE THEY HOW DARE THEY HOW DARE THEY!!!!

God blessid

[FuckJesusFuck]

"A same sex union can never realise the unique and full potential that the marital relationship expresses"

How the FUCK can society go on believing in such ignorant rhetoric? This man has not the slightest intent to qualify that statement. BECAUSE HE DOESN'T CARE.

[talkstocoyotes]

How long has the Church of Rome been turning out these douchebags? Is it some kind of job requirement?

Leave it to some guy in a black robe and a gaudy cross to make the "institution of marriage" sound about as appealing as baked sawdust.

[harveyardman]

Frankly, I prefer the opinions of the Great Spaghetti Monster in the sky. This guy sounds like he's an artifact from another age.

[dorchester65]

When will all people with intelligence stop paying attention to these fools.

Save us from the primitive nonsense

of religion.

[theknowbody]

I sure Christ would be fighting against this man and his bigotry.

It's disgusting how they are wasting their patrons money, just the same way they did in supporting slavery.

Equality is an American Value - Vote No on Question 1!

[NOtoPROP8]

Vote NO on Question 1. Gay couples deserve the exact rights heterosexual couples have.

Go to protectmaineequality(dot)org to learn more.

[homerth1555]

Yeah, a celibate man is an expert on marriage. Did they have to use a crowbar to get his cock out of the choir boy's ass to make this smarmy video?

[altarboy4sin]

fuck YOU!

[richstpete]

Doesn' the catholic cult have bigger fish to fry? Child fuckers.. Go fuck yourself malone and you Nazi asshole pope!

[ChinoBlanco]

Thousands of years of "tradition" and the best you can do is offer up a two-bit provocateur?

Furthermore, you're sad.

[cockyz]

Back when the world was flat and still the center of the universe, the Catholic Church took great pride in burning us homos at the stake. Now these same, loving, caring, theologians say that they owe us respect as fellow humans. Today, theyre merely arguing that marriage is too "special" for our sub-class of humans.

Are we supposed to feel grateful for their new homo-embracing attitude? Make no mistake! They'd burn us at the stake again in a heartbeat if it were legally possible.

[BaldranGraaf]

Your diocese's involvement in the campaign to get it revoked is a textbook violation of the Constitutional separation of church and state, and I would like nothing better than to see your cockamamie cult taxed in this country for every cent it's worth.

[BaldranGraaf]

Hey, Bishop.

If you'd actually bother to pull your head out of your sanctimonious ass and READ THE BILL, you'd find that it explicitly states that no religious institution that does not wish to grant blessing to same-sex couples will be required or even recommended to do so. It is entirely, 100% a secular matter.

[markt729]

@BaldranGraaf It more because you will also be married tho as oppose to be married within the Church, you can't take marriage cal it secular and then say oh it has nothing to do with the Church when it originated 100% from within the Church.

[johnozed]

Lovely gown she has on.

[SeanChapin1]

With all due respect to Bishop Malone, I am appalled at his message to Catholics, telling them to vote on a non-religious civil right based on their religious beliefs. (1) Marriage is a civil right, and (2) the government can not adopt any religion, so therefore (3) Marriage in the eyes of our government is defined as a social, non-religious right. The message he gave to Catholics is fundamentally disrespectful towards other religions different from Catholicism and profoundly un-American.

[Eshto]

TAX THE FUCKING CHURCH!!

[Hdtexan]

fucking drag queens of god

[andrewmichaelcole]

we're not asking for christian sacramental marriages!!

this video makes me sick.