"Ben Hopkins" <nospam.hopkins.nospam.ben@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:b9GdndS_VLHrFofVnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> LA Times had a story, headlined "Same-*** weddings can't be,
Presbyterians
> decide." By the declaration that "same-*** weddings can't be," they
> cleared Rev. Jane Adams Spahr, who had been charged with misconduct for
> conducting weddings of same-*** couples in 2004 and 2005.
>
> Get this logic: (quote from the article:)
>
> "The ceremonies that are the subject of this case were not marriages . .
.
> ," the high court said. "These were ceremonies between women, not
between
> a man and a woman."
>
> The commission said the lower court had "found Spahr guilty of doing
that
> which by definition cannot be done."
>
> (/quote)
>
> The mind boggles. Spahr and her attorney were "troubled" by the ruling,
> because the implication of the ruling was that the court was trying to
> restrict marriage only to hetero***ual couples.
>
> Haven't they heard that old song, "Love Is A Many-Gendered Thing?"
I'm waiting for these perverts to quote 1 Cor 7:8 to justify these
so-called
"marriages".
|
