NorthIowaToday.com

Founded in 2010

News & Entertainment for Mason City, Clear Lake & the Entire North Iowa Region

King on Marriage: One Man and One Woman

Washington, DC – Congressman Steve King released the following statement in response to oral arguments heard before the United States Supreme Court this week regarding California’s Proposition 8 ban on same sex marriage and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed into law in 1996:

httpv://youtu.be/I751IEI7yGw

“The Constitution never contemplated marriage being anything other than between a man and a woman,” said King. “And for the United States Supreme Court to come to an opposite conclusion would mean, I think, a real distortion of the Constitution, which is a contractual guarantee between each of the generations.”

 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

69 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jimbo
11 years ago

How soon will Steve King be arrested for soliciting homosexual sex? All of these far right wingers are actually closet homosexuals. It’s just a matter of time. Come out of the closet, Steve. Stop denying your true nature.

Anonymous
11 years ago

Lack of hospitality meant wanting to have homosexual relations with the angels that Lot had in his house along with the other sins that God saw in Sodom and Gomorra including what you said and more. And when the men said they wanted to know the men inside it meant sex according to the Hebrew language. Your quote “choice for the anal men” is rather disturbing while trying to make your point.. Lay off the pot it will rot your brain cells boy.. If anything this gets you to look up the bible.. Bless you.

maybe
Reply to  Anonymous
11 years ago

Stupid tried to use that as an argument to prove her point, she just left the parts out that proved her wrong.

sickastupd
Reply to  Anonymous
11 years ago

Are you nuts? Inhospitality was a big sin back then! Considering people had to travel many days to get anywhere, it was a SIN to be inhospitable and not take them in! Lot took in the Angels (was hospitable) and refused to let the men of Sodom in because they were planning on acting in an INHOSPITABLE way!

I love the way you alleged christians think you know what’s in the bible, but clearly have never ever read it!

Homosexuality is NEVER mentioned as the reason God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah! NEVER! It’s been twisted into that foolishness by MEN – both in the Catholic and Evangelical churches to condemn homosexuality.

The reality is, greed, unkindness and arrogance destroyed Sodom. For the second time, LOOK IT UP!

maybe
Reply to  sickastupd
11 years ago

God sent angels there to see how many Godly people were there and the crowds chased them to have sex with them, you don’t think that this had something to do with it?

Anonymous
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

God didn’t know how many godly people were there? I thought he was supposed to be omnipotent? This “Bible” sounds a bit fishy.

sickastupd
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

You’re never going to understand this, so I don’t know why I’m trying, but here we go again…

The sin of inhospitality was far worse than anything else in those days. It is in fact the root of “love thy neighbor” – surely you’ve heard that?

There is no condemnation of the rape based on homosexuality, it is based on inhospitablity – that’s the word of God!

For people to keep trying to make Sodom and Gomorrah about homosexuality is to embrace false teaching and reject God’s word! Are you sure you want to do that, Maybe?

The whole homosexual thing has been created by MAN, because God didn’t make an issue of it! He was mad at them for being jerks!

maybe
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

it’s like trying to convert a jehovas witness, they know the bible too but have their own interpretation. One day when you stand before God himself, only then will you find out if you were right or wrong because you sure won’t listen to me. Jehovas witness, Mormons, all the other religions that believe in God all know the bible too but that doesn’t make them right. I may be wrong myself but when a crowd tries to rape some men because they are new in town, that sounds like grounds enough for a firestorm.

sickastupd
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

For the third and final time. It was not about rape. It was not about homosexuality. It was about being unkind. Don’t take my word! Ask a bible historian! Look it up!

Nobody – not even you – are in need of “conversion”. You just have to open your eyes.

maybe
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

I am NOT saying it’s about rape, you are only seeing what you want to see. It is about MEN trying to rape other MEN which is homosexuality.

sickastupd
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

IT’S NOT ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY. IT’S NOT ABOUT RAPE. IT’S ABOUT INHOSPITALITY.

STOP BEING SO DUMB!

maybe
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

Think what you want stupid, as much as you would like to think it is, God wouldn’t destroy 2 cities because they were not hospitable. Probably a combination of alot of different things but not that alone.

sickastupd
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

I don’t “think” anything! It’s written in the bible! Why don’t you just admit you have no idea? You clearly have never studied the bible, or you would know that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because the people went bad. They became unkind, arrogant, greedy, nasty and generally awful.

There is no reference to any kind of sex except the men at Lot’s door, and that is described as being bad because they were going to be rude and unkind to the strangers (angels)- NOT because they were going to rape them.

As I already attempted to tell you, being unkind to strangers was a much, much bigger sin back in those days than rape. And that includes homosexuality.

maybe
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

Lot hid the men in his house, a crowd came and tried to break down the door saying let us in so that we may know these men, know in the biblical tense means sex, know them intimately.

LVS
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

@maybe-interesting. Two different interpretations of the bible. No surprise there.

sickastupd
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

Yes, they did, Maybe, but that was not the problem!

The crowd wanted to figure out if these angels were humans, or if they were really here to destroy the city. That’s the reason they phrased it in the way they did. They did NOT want to admit that they might be vulnerable to these angels, so that was the question – designed to offend.

In a shocking move, Lot offered his daughters, if you will recall, to show these guys how serious he was about protecting the “strangers”.

The crowd was reacting exactly the way “christians” are doing today. They’re trying to bully, terrorize and eliminate anyone who questions them.

This pissing contest was not about sex, much less homosexual sex. It was about power, arrogance, greed and hate.

All the things today’s alleged christians are displaying. You’d better wake up, Maybe. You don’t want to be in Sodom when the angels come knocking this time…

maybe
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

Thank you for your concern about my eternal welfare but I know where I am going. You are saying that the people in Sodom knew they were angels and going to destroy the city?

Uncle Buck
11 years ago

My wife and I have been to 4 civil unions, our friends say they would like the legal benefits that go with marriage, that’s all they are asking for.

sickastupd
11 years ago

Has it ever occurred to the tiny minds against same sex marriage that their argument is invalid?

Want to know why? Churches do not perform marriages. That is the word for the legal, secular union.

Churches perform matrimony. They perform weddings. It’s a ceremony. It is not legally binding.

So now that we have thrown your “bible” baloney out the window, tell us again what you have against same sex marriage.

Anonymous
Reply to  sickastupd
11 years ago

Traditional family comes to mind, normal comes to mind, works against all laws of nature to procreate a species evolution would not have happened (liberal thought process) If you believe in the bible and creation: God created man and woman not man and man. Sodom and Gomorra destroyed because of lets see?? man and man woman and woman taking part in abnormal sins of the flesh.
DOMA- law on the books in 96 to put into law marriage is between one man one woman. President Clinton signed.

sickastupd
Reply to  Anonymous
11 years ago

Traditional? You mean like Adam and Eve?

Oh, that’s right. They weren’t married. They were merely “committed” to each other (you know, “cleaved”).

In fact, some of the banned books of the bible indicate Adam was actually married to Lilith and was just boinking good old Eve OUT OF WEDLOCK because Lilith refused to be his slave! Whoa! More sin!

So that takes care of tradition and the bible.

Now as for “normal”, I guess I will have to direct your attention to the dictionary, where “normal” can mean anything from average to perpendicular.

So that takes care of “normal”.

Moving on to Sodom and Gomorrah, it wasn’t homosexuality that brought God’s wrath. It was because he couldn’t find 10 righteous men, remember? The people were all treating poor people like dirt, they were prideful and ugly, much like today’s “christians”. Sex is the tool of choice for the anal men who created this story, but if you actually READ the bible, you will discover that the city was destroyed because they were ROTTEN, not because they were gay.

So that theory goes down the crapper.

To sum up, you are wrong. You cannot be more wrong. When you are this wrong you should keep your dumbness to yourself.

maybe
Reply to  sickastupd
11 years ago

What made them rotten? Was it a combination of a lot of things like homosexuality?

sickastupd
Reply to  sickastupd
11 years ago

Do these words sound familiar, Maybe?

Ezekiel 16:49-50 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom: pride, fullness of bread, and careless ease was in her and in her daughters; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before Me; therefore I removed them when I saw it.

In other words, they were greedy, nasty, thought they knew it all, shunned the needy and screwed each other. Like today’s christians.

The real sins of Sodom and Gomorrah were greed and arrogance. LOOK IT UP.

maybe
Reply to  sickastupd
11 years ago

You forgot about the line about being lovers of man.

Watchdog
11 years ago

Someone finally asked the right question. What if you don’t believe in the bible?

Here’s the scoop:

The Bible teaches us that law (the commandments) come from a higher power who gave us the power to reason and laws to live by. Laws, rules, and principles that are constant and do no change.

Non believers believe that reason is centered in themselves and make the laws “they” want to believe in as they go along. Man/woman centered laws are constantly changing.

It’s a big o goofy world but I’ll take the Bible any day so I have some set boundaries or laws (the commandments) I can count on.

another brick in the mall
Reply to  Watchdog
11 years ago

That’s a radically bigoted statement. You’re a religious racist. It’s all about YOU and what YOU believe in. You are arrogant, and a irreligious racist. People like you make society worse.

maybe
Reply to  another brick in the mall
11 years ago

Why is it that the first and basically only argument the liberals have is to call people a racist? Sometimes I wonder if brickless actually believes the BS he says or he just says it to start an argument. Ignorance only goes so far before it becomes stupidity.

LVS
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

@maybe-well said.

another brick in the mall
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

I’m not a liberal at all, I’m actually more conservative than you all. I agree with Todd Blodgett more than you think. The problem is that you still think you’re conservative short bus.

maybe
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

Everything you have ever said on here is liberal. If you say you are conservative then you must be saying all this crap to start an argument. I have friends and relatives that are as far left as you can get so I am not anti liberal. Sometimes I just don’t understand some peoples logic.

another brick in the mall
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

I understand you even better than you do. You’re a partisan shill is all.

maybe
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

The definition of Shill is any person who supports and or defends any political candidate, which is not me because I don’t support any political movement, except for the constitution and the bill of rights. Every time I hear someone use that term it is a democrat using it, yet you are not a democrat you just talk and think like one.

Katie
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

B4B is an anarchist. He doesn’t believe in law and order, the police, or anyone telling her what to do.

LVS
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

Likes to smoke pot and blow smoke a lot.

a citizen
Reply to  another brick in the mall
11 years ago

@brick – We’ll never convince these people. And to be honest, I don’t think these people believe in the bible that much themselves. It just gives them a good excuse to validate their convictions. How can you argue with something that is strictly an interpretation? If I don’t like something, and I don’t have a factual or objective reason to not like it, it’s so much easier to say, “The bible says it’s so”. They can’t prove it’s true, I can’t prove it’s not true. It’s just an easy way out. And to say that the bible is fact is stretching even my imagination.

LVS
Reply to  a citizen
11 years ago

@A citizen-I never said I believed in the bible at all. I think the bible is a book that was written by men to control other men and has been modified many times to fit different circumstances. (Mostly Money). The bible can be interpreted in many different ways depending on who is reading it and what their goals are.

Just Saying
Reply to  Watchdog
11 years ago

I wonder, if there is no God and if the Bible isn’t true, why are so many people upset about it?If you don’t believe, and I DO believe, and there is no God, no heaven or hell you’re not in trouble and I’m not in trouble. If you don’t believe and I DO believe, and there IS a God, a heaven and hell, then You’re in trouble and I’m still not in trouble. …So I’d rather believe and have it be false than not believe and have it be true !!

maybe
Reply to  Just Saying
11 years ago

error on the side of caution

Just Saying
Reply to  maybe
11 years ago

Oh please..and that is meant to mean what ?

50 MILES SOUTH
Reply to  Just Saying
11 years ago

Just saying’ you are an agnostic then. but you also are a sheep being led around cause your to scared to think for yourself.

50 MILES SOUTH
Reply to  Watchdog
11 years ago

watchdog: I think your full of it. you wrote this about non believers.
“Non believers believe that reason is centered in themselves and make the laws “they” want to believe in as they go along. Man/woman centered laws are constantly changing.
now look at what LVS thinks as true. (PS I think the same way as LVS on this one). as do many other people.
I think the bible is a book that was written by men to control other men and has been modified many times to fit different circumstances. (Mostly Money). The bible can be interpreted in many different ways depending on who is reading it and what their goals are.
both statements basically mean the same thing. only one is for the believers and the other as watchdog says is for the non believers. My question to everyone is this. Is the bible people worship from today exactly the same as originally written? If not, then it was changed by religious people to fit their new beliefs for the time. proof that things, laws, beliefs change.

a citizen
11 years ago

A lot of people have commented on here, but so far no one has answered my questions. Tell me objectively what harm same sex marriage does. Does it cause car crashes? Human limbs to be torn off? People to go blind or a herd of cattle to die? Gay people have lived together for years. Making it a legal marriage is nothing more than giving what two people who love each other are due.

Joao Do Carmo
Reply to  NIT Publisher
11 years ago

And those who do not believe in the Bible?

a citizen
Reply to  NIT Publisher
11 years ago

@Ms. Foel – Almost everyone in the world needs to cling to something to make it thru the day and be able to face tomorrow. For you it’s Jesus and the Bible. I don’t happen to agree with you. but that’s my choice. I don’t believe you’re a hater or a bigot. You just have strong feelings about what you believe in, and that’s your choice. Have a great day.

Katie
Reply to  NIT Publisher
11 years ago

Less than 1/3 of the world’s population is Christian. Not everyone believes as you do or acknowledges your bible, that was written by men and women. The first thing I was taught in theology class at a Protestant college was that Sunday school was the worst thing in Christianity because it taught kids to take everything in the bible literally. Whew. What a relief to know I no longer had to take everything at face value. That class opened my eyes to looking at the bible objectively. I suggest you step back and acknowledge all the contradictions in the bible, that it does not include all the books originally written about Jesus, and that it was indeed written by men and women and assembled by Popes and others.

LVS
Reply to  Katie
11 years ago

@Katie-I had two very nice lady’s show up at my door last week with some religious literature for me. I listened very politely to what they had to say as I respect other people’s belief. When I was young I went 18 years to church three times a week so I thought I was very well versed in the bible. What these lady’s told me and showed me in their literature was completely different from what I was taught. The moral is that religions change their view of the bible based on their needs (money). I had seen it in my wife’s church but just thought it was the difference between Catholics and Protestants. It is what I always said, the Bible is a Book written by men to control other men.

Anonymous
Reply to  a citizen
11 years ago

disease comes to mind. Gay men live an average of 8 years less. civil rights should have nothing to do with a lifestyle.

Katie
Reply to  Anonymous
11 years ago

Maybe that’s because married people live longer!

LVS
Reply to  a citizen
11 years ago

@a citizen-you are correct. It causes no harm. If it makes people happy I don’t care what they do in their own house. Making anyone into a second class citizen is wrong.

4ever49
Reply to  a citizen
11 years ago

Altering the definition of marriage to include anything other than a man & woman diminishes this very core corner stone institution of society. The institution of “marriage” has suffered recently and adding SSM to satisfy those who cannot or will not meet the expectation of procreation will further damage it.
It is not bigotry to want to protect marriage, but to allow it to be redefined may well take us down a road with very negative consequences.

Jebus
Reply to  4ever49
11 years ago

so if you can’t procreate you shouldn’t be able to marry? I think that argument already fell apart. Humans deserve equal rights. If you don’t agree with that I would LOVE to hear how some people are more equal than others.

Pee Wee
11 years ago

Hell yes things was better when guys married girls and not two of the same try to marry each other. It was also better when blacks and whites was kept separate, our streets and schools was way safer to, the stastastics prove it. Look at Obama, he would not of been born if white couldn’t of marry black. That would of saved us all lots of misery yes. Then look at all them there half breed kids, I do feel sorry for them they are the ones George Jefferson calls Zebras. And George Jefferson is not the only black man calls them that, I use to work with a negro who said the same thing about them kind of kids so it is not racist. I got no problem with gays long as they keep quiet about it and don’t make no big thing of being queer. Look at that Liberachie swishy one made big bucks playing piano just being his pansy self. He is dead of AIDS but he at least was how they do. OK now there you go. We got to get back to normal.

bodacious
11 years ago

Wonder how Stevie would feel if one of his children was gay.

another brick in the mall
Reply to  bodacious
11 years ago

Well, he’d be a good gay kid while all the others would be devils in his mind. That one’s easy.

man and woman
11 years ago

I really believe we are heading in the wrong direction. Its fine to have civil unions and have their own law. But leave the sancitity of marriage alone leave it for a man and a woman. Happy if you and your guy want to be together fine but leave the families out there with the definition of marriage between and man and woman.
No child or animal has been born due to same sex sex, that in my mind should tell you something. Let marriage be a family thing. Happy you and your man can have the same thing just use a different definition. (I assume you married your man already)we do live in Iowa

sickastupd
Reply to  man and woman
11 years ago

Oh, I see. You want the word marriage to be used for the legal contract between a man and a woman, but you want a DIFFERENT word used for the same contract between two people of the same sex.

In other words, you want court houses to be required to carry two different forms, two different sets of instructions, etc.

Just so you can be special.

How about this instead:

How about you call marriage what it is, call birth what it is, call sex what it is and call bigoted homophobes what they are.

a citizen
Reply to  sickastupd
11 years ago

@man and woman – If two people love each other, and find comfort and happiness with each other, and want to make it a legal, formalized act, where is the wrong in it? The bible excuse it just that. An excuse for people to vent their personal dislike for something without having to acknowledge the fact that they are nothing but bigots. Give me a reason to oppose it that I can accept. Drunk drivers kill people. Illegal drugs kill people. Terrorists kill people. These cause a definable harm. Show me objectively what harm same sex marriage does. Does it cause car crashes? Human limbs to be torn off? People to go blind, or a herd of cattle to die? Gay people have lived together for years. Making it a legal marriage is nothing more then giving what two people who love each other are due.

man and woman
Reply to  a citizen
11 years ago

Ok what is next more than 2? Im sorry but it is not the norm. Can people marry more than one person I mean lets just go all the way than. 3,4, a dozen people all at in the same household than when they get employed they can have family ins.
Do you think for one minute that gay couples stay together longer than man and wife. Do you think by adopting children that it gives that child a bubble that if they break up it is easier. Tell me what is normal and natural about the gay lifestyle except the idea of love is the reason.

sickastupd
Reply to  a citizen
11 years ago

Ok, let me ask YOU. Did marriage between a man and a woman lead to more than two? Three? Four?

Why not? Why didn’t heterosexual marriage lead to multiple partners? What’s different about same sex marriage? It’s two people who love each other. Why would other people become involved?

You want an explanation of a “gay lifestyle”? Ok, you got it:

Get up. Eat breakfast. Go to work. Come home. Eat supper. Go to bed. Repeat.

Wild, huh?

Katie
Reply to  a citizen
11 years ago

Sicka: I think people are afraid that allowing gays to marry is going to pave the way for other “abnormal” people to want more permissive laws. They are afraid that fringe Mormon groups will want polygamy to be legalized, then someone will want pedophilia to be legalized, and so on. I know the last is an exaggeration, but that is what they fear it may lead to – things that we pretty much all see as harmful now eventually being normalized and then legalized. The people who are against gays see them as being as sick and demented as pedophiles, whether you and I agree or not. That’s the way they feel about them and gay marriage and they can’t see past it. Don’t know what to do about it.

Katie
Reply to  sickastupd
11 years ago

@ sicka: I’m not bigoted against gays, but I think it might be a good idea for the time being to call a certificate of marriage or civil unions the legal definition and religious unions what happens in churches. I think there has to be some distinction in terms between church and state to keep the religious bigots happy for now. Unfortunately, we have to use a shoe horn to get them used to the idea that gay people have the same rights as others. I don’t like needing 2 terms, but I think it’s the only way to calm things down with the objectors. Eventually, gay people will have fully accepted rights to marry just as black and white people now have the right to intermarry. It’s just going to take time for the objectors to learn that the world isn’t going to end because of it.

sickastupd
Reply to  Katie
11 years ago

Katie, I don’t care WHAT they call it in church! But if the secular state defines it as marriage, that’s the name. If the state wants to change the word so all unions are called civil unions, that’s fine! But it has to be one or the other – it can be civil union in court and marriage in church for all I care – as long as we’re not making two different civil unions and two different marriages just to discriminate. That’s what this is all about. I don’t think even that hateful Steve King would care if same sex people got hitched as long as it would be classified differently in order to make himself special. That’s really the core – trying to hang on the discrimination.

Anonymous
Reply to  man and woman
11 years ago

No animal or child has been born because of marriage! Many children have been tagged as bastards because of marriage and ridiculed by people like you for something they had nothing to do with. Sex and babies have been around way longer than marriage and will be around forever. I’m not so sure about marriage.

happyguy
Reply to  man and woman
11 years ago

are you LVS in disguise? I have been happily married for almost 40 years now. I don’t find it threatening to my marriage if 2 women or 2 men want to get married. Marriage is about 2 people in love. To think that allowing 2 men or 2 women to marry will lead to group marriage is ridicules. Who knows customs may change is 50 or 100 years where group marriage could become true but it won’t happen because we let same sex marriage happen now. It will happen because things change with time. Let the churches decide who they will allow to get married in them but let every man or women decide who they are going to marry.

LVS
Reply to  happyguy
11 years ago

@happy guy-isn’t amazing that some people have the same opinion? Why is that?

man and woman
Reply to  happyguy
11 years ago

Why is it that you have to say hey Ive been married 40 years and two kids. Is it you find being thought of being gay as something to be ashamed of? And sicko the reason gays want marriage is just for the entitlements isnt it. Is it really about rights, whats the big deal civil unions for anything other than man or woman. DOMA was put into law in 96 large majority of congress passed it Clinton signed it into law. Obama: “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.” – April 17, 2008
We all know how politics have influenced this POTUS.

happyguy
11 years ago

Stevie, I’m pretty sure marriage is not mentioned in the US Constitution. And requirements to obtain a license for just about anything have changed over time.

Even more news:

Copyright 2024 – Internet Marketing Pros. of Iowa, Inc.
69
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x