When the Supreme Court Approved Gay Marriage, What ALL Happened to the USA?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

VCO

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2013
11,972
4,587
113
Why rant and rage on the Supreme Court?

I guess you forgot that prior to the decision gay marriage was already legal in 37 states and D.C.

Around three-fourths of Americans believe that same sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.

Gay marriage was a done deal before the Supreme Court ruling. It was just a matter of time before every state made it legal. A few states, where you have the most legalistic fundies and YECs, might have delayed it for a few years.

Actually, I thank the fundies and YECs for gay marriage.

They rant and rage spouting so much nonsense that many doubt anything they say has much credibility.

Jack,

WHY ARE YOU EVEN ON THIS SITE?

Is it just to stir up Strife among the Brethren?


Titus 3:9-11 (NKJV)
[SUP]9 [/SUP] But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless.
[SUP]10 [/SUP] Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition,
[SUP]11 [/SUP] knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned.

Proverbs 6:16-19 (HCSB)
[SUP]16 [/SUP] The LORD hates six things; in fact, seven are detestable to Him:
[SUP]17 [/SUP] arrogant eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood,
[SUP]18 [/SUP] a heart that plots wicked schemes, feet eager to run to evil,
[SUP]19 [/SUP] a lying witness who gives false testimony, and one who stirs up trouble among brothers.
 

VCO

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2013
11,972
4,587
113

comparing God to the supreme court as if they are equals or on the same level


Technically that is exactly how Jesus described the nature of the position of being on the Jewish Supreme Court, the Sanhedrin.

John 10:34-36 (NKJV)
[SUP]34 [/SUP] Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods" '?
[SUP]35 [/SUP] If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),
[SUP]36 [/SUP] do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
It's not a great point for the presence of actual faith amongst the vast majority of OEC advocates is a great argument for OEC, using your own logic, making your argument self-refuting.

You'll have to refute JackH per his own statements apart from the standard OEC model which is a valid creation hypothesis that a great many genuine Christians and world class Christian theologians and scholars align with that include John Ankerberg, Gleason Archer, Chuck Colson, Paul Copan, William Lane Craig, Norman Geisler, Hank Hannegraff, Jack Hayford, Walter Kaiser, Greg Koukl, J. P. Moreland, Francis Schaeffer, C. I. Scofield, Lee Strobel, etc...

Want me to keep going? How can the genuine faith of these world class Christian scholars that align with the standard OEC creation model be a great argument against OEC? It cannot be because it isn't.

The problem is you're making a faulty correlation. One individual's lack of actual faith does not refute the validity of a creation model.

It's like saying an apostate Christian is evidence that the Christian worldview is false. No, that's a fallacious correlation. An apostate Christian is evidence that not all Christians are genuine... not that the Christian worldview itself is false.


I was making the point that his lack of actual faith was a great argument against OEC.
 
O

ORly

Guest
Technically that is exactly how Jesus described the nature of the position of being on the Jewish Supreme Court, the Sanhedrin.

John 10:34-36 (NKJV)
[SUP]34 [/SUP] Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods" '?
[SUP]35 [/SUP] If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),
[SUP]36 [/SUP] do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?
So a secular American court can be compared to God as well?
 
O

ORly

Guest
It's not a great point for the presence of actual faith amongst the vast majority of OEC advocates is a great argument for OEC, using your own logic, making your argument self-refuting.

You'll have to refute JackH per his own statements apart from the standard OEC model which is a valid creation hypothesis that a great many genuine Christians and world class Christian theologians and scholars align with that include John Ankerberg, Gleason Archer, Chuck Colson, Paul Copan, William Lane Craig, Norman Geisler, Hank Hannegraff, Jack Hayford, Walter Kaiser, Greg Koukl, J. P. Moreland, Francis Schaeffer, C. I. Scofield, Lee Strobel, etc...

Want me to keep going? How can the genuine faith of these world class Christian scholars that align with the standard OEC creation model be a great argument against OEC? It cannot be because it isn't.

The problem is you're making a faulty correlation. One individual's lack of actual faith does not refute the validity of a creation model.

It's like saying an apostate Christian is evidence that the Christian worldview is false. No, that's a fallacious correlation. An apostate Christian is evidence that not all Christians are genuine... not that the Christian worldview itself is false.
Oh okay i see, you are not misunderstanding me, you are trying to derail the thread and taking issue with how i called the resident OEC polemic out for his unbelief. The belief of other OEC people does not refute my point that the lack of faith among so many OECs like JackH is a great argument for YEC. Just like yes, whether we like it or not an apostate christian is a powerful argument against the christian life. Ask a many non-believers and they will tell you just that.

if you want to argue this, take it to another thread, this one has been derailed bad enpugh
 
Last edited by a moderator:

VCO

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2013
11,972
4,587
113
So a secular American court can be compared to God as well?
No, Jesus was referring to the nature of their Authority as members of the Sanhedrin, in that their Decisions were final and absolute as if they were gods. Unfortunately even though our Supreme Court is set up, with very similar Authority, five of the Justices, appear to not be born again Christians, leaving room for non-Christian decisions to be handed down.
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
No, now you are making a false assertion. I am not trying to derail the thread but rather correct a faulty correlation you made that I felt was material. Using your logic, you derailed the thread when you made the original faulty correlation and are continuing to derail the thread by not accepting responsibility for doing so after being corrected by someone who is academically qualified to correct you on this point.

JackH's lack of faith (if it actually exists) or anyone else's for that matter is not evidence that the standard OEC model is false. That is a logical fallacy that you continue to make. Faith does not validate nor invalidate objective reality but rather aligns or doesn't align with it. Simple.

An apostate Christian is not a powerful argument that the Christian worldview is not true and to assert so is a form of the genetic fallacy. Specifically, you have committed two fallacies:

1. Argumentum ad populum is a red herring and genetic fallacy that appeals on probabilistic terms. You claimed that because many OEC advocates demonstrate a lack of faith (may be true or false we'll assume it's true for the purpose of this example); therefore, this is evidence against the standard OEC model. This assertion is logically fallacious and therefore false.

2. A secondary type of genetic fallacy in which you assert that a perceived defect in the origin of a claim (e.g. lack of faith) can be taken to be evidence that discredits the thing itself. This is a logical fallacy and therefore false.

I have a silver bar here in my hand. It is 99.99% pure silver. I don't believe that it's silver; however, so using your faulty reasoning my disbelief that the 99.99% silver bar is not silver is actually powerful evidence that it is not silver. That's a logical fallacy. It's not any evidence at all that it's not silver. It's just me making a false assertion that fails to align with the truth and if a whole lot of people do it that's not evidence the bar is not silver either.

Simply stop engaging in fallacious reasoning, and I will stop correcting you.


Oh okay i see, you are not misunderstanding me, you are trying to derail the thread and taking issue with how i called the resident OEC polemic out for his unbelief. The belief of other OEC people does not refute my point that the lack of faith among so many OECs like JackH is a great argument for YEC. Just like yes, whether we like it or not an apostate christian is a powerful argument against the christian life. Ask a many non-believers and they will tell you just that.

if you want to argue this, take it to another thread, this one has been derailed bad enpugh
 
Feb 7, 2013
1,276
21
0
I grew up on a farm, and I learned a very valuable lesson about feeding the unsaved spiritual food, from how I fed the pigs.

For those who did not grow up on a farm, a Pigsty is puddle where there the pigs love to wallow in the mud, but they pee and poop, in it too, so it STINKS to high heaven. What spiritual witnessing lesson did I learn from feeding those pigs. YOU DO NOT CRAWL INTO TO THE PIGSTY TO FEED THE PIGS. YOU POUR THE FOOD IN FROM THE OUTSIDE. The same is true about Witnessing to the unsaved. You do not involve yourself in their lifestyle, you simply pour the spiritual food in from outside their sinful lifestyle.





Thank you Brethren for that comedy and picture examples that 'build up' HIS church in 'prophesying'. 'STINKS to high heaven' and 'others', in your 'witnessing' that made me 'laugh' and they are significant in 'relation' to the 'parables' of CHRIST about, "A swine which is clean, goes back to roll itself in the mud." and others like, "Do not cast pearl to swine, for it will only trample on it."

Regarding, 'feeding the swines from the outside', that you do not involve yourself in their lifestyle but only pour out the Gospel for their Salvation and for them to be born from above.

That was short and simple sharing was very 'spiritually inspiring' and in further acknowledge to them, 'as it is written', that;

"Do not be equally yoked with unbelievers."

The underlined word/teaching is one of the 'commandment of CHRIST', given through Apostle Paul, to HIS church.

May GOD the FATHER of our LORD JESUS CHRIST bless all and you with HIS kindness and peace.
 
Last edited:
Feb 7, 2013
1,276
21
0
So a secular American court can be compared to God as well?
'As it is written' and spoken through Apostle Paul, 'they are GOD's 'official servants', who put 'criminals' behind bars and Christian are to 'pay their taxes' and respect and honor them. They may be 'corrupted' in their ways, but GOD is the one as, "GOD who gives you breath and control everything you do.", according to Daniel's 'testimony' to King Belshazzar. They still have chance for Salvation as the Gospel for repentance is 'preached' and 'taught'.

Comes to 'spiritual' and personal social matters among members or families, the church is called to settle within themselves, rather taking the matters to the court of the Gentiles.

These are 'ordained spirit and life instructions of CHRIST', to GOD's church, for being 'built up'.

GOD bless you all in the name of LORD JESUS CHRIST.
 
Mar 4, 2013
7,761
107
0
"And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death." Leviticus 24:17

I read nowhere in the Bible that this law has changed in relation to governing a country according to God's will.

1 Timothy 1:8-11
[SUP]8 [/SUP]But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;[SUP]9 [/SUP]Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
[SUP]10 [/SUP]For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
[SUP]11 [/SUP]According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

Now this is Paul writing to Timothy in respect to the New Covenant statutes. I think that the United States government has been given free reign to endorse corrupt legislation because the church has been the first to deny the law of God for the good of a self governing nation. Henceforth, in time, righteous judgment no longer exists according to the will of God because of this denial by the population, whether Christian or heathen. If we could get it through our thick heads that the law is a benefit rather than a detriment to salvation through Christ, the countries that we all live in would be prosperous, and settled in peace, having power over all our potential enemies world wide. It's in our face. What is the mental block? Have we willingly been deceived by the adversary?

"And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations." Revelation 13:7
 

VCO

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2013
11,972
4,587
113
. . .
JackH's lack of faith (if it actually exists) or anyone else's for that matter is not evidence that the standard OEC model is false. That is a logical fallacy that you continue to make. Faith does not validate nor invalidate objective reality but rather aligns or doesn't align with it. Simple. . .

. . .

Simply stop engaging in fallacious reasoning, and I will stop correcting you.

Now THAT is a two way STREET. Old Earth Creationism, is a proven false theory in that the Creator, Jesus Christ demonstrated exactly HOW HE CREATES, through the feeding of the 5000 and the Feeding of the 4000, and MAL. 3:6 says HE NEVER CHANGES.

So instead of derailing this thread with another Subject all together, I suggest that you start a new thread entitled: Old Earth Creationism vs. Young Earth Creationism.
 
Jun 5, 2014
1,750
6
0
Oh okay i see, you are not misunderstanding me, you are trying to derail the thread and taking issue with how i called the resident OEC polemic out for his unbelief. The belief of other OEC people does not refute my point that the lack of faith among so many OECs like JackH is a great argument for YEC. Just like yes, whether we like it or not an apostate christian is a powerful argument against the christian life. Ask a many non-believers and they will tell you just that.

if you want to argue this, take it to another thread, this one has been derailed bad enpugh
Regarding your last sentence, who made you the Queen of Sheba?

And what does the word "enpugh" mean?

What unbelief are you talking about, exactly?

I said that I can prove that I believe that homosexuality is sinful behavior.

I can prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt, and not by just citing a bunch of verses.

In my opinion, YECs like you are a powerful argument against the Christian life.

AgeofKnowledge called you out for spouting nonsense.

YECs spout a whole lot of nonsense about a whole lot of things.

I had a point to make about lesbianism and the LGBT crowd who would have us believe that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. But I couldn't even get to that point because of all the shouting and stomping of feet you YECs engaged in.

And that's what turns people away from Christianity.

That and the YEC nonsense like a 6,000-year-old Earth, dinosaurs coexisting with humans, and a global flood around 4400 years ago.

The Supreme Court is not the problem.
 

VCO

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2013
11,972
4,587
113
I said I have this theory that lesbianism is not sinful behavior.

Someone presented this theory to me and I am evaluating it.

I wanted to run this by some of you, but I can see that would likely be an exercise in futility.

You YECs have your head too far in the sand to even get past the fact that the world is older than 6,000 years, there was no global flood around 4400 years ago, and dinosaurs did not coexist with humans.
Jack why do you have such a sick interest in sexual sin of all forms?

Do you know why we refuse to discuss it with you?

Ephesians 5:11-12 (ESV)
[SUP]11 [/SUP] Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.
[SUP]12 [/SUP] For it is shameful even to speak of the things that they do in secret.

You can find your answers in the BIBLE, and it is especially easy with the FREE WORDsearch Basic library. That Program has training videos under HELP, to teach you how to use the program, plus there are over 200 free books that you can add to your library and that includes several versions of the Bible. https://www.wordsearchbible.com/basic


Romans 1:24-32 (ESV)
[SUP]24 [/SUP] Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves,
[SUP]25 [/SUP] because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
[SUP]26 [/SUP] For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;
[SUP]27 [/SUP] and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves {AIDS} the due penalty for their error.
[SUP]28 [/SUP] And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.
[SUP]29 [/SUP] They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips,
[SUP]30 [/SUP] slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,
[SUP]31 [/SUP] foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
[SUP]32 [/SUP] Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

With WORDsearch Basic, you too can find verses like that in seconds. The Program also has Bible Dictionaries, and HUNDREDS of copy/writed add-on books that you purchase and add to your Library; AND THEY RUN OUTSTANDING SALES.

The vast majority of my add on books and bibles, I paid half price or less for them. And if that is not impressive enough, two or three times a year they give you a free $25 coupon to spend on any book you want.

Holman's Illustrated Bible Dictionary is a VERY worth while add-on book that you can purchase. It goes beyond most dictionary's that just define the word, and gives you links in the Bible to prove that is how the word is used:

FORNICATION
Various acts of sexual immorality, especially being a harlot or whore.
Old Testament Normally women are the subject of the Hebrew verb zanah, but in Num. 25:1 “people began to play the harlot” (NASB). The clearest example is that of Tamar sitting on the roadway to entice Judah (Gen. 38:12-30). Such action was subject to criminal prosecution bringing the death penalty (Gen. 38:24; cp. Lev. 21:9; Deut. 22:21). Fornication meant being unfaithful to a marriage commitment (Judg. 19:2).
Israel’s neighbors practiced a fertility religion in which prostitution was part of the worship. This led naturally to describing worship of other gods as prostitution (Exod. 34:15-16; Judg. 8:27,33; Hos. 4:13). This concept is central for Hosea’s preaching based on his experience with his unfaithful wife Gomer. Ezekiel also used this concept (Ezek. 16; 23) and extended it to include political treaties with foreign enemies (Ezek. 16:26,28; 23:5).
New Testament The NT also condemns prostitution. Here again prostitution played a central role in worship in places like Corinth and Athens. Greek philosophers could even distinguish the roles of prostitutes for pleasure, slave mistresses to give daily care to the master’s body, and wives to produce legitimate children. Some Stoic philosophers reacted against such practices and condemned sex outside marriage. Many women used the situation to take slave lovers for themselves or become lesbians.
Jesus went against Jewish tradition and forgave prostitutes and opened the way for them to enter God’s kingdom through faith (Matt. 21:31-32; cp. Heb. 11:31; James 2:25), though He still regarded fornication as evil (Mark 7:21).
Paul extended the use of the Greek term for fornication to cover all sinful sexual activity. He dealt with the problem particularly in writing the Corinthians who faced a society permeated with sexual religion and the sexual sins of a seaport. A believer must decide to be part of Christ’s body or a prostitute’s body (1 Cor. 6:12-20). The believer must flee sexual immorality and cleave to Christ, honoring Him with the physical body. Fornication is thus a result of sinful human nature (Gal. 5:19) and unsuitable for God’s holy people (Eph. 5:3; 1 Thess. 4:3).
The book of Revelation also says much about fornication, condemning those guilty to eternal punishment (Rev. 2:21-22). Revelation, as well as the prophets, extends the meaning of fornication to include political and religious unfaithfulness (Rev. 14:8; 17:2,4; 18:3; 19:2).
As a whole, the NT uses porneia, most often translated “fornication,” in at least four ways: voluntary sexual intercourse of an unmarried person with someone of the opposite sex (1 Cor. 7:2; 1 Thess. 4:3); as a synonym for adultery (Matt. 5:32; 19:9); harlotry and prostitution (Rev. 2:14,20); various forms of unchastity (John 8:41; Acts 15:20; 1 Cor. 5:1). See Adultery; Divorce.
Gary Hardin
Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary.
 
Last edited:
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
Your faith in YEC is not evidence that YEC is correct anymore than a Muslim's faith is evidence that Islam is correct. Your believe that OEC is a "proven false theory" is not evidence that OEC is a "proven false theory" and to assert that is fallacious.

Furthermore, Jesus breaking loaves and fishes does not prove a young or old earth. What it does prove is that Jesus can break loaves and fishes and feed people.

The presence of miracles does not prove the world is either six thousand years old or far older. Just because God can do something does not mean that He has. In fact, God chooses not to do a great many things that He can. Using the faulty reasoning that you employed one can assert that God's chooses not to engage in supernatural acts that this "proves" an old earth. Because the reasoning is faulty, as per the rules of logic, neither assertion is valid.

If you don't want to discuss YEC versus OEC in this thread, then stop engaging in the discussion. Telling everyone else to stop while you continue making false assertions and employing faulty reasoning with respect to the topic isn't going to stop the discussion but rather extend it as people choose to correct you. The quickest way to stop this discussion is for you yourself to take responsibility for your own involvement and stop extending it.


Now THAT is a two way STREET. Old Earth Creationism, is a proven false theory in that the Creator, Jesus Christ demonstrated exactly HOW HE CREATES, through the feeding of the 5000 and the Feeding of the 4000, and MAL. 3:6 says HE NEVER CHANGES.

So instead of derailing this thread with another Subject all together, I suggest that you start a new thread entitled: Old Earth Creationism vs. Young Earth Creationism.
 
Last edited:
S

Sub-Zero

Guest

comparing God to the supreme court as if they are equals or on the same level

Your lack of reading comp isnt my problem



Twisting God's creation, marriage, is sinning. Gay parents have been proven to make their adopted/surrogate children more likely gay. A culture more accepting of gays and gay marriage means more gays. Didnt think you needed me to hold your hand.
1.) Comparing a premise (allowing equates to promoting) to God is the ultimate standard. He is perfect, He is Almighty... surely if a perfect and wonderful Being ISN'T promoting sin by the allowance of it, the SAME exact standard should hold true for any other (less imperfect) entity (like the Supreme Court). You can twist this about my equating the Supreme Court to God all you want, but you're just showing your lack of critical thinking and reading comprehension.

2.) My "lack of reading comprehension" could be attributed to your terribly structured sentence. You used double negatives like it's going out of style. The meaning gets distorted when you do that.

Rather than be juvenile about it, you could just clarify what you meant. I did the best I could in trying to understand what you meant. If your mission is to have banter, I'd rather not... it's fruitless. Hence, lets try to have the best 2-way communication possible.

3.) The government and "God's marriage" are 2 astronomically different things. The government has never ordained any of God's marriages but rather, civil [earthly] marriages. God is irrelevant to the US and their licensing. To pretend like the US has been a champion of God's idealistic plan for marriages between His children would be ignorant and untrue. Historically, interracial marriage was outlawed (this went against God's plan), and today, we have gay marriage. Please get over this notion that the government and God are in business together pertaining to morals and marriages. They aren't!
 
S

Sub-Zero

Guest
You dont hold the Bible as your moral compass or the word of God if you think gay marriage is acceptable
Well it's a good thing I don't think it's acceptable to our Father in Heaven... I'm not sure why you would think or say that... ???
 
Jun 5, 2014
1,750
6
0
Jack why do you have such a sick interest in sexual sin of all forms?
Search this site on the word "masturbation" and find at the top of the list threads like "What about masturbation??" and "Masturbation" and "I struggle with mastribation" (must be a YEC who started that thread) and "Beat masturbation and porn addiction" and "Masturbation in marriage" and "Sinful to masturbation, etc" and "Does Leviticus Say Masterbation is Okay" (probably a YEC who started that one too).

Go accuse all those people who posted on those threads of having a sick interest in sexual sin.

You and ORly do understand that bearing false witness is among the 10 commandments, right?

Oh, and guess what.

The Supreme Court is not responsible for masturbation.

Or gay marriage either.
 
S

Sub-Zero

Guest
Now Sub this is a biblical principal that you might not understand...but Christ does not call us to go out and find the sin in sinners...but He does call us to uphold and promote what is good and to be good citizens, and never promote or encourage evil in any way. Now a good Christian is a good citizen that desires the best for our society and the children of our society. As citizens and as Christians we have ever right and responsibility to defend the moral standards of our society.
I totally agree. That is why the government should allow us our liberty but we should be teaching in our home (and amongst our brothers/sisters/friends/etc..) that even though we are blessed to live in a country with many liberties, to not abuse them and remember where our liberties ultimately come from, God.

Pre-marital sex is legal in all 50 states and it ought to be (as God gives us the free will to engage in it or not). However, I would tell my future children that even though we have the civil right TO engage in pre-marital sex, it goes against God's plan and we should abstain until marriage. I would NEVER mandate a law that restricts people from engaging in pre-marital sex as I think it goes against what God has given us (free will). We show our obedience and commitment to Him by being able to do it, but FREELY chooses to NOT do it. We don't prove it by being FORCED to submit to His standards.
 
S

Sub-Zero

Guest
So....

How does this work, exactly....

I now pronounce you Mr. & Mr....husband and husband....?

And who takes the others last name?
Just as in heterosexual marriages, it's at the discretion of the people getting married to keep or change last names.