It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: Greathouse
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Greathouse
I'm confused as to what this has to do with Islam at all... This country isn't under Sharia Law and it isn't illegal to draw a picture of Mohammad.
I'm not nearly as confused about Islam as I am about the conflicting rationalizations of protest movements .
If someone want to do anything purposefully that is deemed offensive against Islam ( drawl a picture ) it is protested by people throughout this country . And it is vilified by being called offensive to Muslims !
Perhaps you'd like to point out where it is written that the pro-gay rights crowd is EXACTLY the same as the anti-Islamophobia crowd.
Yet a minority chooses to do something purposeful against Muslim beliefs ( Homosexual marriage ) And it is good because it wins political correctness's and favor ?
I'm sorry this is a double standard !!!
It's not a double standard. You just don't understand that people can defend a group of people from being ridiculed and not implicitly support the actions of that religion.
It's not that I disapprove of gay marriage it is that I disapprove of the idealistic protesters/ mainstream media and government officials that sponsor such a hypocritical thoughts in the selection of which of our rights are right and wrong .
I blame your lack of understanding of the issues at hand.
If you look at my first two comparisons they seem to have absolutely nothing to do with the rights ? The only concern I see on these two issues is" what is the political correct choice" ?
Let's see... One issue was JUST ruled on by the Supreme Court and the other issue is some random SJW issue about Islam that has NOTHING to do with the government. Yeah TOTALLY comparable situations...
originally posted by: Greathouse
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: Greathouse
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Greathouse
I'm confused as to what this has to do with Islam at all... This country isn't under Sharia Law and it isn't illegal to draw a picture of Mohammad.
I'm not nearly as confused about Islam as I am about the conflicting rationalizations of protest movements .
If someone want to do anything purposefully that is deemed offensive against Islam ( drawl a picture ) it is protested by people throughout this country . And it is vilified by being called offensive to Muslims !
Perhaps you'd like to point out where it is written that the pro-gay rights crowd is EXACTLY the same as the anti-Islamophobia crowd.
Yet a minority chooses to do something purposeful against Muslim beliefs ( Homosexual marriage ) And it is good because it wins political correctness's and favor ?
I'm sorry this is a double standard !!!
It's not a double standard. You just don't understand that people can defend a group of people from being ridiculed and not implicitly support the actions of that religion.
It's not that I disapprove of gay marriage it is that I disapprove of the idealistic protesters/ mainstream media and government officials that sponsor such a hypocritical thoughts in the selection of which of our rights are right and wrong .
I blame your lack of understanding of the issues at hand.
If you look at my first two comparisons they seem to have absolutely nothing to do with the rights ? The only concern I see on these two issues is" what is the political correct choice" ?
Let's see... One issue was JUST ruled on by the Supreme Court and the other issue is some random SJW issue about Islam that has NOTHING to do with the government. Yeah TOTALLY comparable situations...
I don't even have to cut this up to match your reply it only takes one response .
Freedoms are called freedoms for a reason . When you start selectively enforcing those freedoms they lose all meaning .
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Greathouse
Yet a minority chooses to do something purposeful against Muslim beliefs ( Homosexual marriage ) And it is good because it wins political correctness's and favor ?
Gays and lesbians who have fallen in love and want to marry haven't fallen in love with a person of the same sex in order to purposefully challenge Muslims or Christians or anyone else.
This SCOTUS decision isn't a statement against religion it's a statement for the separation of church and state.
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
ACK! I hate to see this glorious celebration of freedom get turned into a religious argument when it has NOTHING to do with religion! Must we pit "religion vs the gays" yet again? Can't we just celebrate the fact that love, tolerance and EQUAL treatment under secular law have triumphed - without coloring it with the negative, vile and hateful arguments of people who don't want to uphold equality?
Can't we just ignore the poo-pooing for one day in lieu of celebration? Please?
originally posted by: Mugly
so is it safe to assume that insurance companies will extend benefits to the policy holders partner?
lets hope so
Yeah... I just figure if it's so important to him, why wouldn't God have put an 11th commandment in there? Or added "Gross Gay Stuff" as the 8th deadly sin?
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: Seamrog
Ah yes. I must have missed the commandment that said "Don't diddle your same sex flatmate."
God, in his infinite wisdom and never-ending lifespan, ruling over the endless expanses of the cosmos, nay, the MULTIVERSE of cosmos, really cares where you put your thingy.
Yep.
Well, actually, that God fella did:
Punishments for Sin
The Lord said to Moses, ...
...(11 other verses)...
13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
Not that I subscribe to the crazy nonsense about killing people for the myriad of crap listed in Leviticus, Chapter 20, but it is in there (no pun intended). In fact, he seems very preoccupied with where I can or cannot put my thingy. Click the link...some creepy stuff. It even addresses having sex with a woman while on her period--both people shall be shunned.
That crazy Bible, I tell ya...
originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: beezzer
It just happened, a victory just occurred, while it would be nice to take the higher ground, after some of the bigotry that has been leveraged at gays, and the huge struggle to get here, do you honestly expect anything other than "Suck it bigots, we won, equality!!! Whooooo!!!!" from the side who's fought their ass off for this?
It's day one. Plus we're talking about so many people that the concept everyone will take the high road is just a silly pipe dream.
Also, someone comes in threatening gods wrath when everyone is celebrating this, do you really expect no reaction?
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
originally posted by: Mugly
so is it safe to assume that insurance companies will extend benefits to the policy holders partner?
lets hope so
Marriage equality is marriage equality, with ALL the state and federal benefits afforded to straight married couples! That's why the "separate but equal" civil union arguments were worthless. This is the real thing!
originally posted by: buster2010
originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: xuenchen
So gay marriage is now legal in this country . I thought homosexuals were offensive to radical Islam ? Let me get this straight I'm just trying to keep up .
Exercising your rights to draw a picture of Mohammed is called bad, baiting and offensive ?
But a minority exercising their right to gay marriage even though offensive to Islam. Is good ?
I really don't understand the rationality of protesters sometimes ? To me it appears the deck is stacked .
When did Islam become the dominate religion in America? Oh yeah I forgot all those states where Sharia has taken over will not stand for this will they.
originally posted by: NavyDoc
So let's get this straight. Roberts upheld the ACA saying that it was not the job of the court to contradict the votes of the people in one case but then overturns laws voted for by the people in this case?