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.

 

Supreme Court extends same-sex marriage nationwide

page: 7
67
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

They did the same back when interracial marriage was legalised!! Same arguments, always the same.....




posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Greathouse

What you are doing is stating that people who said that the prophet drawing cartoon contests were stupid and offensive, tried to stop these events from happening. No one tried to stop them from happening.

You're saying we're being selective about what rights we support... it is you selectively assigning to us what rights we support instead of actually reading anything we say.



What you are doing is stating that people who said that the prophet drawing cartoon contests were stupid and offensive, tried to stop these events from happening. No one tried to stop them from happening.


That's a lie on two parts . Number one I never said they were trying to stop the events I said they were protesting them . Number two in any of the protest you will hear cries for for drawling Mohammed not to be allowed.




You're saying we're being selective about what rights we support... it is you selectively assigning to us what rights we support instead of actually reading anything we say.


I assigned rights to no one. Unlike you I approve of the usage rights whether I agree with the opinion or not . I have tried three times to bring you in line with what I said you yet refuse .

My post was about the hypocrisy of protesting one issue on the reasoning that it shouldn't be allowed because it is offensive to Islam .


But it seems offensiveness to Islam does not matter if the debate in question is politically correct ?



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnFisher

The biggest pressure churches will have to change is a smaller and smaller flock as more and more people move away from them.

Eventually most churches will do gay marriage, and it won't be because people are forcing them, but because they will be trying to stem the tide of people leaving that has been growing over the years.

Eventually they will have to choose, fade into obscurity or change. Right now the church is still in it's, we can survive with our loyalists, and are pushing against the changes in the world. Eventually more and more will change and we'll have a divide of churches that accept gays and gay marriage and churches that go the extreme opposite. The extreme opposites will become smaller and smaller, and in time, most people will look at them as the insane outskirt weirdo churches.



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnFisher

They can pressure all they want, but that will go right back to the supreme court for a ruling, because now you are trampling on somebody else's rights. This is where I have a problem, gay couple X has never set foot inside church Y
and now they demand to be married by them to make a point. After being married you will never see them again.

Those churches that are going to follow the bibles commands will never give in, even if the court rules against them, they will cede all marrying to the state(justice of the peace) and not marry anybody even their own church members.



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:28 AM
link   
As a resident gAyTSer just wanted to drop by and say haaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyy yaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyy!



I'm loving the memes already!




posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:28 AM
link   
My question is why did we have to do this?

Why should gov be involved in marriages at all?

Gay and want to get married, cool, there are many churches that will let you.......

The gov shouldnt be able to mandate if you can or if you cant, period......

Get the gov out of my bedroom



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnFisher

Well you know, is like everything, some churches will still get shrouded with their freedom of religion rights, while others will openly start to do same sex marriage as nothing but a business.

So people will have plenty to chose from, civil marriage has not religious base because is government, but church marriage is another thing, that is a choice, It will be interesting to see whom will challenge those churches that will dare to say no to a same sex union base on religion, and more interesting to see whom will rather challenge those churches, that is where the debate will be, then it could be call forcing churches to do what they do not want to do when is plenty that will do it with no problems.



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: Krazysh0t


Except I'm trying to explain to you that we DO have that right. It HASN'T been infringed.


Well if you would've read my post there is absolutely no reason to tempt to explain that to me. I never said the rights were being infringed upon .

The whole premise of my statement from the beginning is that freedom of speech is being used hypocritically by protesters .


Fine. It's not about infringing rights. It's about hypocrisy. Good. Go start a thread on it instead of dragging this sore spot of yours into this thread. I think the connection you are making is tenuous at best, but I'd rather not keep discussing Islam in a topic on Gay Marriage.


Hmmm my statement could've been left at one simple response and not dragged through this thread . But 3 to 4 posters chose to respond and continue the debate because I hit a sensitive issue .

Next time instead of insulting someone just passed over it. But I like how you engaged me and then switch the blame to me that's hypocritical also .
edit on 26-6-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:30 AM
link   
I just want you all to pay close attention to just how quickly things go from bad to FUBAR in this country from here on out.

Ever have one of those weeks or months or years where nothing seems to go your way? Prepare for that on a national level.



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

More like get the Religious right out of the bedrooms!!!!



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

No this isn't true at all. No where in this ruling does it state that a gay couple can force a church to marry them. ALL it does is overturn gay marriage bans in states that have them. The gay couple still has to either go to a country clerk or find a gay friendly church to marry them. Stop inventing situations that aren't real.
edit on 26-6-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

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?



I think he used the 14th Amendment to strengthen his case in this.

As for ACA?

Supremo-care"


I'm just making the observation that there seems to be a bit of inconsistency in how the SCOTUS has been ruling as of late.



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

Just like what happened when the SCOTUS made interracial marriage legal?

Got it... they were bad times after that weren't they!



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

That's a fine concept until your partner becomes ill or dies and you have no way to sign consent forms or have full property rights...the family can shut you out. It's really complicated and this is the ONLY way!



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: beezzer

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?



I think he used the 14th Amendment to strengthen his case in this.

As for ACA?

Supremo-care"


I'm just making the observation that there seems to be a bit of inconsistency in how the SCOTUS has been ruling as of late.


Doesn't matter now, the ruling has been made!



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I was responding to this statement



Have fun America. Let's see how long before churches get the pressure to conduct same sex marriage.



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:33 AM
link   
a reply to: flammadraco

Ha, ha, they love to be in bed with you and observe what you do and how. I guess living other peoples life is more exiting than living their own because they are bore.




posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

This reminds me exactly of.....Yesterday I read something that stated in a dressed up way that Gay Marriage in the US is why our nation is crumbling (and this wasn't from the Phelps camp). It didn't mention anything about corporate cronyism, big $ lobbyists, big bank bailouts, never ending undeclared wars, religious intolerance and hate, the list goes on. Funny, from my experience it's usually the gays that congregate in old neighborhoods, fix them up, increase property values, open up friendly coffee shops, galleries, the list goes on. I'm not big on Federal Government meddling like dictators, but I'm happy to see freedom expanded.



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: beezzer

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?



I think he used the 14th Amendment to strengthen his case in this.

As for ACA?

Supremo-care"


I'm just making the observation that there seems to be a bit of inconsistency in how the SCOTUS has been ruling as of late.


Oh I agree.

Personally?

I thought the job of the Supreme Court was to use the Constitution to determine cases.

Now they're more like the Supre'meme' court.



posted on Jun, 26 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   
From Justice Kennedy on the ruling:


No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family. In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.


www.newrepublic.com...

Beautiful.



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join