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.

 

4000 years of history wiped out by five SCOTUS Judges

page: 12
14
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: grimpachi
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I pretty sure that's "Bronze age" I have never heard of the "Brass age".


hahahahahahah.
quoted for mad lulz.
the brass age...
awesome

on topic
its people like the OP that really make me despise religion




posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Marriage it would seem has been between one man and one woman as indicated by the Code of Law established by Hammurabi.

No nations but the current ones has ever legalized marriage between the same sex.

so 4000 plus years of historical tradition is over thrown by five liberal SCOTUS judges without regard to the historical tradition.



good...it's about time we stopped living in the past....



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn




you are confusing acceptance with marriage.


You're confusing what we think constitutes marriage today, willing partners, legal contracts, etc., with what "marriage" was 4000 years ago. Ever heard the term "Married in the eyes of God"? Po-dunk little outposts or the wandering dessert nomads 4000 years ago, weren't concerned with legalities, they just shacked up and were "married" in the eyes of God.

Heck, in the Bible the Benjaminites hid in the bushes and kidnapped their wives, and they called it legal marriage!



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
i have to say that mr hammurabi or however you spell it sounds like a major D bag.

right now i am hoping that some proof pops up somewhere that he liked to inhale the sausage.
that would make my day


2015 and people are talking like we should be living my some ancient lame ass laws.

i can not believe some peoples thought process.
it is quite disturbing



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Mugly

have you read God's PRO-Homosexual pronouncement in Romans 1?

All who practice it and accept it are already under the Judgement of God. Enjoy it while you can.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Making broad sweeping statements like child molesters doesn't support your theory. First off most priests are not child molesters. But let's pretend they are so we can discredit everything they say that doesn't agree with your thoughts. Why do people think this helps an argument? That's what I'd like to understand.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mugly
i have to say that mr hammurabi or however you spell it sounds like a major D bag.

right now i am hoping that some proof pops up somewhere that he liked to inhale the sausage.
that would make my day


2015 and people are talking like we should be living my some ancient lame ass laws.

i can not believe some peoples thought process.
it is quite disturbing


you're right...what I'm afraid of is when these people stop talking about it, and take actions to force us to live by it. it happened to Christianity a while back, and now Islam is going through that same stage. Taoism and Buddhism are the oldest religions and the most sanest to me.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Mugly

Well, Mugly! I'm about to make your day!


Hammurabi’s Code was proclaimed at the end of his reign and carved onto a massive, MIDDLE finger-shaped black stone stela (pillar) that was looted by later invaders and rediscovered in 1901 by a French archaeological team in present-day Iran.



Hammurabi, WHO WAS A KNOWN SAUSAGE SNORTER was the sixth king in the Babylonian dynasty, which ruled in central Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq) from c.1894 to 1595 B.C.


www.history.com...

(Emphasis and capitol additions mine)



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Mugly

have you read God's PRO-Homosexual pronouncement in Romans 1?

All who practice it and accept it are already under the Judgement of God. Enjoy it while you can.


i absolutely have not.
i dont put any stock in god/jesus/the bible/religion because i think it is all a crock of #.
i think religion is the single worst thing that has ever happened to this planet and all of us as a species would be better off if could just be gone.

i dont care to hear or read anything god had to say. positive, negative, neutral....
it is all a load of # to me and i cant believe in 2015 people still believe that garbage.
kind of a bummer



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

hahahahahahah
YES

he should now and forever be known as hamurrabi the chortler



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   
How pleasant.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx
Taoism and Buddhism are the oldest religions and the most sanest to me.


if there is any type of religion i could maybe get on board with it would be one of these.

its a shame people need an ancient book of fiction and laws to live by



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
you are confusing acceptance with marriage. these two things are different. That was the problem. For 30 plus years we have been acceptant of homosexuals and their practice but it wasn't enough for them they want to marry as well because current laws would not allow them to have certain benefits. Such as the partner getting their SSI after they died.

Insurance policies were different you can designate anyone to be the beneficiary. You can add anyone onto your insurance policies after 1997 as long as they are in your house. There was nothing really to benefit LGBT in getting married except to change the 4000 plus year meaning of marriage to include Same Sex.

Many of you argued that using ancient laws of Hammurabi was antiquated and needed change, but yet at the same time you want us to take the one, that ONE example of a homosexual Partners in Egypt as the normal practice in Egypt historically and that is in error, it was not.


You're just being willfully ignorant now.
It's historically recognized as fact that various cultures around the world have perfomed same sex marriages, but you prefer to ignore that because it doesn't suit your specific religious version of what marriage is.

Again, you do not own a patent on marriage.

Marriage is the joining of two people in a publicly recognized ceremony of union, you don't get to pick and choose what form that takes, neither does the Catholic, Christian or any other Abrahamic religious group.

Listen up and listen good - NO RELIGION OWNS MARRIAGE. Therefore, no one gets to say what "traditional marriage" is, or how it should be defined.

Either way, you can believe what you want to believe, same sex marriage is now a reality across the USA and there is nothing you nor your fellow Taliban can do about it



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I think you are confusing a Belief system with a system of controlling everyone. religion will never control everyone because everyone can believe in different things and 'systems'... unless you truly want a one world religion



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   
I think the entire case was based on a false premise - namely that government has anything to do with marriage at all. Marriage has been a religious institution for thousands of years. Governments are late-comers to the game and only recognize marriages for purposes of taxation and inheritance.

So what happened was that the SCOTUS (government) decided to dictate what a religious term now meant. There was no reason government could not institute Civil Unions giving gay couples the very same rights conferred on married heterosexual couples. Instead they purposefully change not only the meaning of the word but open up religious institutions to government interference through new law. Call it a double whammy.

You may not like religion but that shouldn't be one's basis for opinion on the matter. There was no reason for this argument at all other than to tear down traditional ideas. When it's only wrong to you because it changes or interferes with something you enjoy or agree with then all our freedoms can be taken down one by one. The Confederate battle flag is not popular now either but it looks like it has become off limits as free speech. Notice how it's only things valued by Conservatives that are being torn down, reinterpreted or banned outright. I wouldn't have even considered myself a Conservative only a few short years ago but seeing how progressives and the left are attacking other's freedoms right and left I find myself supporting the underdog in the fight.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

they native americans not only recognize same sex marriages they saw those who were same sex as very special, manifesting both the female spirit and the male. that was part of their religious view until it was corrupted by the European conquests!! it's unfortunate that those with the better weapons and stronger desire to gain more territory and wealth also get to decide which religion is superior.... maybe just maybe, those other relgions had some key truths to them that would serve us way better, but we will never know that because everything was destroyed in the conquesters path that contradicted their "perfect", far superior religion!



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Are you saying that the word "Marriage" was created by religion?

www.politicususa.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn





my point being five SCOTUs feel they are more educated and need not consult the traditional recognition of marriage as being between one and male and one female and rule that it is between two people regardless of gender.


So your only point is that the SCOTUS should base their decisions on 4000 year old laws?



what is amazing is NOW only same sex marriages is a protected RIGHT under the US Constitution.


So straight people don't have the right to get married?
Shoot must have missed that one!



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

So your beef is with particular genders making a public commitment, in the eyes of their god and their law.

And you're using 4000 year old law to make the point that 4000 years ago a marriage was to be between a male and female...O..K...

Does that also mean we ought to be stoning thieves, murdering liars, and generally eating our rulers and Royalty after just 7 years on the throne then? (to gain their strength apparently)

Because something is old, doesn't make it better then we have today mate...unless you fancy going back to leeches for disease, arsenic body powders, lead in your wine, slavery, no sanitation, no electricity, and all the rest that is older than current?

Bet your TV isn't older than 10 years...even though apparently, your logic tells you the original 'Televisor' is better because it's older.

Law and attitude are always evolving and for good reason.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Are you saying that the word "Marriage" was created by religion?

www.politicususa.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Marriage was a term used by the church long before the United States was ever around.
To the best of my knowledge 2015 is the first time government has created an interpretation of the word.
To be clear I have nothing against gay couples making a public commitment.
I just fail to see why they needed to redefine a word to make that possible given the legal ramifications for churches.
edit on 11-7-2015 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join