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: 9
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 06:29 PM
link   
a reply to: kitzik

The intellectual dishonesty should be applied to those that imply that US Laws should be measured against the laws or customs of foreign nations.

It should be applied to those that would justify tyranny and persecution based on their personal interpretation of God.

And thats all the Op is trying to do here.

If Op wants to prove his point, show me in US law were marriage is defined to be exclusively between a male and a female...that would be a valid argument. If you find it then the Constitutional amendment you are seeking but will never get wont be necessary.





edit on 10-7-2015 by michaelbrux because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Oh my I just took and developed a photograph of my Father The Seventh Earl of Monkey your post and this was his reaction.



Better get a scotch to calm myself down.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: boymonkey74

The burden of proof is all on you. We have many remaining laws about marriage and it never mentions a marriage between man and man.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: boymonkey74

I'd recommend at least two.

These are heady times.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: kitzik

Are you saying that they had same-sex marriages before Church Laws?



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: kitzik
a reply to: boymonkey74

The burden of proof is all on you. We have many remaining laws about marriage and it never mentions a marriage between man and man.


The bible hasn't even got the testicles to call sexxx by its real name, it is all about lying with such, laying down with such, begetting and there is no f!%@ing at all. The only real f"@$, and it is one of the mind, is what happened to Maria(y), while she was asleep. C'mon guys, take it for what it is and move on.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Oh FFS, how many threads on gay marriage do we need in a week?

I mean really, this is getting stupid now.

It happened.

Things change, otherwise we'd all still be hunter gatherers living in caves.

Get used to it and move on to better and more interesting things with your lives.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: markosity1973

Indeed, or nailed to trees and hit with sponges filled with piss. I don't think modern society is so bad at all.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Jonjonj

I'm not talking about Bible or the language of Bible. Of course words such as sex and fsck didn't existed.

I'm reading "ancient" article published in Yale Law Journal 1907 about Roman laws and customs concerning marriage.
www.jstor.org...

It has a thorough, meticulous descriptions of the subject and it never mentions such thing as "same sex marriage", can anyone here show me opposite example of the same quality ?



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: kitzik

But, are you saying that same-sex marriages occurred before the Bible and all that?



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Sorry, but you are wrong. Same sex marriage existed before even the Code of Hammurabi. 700 years before it was created, Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum were two male Egyptians married to each other in life and buried together in death. Even their tomb depicts many images of them embracing and/or kissing.

Archaeologists also uncovered a burial in Czech Republic where a Bronze Age male was buried with female burial items. If his orientation was not accepted at the time, he would not have been buried with such care and with a reflection of his personality so evident.

Artwork found in Sicily dated back to the Mesolithic period (around 10,000 years ago) depict male on male intercourse. The fact that they made art of it shows that it was something celebrated not despised.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime

No



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: kitzik

You have your ideas, I have mine.

A: Marriage was invented so that man could show his faith in god's law.
B: Marriage was invented to stop the young kids rampantly sexing all over the holy land.
There were old guys who didn't like the sexing all over the holy land I reckon. Just my opinion.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

None of those laws actually say ONE man and ONE woman - so can I assume you are in favour of polygamy??

And of course they allow slavery - what is your position on that?



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Jonjonj

Did you read the article I linked ?

How you can explain that it never mentions homosexual cohabitation as a marriage ?

First of all marriage was invented to solve property and hereditary rights, how and with whom people fsked was of second concern.
This is my Marxist materialistic point of view



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: kitzik
a reply to: Jonjonj

I'm not talking about Bible or the language of Bible. Of course words such as sex and fsck didn't existed.

I'm reading "ancient" article published in Yale Law Journal 1907 about Roman laws and customs concerning marriage.
www.jstor.org...

It has a thorough, meticulous descriptions of the subject and it never mentions such thing as "same sex marriage", can anyone here show me opposite example of the same quality ?


The reason it doesnt mention it is because it was written in a time where even talk of homosexuality could get you into trouble with the law. Your source is as biased as you are.

I can SHOW you that gay was openly accepted here and here



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: kitzik
a reply to: MrSpad

eight pages of denial and still not one fact of "same sex marriage" in the past.

So many intellectually dishonest people on ATS , it is unbelievable !

Distortions, ridicule and lies is all I can see here.



Then you are not reading my posts. I have covered the earliest know same sex marriage, the earliest know same sex public marriage in Egypt and two Christian Emperors who enforced a law that when two men are married they have to as equals with neither playing the roll of the submissive women or be burned alive. And that is not even a fraction of what can be found with a little research. You can hide from the facts all you want however history is not going to change to fit your wishes.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: kitzik
a reply to: Darth_Prime

As I said it is modern distorted interpretation. I can believe that those early Christian martyrs were homosexuals, but from this to say that this "marriage" was sanctioned by Church is a lie. There wasn't marriage by Roman law, since there wasn't Roman "same sex marriage" laws and there wasn't ever sanctioned by Christian Church union of homosexuals.


Their were Roman laws enforced by Christian emperors defining the roles when two men married. And as in neither could play the role of a lowly woman and had instead be equal in roles or be killed by burning.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 07:59 PM
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.



Since when have Americans given a crap about the Code of Hammurabi? This is ridiculous. It's just like how Americans ignored the Mayans until they could exploit their old religion for that 2012 hoax (btw most Mayans are Christians today). It's just like how Americans ignored the Alawites until they could exploit them as an excuse to attack Assad in Syria. And it's just like how Americans ignored the Yazidis until they could exploit them as an excuse to "attack" ISIS & train more troops in Iraq.

Also, marriage in the Old testament allowed many wives. The Prophet Yaqub/Jacob, who later became known as Israel, had 4 wives. The Prophet Abraham had 2 wives. So why doesn't the US allow polygamy? The Israelites themselves were the offspring of polygamy. And if people here were really following the Bible's rules on marriage, why don't you also make a stand against divorce, adultery, and seeing someone other than your spouse's nakedness? Those are all against the Bible too.



posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 08:00 PM
link   
I smell a braindead parrot in the pews. No other country has legalized gay marriage, eh OP? You sure about that? Really REALLY sure?

Eat it, buddy:



The Netherlands (2000)

Belgium (2003)

Canada (2005)

Spain (2005)

South Africa (2006)

Norway (2009)

Sweden (2009)

Argentina (2010)

Iceland (2010)

Portugal (2010)

Denmark (2012)

Brazil (2013)

England and Wales (2013)

France (2013)

New Zealand (2013)

Uruguay (2013)

Luxembourg (2014)

Scotland (2014)

Finland: (signed 2015, effective 2017)

time.com...


As for ancient cultures, try reading something other than a bible for once:

Same-Sex Unions throughout Time A History of Gay Marriage


Evidence exists that same-sex marriages were tolerated in parts of Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt. Artifacts from Egypt, for example, show that same-sex relationships not only existed, but the discovery of a pharaonic tomb for such a couple shows their union was recognized by the kingdom. Meanwhile, accounts of the Israelites’ departure for Canaan include their condemnation of Egyptian acceptance of same-sex practice. In actuality, same-sex marital practices and rituals are less known in Egypt compared to Mesopotamia, where documents exist for a variety of marital practices, including male lovers of kings and polyandry. None of the recorded laws of Mesopotamia, including the Code of Hammurabi, contain restrictions against same-sex unions despite the fact that marriages are otherwise well regulated

Oh snap. Shot down your claim right there, didn't it?

You can click that link and read the rest yourself. Quit being lazy, and quit making excuses.
edit on 7/10/2015 by Nyiah because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join