Judge declares US gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

page: 8
23
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by texastig
 


Dude ok then, a gay guy and his partner goes into a church, the usual self righteous assholes then do the usual abomination speech and these guys then go. Never to return.

Is it your job to convict people of sin or the holy Spirits? Is it your job to work that great work in peoples herts or the Holy Spirits? Can YOU convict anyone? But you do. You deny them their Father because of your own venom. Yet its ok for unmarried moms to be there, people who have commited adultery, people who have stolen, people who have broke every one of Gods commandments including you and deny them salvation...

IT IS THE HOLY SPIRITS JOB TO CONVICT PEOPLE OF SIN NOT YOURS! It is God who does the work on people NOT YOU!




posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter
A down side would be that we have to pay school taxes for your children.

Everyone with property pays school taxes. Yes it does benefit homosexuals and other childless individuals. I imagine when they get older they will want educated doctors, policemen, realtors, a Hover-round that won't launch them into the Grand Canyon, and well put together recreational vehicles. Putting children through schools helps ensure that the entire nation won't be full of complete morons when you're older and need help.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
For you people out there who are not paying attention Marriage is NOT a Civil Right.


Then why did you get married? If you don't want all 1,050 rights allotted to you by being married, then, please show us what you are made of and divorce your wife and just live with her. You can even get "married" in the eyes of God, but don't for once think of using those 1,050 rights allotted to you by the government for doing so.

Again. Time to put up.


To touch on that. Marriage is not a Civil Right. But then Civil Rights are not your Constitutionally protected inalienable rights. They are two separate classes of rights.

But I do digress. If you feel marriage is not a right. Would you then not be angered if your parents were prevented from marrying, or yourself? Bear in mind that with marriage, comes the ability to determine how your partner is handled after death. What to do with the shared income, and the right to take over medical decisions in a serious event.

So I ask, since the fact marriage is not a "civil right" seems to have been brought up. How would any of you feel if it was denied to you?

Some are completely against it, because let's face it they're fascist who are empathetically impaired.
Some are okay with it, so long as it is not called marriage.
Some are for it, and still feel it is immoral.
Some are for it, simply because they are homosexuals.

There's a spectrum. Who is to say who is right? Why not just accept no one is right and leave everyone to their PRIVATE business. Because honestly it is NONE of your business if a clergyman or else decides to MARRY someone. Or if someone who is homosexual wants to be married.

"But I'll have to see them in public."

You have to see them in public regardless of their "domestic" status!



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yissachar1
reply to post by texastig
 


Dude ok then, a gay guy and his partner goes into a church, the usual self righteous assholes then do the usual abomination speech and these guys then go. Never to return.

IT IS THE HOLY SPIRITS JOB TO CONVICT PEOPLE OF SIN NOT YOURS! It is God who does the work on people NOT YOU!




Can really go with this here. There was a case of a man and his mother married in chruch and Paul told them to toss them out. In short they were not to let them flaunt thier maddness in front to the congregation.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


Well, since you are using the LDS church for an example...

...What religious sect in the 1800's was threatened with war if they did not cease and desist certain marriage practices? Yep, the Mormons.
To this day, the splinter groups of polygamists are still persecuted, prosecuted and demonized. Ask them about government telling people what their churches can and can't do.

(Two sidenotes: First, I am not a polygamist...My one wife is way too much for me to deal with most of the time! And second, funny how polygamy is reviled while those same revilers go home and secretly surf the web for freaky porn that make polygamy look like sunday school!)

So for all the excuses I have read on this thread of how Government "can't" and "won't" force religions to do something...they did, didn't they? At the barrel of a gun no less.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Captain Obvious
 


That's the point.

People say marriage is for one woman and one man because of the children. Married couples get a tax break. People with children get a tax break.

People who don't have children have to pay for your child's school taxes because we gave all you people with children tax breaks.

Maybe if you stopped getting those 1,050 rights/privilages/tax breaks then maybe the government could secure your child's education? But, no. Married people with children get the best of both worlds. They have everyone paying for their child's education while they themselves get a tax break for having children.

Maybe take your tax break and use it for your own child's education and stop taxing us that don't have them?



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by blamethegreys

So for all the excuses I have read on this thread of how Government "can't" and "won't" force religions to do something...they did, didn't they? At the barrel of a gun no less.
en.wikipedia.org...


Well hell the government threatened war against it's own Citizens whom the government is designed to REPRESENT. I suppose that means the government is right!

That mentality furthers ignorance in regards to government fascism.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in an American flag." or something like that.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
What trailer park mother terresa doesnt realize is that not so long ago black people were being raped and burned alive to the cherrfull claps of ignorant backwoods hillbillys like herself.


Yes and there were some no doubt buggering each others behind the trailor....squealing like pigs...and they needed to stop that behavior as well.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by mryanbrown
Touche` or what have you. I should have properly said you are citing rationales based in Old Covenant Dogma.


You said I was quoting the Old Covenant. Which is it?



Originally posted by mryanbrown
Cause one is a personal choice between two consenting adults and the other harms someone based upon the judgment of a single party.
I completely see how these two are related. Please invent another asinine scenario and ignore reality to further aid your position.


But you said "freedom is for everyone". But now you are placing limitations on it. So I guess there is no "freedom for everyone".



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


That's why I'm against it. That's my point. Why do marriage certificates exist at all?



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
www.dailymail.co.uk...


They do have to add special chemicals and vitamins. Then they have to turn the cell into another which isn't natural.
Thanks for the source.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 


Paul wasnt God or Yeshua... He had his own issues and was responsable for killing many Christians yet was given a second chance by GOD not man... Who flaunted their madness more than him? Paul was just another Christian saved by grace... Just like you.... No more, no less...

As a man I would choose a gay over a zeleous murderer anyday, but s a Christian I am not allowed to disown anyone because if my own sins are forgiven then i have no business convicting anyone... Neither do you... It is God that is judge not us, and when you judge you are setting yourself up as God... Who then do you think you are huh?, You re no more than a sinner saved by grace yourself who cannot save ANYONE yet you would deny your fellows the same grace showing the truth of your own hert that you have not been to the cross... As Paul said, work out your own salvation before you worry about others, because only God can save, all you can do is watch, and all you have been commanded to do is love...
Stop condemming or be condemed yourself



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by texastig
You said I was quoting the Old Covenant. Which is it?


I improperly stated you were quoting, from recollection in the conversation. I admit this was wrong and stated I should have properly stated you're rationale is based in Old Covenant Dogma.


But you said "freedom is for everyone". But now you are placing limitations on it. So I guess there is no "freedom for everyone".


Are you honestly attempting to rebut me on this by stating that MURDER is a freedom?



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


I have to get a marriage license from STATE officials. Not the Federal Government.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by mryanbrown
 



If marriage was denied to me the as a straight man, then no one would be getting married now would they?



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yissachar1
reply to post by Logarock
 


Paul wasnt God or Yeshua... He had his own issues and was responsable for killing many Christians yet was given a second chance by GOD not man... Who flaunted their madness more than him? Paul was just another Christian saved by grace... Just like you.... No more, no less...



This is the premise for the rest of your post and it is faulty. And just making points not trying to talk down to anyone.

Paul was much more than just a christain saved by grace in the church from an authority standpoint. And he did not contiune killing christians....didnt come into the church later killing christains and then saying "hay just an old sinner saved by grace, dont be haten".

The church really isnt an open sewer and there is accountability in the congregation for actions and life styles bad teachings ect. Granted self-righteousness and hypocrisy are bad and should be delt with.....but the mark of a good soild church is not to be measured by its toleration of openly bad behavior.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by blamethegreys
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


Well, since you are using the LDS church for an example...

...What religious sect in the 1800's was threatened with war if they did not cease and desist certain marriage practices? Yep, the Mormons.
To this day, the splinter groups of polygamists are still persecuted, prosecuted and demonized. Ask them about government telling people what their churches can and can't do.

(Two sidenotes: First, I am not a polygamist...My one wife is way too much for me to deal with most of the time! And second, funny how polygamy is reviled while those same revilers go home and secretly surf the web for freaky porn that make polygamy look like sunday school!)

So for all the excuses I have read on this thread of how Government "can't" and "won't" force religions to do something...they did, didn't they? At the barrel of a gun no less.
en.wikipedia.org...


I couldn't care less about polygamy...but when you're talking about girls as young as 12 or 13, THEN we have a problem. A church can't violate the law merely because it chooses to. In that case, some churches could have slaves, some churches could practice human sacrifice, etc. A church is not above the law. However, we allow them special exemptions, such as no taxes. If we don't sue the Catholic Church for not allowing women to be priests, then why would we turn around and say they MUST marry people whom their faith says shouldn't be married?

And as far as the Utah War, you had a territorial government in rebellion against the legitimate, Constitutional government of the United States - a Constitution that the Utah leaders had sworn to protect. Rather different than the Feds coming in just because they don't like your religion.

And you only real example is a war fought before the Civil War? The reference I made was to recent events, and how the striking down of anti-miscegnation laws did not affect churches - thus, a direct correlation between mixed race marriage and same-sex marriage.

So, you move the goalposts a century or so, to a time when the forward pass wasn't even legal. Irrelevant to the subject at hand.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


That's why I'm against it. That's my point. Why do marriage certificates exist at all?


So, you would prefer it if people had to go to a church to get married? Civil marriages wouldn't exist if the state wasn't involved.

If you want to get into a debate over whether government should regulate contracts (essentially what marriage is), you're in the wrong thread.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yissachar1
reply to post by Logarock
 


As a man I would choose a gay over a zeleous murderer anyday, but s a Christian I am not allowed to disown anyone because if my own sins are forgiven then i have no business convicting anyone... Neither do you... It is God that is judge not us, and when you judge you are setting yourself up as God... Who then do you think you are huh?



Ah.....God?
Just had to do that....take a deeeeppp breath there Yissachar. Just let it go....

Really and once again not tryint to talk down but there is ample show that we are to reprove the unfruitful works of darkeness. I know why you dont like Paul or give him the authority God did....because hes busting your chops right now and indeed was all about the new man not the old man with christain trapings.

Male on male/ female on female is out in Pauls world and he even says its a spritual condition with really bad events to follow.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by texastig

Originally posted by OldDragger
Sorry, freedom is for everyone to live as they choose, not determined by your idea of "God's laws".


I guess I can now go and murder people and steal because freedom is for everyone.
If we don't have God's laws then there will be anarchy.


Have you read the Bible? It's full of people murdering because God wanted them to.

I would rather have secular laws than those of bloodthirsty people who claim it's "God's Will" that people be stoned, their babies heads bashed against walls and their cities destroyed, thank you.





top topics
 
23
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join