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.

 

Why are Republicans so concerned about what goes on in my bedroom?

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   
There's a major problem with that, and if you happen to run into a candidate ask them this :

"To ban sodomy in the US is to violate the 1st Amendment's clause of "The US has no Official State Religion would be a direct violation of The Constitution and what do you plan to do to ensure that the seperation of Church and State remains?"!

People lie down when Religion demands it but in reality if you are having oral or anal with the person you swore in front of God to spend the rest of your life with where is the problem? It's when you deny it to married couples does one or both begin to wander and stray outside of the marriage to get it. Allow it in marriage and you could reduce broken homes and divorce by more then 2/3! Couples would stay together longer and monogyny would be the new norm.




posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   
Republicans and Democrats are two peas in a pod when it comes to infringing on personal liberties.

They just infringe on different issues.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


So let me get this straight...

You jumped on me about the founding fathers and the constitution being outdated but you try to justify homosexuality by saying it was acceptable before Christians came along thousands of years ago???


You've gotta think about these posts more before you press "reply".


Are you beginning to see how indefensible your position is yet?



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


The Constitution is not outdated as it's a living and breathing document!



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


So let me get this straight...

You jumped on me about the founding fathers and the constitution being outdated but you try to justify homosexuality by saying it was acceptable before Christians came along thousands of years ago???


You've gotta think about these posts more before you press "reply".


Are you beginning to see how indefensible your position is yet?


tothetenthpower is correct.

Same gender sex was part of society.

You are the one who needs to do some history reading.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Why the hell do I have to live under the rule of an idiot mass who buys into either flavors of this trash?


You don't have to. You can live like a hermit off in the deep woods and nobody would probably bother you unless you started causing trouble.

Otherwise, if you want the benefit of things like toilets and the Internet and police, then you have to drive on the correct side of the road and stop when the light is red.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


yah gosh the laws from 1632 were so interesting

An act in 1628 forbade marriages“without lycence or asking in
church.” In 1632, in the same group
of acts that empowered church
wardens to collect penalties of one
shilling for each unexcused absence
from church and that required ministers
to preach one sermon every
Sunday, it was stated that “noe
mynister shall celebrate matrymony
betweene any persons without a
facultie or lycense graunted by the
Governor except the banes of
matrymony have beene first published
three severall Sondayes or
holidayes” in a church located where
the parties lived. The act forbade
marriages to be performed “at any
unseasonable tymes,



Also in 1632, an
act was passed requiring all preaching,
administration of communion,
baptizing of children and marriages
to be performed in the church,
“except in cases of necessitie.” [The
Statutes at Large; Being a Collection
of all the Laws of Virginia, Volume I,
by William Waller Hening, 1823.]
Laws pertaining to punishment
of indentured servants who married
in secret without the permission of
their master or widowed mistress
(implication being that if the master
were alive, the mistress’s consent
alone was not acceptable)–



www.wvculture.org...


We've come such a long way, don't you think?



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


The sad reality and truth is that there is a group whose goal is to get policies like this reimplemented while tossing out our current legal system in favour of a theocratic system.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
There's a major problem with that, and if you happen to run into a candidate ask them this :

"To ban sodomy in the US is to violate the 1st Amendment's clause of "The US has no Official State Religion would be a direct violation of The Constitution and what do you plan to do to ensure that the seperation of Church and State remains?"!

People lie down when Religion demands it but in reality if you are having oral or anal with the person you swore in front of God to spend the rest of your life with where is the problem? It's when you deny it to married couples does one or both begin to wander and stray outside of the marriage to get it. Allow it in marriage and you could reduce broken homes and divorce by more then 2/3! Couples would stay together longer and monogyny would be the new norm.




ah who says we don't need regulations



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


The sad reality and truth is that there is a group whose goal is to get policies like this reimplemented while tossing out our current legal system in favour of a theocratic system.



hahaha I have yet to see a church that charged for not attending!!!!! and there was no mention of same-sex marriages being performed in 1632.... just sayin.... they regulated marriage in other ways.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Isn't that what the offering plate is for? A backdoor membership fee, ie, keep on paying and you'll get all the back and support you need, offer nothing and get nothing!

Besides, everyone should be aware of the fact that you ARE TO NOT pay for spiritual healing and spiritual protections as it's all FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
edit on 4-1-2012 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by BubbaJoe
Republicans have bashed everyone for restricting their constitutional rights, however they are all for controlling or making unlawful what goes on in my bedroom. I do not understand this, if the sex act is between two consenting adults, where does anyone get off telling me I can't do it. This has got me totally baffled, if I was not trying to be politically correct on here, I would tell you what I truly think. Rick Santorum winning Iowa, and he believes that sodomy and birth control are things that should be outlawed, WTF, he and his wife have never had oral sex, and if that is the freaking case, I feel sorry for both of them. Get the hell out of my GD bedroom, and fix the freaking government of this country. HFS



No one cares what you do in your bedroom, but, if you decide to make what goes on in your bedroom public and shove it in my face, expect me to comment.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Fromabove
 


Obviously The GOP does or else the reason for this thread wouldn't be needed!



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   
With both parties its good for votes to tell there people what they want to hear.

They can even make laws but the supreme court is the real law maker or breaker.

both parties know this so they can make any promises they want to get votes.

the promotion of religious-based morality is a joke just because promoting any one religions religious-based morality is a violation of other religions rights and would be thrown out by the supreme court.

I am a Christian Deist and my religion does not make any rules forbidding nudity or many other things

Benjamin Franklin was a deist and nudist
naturistmusings.blogspot.com...

Henry David Thoreau Deist and nudist
President John Quincy Adams Deist and nudist.
Alexander Graham Bell Deist and nudist
George Washington Deist and nudist
John Quincy Adams Deist and Weather permitting, swam nude in the Potomac River every day.

None of these people cared what went on in the bedroom

The Hellfire Club was a secret society which engaged in depraved sexual orgies, drunkenness,
And Ben Franklin was a member



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by Fromabove
 


Obviously The GOP does or else the reason for this thread wouldn't be needed!


Nah... I don't buy that. The only people complaining all the time are the ones doing things they think others won't accept and so desire that you must, you simply must, accept what they do.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Isn't that what the offering plate is for? A backdoor membership fee, ie, keep on paying and you'll get all the back and support you need, offer nothing and get nothing!

Besides, everyone should be aware of the fact that you ARE TO NOT pay for spiritual healing and spiritual protections as it's all FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
edit on 4-1-2012 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



The offering plate is a punishment for not attending? Last time I went to church they just passed it but no one forced me at gunpoint to make an offering. No admission is charged. Tithing is pretty voluntary too. No one in the Catholic church promises specific healing. I have gotten emails from psychics promising stuff if I just give them 25 bucks though.

Now Pentacostal church might be different, or that church Benny Hinn heals in....


I'm thinking you misread my post though, as the law clearly stated they charged people a fee for NOT attending.
edit on 4-1-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-1-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 


ummm perhaps that was a mtter of perception. Swimming nude in a river does not necessarily make one a nudist, nor does skinny dipping at the neighbors pool. There were just fewer people around to see it then.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   
 
reply to post by seabag
 


What?

Are you arguing argumentum ad ignorantiam?

I don't have to "defend" homosexuality, as it was around, prior to any of your religious beliefs or convictions, and will be here long before these archaic religions die of old age as they should.

I never said that the constitution was out dated, I said the ideals and morals that the people lived by in those times OTHER than the constitution, were outdated and silly.

As they are.

As for your argument, the only way to prove you are right, is if you die, and go talk to God. Although I think that would be a little bit too much to do, in order to win an argument, you are certainly welcome to try.

~Keeper


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 



Are you arguing argumentum ad ignorantiam?




Apparently that is the case. (You actually did that pretty politely.)



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


A fee for not attending is a backdoor tax according to certain modern terminology!



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join