- Joined
- Mar 31, 2013
- Messages
- 51,636
- Reaction score
- 18,366
- Location
- The birthplace of Italian Beef
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Apparently 29 of them are and the SCOTUS that said gay marriage is okay in CA says that Gay marriage bans are okay in those states too. If judicial activism were a baseball game, the old slaughter rule wouldn't seem to be favoring the left's position at the moment.Congratulations. Too bad the United States isn't run by the Bible.
Actually SCOTUS said nothing about marriage...Apparently 29 of them are and the SCOTUS that said gay marriage is okay in CA says that Gay marriage bans are okay in those states too. If judicial activism were a baseball game, the old slaughter rule wouldn't seem to be favoring the left's position at the moment.
whats out of context?It's nice how people can take things out of context and make pretty charts to slander a religion and probably make an attempt to dig at them for accepting the fact that homosexual sex is a sin and in God's eyes a homosexual couple is neither married or living out of sin.
Yeah, and that's the problem with America. Just because a majority of people in a state follow a certain religion doesn't mean they should be able to oppress others in the state by forcing biblical based legislation on them.Apparently 29 of them are and the SCOTUS that said gay marriage is okay in CA says that Gay marriage bans are okay in those states too. If judicial activism were a baseball game, the old slaughter rule wouldn't seem to be favoring the left's position at the moment.
Indeed.Congratulations. Too bad the United States isn't run by the Bible.
Is someone making fun of your religion?It's nice how people can take things out of context and make pretty charts to slander a religion and probably make an attempt to dig at them for accepting the fact that homosexual sex is a sin and in God's eyes a homosexual couple is neither married or living out of sin.
It's biological based legislation. Bushmen of the Kalahari, former headhunters from Papua New Guinea, Native American tribes, Hindus, Taoists..... everyone except a bunch of militant homosexuals in the USA get that the "man and woman" joining relationship is known as "marriage" and same sex relationships are known as "friendships".Yeah, and that's the problem with America. Just because a majority of people in a state follow a certain religion doesn't mean they should be able to oppress others in the state by forcing biblical based legislation on them.
There is no requirement to be sworn in on a Bible. It has been done before and it will be done again. Just because Presidents are individually religious doesn't mean every American is the same religion.Indeed.
Perhaps we need to have public officials swear in with one hand on the Constitution.
No, come to think of it, the Constitution needs to be open, so they can read it. The Bible can stay closed, and be read in church instead.
or perhaps civil unions with the same legal rights as marriage.It's biological based legislation. Bushmen of the Kalahari, former headhunters from Papua New Guinea, Native American tribes, Hindus, Taoists..... everyone except a bunch of militant homosexuals in the USA get that the "man and woman" joining relationship is known as "marriage" and same sex relationships are known as "friendships".
Good.There is no requirement to be sworn in on a Bible. It has been done before and it will be done again. Just because Presidents are individually religious doesn't mean every American is the same religion.
Dont forget these countries if you are going to talk about "militant homosexuals"It's biological based legislation. Bushmen of the Kalahari, former headhunters from Papua New Guinea, Native American tribes, Hindus, Taoists..... everyone except a bunch of militant homosexuals in the USA get that the "man and woman" joining relationship is known as "marriage" and same sex relationships are known as "friendships".
Only "militant homosexuals" from the United States believe in free choice. Riiiiight...Argentina
Belgium
Brazil
Canada
Denmark
France
Iceland
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Portugal
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Uruguay
I'd go along with that. I'm not sure all the states want to go along with that, though. Still, I see no reason why any two people who want to live together shouldn't be able to draw up whatever sort of legal contract they wish and I don't even see why the state can't make concessions to give them some sort of similar legal structure as marriage. Civil Unions should resolve most of the issues including the "slippery slope" issue of marriage.or perhaps civil unions with the same legal rights as marriage.
Well I agree with you premise but I think swearing in on the physical Constitution might be bad for it's condition. I mean you have to run first but you never know :lol:Good.
If I'm ever elected, which is unlikely since I never run for anything, I'm swearing in on t he Constitution. Every American should at least believe in that.
It's like a who's who of nutcase progressive nations and damned if we didn't join them. I'm wondering how long France will keep homosexual marriage with the outrage people have expressed against it there.Dont forget these countries if you are going to talk about "militant homosexuals"
Only "militant homosexuals" from the United States believe in free choice. Riiiiight...
I think the OP was directed less at the bible and more at the religious fools who pretend the bible supports their biases.It's nice how people can take things out of context and make pretty charts to slander a religion and probably make an attempt to dig at them for accepting the fact that homosexual sex is a sin and in God's eyes a homosexual couple is neither married or living out of sin.
Marriage LAW has to do with property rights, inheritance, etc. It has nothing to do with your pseudo-darwinist socio-biology claptrap. There are plenty of good reasons marriage as an institution evolved. The reasons marriage LAW evolved is quite different. We're talking about marriage LAW in case you didn't notice, wallowing in lumpen sociobiology the way you were.It's biological based legislation. Bushmen of the Kalahari, former headhunters from Papua New Guinea, Native American tribes, Hindus, Taoists..... everyone except a bunch of militant homosexuals in the USA get that the "man and woman" joining relationship is known as "marriage" and same sex relationships are known as "friendships".
Let me put it to you this way, since Conservatives like to legislate with the Bible: here ya goIt's like a who's who of nutcase progressive nations and damned if we didn't join them. I'm wondering how long France will keep homosexual marriage with the outrage people have expressed against it there.
Meanwhile, most of the world and most of the United States maintains the sane position that if it isn't a man and a woman it isn't a marriage.
If the rest of the world favored killing people indiscriminately would you be advocating that as well?And be not conformed to this world....
Marriage law has to do with a lot of things covering the union between a MAN and a WOMAN and none of those things mean that marriage should be anything but a union between a MAN and a WOMAN.Marriage LAW has to do with property rights, inheritance, etc. It has nothing to do with your pseudo-darwinist socio-biology claptrap. There are plenty of good reasons marriage as an institution evolved. The reasons marriage LAW evolved is quite different. We're talking about marriage LAW in case you didn't notice, wallowing in lumpen sociobiology the way you were.
The Bible has nothing to do with it, in my opinion. Common sense and some basic understanding of the birds and the bees and the institution thought of as "fundamental to our very existence and survival". That's got everything to do with it. While some people think it's fine if homosexuals mock up marriage for the sake of tax benefits or sticking a thumb in the eye of the evangelicals they hate with a passion, I think we should take it just a wee bit more serious than that and leave marriage the hell along since it's done a pretty good job for us for centuries without being modified into a freak of nature.Let me put it to you this way, since Conservatives like to legislate with the Bible: here ya go
Romans 12:2
If the rest of the world favored killing people indiscriminately would you be advocating that as well?