Homosexuality In Media

[wenglund]

Windsor is pertinent because it has been cited in every case since then.

 

Windsor isn't pertinent to the issue of state rational basis (except by inference in suggesting that states are reserved the right to define marriage as they deem rational), regardless of whether it is cited in the relatively few cases thereafter or not.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited February 28, 2014 by wenglund

[california boy]

To my knowledge, the two or three SSM cases filed in federal district courts that have been tried since Windsor (which had to do with federal law, and not state law), the rulings by the judges have gone against the states. There is no denying that.

States that have had SSM ruliings against them since Windsor.  So far, every Federal District Court has rulled in favor of SSM since Windsor.  They all challenged state law as being legal under the federal constitution.  Equal protection is the most common reason cited.

 

Oklahoma

Virginia

Utah

Texas

Kentucky

Ohio

Nevada

Oregon

Pennsylania

Michigan

Texas

Windsor isn't pertinent to the issue of state rational basis (except by inference in suggesting that states are reserved the right to define marriage as they deem rational), regardless of whether it is cited in the relatively few cases thereafter or not.

 

 

 

Though the justices said nothing in Windsor about whether a state must allow gay couples to marry, the language of their ruling, which found "no legitimate purpose" in declaring same-sex marriages less worthy, has been cited repeatedly in lawsuits attacking gay marriage bans and in court decisions declaring them invalid.  That more than anythig is what is driving these cases.  And those opposing gay marriage have yet to be able to counter that.

 

17 states and D.C. now have gay marriage.  Of the 33 states barring marriage for gay couples, lawsuits have been filed and are working their way up the legal system or waiting trial in all but Georgia, Indiana, Montana, Nebraska, North and South Dakota, and Wyoming.  Alaska just filed today.

Edited February 28, 2014 by california boy

[Stone holm]

States that have had SSM ruliings against them since Windsor.  So far, every Federal District Court has rulled in favor of SSM since Windsor.  They all challenged state law as being legal under the federal constitution.  Equal protection is the most common reason cited.

 

Oklahoma

Virginia

Utah

Texas

Kentucky

Ohio

Nevada

Oregon

Pennsylania

Michigan

Texas

 

 

Though the justices said nothing in Windsor about whether a state must allow gay couples to marry, the language of their ruling, which found "no legitimate purpose" in declaring same-sex marriages less worthy, has been cited repeatedly in lawsuits attacking gay marriage bans and in court decisions declaring them invalid.  That more than anythig is what is driving these cases.  And those opposing gay marriage have yet to be able to counter that.

 

17 states and D.C. now have gay marriage.  Of the 33 states barring marriage for gay couples, lawsuits have been filed and are working their way up the legal system or waiting trial in all but Georgia, Indiana, Montana, Nebraska, North and South Dakota, and Wyoming.  Alaska just filed today.

I think you may be overstating the likelihood of where the SCOTUS will go. There is considerable wiggle room in the DOMA decision, because of the Kennedy opinion. The Prop 8 case was not decided on the merits, and legally I don't think the existence or non existence of a stay is of significance. I also think the more telling event was what happened in Arizona. Clearly money talks and in this ideological struggle, the fiscal conservatives know they do not want boycotts, and that will override the desire of the social conservatives. Every time that the conservatives have been placed in a situation where their affluent backers have had to choose between the social/cultural values of the social conservatives and their economic security, the social conservatives lose. What is truly comical is that the social conservatives never seem to wise up to the fact that they are being used. They all seemed to forget that the Director of the Faith Based Initiatives under Bush resigned because he was completely ignored by that administration. And rightly so, Bush understood that what the Christian Right was peddling will not sell to the general populace. That has been shown over and over again when extreme social conservatives bump off fiscal conservatives in the primary they get crushed in the general election if its a Statewide election.

[wenglund]

In Sunday School today, the class read Gen 13:12, and was asked to explain the symbolism in the phrase "pitched his tent toward Sodom." We were then asked how we, as members, may pitch our tents towards Sodom in modern times.

 

Hmmm.....

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 2, 2014 by wenglund

[Stone holm]

In Sunday School today, the class read Gen 13:12, and was asked to explain the symbolism in the phrase "pitched his tent toward Sodom." We were then asked how we, as members, may pitch our tents towards Sodom in modern times.

 

Hmmm.....

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

As I recall Abraham negotiated to try and avoid the destruction and left the destruction up to The Lord. Did anyone suggest we build our Temples in small rural towns rather than in urban areas? Although, I don't recall the saying being pitching Temples toward Sodom. Hm.......

[wenglund]

I don't recall that either, though I can't imagine why I would since it isn't relevant to what I said or what is being discussed in the thread.

 

However, there is a related passage of scripture that speaks about saints pointing their tents towards the temple. (See HERE)

 

Perhaps this scripture will provide enough of a hint to enable you to correctly and relevantly answer the simple Sunday School questions. We'll see.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Stone holm]

I don't recall that either, though I can't imagine why I would since it isn't relevant to what I said or what is being discussed in the thread.

 

However, there is a related passage of scripture that speaks about saints pointing their tents towards the temple. (See HERE)

 

Perhaps this scripture will provide enough of a hint to enable you to correctly and relevantly answer the simple Sunday School questions. We'll see.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The point is very simple. What social conservatives believe to be modern day Sodom is the cultural norms of the modern urban American world, the gay community, although Christian gays have argued that the real sin of Sodom was more akin to modern day Wall Street. But the Church has sited nearly all its recent Temples in urban areas. An exception being Nauvoo, but it's my understanding that Nauvoo was specially financed. Given SLC is considered the gayest city in America, then is it the modern Sodom? And if it is? In a geographical sense what does it say if we pitch our tents toward SLC. Seems like the question is a wee bit simple minded don't you think?

[wenglund]

The point is very simple. What social conservatives believe to be modern day Sodom is the cultural norms of the modern urban American world, the gay community, although Christian gays have argued that the real sin of Sodom was more akin to modern day Wall Street. But the Church has sited nearly all its recent Temples in urban areas. An exception being Nauvoo, but it's my understanding that Nauvoo was specially financed. Given SLC is considered the gayest city in America, then is it the modern Sodom? And if it is? In a geographical sense what does it say if we pitch our tents toward SLC. Seems like the question is a wee bit simple minded don't you think?

 

Where your point misses the point, is that it not only focuses on strained comparisons at the expense of the obvious, but it also interprets things too literally and in an either/or (binary) sense.

 

"Sodom" symbolizes a variety of things, including "Wall Street" as well as  homosexuality and other sexual sins, etc.

 

And, the symbolism isn't so much in regards to where the tents or temple are literally located (urban or within the city), but to where or what the tents are sumbolically pointed--i.e. towards "Sodom" vs. the "temple.".

 

It is a variation on the "in the worlds but not of the world" theme.

 

Hopefully you got it this time--though, if a person can't see that the emporer has no clothes, there is little hope the person will get the gist of the seemingly obvious Sunday School questions..

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 3, 2014 by wenglund

[Stone holm]

Where your point misses the point, is that it not only focuses on strained comparisons at the expense of the obvious, but it also interprets things too literally and in an either/or (binary) sense.

 

"Sodom" symbolizes a variety of things, including "Wall Street" as well as  homosexuality and other sexual sins, etc.

 

And, the symbolism isn't so much in regards to where the tents or temple are literally located (urban or within the city), but to where or what the tents are sumbolically pointed--i.e. towards "Sodom" vs. the "temple.".

 

It is a variation on the "in the worlds but not of the world" theme.

 

Hopefully you got it this time--though, if a person can't see that the emporer has no clothes, there is little hope the person will get the gist of the seemingly obvious Sunday School questions..

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Ah you really think many people see the Wall Street connection? Pope Francis might, but we really don't emphasize that much as Pres. Hinckley might have said, we are kind of focused on the SSM thingy with our Christian Right political allies.

[wenglund]

Ah you really think many people see the Wall Street connection? Pope Francis might, but we really don't emphasize that much as Pres. Hinckley might have said, we are kind of focused on the SSM thingy with our Christian Right political allies.

 

No one in my class mentioned SSM, though some talked of fancy cars and homes and jobs they spend too much time at, rather than doing the Lord's work.

 

I just thought you would want to know this just in case you were concerned that your "got it wrong" streak might have ended. Rest secure in the knowledge that it hasn't.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[jaxenro]

When we moved a year ago we stopped the satellite and went strictly to DVD. Except for the ball games I dont miss it