carbon dioxide Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 I'm not sure it's been brought up, but does anyone wonder if our church and other Christians had not raised a fuss and started Prop 8, that legalizing SSM would have shot forward so fast? I read someone say this somewhere on the web, made me wonder. Also, Duncan if you're reading, do you think SSM being legal in Canada has hurt heterosexual marriage there? Or done harm that you can see? How are the children in these SS marriages? I think I read that Canada has had SSM since 2005. It would have. The race to the bottom is a real race. Prop 8 probably would have passed even if the LDS Church not been involved. Anti-gay marriage statutes were being passed in many states and at some point someone was going to challenge it. I don't think its an issue of whether gay marriage hurts heterosexual marriage. Gay marriage does not hurt my marriage anymore than legal prostitution hurts my marriage. Its an issue of standing up for right and wrong. The people in the country want more wickedness and they will get it. The devil rejoices and his angels laugh at the people of America and I am sure he has some new goodies on the drawing board for America that Americans will just fall in love with.
bluebell Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 SSM was not illegal until states passed laws against it. The court past no laws. They struck down unconstitutional laws against SSM So how come there were no SSM marriages recognized by the government in the 1990s? 2
Tacenda Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 It would have. The race to the bottom is a real race. Prop 8 probably would have passed even if the LDS Church not been involved. Anti-gay marriage statutes were being passed in many states and at some point someone was going to challenge it. I don't think its an issue of whether gay marriage hurts heterosexual marriage. Gay marriage does not hurt my marriage anymore than legal prostitution hurts my marriage. Its an issue of standing up for right and wrong. The people in the country want more wickedness and they will get it. The devil rejoices and his angels laugh at the people of America and I am sure he has some new goodies on the drawing board for America that Americans will just fall in love with.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008) I should have done some research and not rely on my MDDB friends. There is a lot here to read and see how it got to this point. For those that think SSM is evil, how do you know that someone writing it down in the Bible means it comes from God Himself? Also, how many times does history prove that what we thought was evil was not! 1
carbon dioxide Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 (edited) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008) I should have done some research and not rely on my MDDB friends. There is a lot here to read and see how it got to this point. For those that think SSM is evil, how do you know that someone writing it down in the Bible means it comes from God Himself? Also, how many times does history prove that what we thought was evil was not!It is what I believe. I strongly believe that SSM is wickedness or evil. I am so sure of that that I will even say that if I am wrong, my the Lord send me directly to the Telestial Kingdom, do not pass go. If SSM is not wrong, there is no wrong. There is no sin. Sin is just the time period that you live in and what you perceive to be wrong at that moment in time thus no need for even Jesus. Edited June 27, 2015 by carbon dioxide
Tacenda Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Looks like these countries are thriving after their SSM legalization/acceptance. http://www.buzzfeed.com/awesomer/what-happens-now#.teBm6mqp9N 1
carbon dioxide Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 (edited) Looks like these countries are thriving after their SSM legalization/acceptance. http://www.buzzfeed.com/awesomer/what-happens-now#.teBm6mqp9NSome countries thrive with legal prostitution. Lets go with it. The real question is are they thriving because SSM exists or are they thriving despite its existence? The US thrived in the 20th century without gay marriage so there is no reason to believe a country needs it to thrive. Will SSM destroy a society by itself? No. It is a symptom of a society in decline and moral decay. I believe it is. It should also be noted that most of those countries mentioned are European countries who existence today they can thank the US for. How many times did we have to bail the Europeans out of their own insanity in the 20th century? Even today, those nations are dependent on US to protect them from Russia. Edited June 27, 2015 by carbon dioxide 1
ERayR Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Heck, I was late to the party having sought to fire gays in the school system back 30 years ago because of my religious and social beliefs and not changing my mind until my daughter in laws uniformly classified me as a bigot. Then I realized you don't persuade peoplee to your religious beliefs by adopting legislation and taking discriminatory action. To each his own when it comes to religious beliefs. I do not believe homosexual behavior can ever be squared with our religious beliefs, and feel that homosexuals who wish to remain fully active in the Church should stay firmly in the closet, however, I no longer think we should try to stop them from pursuing their view of happiness and it is long overdue that we recognize the contributions they have made to urban improvement, the arts, and design. The whole debacle is an example of what happens when the state preempts a religious sacrament for government purposes. It was bound to happen sooner or later, it just took several hundreds of years.
Tacenda Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Why, oh why is Mormonism obsessed with sex? It feels like it is. 1
Duncan Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 (edited) I'm not sure it's been brought up, but does anyone wonder if our church and other Christians had not raised a fuss and started Prop 8, that legalizing SSM would have shot forward so fast? I read someone say this somewhere on the web, made me wonder. Also, Duncan if you're reading, do you think SSM being legal in Canada has hurt heterosexual marriage there? Or done harm that you can see? How are the children in these SS marriages? I think I read that Canada has had SSM since 2005. Um, SSM is legal but let's be honest gay people will never be fully accepted in society. I think here it's a general apathy towards the situation, Canada has much bigger problems than homosexuality. I don't think it's hurt it, I think overall marriage has been on the decline. I am not sure about children in SS couples. Canada isn't a anything goes kind of place. Our government is so different and I have no idea about constitutions and amendments and courts and all this stuff everyone here is talking about hahhahha! it's another language that I hear the words but am lost entirely! hahahhahahha! Canada is generally apathetic to politics, our Prime Minister (sounds like a cut of meat) but you couldn't pick him out of a crowd, it's just so different here than in the US.2005 is when SSM became legal. Edited June 27, 2015 by Duncan
ERayR Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Why, oh why is Mormonism obsessed with sex? It feels like it is. It is not only "Mormonism". Look at our critics underwear fetish. Look at mainstream Christianity's reaction to Mother in Heaven and the conception of Christ.
jwhitlock Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Wrong again. The courts have no means or authority to create laws in America. Maybe NZ is different. The Supreme Court only ruled against a law that contradicted the guarantees contained in the 14th amendment. Those laws did not originate in the court. If the states had not passed those laws then there would not have been a court case to bring before the courtFor example New Mexico never instituted any laws to deny gay couples the right to marry. When the first gay couple applied for a marriage license it was granted. That same senerio would have happened in every state of they had not passed unconstitutional laws banning gay marriage Kennedy claimed that they contradicted the 14th amendment. Those dissenting disagreed, and gave very clear reasons why. Since laws concerning marriage were always understood to be under the control of the states, and since that has been accepted since the Constitution was ratified, it is clear that the federal courts have strayed into areas that the constitution forbids. It took a contorted interpretation of the 14th amendment to rationalize this ruling, but if the 14th amendment hadn't been available, the "esteemed justices" would have found another convenient reason to push their agenda for social engineering - something that is also clearly not contained within their constitutional powers. You really should read the dissents. They raise very troubling concerns about what the court has done in this case. Before SSM supporters celebrate a government that has unlawfully foisted a redefinition of marriage on us, they should reflect on whether they really want a government that holds so much power and to which the People have no recourse. I personally don't, which is why I find this particular decision disturbing. 1
guerreiro9 Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 You don't have to agree with SSM, LGBT movement is simply asking you to allow it to be legal. Just because you allow something doesn't mean you support it. Allow something ≠ Promoting it LGBT movement is simply asking you to give them moral agencyNo, this is where you are wrong. The government is now actively promoting homosexual as well as heterosexual marriages.This was not about legalizing same-sex marriage. SSM has been legal in every state in the union since 2003 when Lawrence vs. Texas was decided.This was about gaining tax benefits, preferred status and government promotion of homosexual unions.Simply allowing something is the situation we have been in for the last 12 years which is not what the LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ (how many letters are they using now?) movement was asking for.When you receive tax benefits for engaging in an activity it has gone beyond simply being allowed...-guerreiro9
TheSkepticChristian Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 This was not about legalizing same-sex marriage. SSM has been legal in every state in the union since 2003 when Lawrence vs. Texas was decided. According to the wiki Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court. In the 6–3 ruling the Court struck down the sodomy law in Texas and, by extension, invalidated sodomy laws in 13 other states, making same-sex sexual activity legal in every U.S. state and territory. I didn't know same-sexual activity was illegal in some states. Satan doesn't like moral agency
Calm Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 (edited) Why, oh why is Mormonism obsessed with sex? It feels like it is. Have you looked at TV lately? Commercials? There is one on hulu or some such service about breakfast cereal featuring a pregnant Barbie (like) doll taking to a Kenish doll and the cat suggesting the baby isn't his. There is another one suggesting that the wife/girlfriend is having an affair with all these male dolls that like the cereal as well. For breakfast cereal.... I don't think Mormons are that obsessed about sex that we are generally discussing it around the breakfast table. Edited June 27, 2015 by calmoriah 1
Damien the Leper Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Yep. The elimination of morality and religious influence in government has truly resulted the very civil society that we have today. </sarcasm>The morally bankrupt and apostate WHOLE of Christendom should not have a dog in this fight. They continue to show how completely ridiculous they are. Look at the pastor who expressed sentiments of setting himself on fire if SCOTUS declared the way they did. He hasn't but the ridiculousness remains intact.
Damien the Leper Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 And of course, the courts have been so consistent in this function, haven't they. Fully unified in their "interpretations" of the constitution. Not influenced by agendas or special interest groups at all, ever. Only using that power when absolutely necessary and never engaging in social re-engineering.Nice to see you as arbiter of she judges are actually doing their job. <sarcasm and eye roll>Marriage doesn't belong to religion. That is an outright lie. These ignoramuses need to stop whining that marriage has been redefined. 1
Damien the Leper Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Have you looked at TV lately? Commercials? There is one on hulu or some such service about breakfast cereal featuring a pregnant Barbie (like) doll taking to a Kenish doll and the cat suggesting the baby isn't his. There is another one suggesting that the wife/girlfriend is having an affair with all these male dolls that like the cereal as well. For breakfast cereal.... I don't think Mormons are that obsessed about sex that we are generally discussing it around the breakfast table.This made me laugh. Thank you.
Stone holm Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 I'm not sure it's been brought up, but does anyone wonder if our church and other Christians had not raised a fuss and started Prop 8, that legalizing SSM would have shot forward so fast? I read someone say this somewhere on the web, made me wonder. Also, Duncan if you're reading, do you think SSM being legal in Canada has hurt heterosexual marriage there? Or done harm that you can see? How are the children in these SS marriages? I think I read that Canada has had SSM since 2005.Strategically the promotion of Prop 8 from the pulpit was a blunder. We have had SSM for several years in Vermont, it's a non issue. The nuclear family is threatened, but not by SSM. It is threatened by the economic situation in the US. 1
longview Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 The real agenda is NOT equal rights for homosexuals but to trivialize and reduce commitment to the basic unit consisting of mother/father/children. 2
bluebell Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Strategically the promotion of Prop 8 from the pulpit was a blunder. We have had SSM for several years in Vermont, it's a non issue. The nuclear family is threatened, but not by SSM. It is threatened by the economic situation in the US.One of the apostles specifically stated that he hey got involved in prop 8 because God told them to, but stayed out of the fight in other states for the same reason. If it was a blunder, it was a necessary one. 3
JLHPROF Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Why, oh why is Mormonism obsessed with sex? It feels like it is. An ironic question from someone so concerned with polygamy and its practice.
guerreiro9 Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 The nuclear family is threatened, but not by SSM. It is threatened by the economic situation in the US.The economic system is threatened by the decline of the nuclear family (you've confused cause for effect) and same-sex families are part of this decline.-guerreiro9 1
JLHPROF Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 The real agenda is NOT equal rights for homosexuals but to trivialize and reduce commitment to the basic unit consisting of mother/father/children. I have so many friends who are up in arms over the SCOTUS decision.And I am just as firmly opposed to SSM as any of them.But yet the SCOTUS decision doesn't bother me in the least. It just seems like the more wicked the world becomes the sooner God will have to step in. I'm not going to get myself all worked up trying to do God's work for him. I have a hard enough time keeping myself from participating in wicked acts without trying to police the whole world.People have their agency to "marry" (and I use that word very lightly here) whomever they want and I'll let God pass judgement and consequences according to its validity and righteousness. He instituted marriage on this planet after all, we didn't. I can't make other people righteous - that was Satan's plan. So why get all up in arms? 1
tonie Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 SSM has been legal in every state in the union since 2003 when Lawrence vs. Texas was decided.-guerreiro9 Do you know what Lawerence v Texas was about? And how did it leagalize ssm in 2003?
guerreiro9 Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) Do you know what Lawerence v Texas was about? And how did it leagalize ssm in 2003?Lawrence v Texas decriminalized same-sex sexual relations, and allowed same-sex couples to form long-term intimate relationships with their chosen partner without threat of prosecution.Intimacy is what defines a marriage, not which tax advantages one receives.Marriages existed long before governments recognized them and they will continue to exist after governments stop recognizing them.-guerreiro9 Edited June 28, 2015 by guerreiro9 2
Recommended Posts