Damien the Leper Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 Great. Polygamy should legal. And Mormons should want that. After all the LDS leaders of the 19th century argued that monagamy was the downfall of the Roman Empire as well as the root cause of whoredoms and prostitution. A slightly different message than that of the LDS GAs today though.That's because those GAs were right and today's GAs are dead wrong.
rodheadlee Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 Nor does it include 4 activists who think they're preserving anything. It's ok to have a 1950s mindset as long as you're in the 1950s. It has no business here and now.Yeah that stuff belongs in 780BC. 20 ¶ Woe unto them that call aevil bgood, and good evil; that put cdarkness for dlight, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! 21 Woe unto them that are awise in their own beyes, and cprudent in their own sight! 2
The Nehor Posted June 28, 2015 Posted June 28, 2015 Well it certainly worked when the church drew the line in the sand against blacks. Now all the world knows how God wanted blacks treated. It also made enemies but Christ will be pleased in the last daysI am not sure you really want to stand behind that line of reasoning. You would be surprised at the kinds of reasoning I will stand by.
Stone holm Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Great. Polygamy should legal. And Mormons should want that. After all the LDS leaders of the 19th century argued that monagamy was the downfall of the Roman Empire as well as the root cause of whoredoms and prostitution. A slightly different message than that of the LDS GAs today though.I rather think not, in fact I think that one of the motivating factors behind the Church getting involved in the SSM litigation was to avoid polygamy being legalized. It would be a very awkward legal and social debate for polygamy to erupt as an issue. But I don't think those who would support polygamy are sufficiently equipped or financed to start the fray, and they would need a State to go for political line in the sand drawing. Although who knows what fruit the Utah appeal may bear.
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Who doesn't miss McCarthy? Who doesn't miss both parents having to work?
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 If you wanna address other religions then start a new thread. Embracing Christianity is like running into a burning house on the verge of collapse. Maybe you should be smart and not assume things about my post and ask questions instead. Not much to assume when you write tripe like this. And nothing particularly enlightened about it, either. 1
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 It's not that the mindset was wrong but that ot is irrelevant to modern society. Stop being so dramatic. The mindset isn't wrong, but is irrelevant to modern society?? That doesn't speak well for where we're headed.
Stone holm Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 And evidently from only a small slice of the gay community. I don't see that same attitude manifest in the vast majority of the gay community from what I'm reading.Are you bothering to actually talk to them? What he said seems to be confirmed by what I am observing out here. Married gay couples are as restrained or more so when they have kids, as straight couples. So what he is sayin and what I am observing pretty much coincide with common sense despite what right wing doomsayers are spewing forth.
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Are you bothering to actually talk to them? What he said seems to be confirmed by what I am observing out here. Married gay couples are as restrained or more so when they have kids, as straight couples. So what he is sayin and what I am observing pretty much coincide with common sense despite what right wing doomsayers are spewing forth. Married gay couples are a small (very small) slice of the gay community. What about the rest of the community, which consists of the vast majority of gays? I don't see any evidence (written or talking with them) that attitudes are changing for the better. Apparently that small slice has its own issues, if the experience in Massachusetts since gay marriage was legalized is any indication.
Russell C McGregor Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Well it certainly worked when the church drew the line in the sand against blacks. Now all the world knows how God wanted blacks treated. You really enjoy demonstrating your ignorance, don't you? 1
Teancum Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) I rather think not, in fact I think that one of the motivating factors behind the Church getting involved in the SSM litigation was to avoid polygamy being legalized. It would be a very awkward legal and social debate for polygamy to erupt as an issue. But I don't think those who would support polygamy are sufficiently equipped or financed to start the fray, and they would need a State to go for political line in the sand drawing. Although who knows what fruit the Utah appeal may bear.You rather think not what? That polygamy should be legal? Or that 19th century leaders argued that monagamy caused evils? Edited June 29, 2015 by Teancum
tagriffy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 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. And your evidence for that is ...? There are thousands that either directly or indirectly support my statement (I have seen many others make the same observation). I'll just list a few of the evidences:1- Parents are no longer the "movers and shakers" of the local PTA (as was the case decades ago). Public schools are now much more doctrinaire and authoritarian in controlling the children and taking away the prerogatives of the parents. Which is reminiscent of the early days of the Soviet Union's failed attempt to communalize the rearing of children. There are many horror stories of Child "Protective" Agencies overstepping their roles.2- Assault on homeschoolers and various governmental harassment around the world (notably in Germany and the USA).3- The campaign to harass/prosecute various businesses to make them examples to the public for not wishing to kowtow to the demands of the activists. In all cases, there were plenty of places that were already available for meeting their desires. But no, the activists search long and hard for somebody to punish.4- There are a handful of professors and organizations that are advocating decriminalizing pedophilia for the past few years. Including NAMBLA (think it stands for National Association of Man/Boy Love Advocacy). There are far too many incidences of homosexual couples abusing their adopted boys (at a greater rate than in heterosexual families). Interesting side note: most homosexuals very likely were abused by a funny uncle or someone in a position of trust.I could go on and on but don't have much time today. Wait a minute here. Whose agenda are we talking about here?
tagriffy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 We have gone well beyond allowing it. We are promoting it.Allow it ≠ Receive tax benefits for engaging in it.I think the use of marijuana should be decriminalized (Allow it), but I do not think we should extend tax advantages and protected status to those who smoke it (Promotion).-guerreiro9 I'd be perfectly happy with removing all the tax and other benefits, so long as it applies to both opposite-sex and same-sex marriages.
longview Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Wait a minute here. Whose agenda are we talking about here?Not sure which agenda you mean. My concern is the tidal wave of assaults on the stability of the basic unit. From many directions.
tagriffy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 This is one of the central points made by the 4 dissenting Justices. It may well be that future generations look at June 26th, 2015 and point to it as the day that states rights finally were eliminated after being slowly compromised over the previous decades. The same four dissenting judges who have no compunctions about overturning other laws passed by legislatures and/or the people when those laws go against their agendas. States rights died on 9 April 1865. The Fourteenth Amendment put states rights in the coffin, the Sixteenth Amendment nailed the coffin shut, and the Eighteenth Amendment buried. Get over it already.
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 The same four dissenting judges who have no compunctions about overturning other laws passed by legislatures and/or the people when those laws go against their agendas. States rights died on 9 April 1865. The Fourteenth Amendment put states rights in the coffin, the Sixteenth Amendment nailed the coffin shut, and the Eighteenth Amendment buried. Get over it already. Get over that states rights are dead, the principles of the Constitution are dead, and we're living in a country that is increasingly being ruled by elites and the bureaucracy? Pray tell, how does one "get over it"?
tagriffy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Not sure which agenda you mean. My concern is the tidal wave of assaults on the stability of the basic unit. From many directions. But you specifically said it was part of an agenda. So whose agenda are we talking about?
tagriffy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Get over that states rights are dead, the principles of the Constitution are dead, and we're living in a country that is increasingly being ruled by elites and the bureaucracy? Pray tell, how does one "get over it"? By accepting the fact that the Constitution grants everyone equal protection under the law. 2
Storm Rider Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Get over that states rights are dead, the principles of the Constitution are dead, and we're living in a country that is increasingly being ruled by elites and the bureaucracy? Pray tell, how does one "get over it"? Hello J, I agree that we are increasingly being ruled by elites and the bureaucracy of the government machine; we certainly do not have a government that is for the people and by the people. However, I am not completely sure that we are living in a period where the Constitution is dead. Maybe we are living in a time when our judges and our leaders follow the Constitution when it is convenient and then ignore it when it is not. I still have a degree of hope that the Constitution can return to being a foundational document rather than only a document of convenience for those who want to give the impression that it has not been completely abandoned.
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 By accepting the fact that the Constitution grants everyone equal protection under the law. How wonderful! We get to lose an increasing number of liberties and any voice in government, in return for the illusion of some kind of equal protection. 1
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Hello J, I agree that we are increasingly being ruled by elites and the bureaucracy of the government machine; we certainly do not have a government that is for the people and by the people. However, I am not completely sure that we are living in a period where the Constitution is dead. Maybe we are living in a time when our judges and our leaders follow the Constitution when it is convenient and then ignore it when it is not. I still have a degree of hope that the Constitution can return to being a foundational document rather than only a document of convenience for those who want to give the impression that it has not been completely abandoned. I think we lost it when the concept of the Constitution as a "living" document, subject to whatever interpretation is convenient at the time, became entrenched. In my opinion, it's dead when those that govern feel free to ignore it whenever they choose. It's dead when it's no longer considered as binding. They may follow it when convenient, but they don't consider themselves bound to do so. I also hope that it will be resurrected, but I have little hope that will happen under our current system. 2
Stone holm Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 You rather think not what? That polygamy should be legal? Or that 19th century leaders argued that monagamy caused evils?Probably not the best crafted response. I rather think the modern Church does not want U.S. V Reynolds overturned. I don't think most Mormons want it overturned, nor if they want the Church to grow would they like to see it overturned. I don't disagree as to things commonly said in the 19th Century, and if there was a near miss human apocalypse that caused a shortage of males, I think you might see it re instituted. Is that a clearer response. My pure speculation is if it were reinstituted right now you might see apostasy rates as high as 50%.
sunstoned Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 How wonderful! We get to lose an increasing number of liberties and any voice in government, in return for the illusion of some kind of equal protection.I not sure what your meaning is with this statement. This latest ruling did not decrease anyone's liberties. It raised a minority segment of our citizenship to the same level of liberty and rights with the rest of us. 1
tagriffy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 How wonderful! We get to lose an increasing number of liberties and any voice in government, in return for the illusion of some kind of equal protection. Who says we lose liberties and any voice in government? The guarantee of equal protection doesn't cost us any liberties; it ensures those liberties are enjoyed by everyone. And it doesn't deny us any voice in government; it just means our voice can't trample other people's liberties. That's the entire premise of the Constitution in a nutshell. 1
longview Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 But you specifically said it was part of an agenda. So whose agenda are we talking about?Oh I did use the word agenda. I was thinking in terms of a mass movement. The LEFT is a conglomeration of numerous causes. They know to how to get greater leverage by supporting each other's pet projects. Is there a single leader? Don't know unless we should consider Lucifer to be the ultimate instigator. 1
Recommended Posts