Damien the Leper Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Not much to assume when you write tripe like this. And nothing particularly enlightened about it, either.Considering the cow manure you've been regurgitating, I think I'm being fair.
Damien the Leper Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) The mindset isn't wrong, but is irrelevant to modern society?? That doesn't speak well for where we're headed.We're headed forward as each day goes by. I don't mean in a progressive sense but humanity and civilization will continue on. No need for any apocalyptic paranoia. That is only a deterrent. Edited June 29, 2015 by Valentinus 1
tagriffy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 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. The right is a conglomeration of different causes supporting each other's pet projects as well, but leave that aside for the moment. A statement like "The real agenda is NOT equal rights for homosexuals but to trivialize and reduce commitment to the basic unit consisting of mother/father/children" suggests that this is a goal, rather than an effect as you are now portraying it. But now, you would seem to be suggesting that what's going on (Assuming it really is going on; I note you haven't answered at least one CFR so far), is an effect of individual pet projects. And notably the effect (assumed to be bad) may even be unintended. But in that case, the real agenda was definitely equal rights for homosexuals, and the effects are secondary.
Damien the Leper 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.Religious morality must be expelled from government completely. We are not a Christian nation and we were not founded on such values. That silly picture of Jesus holding the Constitution is an outright lie. It is propaganda.What I'm curious about is whether or not the Federal government (all three branches) have ever made law a definition of marriage. If not, then the argument against marriage is unconstitutional. The state's have their rights but the republic, thankfully, controls the state's.As for the elites and evil liberals taking over the country...hogwash. The elites, left and right, sold out decades ago. 1
guerreiro9 Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) You aren't really suggesting that SSM has been legal in every state of the country for 10 years are you? Or that if a gay couple got married in Mass the state they lived in would legally recognize that marriage?Of course it has been legal, but something being legal does not imply state recognition.This is no different than arguing that I am not legally allowed to be baptized because it is not recognized by the state.-guerreiro9 Edited June 29, 2015 by guerreiro9
california boy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 You really enjoy demonstrating your ignorance, don't you?I enjoy discussing truth rather then revised history
guerreiro9 Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 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.Would you still consider them to be married if no benefits were extended by the state?-guerreiro9
webbles Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 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.The issue I have with the latest ruling is that it makes it seem like the supreme court (specifically, 5 justices) have the ability to manufacture rights. The ruling is based off a quasi mixture of Due Process and Equal Proection which apparently hasn't ever been done before and some of Kennedy's statements seem to say that if the justices feel that the right should exist, then they can say it exists. That's nice as long as the court is in line with your beliefs, but if it switches sides, then you're not going to be happy. Here's some articles that talk about the issues with the reasoning: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/06/26/a-great-decision-on-same-sex-marriage-but-based-on-dubious-reasoning/ and http://fee.org/anythingpeaceful/detail/gay-marriage-decision-right-for-the-wrong-reasons-dissents-wrong-for-worse-reasons 1
The Nehor Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 So on one hand we are sure that this is the end of all morality in the United States and that all morality has been abandoned, all power unjustly seized from the people, and the apocalypse right around the corner and on the other hand all religious thought must be expelled from government, this is a great victory for agency (which for some reason is taken to mean the right to sin without civil consequences, an odd definition), and that gay marriage will foster in a new age of liberty and joy. I think virtually every poster here is deliberately engaging in hyperbole or (if they are serious) are completely......... 1
Damien the Leper Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 I'll willingly submit myself to your post, Nehor. Still think you'd make a great hubby.
tagriffy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Would you still consider them to be married if no benefits were extended by the state?-guerreiro9 If they consider themselves married, I'm not going to question it.
Russell C McGregor Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Religious morality must be expelled from government completely. We are not a Christian nation and we were not founded on such values. That silly picture of Jesus holding the Constitution is an outright lie. It is propaganda. Thank you for this disarming moment of honesty, Val. Now that you guys have won, it's high time to "come out" and admit that the "same sex marriage" campaign was never really about "marriage." Oh, I don't doubt that a few of you might have "marriage" on your bucket list, like others might have skydiving or visiting the Eiffel Tower; but you didn't need state recognition by judicial fiat for that. No, the real purpose of the "same sex marriage" campaign was to provide yourself with a weapon that you can use to drive Judeo-Christian morality (ugh!) out of public life. First government. Then commerce. Then you'll start going after the churches themselves. At least, that would be the sensible way to go about it: eat the elephant one forkful at a time. However, some of you got greedy, and started dividing the spoils before your victory was complete. Which signalled your real intentions. Well, I'm sorry to be the one to break the news to you, Val: but moral people aren't about to crawl into the closet just because you can't stand sharing the planet with them. People with principles are going to continue to live those principles; and those who still have a conscience will vote accordingly. 4
Russell C McGregor Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 I enjoy discussing truth rather then revised history Well, your claim that "the church drew the line in the sand against blacks" is not "revised history." It is completely fabricated history. It is false. Just so you know. If indeed you didn't already. 2
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 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. Five unelected elites overriding the will of the people for social engineering purposes did indeed decrease the liberties of the People. And that same minority segment already had the same level of liberty and rights as anyone else. 3
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 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. We continue to lose religious freedoms due to court rulings and government regulations, often in the name of providing privilege to small special interest groups. That's what happened with this ruling. It had nothing to do with equal rights or protection. That was the Big Lie propagated in order to justify SSM and to ignore the Constitution by judicial fiat. 4
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 We're headed forward as each day goes by. I don't mean in a progressive sense but humanity and civilization will continue on. No need for any apocalyptic paranoia. That is only a deterrent. I don't see any evidence that society is progressing "forward" in a positive manner. One really has to willfully ignore the daily, increasing issues that we're having on a variety of fronts in order to proclaim that all is well in the world. The fact that the government has now officially approved and embraced homosexual behavior and will now be proceeding to curtail religious freedom by forbidding any disagreement with it is one evidence of that decline. 3
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Religious morality must be expelled from government completely. We are not a Christian nation and we were not founded on such values. That silly picture of Jesus holding the Constitution is an outright lie. It is propaganda.What I'm curious about is whether or not the Federal government (all three branches) have ever made law a definition of marriage. If not, then the argument against marriage is unconstitutional. The state's have their rights but the republic, thankfully, controls the state's.As for the elites and evil liberals taking over the country...hogwash. The elites, left and right, sold out decades ago. What planet did you say you were from?
california boy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Five unelected elites overriding the will of the people for social engineering purposes did indeed decrease the liberties of the People. And that same minority segment already had the same level of liberty and rights as anyone else.You forgot about every other judge in the country that struck down marriage bans. This conspiracy is way bigger than you can imagine You are really becoming unhinged over this aren't you Whitlock 2
Popular Post jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Popular Post Posted June 29, 2015 You forgot about every other judge in the country that struck down marriage bans. This conspiracy is way bigger than you can imagineYou are really becoming unhinged over this aren't you Whitlock Nope. Just willing to identify how far we've deteriorated. What's been enlightening about this thread is the fact that SSM supporters are basically happy with the will of the People being eliminated, and "progressive" government taking over just as along as their agenda "wins". It's also been very, very clear that there is significant hatred towards religion and towards those who are religious by those same supporters. That probably shouldn't be a surprise, but it's interesting to see it being consistently confirmed over time. 5
Bobbieaware Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) I don't see any evidence that society is progressing "forward" in a positive manner. One really has to willfully ignore the daily, increasing issues that we're having on a variety of fronts in order to proclaim that all is well in the world. The fact that the government has now officially approved and embraced homosexual behavior and will now be proceeding to curtail religious freedom by forbidding any disagreement with it is one evidence of that decline.Consider the fact that twice in scriptures (Moses 7 and 3 Nephi 10) it's recorded that the Devil and his fallen angels had a big celebration in hell after successfully causing the moral destruction of two earthly societies -- the meridian Nephites and the wicked people of Enoch's day -- and you'll come to realize where such self-destructive thinking has its origin. But wonder not, because there must needs be opposition in all things. Just as it was in the war in heaven, there will always be those who choose to follow the Savior and there will always be those who choose to walk down the opposite path. Nothing new under the sun...1 And it came to pass that there was a voice heard among all the inhabitants of the earth, upon all the face of this land, crying: 2 Wo, wo, wo unto this people; wo unto the inhabitants of the whole earth except they shall repent; for the devil laugheth, and his angels rejoice, because of the slain of the fair sons and daughters of my people; and it is because of their iniquity and abominations that they are fallen! (3 Nephi 10)and again...25 And he saw angels descending out of heaven; and he heard a loud voice saying: Wo, wo be unto the inhabitants of the earth.26 And he beheld Satan; and he had a great chain in his hand, and it veiled the whole face of the earth with darkness; and he looked up and laughed, and his angels rejoiced. (Moses7)In the precincts of hell, progress is measured by how far societies can be made to move away from God. Edited June 29, 2015 by Bobbieaware 3
tagriffy Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 We continue to lose religious freedoms due to court rulings and government regulations, often in the name of providing privilege to small special interest groups. That's what happened with this ruling. It had nothing to do with equal rights or protection. That was the Big Lie propagated in order to justify SSM and to ignore the Constitution by judicial fiat. How does SSM threaten our religious freedoms? No one is being forced to either believe or practice anything as a result of the ruling. We haven't lost anything. 3
Popular Post Bobbieaware Posted June 29, 2015 Popular Post Posted June 29, 2015 How does SSM threaten our religious freedoms? No one is being forced to either believe or practice anything as a result of the ruling. We haven't lost anything.Because in direct proportion to whatever degree a society turns away from God, the more dictatorial and oppressive that society becomes. As Paul said, "where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty." And as a natural corollary to Paul's dictum we could say, "where the Spirit of the Lord is absent there is tyranny." As sure as night follows day, this principle is true. 5
jwhitlock Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 How does SSM threaten our religious freedoms? No one is being forced to either believe or practice anything as a result of the ruling. We haven't lost anything. Two quotes from Roberts' dissent: Respect for sincere religious conviction has led voters and legislators in every State that has adopted same-sex marriage democratically to include accommodations for religious practice. The majority’s decision imposing same-sex marriage cannot, of course, create any such accommodations. The majority graciously suggests that religious believers may continue to “advocate” and “teach” their views of marriage. The First Amendment guarantees, however, the freedom to “exercise” religion. Ominously, that is not a word the majority uses. Hard questions arise when people of faith exercise religion in ways that may be seen to conflict with the new right to same-sex marriage—when, for example, a religious college provides married student housing only to opposite-sex married couples, or a religious adoption agency declines to place children with same-sex married couples. Indeed, the Solicitor General candidly acknowledged that the tax exemptions of some religious institutions would be in question if they opposed same-sex marriage. There is little doubt that these and similar questions will soon be before this Court. Unfortunately, people of faith can take no comfort in the treatment they receive from the majority today. 3
sunstoned Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 Five unelected elites overriding the will of the people for social engineering purposes did indeed decrease the liberties of the People. And that same minority segment already had the same level of liberty and rights as anyone else.Many were of the same opinion with the civil rights ruling in 1964. This is precisely the reason we need a judiciary body. The supreme court is one of the three branches of our government that was set up by the founding fathers. This last week the supreme court fulfilled its mission by protecting our civil liberties, which includes the rights of a minority. 2
JLHPROF Posted June 29, 2015 Posted June 29, 2015 If they consider themselves married, I'm not going to question it. I will.As I've posted in the past, it doesn't matter what the state authorizes and licenses. As far as I'm concerned any SSM is just playacting on the part of mortals. The only marriage that is actually a marriage is one that God recognizes and seals by his authority.God placed marriage on the earth as recorded in scripture. Anything that doesn't meet God's requirement to be called a marriage isn't a marriage. At best these so-called marriages are still civil unions or state unions. As many traditional Christian weddings state "What GOD has joined together, let no man put asunder" (a rephrase of Matthew).God didn't join these couples, therefore, they aren't married and never will be in my opinion.
Recommended Posts