Yes, I'm going there!

[TedKennedy]

Already happening. I've heard of a church being sued for not allowing a gay wedding ceremony on their property, a photographer being sued for refusing to shoot a gay wedding, and a baker being sued for not baking a gay wedding cake.

Well, those hateful homophobes ought to leave town, and take their white robes and pointy hats with them.

 

[Hobbes]

Already happening. I've heard of a church being sued for not allowing a gay wedding ceremony on their property, a photographer being sued for refusing to shoot a gay wedding, and a baker being sued for not baking a gay wedding cake.

Anyone can sue anyone for anything. Nothing different now.
You could sue me for something I post on this forum.
Winning a lawsuit or not having it thrown out by a judge is another thing however.

 

[ignerntbend]

Already happening. I've heard of a church being sued for not allowing a gay wedding ceremony on their property, a photographer being sued for refusing to shoot a gay wedding, and a baker being sued for not baking a gay wedding cake.

I don't think you can find an example of a church being (successfully) sued for refusing to host a gay wedding.

 

[LightningCrash]

I firmly believe that a person ought to be able to purchase/leave their wealth as they choose.

This will not stop here, however. We now have "protected" categories of people, and gov dictates on accomodating such. Get ready to add another to the list. I'm sure it'll right any wrongs ever perpetrated on the "protected" class.

Well now you done it. The last time this came up it pretty well went back to separate drinking fountains.

Hope you enjoy the show.

 

[n2sooners]

I don't think you can find an example of a church being (successfully) sued for refusing to host a gay wedding.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91486340

Suing and winning. Against churches, photographers, bakers, doctors, and private groups such as the boy scouts.

 

[rebel-son]

I still haven't figured out why people are getting their panties in a wad over gay marriage. Are you being forced to marry someone of the same sex? Nope. It's funny how some people say they should have the freedom to do what they want with regards to seatbelts/motorcycle helmets but deem 2 people in love as unequal to them based on their genders. Don't even get me started on those who say "Marriage is a religious institution." People were exclusive to one another long before someone forced them to have it approved by a religious leader.

Why?

Many decent people don't like kids being taught in school that this is normal or acceptable. The schools should not be indoctrinating our kids. Someone wants to be gay. Good for them I am a conservative with libertarian leanings. I am much more concerned with the amnesty for illegals than gay marriage. Its a state issue and that is what the court said.

I do have issue with it being forced on people. Like 5% of the population is gay yet there is a token gay on every reality show and on the new show the dome they go as far as having a lesbian couple. the way they try to make it out its as common as normal biblical marriage.

 

[rebel-son]

It's not like the gay people are going to get into heaven because the government gave them equal rights. They will still get the lever plunge to hell so they might as well be comfortable here before that time comes.

Actually God forgives if people ask. Gay people won't go to hell. I honestly don't know what God will do, but I think someone who professes to be a Christian ( like Pelosi) that support gay marriage in spite of knowing its wrong would be more likely to be dammed.

I am surprised the catholic church has not excommunicated her.

 

[rebel-son]

Actually, you right and wrong. States have been " backed up" by the Fed to do as they vote, however, the Fed now recognizes Gay marriage and recognizes their status as a union. So, reading between the lines, if a problem arises at the state level, guess who makes the ruling when it's sent up the pipeline?

I guess wasting my time here tonight. Thought I would piss and moan a little about the direction of this country. Guess I'll wait till something similar happens to our guns. By then, every one here will be pissing and moaning, calling for representation, etc. Will stay away from politics on here till then! Gosh, what was I thinking? Should have been quiet like a good little conservative!

And when it "happens to our guns" many of those leading the charge will be the same ones supporting gay marriage.

 

[rebel-son]

I think this would have been a better argument before DOMA was passed in 1996(?) by a republican congress and democrat president.

I have a hard time seeing how a law that singles one group out for negative treatment is ever good and how a ruling that gives said group equal protection under the constitution is "the governement legitimizing ideas"

I agree a law that singles out one group for negative treatment is wrong. That is why the supreme court tossed part of the voting rights act as it targeted decent Christian conservative southern people. They also came close to doing that with affirmative action because it discriminates against whites.

Once again the people demanding gay rights see nothing wrong with affirmative action for the most part.

 

[donner]

I agree a law that singles out one group for negative treatment is wrong. That is why the supreme court tossed part of the voting rights act as it targeted decent Christian conservative southern people. They also came close to doing that with affirmative action because it discriminates against whites.

Once again the people demanding gay rights see nothing wrong with affirmative action for the most part.

there are lots of single issue voters and lots of people who can't see how supporting one right while infringing on other rights is bad (several people on this board, for example). For as much as people say they aren't single-issue voters, it's often hard to not have contradictory positions on some issues. Being for gay rights as equal protection, but against guns is a contradiction since both are constitutionally protected. But being for guns and against gay rights under equal protection is also contradictory. Not all gay people are against guns, though, nor are all gun owners against gay rights. Heck, log cabin republicans are gay people who feel that the GOP has it right, even though many in the GOP don't support the rights of gays to marry. We will never pigeonhole everyone into nice, neat, political boxes.

I have agreed all along that this shouldn't be an issue of protected groups. DOMA by it's very nature created different groups, treated one negatively and that the court's decision yesterday fixed it. This ruling was a step towards fixing the issue of government involvement in marriage, not creating the problem.