Oh the pain, it hurts my head so bad.
- Status
Oh the pain, it hurts my head so bad.
I think the decision is going to have a tough time being accepted in all 50 states, and why doesn't have anything to do with whether or not you think the LGBT community has or does not have a right to be married and have it recognized by the state. I do believe in time, most states will capitulate.
I think there are going to be lots of state AG's that challenge the decision based on the SCOTUS overstepping their bounds, some will do some political grandstanding and pandering to the religious right, but most AG's that challenge it are going to challenge on the basis of it not being an issue the SCOTUS should have ever been considering, as was pointed out in Chief Justice Roberts' dissent.
We'll see. As for me, I couldn't possibly care less, which I guess makes me an enemy of both sides. I just worry about the SCOTUS being involved in issues they shouldn't be involved in. This should have been left up to state legislatures and state supreme courts.
I don't think I've seen it here, but if I hear one more person cite "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" as being a constitutional right I'm gonna be sick. That isn't in the Constitution, it's in the Declaration of Independence. What is in the Constitution is "Life, Liberty and Property" and it's the taking clause found in the 5th amendment.
If there is a Constitutional right to happiness, I'm calling my lawyer in the morning, cause I'm being cheated.
I think there are going to be lots of state AG's that challenge the decision based on the SCOTUS overstepping their bounds, some will do some political grandstanding and pandering to the religious right, but most AG's that challenge it are going to challenge on the basis of it not being an issue the SCOTUS should have ever been considering, as was pointed out in Chief Justice Roberts' dissent.
We'll see. As for me, I couldn't possibly care less, which I guess makes me an enemy of both sides. I just worry about the SCOTUS being involved in issues they shouldn't be involved in. This should have been left up to state legislatures and state supreme courts.
I don't think I've seen it here, but if I hear one more person cite "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" as being a constitutional right I'm gonna be sick. That isn't in the Constitution, it's in the Declaration of Independence. What is in the Constitution is "Life, Liberty and Property" and it's the taking clause found in the 5th amendment.
If there is a Constitutional right to happiness, I'm calling my lawyer in the morning, cause I'm being cheated.
If you want to argue the constitutional aspect of same-sex marriage that is one point. Acceptance by Christians or the Christian Church is quite another. Just because all Christians are sinners, doesn't mean that they should condone something that is biblically defined as sinful...lest they be labeled hypocrites or bigots.
Look at the apostle Paul. In 1 Timothy he says that "he is the worst of all sinners". Do you feel that makes him a hypocrite when just a few verses earlier he is condemning murderers, adulterers, homosexuals, liars etc as ungodly, sinful people? I'm not sure that you can make the argument that homosexuality or any other sin should be given a free pass..."since we're all just sinners anyway." Slippery slope...
As you've stated before, the issue is the commands that we've already chosen to ignore because it's convenient for us to do so. I still don't agree that it justifies adding any more to the list though.
Have Christian churches accepted divorce? By the standard of the Holy Bible, any man that is married to a woman that has been divorced is married to an adulterer. How many Christian men want to admit that that while cursing the sins of homosexuals?
That's why they have annulment.
And the buying/selling of indulgences
There isn't "a" christian church. There are many. Each is different. Some christian churches welcome LGBT members. Some even perform marriage in holy matrimony for same-sex couples.
By all means, argue and debate your views... but do so with proper knowledge.
From Wikipedia...
The Christian Church is a term used by some to refer to the whole group of people belonging to the Christian religious tradition throughout history. In this understanding, which is generally used by Protestants, "Christian Church" does not refer to a particular Christian denomination, but to the body of all believers.
Maybe I should have stated "widespread" acceptance? There's a alternative for every type of church to suit your needs when you don't agree with how the mainstream interprets or teaches. Just because the words "Christian" or "church" is name of the building or institution doesn't make it a biblically sound church. Ever hear of the term "false teaching"?
lol... you sourced Wikipedia
- Status
