SCOTUS Rules In Favor Of Marriage Equality

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

MadDogs

Sharpshooter
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
2,960
Reaction score
631
Location
Edmond, OK
Anyone that's religious shouldn't argue about "fact based reasoning or logic". Religion itself is a belief, not fact or logic based. Hate from religious groups is a fact. I dare you to pick up a paper, any day of the week, and not see something that screams religious hatred.

Genius … I was addressing your lack of reasoning and over generalizations.
 

farmerbyron

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
5,289
Reaction score
152
Location
Tuttle
Why would anyone want the government involved in who they decide to form a marital commitment with any ways? When did it begin? (Honest question) Why would someone fight for the right to be subjected to government rule in the relationship they have before their God?


When death benefits, insurance benefits, asset transfer, healthcare decisions, tax purposes, etc. all have special exemptions and privileges for folks that have been formally recognized as a union, then you begin to see why this was an issue for homosexuals.

Now in a perfect world I agree with the .gov not having **** to do with marriage. But if heterosexuals get to enjoy certain legal privileges of Union, then so should homosexuals.
 

Dave70968

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
6,676
Reaction score
4,619
Location
Norman
As I pointed out above, the bible has been used in many situations to justify wrong or even evil things. By taking a verse or two out of context, anything can be justified by quoting the bible. You must read it all, not cherry pick what you like.

You still haven't explained why, out of all of the billions of people who've read it, yours is the perfect, inerrant understanding. Aren't you just as fallible as the rest of us, or do you possess some spark of divinity with which we are not graced?

I have not studied this topic much....

Wow. Perfect understanding without even studying much. You must be Divine!
 

MadDogs

Sharpshooter
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
2,960
Reaction score
631
Location
Edmond, OK
Anyone know a devout and highly-convicted Muslim caterer? I wanna schedule an event. Pulled pork, bacon-wrapped jalapenos and a few kegs of beer. Seriously.

You mean one with a long rap sheet of convictions OR one that his devoted to killing infidels?

And I like the menu ... need strippers for entertainment.
 

MadDogs

Sharpshooter
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
2,960
Reaction score
631
Location
Edmond, OK
Isn't it interesting how many "conservatives" want to use the power of government to tell people how to manage their private affairs?

So there are no liberals or democrats that are against calling a same sex union a marriage? Let me guess, you probably believe 100% of gays are for it too?

Dave ... suggestion? Eat a Snickers. You're sounding really bitchy again.
 

MadDogs

Sharpshooter
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
2,960
Reaction score
631
Location
Edmond, OK
images4.fanpop.com_image_photos_23800000_Help_we_re_being_oppressed_atheism_23887187_350_355.png

The graph is interesting in the sense that according to UCLA's LGBT Studies they estimate that there are as many LGBT folks in America as there are Jews.
 

MadDogs

Sharpshooter
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
2,960
Reaction score
631
Location
Edmond, OK
Its funny how when people want to show that Christians are really strong - they will show stats showing nominal Christians out numbering anyone else. Then when they wish to show why Christian sensibilities should be ignored they will explain how really only a small minority are believing Christians the rest just say they are Christian - so there is no need to heed this small annoying minority.

If an unelected group with lifetime tenure can make rulings that will eventually force Christians (or anyone else) to give, at least tactic, assent to morally repugnant laws or face sanctions then what difference does being a nominal majority matter?

I am somewhat apathetic to this whole issue given that churches are not going to be required (as of yet) to perform a ceremony that goes against their moral foundation.

But what I disagree with is that courts had to handle this in the first place. I don’t see why the definition of a word had to be changed for this. And I am against any business having to be forced to perform something that runs counter to their First Amendment rights to pursue their religious beliefs AS MUCH as I am for the government to tell a business that they cannot let patrons smoke in their place of business. STFU and let the market decide.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom