Gay marriage

[bio-chem]

People are objecting to gay marriage based on religion. -20 for your moronic arguments.

objecting to gay marriage, based upon religion, or for any other reason does not go against the first amendment. In fact it's protected by the first amendment. Your understanding of constitutional law is so fundamentally flawed that i'm recommending you go back to a middle school social studies class. 8th graders understand this topic better than you do. now go away.

 

[Zaphod]

objecting to gay marriage, based upon religion, or for any other reason does not go against the first amendment. In fact it's protected by the first amendment. Your understanding of constitutional law is so fundamentally flawed that i'm recommending you go back to a middle school social studies class. 8th graders understand this topic better than you do. now go away.

Nobody ever said it went against the first amendment. Using religion to create laws goes against it.

 

[Zaphod]

Besides, it's a rights issue.

 

[bio-chem]

Nobody ever said it went against the first amendment. Using religion to create laws goes against it.

You did. holy shit. You said objecting to gay marriage based upon religion goes against the first amendment.

No one is using religion to create laws. People are allowed to use morality when choosing their laws regardless of where that morality is derived. The government is not enacting a state religion, by passing laws against gay marriage. It doesn't break the first amendment. I can't be more clear on this. Christian, Jew, Muslim, Athiest, and many other people disagree with gay marriage, and want to see laws against it here in the United States. Just because I, or my neighbor, or a guy in California may use religion as the basis for our belief it does not mean that by passing that law the government is breaking the first amendment.

Why was it constitutional in 1791 to not allow gay marriage? The men who wrote the bill of rights, the men who wrote and signed the constitution would have never said that passing DOMA would be against the constitution. So why is it now?

Let me be clear. You need to understand what separation of church and state actually means, because you will look like a bigger idiot if you say these things publicly. It means the State can not enact a state religion, meaning no Church of the United States. Like there is a Church of England. It means that a Church can say whatever they want and operate independently without interference of the government unless the practice of their religion harms society. It's why Westboro can preach hate all day long, and picket funerals, but the Mormons can't practice polygamy.

 

[Zaphod]

You did. holy shit. You said objecting to gay marriage based upon religion goes against the first amendment.

No one is using religion to create laws. People are allowed to use morality when choosing their laws regardless of where that morality is derived. The government is not enacting a state religion, by passing laws against gay marriage. It doesn't break the first amendment. I can't be more clear on this. Christian, Jew, Muslim, Athiest, and many other people disagree with gay marriage, and want to see laws against it here in the United States. Just because I, or my neighbor, or a guy in California may use religion as the basis for our belief it does not mean that by passing that law the government is breaking the first amendment.

Why was it constitutional in 1791 to not allow gay marriage? The men who wrote the bill of rights, the men who wrote and signed the constitution would have never said that passing DOMA would be against the constitution. So why is it now?

Let me be clear. You need to understand what separation of church and state actually means, because you will look like a bigger idiot if you say these things publicly. It means the State can not enact a state religion, meaning no Church of the United States. Like there is a Church of England. It means that a Church can say whatever they want and operate independently without interference of the government unless the practice of their religion harms society. It's why Westboro can preach hate all day long, and picket funerals, but the Mormons can't practice polygamy.

Where did I say that?

How does polygamy hurt society?

DOMA is against the constitution now because society has changed in the last 200+ years.

And you never did answer my question. How does gay marriage affect you?

 

[troubador]

People are allowed to use morality when choosing their laws regardless of where that morality is derived.

But you shouldn't try to legislate your religious beliefs on others. A more scientific approach would be far superior.

"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good
of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live
under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.
The robber baron?s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may
at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good
will torment us without end for they do so with the approval
of their own conscience."~ C.S. Lewis​

 

[troubador]

"We remonstrate against the said Bill,1. Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence." The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate.
This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator." ~ James Madison

 

[troubador]

Why was it constitutional in 1791 to not allow gay marriage?

Marriage was and is regulated by the states. Saying it was "constitutional" is ambiguous.

 

[DOMS]

But you shouldn't try to legislate your religious beliefs on others. A more scientific approach would be far superior.

Much more importantly, a person should be able to vote for or against laws based on what they believe.

 

[troubador]

Much more importantly, a person should be able to vote for or against laws based on what they believe.

No one argued the opposite.

 

[maniclion]

Gay marriage and interracial marriage are totally different, and can't be compared. Being black, and being gay are different, and can't be compared. Just because you call it an illegitimate reason doesn't make it so.

tell me, should polygamy, and incest be allowed? we have laws against those, should they be repealed as well as unconstitutional, or is it constitutional to regulate marriage, and sex a little bit, but not towards homosexuals? The age of consent is different in different states. In one state something that is completely legal, may be labeled as rape just across the border. All because of dates on a calendar.

Marriage and sex is a state issue, and is regulated as such. Just as gay marriage should be regulated. People have the right to chose the societies laws and moral code they want to live in.

Marriage and Sex can't be compared. Only religious people view marriage as a right of passage for sex. Heres a wake up call for you men are still fucking other men in the ass and women are scissoring other women and men are fucking women out of wedlock....GASP you proclaim. Well its a fact your righteous stand against the ones with matching naughty bits not being able to enter into a binding agreement has no effect on them getting it on.

 

[exphys88]

Much more importantly, a person should be able to vote for or against laws based on what they believe.

Of course they can, but you can't deny a group of people the option to marry, especially when the only reason for denying those rights is your religion.

Can any of the anti gay marriage folks present 1 reason gays shouldn't marry other than their religion?

Bio chem: if a majority of Americans felt it was against their religious beliefs to allow inter racial marriage, should they be able to enact laws preventing it?

 

[bio-chem]

Marriage and Sex can't be compared. Only religious people view marriage as a right of passage for sex. Heres a wake up call for you men are still fucking other men in the ass and women are scissoring other women and men are fucking women out of wedlock....GASP you proclaim. Well its a fact your righteous stand against the ones with matching naughty bits not being able to enter into a binding agreement has no effect on them getting it on.

You are right and I misspoke. Please mentally remove sex from my post as you read it. Marriage is a state issue........

 

[DOMS]

Of course they can, but you can't deny a group of people the option to marry, especially when the only reason for denying those rights is your religion.

So it's especially a problem if religion is the motivating factor?

 

[exphys88]

My religion says interracial marriage is immoral and I should be able to vote according to my religious views. The first amendment protects my right to vote however the fuck I want.

All interracial marriages should be illegal. Each state should be able to decide if blacks should be allowed to marry whites. It's a state issue.

 

[exphys88]

So it's especially a problem if religion is the motivating factor?

No, it's a problem if that's the only reason.

First, you can't discriminate based on sexual preference. Secondly, you can't deny someone something because your religion opposes it. See my post above, it's a perfect example of how fucked up that way if thinking is.

 

[DOMS]

No, it's a problem if that's the only reason.

First, you can't discriminate based on sexual preference. Secondly, you can't deny someone something because your religion opposes it. See my post above, it's a perfect example of how fucked up that way if thinking is.

It's funny that you seem so anti-big brother, but you hatred for religion has you advocating for the Thought Police. That's awesome...a shitty brand of hypocrisy.

 

[exphys88]

It's funny that you seem so anti-big brother, but you hatred for religion has you advocating for the Thought Police. That's awesome...a shitty brand of hypocrisy.

Lol, is it a problem that I don't want people's religion infringing on others?

People can think/vote for whatever they want, but they shouldn't be able to pass laws forcing others to conform to their religious beliefs. The courts agree which is why doma will end up like DADT.

 

[heavyiron]

Just marry your boyfriend and come out of the closet. After 8 homo threads its obvious you want to.

 

[DOMS]

Lol, is it a problem that I don't want people's religion infringing on others?

People can think/vote for whatever they want, but they shouldn't be able to pass laws forcing others to conform to their religious beliefs. The courts agree which is why doma will end up like DADT.

The problem isn't that your so much against the desires of others, but that you're against the thoughts of others and you're advocating that their desires should be ignored for that reason. That shit is very big brother, which you'd argue against if they topic were nearly anything else.

 

[exphys88]

Just marry your boyfriend and come out of the closet. After 8 homo threads its obvious you want to.

I can't marry him because of prop 8.

 

[exphys88]

The problem isn't that your so much against the desires of others, but that you're against the thoughts of others and you're advocating that their desires should be ignored for that reason. That shit is very big brother, which you'd argue against if they topic were nearly anything else.

People can think what they want, they just don't get to put them into law. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

 

[vicious 13]

If gay marriage voids the sanctity of marriage... Shouldn't divorce be illegal? I'm drunk I'm might have fucked that one up

 

[vicious 13]

I see it like this... I don't like people telling me I shouldn't inject my ass... I'm sure gays feel the same way

 

[vicious 13]

Still drunk

 

[exphys88]

If gay marriage voids the sanctity of marriage... Shouldn't divorce be illegal? I'm drunk I'm might have fucked that one up

Interestingly, Jesus said divorce was a sin, but never condemned homosexuality.

Shouldn't anti gay marriage christians retards be trying to make divorce illegal? Yet another example of cherry picking scripture to fit their bigotry.

 

[DOMS]

People can think what they want, they just don't get to put them into law. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

Only so much that it doesn't violate basic rights outlined in other documents. Religious people are also against murder. I assume you're okay with that?

 

[heavyiron]

Interestingly, Jesus said divorce was a sin, but never condemned homosexuality.

Shouldn't anti gay marriage christians retards be trying to make divorce illegal? Yet another example of cherry picking scripture to fit their bigotry.

Omissions does not prove what he believed. This is an illogical conclusion. I don't recall Jesus saying rape or sex with an animal is sin but he very likely believed it was. Under Jewish law which he supported it was a sin to commit a homosexual act. Therefore Christ would follow and believe the Jewish law that condemns homosexual acts.

You also make general statements about Christians being bigots. I can't help but point out that you sound like a bigot for labeling this group in a general and negative fashion. I know you are passionate about this topic but frankly you seem filled with hate and contempt for a group you have labeled. I know many Christians that are some of the most kind and intelligent people I have ever met. Before you retort maybe judge yourself with the same measure you judge others brother.

 

[exphys88]

Only so much that it doesn't violate basic rights outlined in other documents. Religious people are also against murder. I assume you're okay with that?

There's many valid reasons to be against murder. I have yet to see 1 valid reason to oppose gay marriage.

 

[exphys88]

Omissions does not prove what he believed. This is an illogical conclusion. I don't recall Jesus saying rape or sex with an animal is sin but he very likely believed it was. Under Jewish law which he supported it was a sin to commit a homosexual act. Therefore Christ would follow and believe the Jewish law that condemns homosexual acts.

You also make general statements about Christians being bigots. I can't help but point out that you sound like a bigot for labeling this group in a general and negative fashion. I know you are passionate about this topic but frankly you seem filled with hate and contempt for a group you have labeled. I know many Christians that are some of the most kind and intelligent people I have ever met. Before you retort maybe judge yourself with the same measure you judge others brother.

He did say that divorce was a sin though. Why is there no legislation making it illegal when there are many Christians willing to pass legislation that makes life so difficult for gays because of who they choose to love?

To be exact, the Jewish law says homosexuality is punishable by death.

I'm sorry, but if you try to force your religion onto others and treat homos as second class citizens, and deny them equal rights, you're a bigot. If the shoe fits...

It's one thing to have these opinions, but once you try to force them into legislation, you're wrong.