Are queer weddings a sin?

[Andylusion]

If you didn't do any of those things... then you would be perfect, and the Bible would be proven wrong.

Ah, still tap dancing.

You say the evil was in my heart from the day I was born, due to decisions "we" made.

The absurdity is obvious. This is what goofy, iron aged religion does to a person's brain.

Thanks!

Regardless, what I said is true.

Here's the real question for the non-christian materialist. If you have no evil nature, then why can't we eliminate all evil from the world?

If there is no sin, and fallen nature.... then we need to find those people that teach children to lie, and hurt each other, and put those people in prison. Right? Isn't that the claim? We have no human nature, and we are only a product of our environment, so someone must be teaching children to be evil. And if no one is teaching people to be evil, then why do they lie, cheat, steal?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Regardless, what I said is true.

Yes, and water is wet. Still you are tap dancing, whether it was true or not.

Of course there is no "sin". That's magical nonsense from the iron age.

 

[DOTR]

Seriously dude?? All of out rights are limited to what is in the first ten amendments? If that were so, then I guess slaves would not be free., and black folks and women would not be able to vote.

Freeing slaves and giving women the right to vote took changes to the Constitution. Both were voluntarily approved by the requisite number of people in the requisite number of states.

Did I miss a change in the Constitution in 2015?

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

No. The sin is every other TV commercial flaunting people I’ve never encountered in reality. It’s like a freak show.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Freeing slaves and giving women the right to vote took changes to the Constitution. Both were voluntarily approved by the requisite number of people in the requisite number of states.

Such an effort had to be undertaken to help purge the religious nonsense.

 

[Andylusion]

Regardless, what I said is true.

Yes, and water is wet. Still you are tap dancing, whether it was true or not.

Of course there is no "sin". That's magical nonsense from the iron age.

lol Well, you have the right to be wrong.

 

[Andylusion]

Freeing slaves and giving women the right to vote took changes to the Constitution. Both were voluntarily approved by the requisite number of people in the requisite number of states.

Such an effort had to be undertaken to help purge the religious nonsense.

What are you talking about? Most of the people on both of those fronts, were religious people, pushing it based on religious belief.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Most of the people on both of those fronts, were religious people, pushing it based on religious belief.

Against older "religious belief" (of course, slavery and misogyny were much more in line with literal readings of the Bible than their opposites). Funny, the Bible didn't change, yet the moral majority did. This happened thanks to scientific enlightenment and secular ideas, of course. Not courtesy of the Bible, because, as I pointed out, it didn't change a bit.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Seriously dude?? All of out rights are limited to what is in the first ten amendments? If that were so, then I guess slaves would not be free., and black folks and women would not be able to vote.

Freeing slaves and giving women the right to vote took changes to the Constitution. Both were voluntarily approved by the requisite number of people in the requisite number of states.

Did I miss a change in the Constitution in 2015?

First, allow me to commend you for recognizing that your contention, that all rights that we have are based on the bill of rights, was a stupid blunder. Now you acknowledge that other amendments also secure certain rights .So far so good.

But as far as 2015 goes, yes you did miss a change to the constitution. You see ,it is not only the articles and the amendments that comprise the body of Constitutional law. It is also binding precedents that result form SCOTUS decisions such as Obergefell which also carries the force of law. And, in that decision, the high court relied on the 14th Amendment which in effect extended the bill of rights to the states and guaranteed equal protection under the law and due process to everyone. Sometimes , civil rights cant wait for the states and the voters to act.

 

[DOTR]

Seriously dude?? All of out rights are limited to what is in the first ten amendments? If that were so, then I guess slaves would not be free., and black folks and women would not be able to vote.

Freeing slaves and giving women the right to vote took changes to the Constitution. Both were voluntarily approved by the requisite number of people in the requisite number of states.

Did I miss a change in the Constitution in 2015?

First, allow me to commend you for recognizing that your contention, that all rights that we have are based on the bill of rights, was a stupid blunder. Now you acknowledge that other amendments also secure certain rights .So far so good.

But as far as 2015 goes, yes you did miss a change to the constitution. You see ,it is not only the articles and the amendments that comprise the body of Constitutional law. It is also binding precedents that result form SCOTUS decisions such as Obergefell which also carries the force of law. And, in that decision, the high court relied on the 14th Amendment which in effect extended the bill of rights to the states and guaranteed equal protection under the law and due process to everyone. Sometimes , civil rights cant wait for the states and the voters to act.

You got the stupid blunderer confused buddy. I never made or even entertained such a claim. But your programming is running right along.

I also never mentioned "the body of constitutional law." I spoke of the Constitution..and the lefts contention is always simply this..."hehe you can write it down but it wont do you any good".

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Seriously dude?? All of out rights are limited to what is in the first ten amendments? If that were so, then I guess slaves would not be free., and black folks and women would not be able to vote.

Freeing slaves and giving women the right to vote took changes to the Constitution. Both were voluntarily approved by the requisite number of people in the requisite number of states.

Did I miss a change in the Constitution in 2015?

First, allow me to commend you for recognizing that your contention, that all rights that we have are based on the bill of rights, was a stupid blunder. Now you acknowledge that other amendments also secure certain rights .So far so good.

But as far as 2015 goes, yes you did miss a change to the constitution. You see ,it is not only the articles and the amendments that comprise the body of Constitutional law. It is also binding precedents that result form SCOTUS decisions such as Obergefell which also carries the force of law. And, in that decision, the high court relied on the 14th Amendment which in effect extended the bill of rights to the states and guaranteed equal protection under the law and due process to everyone. Sometimes , civil rights cant wait for the states and the voters to act.

You got the stupid blunderer confused buddy. I never made or even entertained such a claim. But your programming is running right along.

I also never mentioned "the body of constitutional law." I spoke of the Constitution..and the lefts contention is always simply this..."hehe you can write it down but it wont do you any good".

Wow!! Another brilliant and scholarly thesis on constitutional law! You are truly brilliant -or at least you have seemingly convinced yourself of that. The fact is that same sex marriage is the law so you might as well get over it and move on.

 

[Shawnee_b]

Are you really a conservative and Christian? Commies claim ANY and EVERY political identifying term, since they hate being exposed as commies. I do not know if you are a commie claiming to be a conservative Christian or if you are the real deal, but I do get suspicious when you are defending queer marriage that is neither conservative nor Christian. Are you voting for Trump in 2016, or are you planning to vote for one of the commie candidates?

Yes I am both. I am not defending queer marriage at all, it's not for us to judge, However most DO judge while living in glass houses throwing stones. Your reading comprehension is very lacking.

 

[DOTR]

Seriously dude?? All of out rights are limited to what is in the first ten amendments? If that were so, then I guess slaves would not be free., and black folks and women would not be able to vote.

Freeing slaves and giving women the right to vote took changes to the Constitution. Both were voluntarily approved by the requisite number of people in the requisite number of states.

Did I miss a change in the Constitution in 2015?

First, allow me to commend you for recognizing that your contention, that all rights that we have are based on the bill of rights, was a stupid blunder. Now you acknowledge that other amendments also secure certain rights .So far so good.

But as far as 2015 goes, yes you did miss a change to the constitution. You see ,it is not only the articles and the amendments that comprise the body of Constitutional law. It is also binding precedents that result form SCOTUS decisions such as Obergefell which also carries the force of law. And, in that decision, the high court relied on the 14th Amendment which in effect extended the bill of rights to the states and guaranteed equal protection under the law and due process to everyone. Sometimes , civil rights cant wait for the states and the voters to act.

You got the stupid blunderer confused buddy. I never made or even entertained such a claim. But your programming is running right along.

I also never mentioned "the body of constitutional law." I spoke of the Constitution..and the lefts contention is always simply this..."hehe you can write it down but it wont do you any good".

Wow!! Another brilliant and scholarly thesis on constitutional law! You are truly brilliant -or at least you have seemingly convinced yourself of that. The fact is that same sex marriage is the law so you might as well get over it and move on.

It isnt the law. The Legislative Branch writes laws. It is an imposition by fiat and raw power...like so much else from the left. When you banned school prayer by fiat and overturned abortion laws did we "get over it and move on"? Nope. Half a century later they are still the fault lines and we dont stop fighting. When you disenfranchise Americans you will find that happens. Your pretense that we are powerless and lacking self government may have some truth but all it means is that the fight for it will continue.
At some point that silly decision will be overturned and forgotten as will Roe V Wade. It been a loooong fight. Incremental. Didnt even seem possible once. Now...

Roe v. Wade: Settled Law Or Bad Precedent? States Prep For An Overturn

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Seriously dude?? All of out rights are limited to what is in the first ten amendments? If that were so, then I guess slaves would not be free., and black folks and women would not be able to vote.

Freeing slaves and giving women the right to vote took changes to the Constitution. Both were voluntarily approved by the requisite number of people in the requisite number of states.

Did I miss a change in the Constitution in 2015?

First, allow me to commend you for recognizing that your contention, that all rights that we have are based on the bill of rights, was a stupid blunder. Now you acknowledge that other amendments also secure certain rights .So far so good.

But as far as 2015 goes, yes you did miss a change to the constitution. You see ,it is not only the articles and the amendments that comprise the body of Constitutional law. It is also binding precedents that result form SCOTUS decisions such as Obergefell which also carries the force of law. And, in that decision, the high court relied on the 14th Amendment which in effect extended the bill of rights to the states and guaranteed equal protection under the law and due process to everyone. Sometimes , civil rights cant wait for the states and the voters to act.

You got the stupid blunderer confused buddy. I never made or even entertained such a claim. But your programming is running right along.

I also never mentioned "the body of constitutional law." I spoke of the Constitution..and the lefts contention is always simply this..."hehe you can write it down but it wont do you any good".

Wow!! Another brilliant and scholarly thesis on constitutional law! You are truly brilliant -or at least you have seemingly convinced yourself of that. The fact is that same sex marriage is the law so you might as well get over it and move on.

It isnt the law. The Legislative Branch writes laws. It is an imposition by fiat and raw power...like so much else from the left. When you banned school prayer by fiat and overturned abortion laws did we "get over it and move on"? Nope. Half a century later they are still the fault lines and we dont stop fighting. When you disenfranchise Americans you will find that happens. Your pretense that we are powerless and lacking self government may have some truth but all it means is that the fight for it will continue.
At some point that silly decision will be overturned and forgotten as will Roe V Wade. It been a loooong fight. Incremental. Didnt even seem possible once. Now...

Roe v. Wade: Settled Law Or Bad Precedent? States Prep For An Overturn

Wow Boss...do bestow more of you vast knowledge of constitutional law on us. If SCOTUS is not there to rule on the constitutionality of laws, please explain what exactly they are supposed to be doing.

 

[Andylusion]

Most of the people on both of those fronts, were religious people, pushing it based on religious belief.

Against older "religious belief" (of course, slavery and misogyny were much more in line with literal readings of the Bible than their opposites). Funny, the Bible didn't change, yet the moral majority did. This happened thanks to scientific enlightenment and secular ideas, of course. Not courtesy of the Bible, because, as I pointed out, it didn't change a bit.

Well if that makes you feel better, that's fine with me for you to believe that. Everyone has the right to be wrong.

 

[EvMetro]

Are you really a conservative and Christian? Commies claim ANY and EVERY political identifying term, since they hate being exposed as commies. I do not know if you are a commie claiming to be a conservative Christian or if you are the real deal, but I do get suspicious when you are defending queer marriage that is neither conservative nor Christian. Are you voting for Trump in 2016, or are you planning to vote for one of the commie candidates?

Yes I am both. I am not defending queer marriage at all, it's not for us to judge, However most DO judge while living in glass houses throwing stones. Your reading comprehension is very lacking.

Your failure to answer the last question of my post that you just quoted shows me that you are most likely just a commie claiming to be a conservative Christian. Evasion is typical commie behavior, so I have learned to watch for it when I am wondering if a person is a commie.

 

[Shawnee_b]

Your failure to answer the last question of my post that you just quoted shows me that you are most likely just a commie claiming to be a conservative Christian. Evasion is typical commie behavior, so I have learned to watch for it when I am wondering if a person is a commie.

Oh the part about voting for Trump? Yes of course I will vote for him, again.

Not one of the clown commie nominees.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Most of the people on both of those fronts, were religious people, pushing it based on religious belief.

Against older "religious belief" (of course, slavery and misogyny were much more in line with literal readings of the Bible than their opposites). Funny, the Bible didn't change, yet the moral majority did. This happened thanks to scientific enlightenment and secular ideas, of course. Not courtesy of the Bible, because, as I pointed out, it didn't change a bit.

Well if that makes you feel better, that's fine with me for you to believe that. Everyone has the right to be wrong.

Of course, my claim is factual and supported by all the evidence, while yours just like all your other claims in this thread, are evidence-free, faith based hoo-ha.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

In related news

Franklin Graham Banned In Liverpool For Anti-Gay Christian Hate

Banned in Liverpool: Christian hate preacher Franklin Graham has been banned from appearing at a venue in Liverpool because he promotes anti-gay Christian hate. BBC reports: A conference venue in Liverpool has cancelled an event featuring American evangelist Franklin Graham. Mr Graham, the eldest son of the late preacher Billy Graham, has said he believes gay marriage is a “sin”. He was due to speak at ACC Liverpool on 12 June as part of a UK tour. But an ACC… Read more

You people are all bat shit bonkers!

 

[justinacolmena]

Freeing slaves and giving women the right to vote took changes to the Constitution.

That was in the 1800s, when a white woman of a certain social standing was required to wear a corset to lace her waist extremely tight.

She couldn't do it herself of course, so as a general rule she had a black female slave or governess to help her dress in the morning.

I don't know if the two women considered themselves "married" to each other in such cases, or how much there was to talk of "Boston marriages" of two women who would keep house together in those days.

Both were voluntarily approved by the requisite number of people in the requisite number of states.

Do you only begrudgingly acknowledge the U.S. Constitution, as the Jews of the Old Testament submitted themselves to the law of circumcision?

It's not so far off from the same thing, either, because if women are given to "unnatural use" or "inordinate affection" in that they hate men while loving one another, then is this a partial explanation for their ardent desire to mutilate the flesh of newborn male infants?