Newt Gingrich Changes Views on Gay-Marriage, Says 'Deal with Reality'

[Glensather]

Sure it can!
As explained by Neil deGrasse Tyson, Stephen Hawking, Bill Nye, Charles Darwin... I could go on.

None of your heros can explain scientifically how life began.

Nor can they explain what the purpose of life is about.

They can and have. Watch 'Origins', a NOVA documentary, and it explains the whole thing pretty well.

And there is no one purpose to life. Life is what you make of it. If you want to spend your life believing in a higher purpose, then by all means, go ahead. I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong.

But I believe differently. I believe that my purpose in life is to raise my kids and give them the opportunities I was denied. That alone makes life worth living to me.

All I ask is that you respect our differences.

 

[Sunni Man]

Sure it can!
As explained by Neil deGrasse Tyson, Stephen Hawking, Bill Nye, Charles Darwin... I could go on.

None of your heros can explain scientifically how life began.

Nor can they explain what the purpose of life is about.

They can and have. Watch 'Origins', a NOVA documentary, and it explains the whole thing pretty well.

Nope, there is zero scientific evidence as to how life began or exactly what caused it to happen.

Stephen Hawking calls it a "singularity" but never offers an explanation as to how it came about.

 

[Glensather]

If you're referring to the literal beginning of the universe, it's simply random chance that it occurred. The 'singularity' was a ball of energy that at something like 10 to the negative 100 to the negative 100 seconds, detonated, thus starting time as we can perceive it, the expansion of the universe, and thus, life.

 

[Sunni Man]

I am talking about life.......living things...........

 

[NYcarbineer]

No, the issue is should the government be allowed to discriminate against a select group for no compelling government reason violating the who concept of equal protection of the law embodied in the 14th Amendment, the principals of liberty and justice embodied in the Constitutions preamble and what we teach to our children when the conclude the pledge "with liberty and justice for all".

No one is suggesting that the entirety of the people should enter into same-sex relationships.




No it's not.

One is a relationship between consenting adults that harms no one.

The other is raping a child.

Big difference.



>>>>

The age of majority at which time an individual has the capacity to consent to sex is arbitrary. Lower it to ten, lower it to six, there's no crime. So this rape of children is merely a matter of the calendar.

The issue isn't whether the government will discriminate, it's whether the government will support the individual's right to discriminate against that which the individual considers wrong.

While no one has suggested that everyone be required to enter into same sex relationships, what homosexuals intend is that everyone accept same sex relationships as a form of normalcy and not consider it the perversion that it is.

What the government should do is extend same sex relationship rights to everyone only as far as the government goes and preserve individual rights to say no.

Tell me something...in the United States, has the age of consent gone up or down in recent years? When laws are passed regarding the age of consent, please show me where they have been changed to LOWER the age of consent.

I really don't give a shit if you "accept" me or not. What I care about is equal treatment under the LAW.

What is the 'normal' age at which consent should be permissible? Based on your criteria for 'normal'?

 

[Glensather]

I am talking about life.......living things...........

Also explained. It was also random chance. On Earth, when the first oceans formed, a smattering of molecules came together to form the first single-celled organisms. These cells evolved and grew, and became multi-celled organisms. The cycle continued to present-day life.

 

[Sunni Man]

I am talking about life.......living things...........

Also explained. It was also random chance. On Earth, when the first oceans formed, a smattering of molecules came together to form the first single-celled organisms. These cells evolved and grew, and became multi-celled organisms. The cycle continued to present-day life.

No scientist has ever explained how inorganic chemicals could suddenly transform themselves into organic life.

If you have a LINK which explains this miraculous event, and how it has been replicated in a laboratory, then please post it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Of course homosexuals should have the right to conduct their lives as they see fit. They aren't hurting anyone else and when they do, there are criminal penalties for that. The way they choose to live their lives isn't an issue. It's whether the way they conduct their lives should be embraced as an alternative form of normal by the entirety of the people.

No, the issue is should the government be allowed to discriminate against a select group for no compelling government reason violating the who concept of equal protection of the law embodied in the 14th Amendment, the principals of liberty and justice embodied in the Constitutions preamble and what we teach to our children when the conclude the pledge "with liberty and justice for all".

No one is suggesting that the entirety of the people should enter into same-sex relationships.

Gay couples and child molesters are both alternative forms of normalcy. The comparison is correctly made.

No it's not.

One is a relationship between consenting adults that harms no one.

The other is raping a child.

Big difference.



>>>>

The age of majority at which time an individual has the capacity to consent to sex is arbitrary. Lower it to ten, lower it to six, there's no crime. So this rape of children is merely a matter of the calendar.

The issue isn't whether the government will discriminate, it's whether the government will support the individual's right to discriminate against that which the individual considers wrong.

While no one has suggested that everyone be required to enter into same sex relationships, what homosexuals intend is that everyone accept same sex relationships as a form of normalcy and not consider it the perversion that it is.

What the government should do is extend same sex relationship rights to everyone only as far as the government goes and preserve individual rights to say no.

The issue isn't whether the government will discriminate, it's whether the government will support the individual's right to discriminate against that which the individual considers wrong.

The issue is indeed whether the government will discriminate, and if there’s justification to do so – which there clearly is not. The right of private individuals to not enter into same-sex marriage, or to disallow same-sex marriage in a private religious institution is not at issue; private organizations are free to discriminate, equal protection doctrine applies only to the public sector.

While no one has suggested that everyone be required to enter into same sex relationships, what homosexuals intend is that everyone accept same sex relationships as a form of normalcy and not consider it the perversion that it is.

Incorrect.

Private citizens are free to perceive same-sex relationships however they see fit. That the government allows same-sex couples access to marriage in accordance with the Constitution in no way interferes with that. And that those hostile to same-sex couples’ civil liberties perceive the state following the Constitution as ‘acceptance’ of homosexuality as ‘normal’ doesn’t justify denying same-sex couples their equal protection rights.

What the government should do is extend same sex relationship rights to everyone only as far as the government goes and preserve individual rights to say no.

Moot – as this is already the case.

 

[Glensather]

I am talking about life.......living things...........

Also explained. It was also random chance. On Earth, when the first oceans formed, a smattering of molecules came together to form the first single-celled organisms. These cells evolved and grew, and became multi-celled organisms. The cycle continued to present-day life.

No scientist has ever explained how inorganic chemicals could suddenly transform themselves into organic life.

If you have a LINK which explains this miraculous event, and how it has been replicated in a laboratory, then please post it.

Explaining random chance is hard. We can do it over and over again, but something as random as this requires the right conditions as well as chance. We'd have to replicate Earth's waters exactly as it was hundreds of millions of years ago.

 

[rdean]

Newt blows like the wind.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I am talking about life.......living things...........

Also explained. It was also random chance. On Earth, when the first oceans formed, a smattering of molecules came together to form the first single-celled organisms. These cells evolved and grew, and became multi-celled organisms. The cycle continued to present-day life.

No scientist has ever explained how inorganic chemicals could suddenly transform themselves into organic life.

If you have a LINK which explains this miraculous event, and how it has been replicated in a laboratory, then please post it.

And no scientist likely ever will.

That science will never be able to explain the origins of life doesn’t mean religion is the ‘answer,’ however.

 

[Sunni Man]

Explaining random chance is hard. We can do it over and over again, but something as random as this requires the right conditions as well as chance. We'd have to replicate Earth's waters exactly as it was hundreds of millions of years ago.

Random/chance or not.....Scientists do not have a clue as to how life started.

 

[Seawytch]

The age of majority at which time an individual has the capacity to consent to sex is arbitrary. Lower it to ten, lower it to six, there's no crime. So this rape of children is merely a matter of the calendar.

The issue isn't whether the government will discriminate, it's whether the government will support the individual's right to discriminate against that which the individual considers wrong.

While no one has suggested that everyone be required to enter into same sex relationships, what homosexuals intend is that everyone accept same sex relationships as a form of normalcy and not consider it the perversion that it is.

What the government should do is extend same sex relationship rights to everyone only as far as the government goes and preserve individual rights to say no.

Tell me something...in the United States, has the age of consent gone up or down in recent years? When laws are passed regarding the age of consent, please show me where they have been changed to LOWER the age of consent.

I really don't give a shit if you "accept" me or not. What I care about is equal treatment under the LAW.

What is the 'normal' age at which consent should be permissible? Based on your criteria for 'normal'?

I like 18, personally.

 

[YoungRepublican]

Assuming he’s sincere, this will place more pressure on social conservatives as they see more republicans accept the Constitutional requirement to allow same-sex couples access to marriage.

Fudge packing isn't mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.

True story............

You know what is mentioned in the Constitution? Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise there of. Our founding fathers found it so important they made it the first part. So in reality it is in the Constitution.. you cant ban gay marriage on the merits of Religon so whats your next argument?

 

[Politico]

Good for him. They should be allowed to get married and suffer like the rest of us.

 

[YoungRepublican]

No matter what you think of homosexuality, it is a fact that gays and lesbians are members of our families, clubs, and workplaces. They are our doctors, our teachers, our soldiers (whether we admit it or not), and our friends. They yearn for acceptance, stable relationships, and success in their lives, just like the rest of us.

So do child molesters, rapists, thieves, and murders.

Should we accept and embrace them also??

Comparing Homosexuality to Child molestors is probably the most shameful thing I have ever heard. Dont hide behind Christianity to preach your intolerance, youre disrespecting the religon. If you dont agree with homosexuality, thats cool, just dont compare them to pedophiles thats not cool.

 

[BallsBrunswick]

If the GOP wants any hope of still being relevant in the 21st century, they're going to have to accept and welcome homosexuality. Especially with how powerful and relevant the LBGT community is.

 

[YoungRepublican]

I am talking about life.......living things...........

What are you talking about? I thought everyone was on board with how living beings got their start.. Is it really the case that with so much evidence you can still deny how life started? I mean I dont really care that you think what you do, but I was just curious. it's like I just robbed a guy in front of you and youre standing there saying idk what happened..

 

[Sunni Man]

Comparing Homosexuality to Child molestors is probably the most shameful thing I have ever heard. Dont hide behind Christianity to preach your intolerance, youre disrespecting the religon. If you dont agree with homosexuality, thats cool, just dont compare them to pedophiles thats not cool.

First of all, I am not a christian.

Secondly, both homos and child molesters are perverts who claim that their behavior is not a choice.

Lastly, homos engage in filthy animalistic behavior and should be culled from society in the interrest of public decency and safety.

 

[Sunni Man]

I am talking about life.......living things...........

What are you talking about? I thought everyone was on board with how living beings got their start.. Is it really the case that with so much evidence you can still deny how life started? I mean I dont really care that you think what you do, but I was just curious. it's like I just robbed a guy in front of you and youre standing there saying idk what happened..

Please post a LINK or other evidence from any scientific journal, or other source, that explains how life started on the earth.

Thank You in advance..........