Watching Maine today.

[del]

Catholic Charities was forced to shut its doors because they weren't granted religious exemption from anti-discrimination laws. Like I said, I'm not worried about a church being forced to marry a gay couple. The concept of "religious freedom" goes beyond that with this issue.

no, they weren't. catholic charities is still open for business; they chose to discontinue adoption services rather than comply with state law, which is their right. they still provide other services.

Catholic Charities stuns state, ends adoptions - The Boston Globe

try again.

Still, his point is taken that a religious organization was affected by the alleged null outcome of instituting same-sex marriage. You call it a failure to comply with "state law", but that's what people are afraid of: "state law" affecting religious organizations.

since marriage isn't a requirement for adoption in massachusetts, i really don't see how gay marriage even enters into the conversation.

 

[bodecea]

it's been legal here for 5+ years.
zero cases of churches being sued for refusing to perform a wedding
ceremony.

probably just waiting to lull them into a false sense of security.

Catholic Charities was forced to shut its doors because they weren't granted religious exemption from anti-discrimination laws. Like I said, I'm not worried about a church being forced to marry a gay couple. The concept of "religious freedom" goes beyond that with this issue.

no, they weren't. catholic charities is still open for business; they chose to discontinue adoption services rather than comply with state law, which is their right. they still provide other services.

Catholic Charities stuns state, ends adoptions - The Boston Globe

try again.

Will the falsehoods never stop?

 

[bodecea]

I didn't say religion had nothing to do with it. My point was that a large majority of blacks voted for the gay marriage ban. That's a fact and is the point I was making.

And you will find on the demographics that the black people who voted for Prop H8 were the church going ones lied to. The failure to include them in pro-gay marriage canvassing will not be repeated. They should never have been taken for granted.

Lied to? What lie were they told?

That Prop H8 would prevent the mention of gay people to school children. (It has no language referring to children or schools at all).

That without Prop H8, gay couples would successfully sue churches to force them to marry gay couples. (Let's forget the First Amendment for a moment....but since Loving v. Virginia, what church has been sued to force interracial marriages?)

 

[bodecea]

It's all about keeping gay people as second class citizens legally

Boo and hoo-ey...

i guess those guys who can't marry their brother...

...or their three favorite women...

...are also "second class citizens"...?

See? Ridicule is a tool used by those who want to relegate us into the same catagory with ridiculous comparisons.

 

[saveliberty]

When you break the law you have certain liberties removed, aka "a second class citizen". Illegal unions, and immoral ones to boot, tend to have that effect. My advice, stop shoving it in people's faces and relax.

P.S. I read the list of major contributors and the No group had mostly out of state major contributors.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

no, they weren't. catholic charities is still open for business; they chose to discontinue adoption services rather than comply with state law, which is their right. they still provide other services.

Catholic Charities stuns state, ends adoptions - The Boston Globe

try again.

Still, his point is taken that a religious organization was affected by the alleged null outcome of instituting same-sex marriage. You call it a failure to comply with "state law", but that's what people are afraid of: "state law" affecting religious organizations.

since marriage isn't a requirement for adoption in massachusetts, i really don't see how gay marriage even enters into the conversation.

It doesnt at all really del. Basically the charity said that the Gay lifestyle runs counter to their personal values so they wont let gay people adopt from them. The state said you can't be considered a charitable organization if you deny people because they are gay so the charity said we aren't doing adoptions anymore.

At least thats how I read it.

 

[bodecea]

But what about the mandatory gay week...where everyone will be required by law to have gay sex?

Ahhh....The Slippery Slope argument

I am hoping that they will allow us to make it slippery.

Mandatory dry penetration will just be over the top!

Lord! Can't we have ANYTHING to ourselves?????

 

[bodecea]

When you break the law you have certain liberties removed, aka "a second class citizen". Illegal unions, and immoral ones to boot, tend to have that effect. My advice, stop shoving it in people's faces and relax.

Wanting equal civil rights is "shoving it in people's faces" OK...tell me where any minority in the history of mankind has gained equal rights by "relaxing"?

P.S. I read the list of major contributors and the No group had mostly out of state major contributors.

Any dominant groups or rich gay people? We DO have a lot of them, you know.

 

[xotoxi]

Catholic Charities was forced to shut its doors because they weren't granted religious exemption from anti-discrimination laws. Like I said, I'm not worried about a church being forced to marry a gay couple. The concept of "religious freedom" goes beyond that with this issue.

no, they weren't. catholic charities is still open for business; they chose to discontinue adoption services rather than comply with state law, which is their right. they still provide other services.

Catholic Charities stuns state, ends adoptions - The Boston Globe

try again.

Will the falsehoods never stop?

Not knowing anything about anything...but I would think that an agency performing an adoption would be essentially acting as an agent of the state to place a child and thus would have to abide strictly by all state anti-discrimination laws. An adoption is not a religious event.

However, a church performing a marriage, is performing a religious event and would not be required to abide by anti-discrimination laws.

Maybe?

 

[xsited1]

And you will find on the demographics that the black people who voted for Prop H8 were the church going ones lied to. The failure to include them in pro-gay marriage canvassing will not be repeated. They should never have been taken for granted.

Lied to? What lie were they told?

That Prop H8 would prevent the mention of gay people to school children. (It has no language referring to children or schools at all).

That without Prop H8, gay couples would successfully sue churches to force them to marry gay couples. (Let's forget the First Amendment for a moment....but since Loving v. Virginia, what church has been sued to force interracial marriages?)

I seriously doubt churches will be forced to marry gay couples, but religious institutions may eventually lose their tax exempt status if they speak out against gay marriage. The case against Bob Jones University concerning interracial dating comes to mind. However, there is a bigger issue here which cannot be overlooked. The Christian Bible (as well as other religious texts) is very clear about homosexuality to the fundamentalist. You allow homosexuality to flourish and God reigns down fire and brimstone. That's one of the primary reasons why some religious people are against it.

 

[bodecea]

Lied to? What lie were they told?

That Prop H8 would prevent the mention of gay people to school children. (It has no language referring to children or schools at all).

That without Prop H8, gay couples would successfully sue churches to force them to marry gay couples. (Let's forget the First Amendment for a moment....but since Loving v. Virginia, what church has been sued to force interracial marriages?)

I seriously doubt churches will be forced to marry gay couples, but religious institutions may eventually lose their tax exempt status if they speak out against gay marriage. The case against Bob Jones University concerning interracial dating comes to mind. However, there is a bigger issue here which cannot be overlooked. The Christian Bible (as well as other religious texts) is very clear about homosexuality to the fundamentalist. You allow homosexuality to flourish and God reigns down fire and brimstone. That's one of the primary reasons why some religious people are against it.

Fine...then don't let gays into your church. They believe they're gonna leave us all behind soon anyways.

 

[xsited1]

That Prop H8 would prevent the mention of gay people to school children. (It has no language referring to children or schools at all).

That without Prop H8, gay couples would successfully sue churches to force them to marry gay couples. (Let's forget the First Amendment for a moment....but since Loving v. Virginia, what church has been sued to force interracial marriages?)

I seriously doubt churches will be forced to marry gay couples, but religious institutions may eventually lose their tax exempt status if they speak out against gay marriage. The case against Bob Jones University concerning interracial dating comes to mind. However, there is a bigger issue here which cannot be overlooked. The Christian Bible (as well as other religious texts) is very clear about homosexuality to the fundamentalist. You allow homosexuality to flourish and God reigns down fire and brimstone. That's one of the primary reasons why some religious people are against it.

Fine...then don't let gays into your church. They believe they're gonna leave us all behind soon anyways.

Gays are allowed in my church, but I digress. There is another element to this equation which has nothing to do with religion. Some believe that homosexuality is either a mental disorder or the result of sexual and/or physical abuse as a child. Indeed, there is some evidence to back this up, although it is usually difficult to find. For example, Scientists have discovered that some animals that exhibit gay tendencies have a chemical brain imbalance. Would it be possible to 'treat' this imbalance, making them 'straight'? Nobody knows the answer at this time, but I am confident that Science will prevail. And if homosexuality can be caused by adolescent abuse, wouldn't allowing them to continue without treatment be morally wrong?

(That reminds me of an exchange I once had with a USMB poster about gay churches. I mentioned that I had gone to a predominately gay church to the poster and attended several gay weddings. She asked me if I had ever been to a gay wedding at a 'Christian Church'. Huh? I guess in her mind, gay churches can't be Christian.)

 

[saveliberty]

When you break the law you have certain liberties removed, aka "a second class citizen". Illegal unions, and immoral ones to boot, tend to have that effect. My advice, stop shoving it in people's faces and relax.

Wanting equal civil rights is "shoving it in people's faces" OK...tell me where any minority in the history of mankind has gained equal rights by "relaxing"?

P.S. I read the list of major contributors and the No group had mostly out of state major contributors.

Any dominant groups or rich gay people? We DO have a lot of them, you know.

What current civil rights are you denied? Marriage is a religious ceremony, so not a civil issue.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

It's all about keeping gay people as second class citizens legally

Boo and hoo-ey...

i guess those guys who can't marry their brother...

...or their three favorite women...

...are also "second class citizens"...?

See? Ridicule is a tool used by those who want to relegate us into the same catagory with ridiculous comparisons.

This was NOT ridicule.....but a very serious question.....please provide a serious answer...

 

[bodecea]

I seriously doubt churches will be forced to marry gay couples, but religious institutions may eventually lose their tax exempt status if they speak out against gay marriage. The case against Bob Jones University concerning interracial dating comes to mind. However, there is a bigger issue here which cannot be overlooked. The Christian Bible (as well as other religious texts) is very clear about homosexuality to the fundamentalist. You allow homosexuality to flourish and God reigns down fire and brimstone. That's one of the primary reasons why some religious people are against it.

Fine...then don't let gays into your church. They believe they're gonna leave us all behind soon anyways.

Gays are allowed in my church, but I digress. There is another element to this equation which has nothing to do with religion. Some believe that homosexuality is either a mental disorder or the result of sexual and/or physical abuse as a child. Indeed, there is some evidence to back this up, although it is usually difficult to find. For example, Scientists have discovered that some animals that exhibit gay tendencies have a chemical brain imbalance. Would it be possible to 'treat' this imbalance, making them 'straight'? Nobody knows the answer at this time, but I am confident that Science will prevail. And if homosexuality can be caused by adolescent abuse, wouldn't allowing them to continue without treatment be morally wrong?

(That reminds me of an exchange I once had with a USMB poster about gay churches. I mentioned that I had gone to a predominately gay church to the poster and attended several gay weddings. She asked me if I had ever been to a gay wedding at a 'Christian Church'. Huh? I guess in her mind, gay churches can't be Christian.)

MCC...that's where we were married in 1990.

And I hear what you are saying. Remember at one time, being left handed was considered a "choice", an evil choice and others said it was caused by an imbalance mentally. They were still allowed to marry. In fact, people who have true mental health issues such as clinical depression, bi polar, etc. are still allowed to marry.

 

[bodecea]

When you break the law you have certain liberties removed, aka "a second class citizen". Illegal unions, and immoral ones to boot, tend to have that effect. My advice, stop shoving it in people's faces and relax.

Wanting equal civil rights is "shoving it in people's faces" OK...tell me where any minority in the history of mankind has gained equal rights by "relaxing"?

P.S. I read the list of major contributors and the No group had mostly out of state major contributors.

Any dominant groups or rich gay people? We DO have a lot of them, you know.

What current civil rights are you denied? Marriage is a religious ceremony, so not a civil issue.

We are talking civil marriage...not religious marriage (which I already am religiously married, since 1990)

And marriage isn't always a religious ceremony. Many, many people never get married religiously, yet are legally married.

 

[bodecea]

Boo and hoo-ey...

i guess those guys who can't marry their brother...

...or their three favorite women...

...are also "second class citizens"...?

See? Ridicule is a tool used by those who want to relegate us into the same catagory with ridiculous comparisons.

This was NOT ridicule.....but a very serious question.....please provide a serious answer...

What does gay marriage have to do with marrying one's brother?

What does gay marriage have to do with marrying one's three favorite women?


....any more than straight marriage does, that is. Why even bring those up? A serious question right back at you.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

See? Ridicule is a tool used by those who want to relegate us into the same catagory with ridiculous comparisons.

This was NOT ridicule.....but a very serious question.....please provide a serious answer...

What does gay marriage have to do with marrying one's brother?

What does gay marriage have to do with marrying one's three favorite women?


....any more than straight marriage does, that is. Why even bring those up? A serious question right back at you.

It has to do with being...as you say...a "second class citizen"....

...these people can claim to be treated as "second class citizens" also...just like gays claim...

...these people have just as valid reasons for getting married as any gay person does....don't they?

 

[bodecea]

This was NOT ridicule.....but a very serious question.....please provide a serious answer...

What does gay marriage have to do with marrying one's brother?

What does gay marriage have to do with marrying one's three favorite women?


....any more than straight marriage does, that is. Why even bring those up? A serious question right back at you.

It has to do with being...as you say...a "second class citizen"....

...these people can claim to be treated as "second class citizens" also...just like gays claim...

...these people have just as valid reasons for getting married as any gay person does....don't they?

No they cannot. But convince me otherwise. I'm listening.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

What does gay marriage have to do with marrying one's brother?

What does gay marriage have to do with marrying one's three favorite women?


....any more than straight marriage does, that is. Why even bring those up? A serious question right back at you.

It has to do with being...as you say...a "second class citizen"....

...these people can claim to be treated as "second class citizens" also...just like gays claim...

...these people have just as valid reasons for getting married as any gay person does....don't they?

No they cannot. But convince me otherwise. I'm listening.

Their claims are just as valid as yours....why wouldn't they be?