Gods Own Party Can’t Get Over Same Sex Marriage

[BS Filter]

Ok, more recently, until 1967, an interracial couple could be jailed for who they love.

Interracial marriage isn't a religious issue. Nothing in the Bible forbids it.

 

[WinterBorn]

And another non-sequitur. What does that have to do with the RCC?

You complained that I went back 1,000 years for an example. I provided one that was more recent. It had nothing to do with RCC.

 

[Mashmont]

You complained that I went back 1,000 years for an example. I provided one that was more recent. It had nothing to do with RCC.

Exactly.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

False narrative. No one is being sued for refusing to serve queers. Businesses are sued for refusing to believe in same-sex marriage. Try again.

Your BS filter is not qorking very well. In fact not at all. You are oozing excrement

 

[BS Filter]

Your BS filter is not qorking very well. In fact not at all. You are oozing excrement

You're out of bullets. Poor baby.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

If you reread my post, I said doing unnatural sexual acts leads to disaster, whether it be gay sex or illicit sex by unmarrieds. I didn't tie it to gay marriage. You did.

I read your post. You were replying to a thread about gay marriage. Of course yu were referring too gay sex. Now you are trying to sound like you are not a bigot by including everything that you consider unnatural sex? What disasters are you referring to? What do you consider "natural sex" and wht do you get to define it for others

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Gay sexual relationships were not afforded legitimacy, nor should they be. They are immoral. Gays have more sex partners than heteros, with or without gay 'marriage'.

How would you know and what business is it of yours,? Don't bother to pretend that yu care about AIDS

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Gays can already fully participate in society. They want extra immoral "rights".

WHAT?? Immoral rights?? Gays still experience discrimination in many ways. Your ignorance is obvious

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Illicit sex (any act outside hetero marriage) harms all of society.

Please explain how EXACT:T

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I agree. The badly-decided Obergefell will fall just like Roe v Wade did. Even liberal John Roberts dissented.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/06/26/9-need-to-know-quotes-from-the-obergefell-v-hodges-opinions

"Marriage is sacred to those who live by their religions and offers unique fulfillment to those who find meaning in the secular realm. Its dynamic allows two people to find a life that could not be found alone, for a marriage becomes greater than just the two persons. Rising from the most basic human needs, marriage is essential to our most profound hopes and aspirations."

"As all parties agree, many same-sex couples provide loving and nurturing homes to their children, whether biological or adopted. ... Excluding same-sex couples from marriage thus conflicts with a central premise of the right to marry. Without the recognition, stability, and predictability marriage offers, their children suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser. They also suffer the significant material costs of being raised by unmarried parents, relegated through no fault of their own to a more difficult and uncertain family life. The marriage laws at issue here thus harm and humiliate the children of same-sex couples."

"In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right."

 

[Mashmont]

How would you know and what business is it of yours,? Don't bother to pretend that yu care about AIDS

I read studies that said so. I do care about AIDS and the effect it has on the entire population.

 

[talksalot]

Intelligent people understand that this thread is about the continued opposition to same sex marriage and the myriad of ways that the GOP is trying to undermine gay rights.

If you are trying to make a case against gay marriage by citing AIDS, it is a desperate use of a logical fallacy, specifically a false cause fallacy, not to mention just plain stupid. People are going to have sex as they please with or without marriage. I will also point out that heterosexuals also engage in some of those same sexual practices

Intelligent people understand that the AIDS epidemic sprung from a time when gay men were marginalized had few options other than having anonymous sex in bath houses and dark theaters. Their relationships were not afforded any legitimacy and therefore unstable and ripe for promiscuity. Now, it has been found that gay men who are married or otherwise in a committed relationship are far less likely to transmit diseases.

Intelligent people understand that anyone who expresses concern about AIDS but does not support laws and policies that allow gays to fully participate in society by the light of day are hypocrites and just plain full of shit

If you knowingly give AIDS to another person through sexual intercourse or a blood donation (pretty much a death sentence) California law considers it just a misdemeanor.

It wouldn't consider it was a misdemeanor if I contracted AIDS, especially through a blood donation.

 

[Robert W]

Just as they have been working to water down Roe v. Wade , with restrictions on abortion, they continue to concern themselves with another, more recent decision, Obergfelle v Hodges which made same sex marriage the law of the land.

They are obsessed with people private lives and social issues, while purporting to be the party of freedom and individual responsibility.

While the country is facing numerous threats and problems both foreign and domestic, they can’t keep their noses out of people’s bedrooms. While they are hell bent on allowing Wall Street to run amok, and letting corporations pollute the planet, women, gays and other who they disapprove of must be tightly controlled.

While they are not actively seeking to overturn Obergefell- that know that even with a conservative SCOTUS- it would be a long road to hoe. So as with Roe, they are finding ways to water down the gains that have been made with respect to choice, privacy, and equality. Consider:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-signorile-georgia-adoption_us_5a9c23e7e4b0a0ba4ad45681



Adoption is only one of several fronts on which they are attacking:



I




Is that what God would want? These issues, along wth the myriad of so call "bathroom bills " aimed at trans people make it clear that the GOP is hell bent on making life as difficult as possible for LGBT people in order to appease the religious right.

Roe v Wade has always been fatally flawed. Laws are to be created by state and Federal Legislators. Not by Judges. I have nothing at all against Judges who stick to judging. Legislation can often take many years. So a Judge does not take many years, the Judge sentences in several days. We have convicts in prisons today who appeal to judges who turn them down, even if the case contains proof the convict is not guilty at all. still the Judge follows rules they say that keeps convicts who are innocent, locked up in prison for extreme long terms. The woman who is the subject of Roe V Wade appeared in court to plead the case she wanted the case dropped.
I argued on forums for more than 25 years that the rule in the Court was wrong. I was pleased when the Supreme Court corrected this massive error.

 

[Robert W]

How would you know and what business is it of yours,? Don't bother to pretend that yu care about AIDS

What law is on the books about AIDS? Would you want judges to rule those who have AIDS amount to killers and should be executed? Or would you prefer this issue is for the states and federal lawmakers, the legislators?

 

[Robert W]

Intelligent people understand that this thread is about the continued opposition to same sex marriage and the myriad of ways that the GOP is trying to undermine gay rights.

If you are trying to make a case against gay marriage by citing AIDS, it is a desperate use of a logical fallacy, specifically a false cause fallacy, not to mention just plain stupid. People are going to have sex as they please with or without marriage. I will also point out that heterosexuals also engage in some of those same sexual practices

Intelligent people understand that the AIDS epidemic sprung from a time when gay men were marginalized had few options other than having anonymous sex in bath houses and dark theaters. Their relationships were not afforded any legitimacy and therefore unstable and ripe for promiscuity. Now, it has been found that gay men who are married or otherwise in a committed relationship are far less likely to transmit diseases.

Intelligent people understand that anyone who expresses concern about AIDS but does not support laws and policies that allow gays to fully participate in society by the light of day are hypocrites and just plain full of shit

Intellect plays no role. It has to be an education called Law. This is what Legislators use. They do not use the term you used.

I urge homosexuals to use the correct term. It is not gay. Gay is an english word used for eons as happy. Very happy in many cases. Homosexuals persist on posting in extremely unlawful displays. They can't be happy if they keep this going.
Homosexuals got AIDs as patients got CV19. It originated elsewhere and was imported to the USA. And homosexuals did not accept the blame, they blamed President Reagan. Reagan had never heard of it. Why he got blamed has always been a mystery. Reagan also was no legislator or Doctor. Even CV came from China yet Democrats blamed only Trump who did nothing at all to be blamed for. And Trump went to war against CV19 and managed to get vaccines for it to the public.
I lived in CA when I voted to help homosexuals. Marriage I explained to them was the wrong word. It invited those who do not like homosexuals to have a reason to not help homosexuals. I and millions of CA voters voted for more than court ruling, we voted for the law to change. We in fact put it into the State constitution. We handed the homosexuals what they wanted on a gold platter. We called it the Civil Union. Why did homosexuals hate the word Civil Union? We in CA even had the blessing of our Supreme court who approved the legal term Civil Union. So some who lived in the East went to the Federal Supreme court and now the problem still exists. We know it by comments made above. So homosexuals turned down the best solution they had. Even today they whine about it.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I read studies that said so. I do care about AIDS and the effect it has on the entire population.

You read studies ? What studies? Some garbage from the Heritage Foundation? Studies from when? Pre Stonewall, or before Lawrence V. Texas when gays were relegated to the margins of society and found it virtually impossible to maintain a stable relationship ? And now, in the same breath you are basically saying that is the era that you want to go back to while at the same time claiming to care about AIDS . There appears to be something seriously wrong with you

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

We handed the homosexuals what they wanted on a gold platter. We called it the Civil Union. Why did homosexuals hate the word Civil Union? We in CA even had the blessing of our Supreme court who approved the legal term Civil Union. So some who lived in the East went to the Federal Supreme court and now the problem still exists. We know it by comments made above. So homosexuals turned down the best solution they had. Even today they whine about it.

I previously tried to school you on the issue of civil unions just days a go on another thread but apparently you don't learn to well Here it is again:

Civil Unions are a Sham and a Failure - by Progressive Patriot 5. 7. 16

Long after Obergefell, I’m still hearing that gay people should have been satisfied with civil unions or domestic partnerships instead of pushing the issue of marriage. This is the familiar separate but equal argument reminiscent of the Jim Crow era.

To begin with, the simple fact is that even if they are equal on paper, in reality they are not equal if for no other reason, because they are called by different names. “Marriage” is universally understood to mean a certain thing… a bond and a commitment between two people. “Civil Unions” carry no such instantly understood meaning. Now, I know that there are those who will say that marriage is understood to mean a man and a woman, but those people are living in a bygone era. Similarly, there are those who contend that marriage is a religious institution, but they too are living in a world that no longer exists, if it ever did. While there were times and places in history where it was-and for some still is -for the most part it is anything but religious. Therefore, neither heterosexuals nor the religious own “marriage”

I firmly believe that those who claim that they believe in equal rights for gays and lesbians but are against marriage in favor of civil unions are using that story line so as not to appear to be anti -equality while not really believing in equality at all. This may be conscious process that is deliberately deceptive, or a rationalization to make themselves feel good about how magnanimous they imagine themselves to be, but the motive, and the outcome is the same.

Words are powerful. Consider the word “Citizen” In this country anyone who is born a citizen -as well as those who are naturalized – are simply” citizens” They all have the same rights and responsibilities. But let’s say that we decided that naturalized citizen could not and should not be called “citizens” but rather they must be distinguished from those who were born into citizenship by calling them something like Permanent Legal Domestic Residents. Still the same rights and responsibilities but are they equal in reality? How many times will they have to explain what that means? For instance, will hospital staff understand when there is an issue with visitation or making a medical decision regarding a spouse?

Consider this:

Marriage is more perfect union: In gay marriage debate, separate but equal won't cut it

Civil unions are in no way a legitimate substitute for gay marriage.

They fail on principle, because - as America should have learned from racial segregation - separate is never equal.

And they fail in practice, because couples who enter into this second-class marriage alternative in New Jersey and elsewhere are constantly denied the rights and benefits that married couples take for granted.

Which brings up a third way in which they fail - verbally. Imagine getting down on one knee and saying, "Will you civilly unite with me?"

All kidding aside, semantics matters when it comes to labeling our most important and intimate relationships. Denying gay and lesbian couples the right - and the joy and the responsibility and the ordinariness - to use the M-word is a profound slap in the face.

"When you say, 'I'm married,' everyone knows who you are in relation to the primary person you're building your life with," says Freedom to Marry director Evan Wolfson. " 'Civil union' doesn't offer that clarity, that immediately understood respect." Marriage is more perfect union: In gay marriage debate, separate but equal won’t cut it

True patriotism is progressivism. True patriotism is working to fix what is wrong with America instead of pretending that it is just high taxes, too much government and liberal policies. True Patriotism is working to make America the truly great country that it can be for all, not just the wealth, white, heterosexual males. I am the Progressive Patriot

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Intellect plays no role. It has to be an education called Law. This is what Legislators use. They do not use the term you used.

I urge homosexuals to use the correct term. It is not gay. Gay is an english word used for eons as happy. Very happy in many cases. Homosexuals persist on posting in extremely unlawful displays. They can't be happy if they keep this going.
Homosexuals got AIDs as patients got CV19. It originated elsewhere and was imported to the USA. And homosexuals did not accept the blame, they blamed President Reagan. Reagan had never heard of it. Why he got blamed has always been a mystery. Reagan also was no legislator or Doctor. Even CV came from China yet Democrats blamed only Trump who did nothing at all to be blamed for. And Trump went to war against CV19 and managed to get vaccines for it to the public.
I lived in CA when I voted to help homosexuals. Marriage I explained to them was the wrong word. It invited those who do not like homosexuals to have a reason to not help homosexuals. I and millions of CA voters voted for more than court ruling, we voted for the law to change. We in fact put it into the State constitution. We handed the homosexuals what they wanted on a gold platter. We called it the Civil Union. Why did homosexuals hate the word Civil Union? We in CA even had the blessing of our Supreme court who approved the legal term Civil Union. So some who lived in the East went to the Federal Supreme court and now the problem still exists. We know it by comments made above. So homosexuals turned down the best solution they had. Even today they whine about it.

Holy shit!! What a boatload of bizarre Gish Gallop! Can you possibly find anymore excrement to throw at the wall in order to avoid and honest and rational discussion of gay marriage? Here you digress into the use of the tern “gay” then blather about covid 19 Reagan , China, Trump and of course AIDS Previously on another thread, you suggested that because I am “pro Homosexual” (your words) I want 4 year olds to marry . Amazingly stupid!!

Then you seem to have deluded yourself into believing that you tried to help "homosexuals" by offering then civil unions while ignoring the fact that civil unions are wofully inadequate, Clearly you are impervious to rational thought and reason

I am clearly seeing a disturbing pattern here with you that indicates to me that you are becoming increasingly unhinged. I have a background in mental health and I my assessment of you is that you are decompensating. I am seriously considering no longer engaging you on this topic since I do not want to be responsible for you further deterioration

 

[Robert W]

Holy shit!! What a boatload of bizarre Gish Gallop! Can you possibly find anymore excrement to throw at the wall in order to avoid and honest and rational discussion of gay marriage? Here you digress into the use of the tern “gay” then blather about covid 19 Reagan , China, Trump and of course AIDS Previously on another thread, you suggested that because I am “pro Homosexual” (your words) I want 4 year olds to marry . Amazingly stupid!!

Then you seem to have deluded yourself into believing that you tried to help "homosexuals" by offering then civil unions while ignoring the fact that civil unions are wofully inadequate, Clearly you are impervious to rational thought and reason

I am clearly seeing a disturbing pattern here with you that indicates to me that you are becoming increasingly unhinged. I have a background in mental health and I my assessment of you is that you are decompensating. I am seriously considering no longer engaging you on this topic since I do not want to be responsible for you further deterioration

I was very calm. You on the other hand blew a fuse. Who will tolerate you blowing fuses?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I was very calm. You on the other hand blew a fuse. Who will tolerate you blowing fuses?

helplines for mental health - Bing

Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.

www.bing.com