Religious Right Wing Bigots Still Obsessing About Marriage-Get a Life!

[Polishprince]

That's one way to spin it.

But ministers would point out that it is a theological fact that Almighty God put Adam and Eve into the garden , not Adam and Steve, and He just doesn't approve of homosexuality. I guess you can spin taking it in the ass as a "civil right", but that has not been the position of Christian theologians since antiquity

So what? This is a secular country. We are not (thank goodness) controlled by your religious beliefs. We do not, yet, have christian sharia law here.

If we all do have Freedom of Religion, Mayor Petey needs to respect that as well, and be understanding to his fellow Americans who don't believe it is particularly holy to abort babies or to take it in the caboose. Calling people "hypocrites" because they don't hold to his sectarian views isn't very diverse and doesn't show any inclusivity.

What do we do about all the CRCs who accuse their fellow christians of not be really christian when they support gay marriage and try to help those poor and needy on our borders?

You can do whatever the hell you want to argue the fine points of theology in the media, in the pulpit, or on the Street corner.

You are certainly entitled to your own religious beliefs just as Normative Americans are.

But I'd say its out of place for a gentleman like Mr. Buttigieg, who wants to rule over all of us in a non-sectarian state, to use a political event to attack the religious beliefs of others.

He didn't.....any more or less than anyone else would.

Well, maybe your right.

But a lot of Christians are getting the idea that Mr. Buttigieg is rabidly Christophobic. To quell this, I would advise Petey to make a visit to San Antonio and assure Christian leaders like John Hagee that he thinks its great that they have their own religious beliefs and he has no intent of condemning them in any way

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

All of those entitlement can be and literally were available in same sex civil unions .

The Federal government does not recognize civil unions.

 

[Terri4Trump]

The Federal government does not recognize civil unions.

The Federal Govt has nothing to do with it you gonad gargler

 

[Polishprince]

All of those entitlement can be and literally were available in same sex civil unions .

The Federal government does not recognize civil unions.

If you get rid of Legalized Grave Robbery, what difference does it make?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

All of you bigots and other assorted morons need to stop whining about same sex marriage long enough to read this. Lets who, if anyone has something intelligent to say about it:

124 Words From Justice Kennedy's Majority Opinion On Marriage To Remember Forever

Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority opinion in the Supreme Court's same-sex marriage case is excellent. The last paragraph is exquisite. Take a look.

Today's 5-4 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges will likely be studies by legal scholars for centuries. The crazed rantings of Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Antonin Scalia notwithstanding, the decision is a fascinating read.

But it's Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority, and the last paragraph, all 124 words, that is exquisite.

"No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family. 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."

 

[bodecea]

So what? This is a secular country. We are not (thank goodness) controlled by your religious beliefs. We do not, yet, have christian sharia law here.

If we all do have Freedom of Religion, Mayor Petey needs to respect that as well, and be understanding to his fellow Americans who don't believe it is particularly holy to abort babies or to take it in the caboose. Calling people "hypocrites" because they don't hold to his sectarian views isn't very diverse and doesn't show any inclusivity.

What do we do about all the CRCs who accuse their fellow christians of not be really christian when they support gay marriage and try to help those poor and needy on our borders?

You can do whatever the hell you want to argue the fine points of theology in the media, in the pulpit, or on the Street corner.

You are certainly entitled to your own religious beliefs just as Normative Americans are.

But I'd say its out of place for a gentleman like Mr. Buttigieg, who wants to rule over all of us in a non-sectarian state, to use a political event to attack the religious beliefs of others.

He didn't.....any more or less than anyone else would.

Well, maybe your right.

But a lot of Christians are getting the idea that Mr. Buttigieg is rabidly Christophobic. To quell this, I would advise Petey to make a visit to San Antonio and assure Christian leaders like John Hagee that he thinks its great that they have their own religious beliefs and he has no intent of condemning them in any way

He's a christian himself....or are you saying that only certain christians are really christians?

Oh...and John Hagee? too funny!

 

[Lysistrata]

Not for you to say. Not for this Brown to say. There is too wide a variety of people in the world who are Christians. You have to be much more specific than just referring to some sort of "attack on Christianity." Shoot. I used to work with a gay guy who is Christian and has taught Sunday school. Buttigieg was married in church. You are free to practice your own form of Christianity as long as you don't interfere with others.

This is a laugh, as libs attack leading ministers who oppose abominations like Homosexual Marriage or Cutting and Running, as "unchristian". President Trump has been attacked by libs as not a True Christian as well.

What's good for the good is good for the gander

I don't know who a "lib" actually is. These "ministers" chose to enter the political arena in an aggressive and highly insulting attempt to interfere with the public/civil rights of a whole group of people, of all faiths and none; a group of people defined by their sexual orientation rather than their religious views. Are you saying that people should not oppose them when these ministers seek to justify themselves by reference to their particular faith? How would you handle this sort of "asymmetrical" situation?

We are not all members of the same faith. And these people do not understand that religion is not a competitive sport.

That's one way to spin it.

But ministers would point out that it is a theological fact that Almighty God put Adam and Eve into the garden , not Adam and Steve, and He just doesn't approve of homosexuality. I guess you can spin taking it in the ass as a "civil right", but that has not been the position of Christian theologians since antiquity

So what? This is a secular country. We are not (thank goodness) controlled by your religious beliefs. We do not, yet, have christian sharia law here.

If we all do have Freedom of Religion, Mayor Petey needs to respect that as well, and be understanding to his fellow Americans who don't believe it is particularly holy to abort babies or to take it in the caboose. Calling people "hypocrites" because they don't hold to his sectarian views isn't very diverse and doesn't show any inclusivity.

Respect is a two-way street. Exactly what do you think Mayor Pete ought to do or refrain from doing? Frankie graham has not been very respectful or "understanding" toward people who don't share his sectarian views. He insults people often.

The word "hypocrite" implies a contrast between taking a stance on one issue and then taking an inconsistent stance on another issue.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The answer is that the People thought the country and culture has an interest in the success of the family.

The result of losing that understanding should be self-evident

Same sex couples have children and are families

They do not "have children"

Sure we do.

Is your wife the biological father of your child? If not, you don't have children. YOU have a child with an father of unknown origin perhaps?

Interesting. How many straight couples would you be so.....er.....discerning about where the kids came from? Or do you "think" that families only "count" if it's made up of the bio father and the bio mother? So much for adoption. So much for artificial means of procreation, eh?

Hey dumbass, look at the meaning of the word "have". In this context, it does not mean possession.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The same gender marriage issue has always been about the amoral left wingers attempting to force mainstream society to lower their moral standards.
If you are against under aged marriage you aren't a bigot.
If you are against polygamy marriage you aren't a bigot
If you are against incest marriage you are not a bigot.
If you are against same gender marriage you are also not a bigot, you are just wise.

The others are being worked on as we discuss this topic. You will be a bigot if you do not support polygamy, incest,and pedophilia very soon!

It's a very concerning thing when we hear about people who cannot distinguish between what is legal and goes on between consenting law-abiding, tax-paying adults...............................and illegal acts of assault and abuse against those who cannot consent. Those who cannot tell the difference should not be allowed near children, or animals, or other helpless people.

You blew right past polygamy and incest and went straight to your favorite topic. Why is that? Do you support polygamy and incest?

Your last statement definitely would apply to you if it were true. How do you reconcile that fact?

 

[bodecea]

Same sex couples have children and are families

They do not "have children"

Sure we do.

Is your wife the biological father of your child? If not, you don't have children. YOU have a child with an father of unknown origin perhaps?

Interesting. How many straight couples would you be so.....er.....discerning about where the kids came from? Or do you "think" that families only "count" if it's made up of the bio father and the bio mother? So much for adoption. So much for artificial means of procreation, eh?

Hey dumbass, look at the meaning of the word "have". In this context, it does not mean possession.

My questions still stand.

 

[bodecea]

The same gender marriage issue has always been about the amoral left wingers attempting to force mainstream society to lower their moral standards.
If you are against under aged marriage you aren't a bigot.
If you are against polygamy marriage you aren't a bigot
If you are against incest marriage you are not a bigot.
If you are against same gender marriage you are also not a bigot, you are just wise.

The others are being worked on as we discuss this topic. You will be a bigot if you do not support polygamy, incest,and pedophilia very soon!

It's a very concerning thing when we hear about people who cannot distinguish between what is legal and goes on between consenting law-abiding, tax-paying adults...............................and illegal acts of assault and abuse against those who cannot consent. Those who cannot tell the difference should not be allowed near children, or animals, or other helpless people.

You blew right past polygamy and incest and went straight to your favorite topic. Why is that? Do you support polygamy and incest?

Your last statement definitely would apply to you if it were true. How do you reconcile that fact?

MY favorite topic? Hardly....but there's an awful lot of CRCs who have pedophilia as THEIR favorite subject.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

They do not "have children"

Sure we do.

Is your wife the biological father of your child? If not, you don't have children. YOU have a child with an father of unknown origin perhaps?

Interesting. How many straight couples would you be so.....er.....discerning about where the kids came from? Or do you "think" that families only "count" if it's made up of the bio father and the bio mother? So much for adoption. So much for artificial means of procreation, eh?

Hey dumbass, look at the meaning of the word "have". In this context, it does not mean possession.

My questions still stand.

You still do not understand the difference in procreation and possessing children, so you would not understand any answer I gave. Your gonads overruled your brain a long time ago.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The same gender marriage issue has always been about the amoral left wingers attempting to force mainstream society to lower their moral standards.
If you are against under aged marriage you aren't a bigot.
If you are against polygamy marriage you aren't a bigot
If you are against incest marriage you are not a bigot.
If you are against same gender marriage you are also not a bigot, you are just wise.

The others are being worked on as we discuss this topic. You will be a bigot if you do not support polygamy, incest,and pedophilia very soon!

It's a very concerning thing when we hear about people who cannot distinguish between what is legal and goes on between consenting law-abiding, tax-paying adults...............................and illegal acts of assault and abuse against those who cannot consent. Those who cannot tell the difference should not be allowed near children, or animals, or other helpless people.

You blew right past polygamy and incest and went straight to your favorite topic. Why is that? Do you support polygamy and incest?

Your last statement definitely would apply to you if it were true. How do you reconcile that fact?

MY favorite topic? Hardly....but there's an awful lot of CRCs who have pedophilia as THEIR favorite subject.

Again, you didn't address polygamy and incest. Why?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Same sex couples have children and are families

They do not "have children"

Sure we do.

Is your wife the biological father of your child? If not, you don't have children. YOU have a child with an father of unknown origin perhaps?

Interesting. How many straight couples would you be so.....er.....discerning about where the kids came from? Or do you "think" that families only "count" if it's made up of the bio father and the bio mother? So much for adoption. So much for artificial means of procreation, eh?

Hey dumbass, look at the meaning of the word "have". In this context, it does not mean possession.

Hey dumb ass. Gay couples HAVE children in their care. The are parents to those children. Those children have the same right to the legal protections, financial security and social status of having married parents as other children . The bigots just want to use the issue of children as a weapon to harm gay people.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The same gender marriage issue has always been about the amoral left wingers attempting to force mainstream society to lower their moral standards.
If you are against under aged marriage you aren't a bigot.
If you are against polygamy marriage you aren't a bigot
If you are against incest marriage you are not a bigot.
If you are against same gender marriage you are also not a bigot, you are just wise.

The others are being worked on as we discuss this topic. You will be a bigot if you do not support polygamy, incest,and pedophilia very soon!

It's a very concerning thing when we hear about people who cannot distinguish between what is legal and goes on between consenting law-abiding, tax-paying adults...............................and illegal acts of assault and abuse against those who cannot consent. Those who cannot tell the difference should not be allowed near children, or animals, or other helpless people.

You blew right past polygamy and incest and went straight to your favorite topic. Why is that? Do you support polygamy and incest?

Your last statement definitely would apply to you if it were true. How do you reconcile that fact?

MY favorite topic? Hardly....but there's an awful lot of CRCs who have pedophilia as THEIR favorite subject.

Again, you didn't address polygamy and incest. Why?

I'll answer that one. Because neither are on topic. You seem to be trying to call someone a hypocrite here . That is nothing more than a pathetic logical fallacy- my favorite actually:

tu quoque (To kwok we )(Latin for "you, too" or "you, also") or the appeal to hypocrisy, is a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. This dismisses someone's point of view based on criticism of the person's inconsistency and not the position presented whereas a person's inconsistency should not discredit the position. Thus, it is a form of the ad hominem argument. To clarify, although the person being attacked might indeed be acting inconsistently or hypocritically, this does not invalidate their
argument."

It is also a red herring fallacy intended to derail the discussion

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Sure we do.

Is your wife the biological father of your child? If not, you don't have children. YOU have a child with an father of unknown origin perhaps?

Interesting. How many straight couples would you be so.....er.....discerning about where the kids came from? Or do you "think" that families only "count" if it's made up of the bio father and the bio mother? So much for adoption. So much for artificial means of procreation, eh?

Hey dumbass, look at the meaning of the word "have". In this context, it does not mean possession.

My questions still stand.

You still do not understand the difference in procreation and possessing children, so you would not understand any answer I gave. Your gonads overruled your brain a long time ago.

You still do not understand that producing children and being parents are two different and separate things.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

And just who does that crazy ass think that he is to decide what marriage should be....for everyone!!?? Everyone has the right to decide what marriage is for themselves and only themselves.

If the meaning of marriage is so fluid as to be defined separately, by every individual who wants to define it to fit his own agenda, then marriage means nothing.

That's the game that you on the left wrong play with important moral principles; to undermine any solid, objective definitions, in order to render these principles meaningless.

It does not work.

Marriage is not meaningless, no matter how much you try to make it so.

Morality is not meaningless, no matter how much you try to make it so.

Who do you think you are fooling?

 

[bodecea]

The same gender marriage issue has always been about the amoral left wingers attempting to force mainstream society to lower their moral standards.
If you are against under aged marriage you aren't a bigot.
If you are against polygamy marriage you aren't a bigot
If you are against incest marriage you are not a bigot.
If you are against same gender marriage you are also not a bigot, you are just wise.

The others are being worked on as we discuss this topic. You will be a bigot if you do not support polygamy, incest,and pedophilia very soon!

It's a very concerning thing when we hear about people who cannot distinguish between what is legal and goes on between consenting law-abiding, tax-paying adults...............................and illegal acts of assault and abuse against those who cannot consent. Those who cannot tell the difference should not be allowed near children, or animals, or other helpless people.

You blew right past polygamy and incest and went straight to your favorite topic. Why is that? Do you support polygamy and incest?

Your last statement definitely would apply to you if it were true. How do you reconcile that fact?

MY favorite topic? Hardly....but there's an awful lot of CRCs who have pedophilia as THEIR favorite subject.

Again, you didn't address polygamy and incest. Why?

Not something I am that concerned about....if they want to make it legal (it currently is not), let them make their case.

 

[bodecea]

Is your wife the biological father of your child? If not, you don't have children. YOU have a child with an father of unknown origin perhaps?

Interesting. How many straight couples would you be so.....er.....discerning about where the kids came from? Or do you "think" that families only "count" if it's made up of the bio father and the bio mother? So much for adoption. So much for artificial means of procreation, eh?

Hey dumbass, look at the meaning of the word "have". In this context, it does not mean possession.

My questions still stand.

You still do not understand the difference in procreation and possessing children, so you would not understand any answer I gave. Your gonads overruled your brain a long time ago.

You still do not understand that producing children and being parents are two different and separate things.

Unfortunately, you would think someone who has worked our school systems would know the difference all too well.

 

[Polishprince]

This is a laugh, as libs attack leading ministers who oppose abominations like Homosexual Marriage or Cutting and Running, as "unchristian". President Trump has been attacked by libs as not a True Christian as well.

What's good for the good is good for the gander

I don't know who a "lib" actually is. These "ministers" chose to enter the political arena in an aggressive and highly insulting attempt to interfere with the public/civil rights of a whole group of people, of all faiths and none; a group of people defined by their sexual orientation rather than their religious views. Are you saying that people should not oppose them when these ministers seek to justify themselves by reference to their particular faith? How would you handle this sort of "asymmetrical" situation?

We are not all members of the same faith. And these people do not understand that religion is not a competitive sport.

That's one way to spin it.

But ministers would point out that it is a theological fact that Almighty God put Adam and Eve into the garden , not Adam and Steve, and He just doesn't approve of homosexuality. I guess you can spin taking it in the ass as a "civil right", but that has not been the position of Christian theologians since antiquity

So what? This is a secular country. We are not (thank goodness) controlled by your religious beliefs. We do not, yet, have christian sharia law here.

If we all do have Freedom of Religion, Mayor Petey needs to respect that as well, and be understanding to his fellow Americans who don't believe it is particularly holy to abort babies or to take it in the caboose. Calling people "hypocrites" because they don't hold to his sectarian views isn't very diverse and doesn't show any inclusivity.

Respect is a two-way street. Exactly what do you think Mayor Pete ought to do or refrain from doing? Frankie graham has not been very respectful or "understanding" toward people who don't share his sectarian views. He insults people often.

The word "hypocrite" implies a contrast between taking a stance on one issue and then taking an inconsistent stance on another issue.

Rev. Franklin Graham is a theologian, Mr. Buttigieg is a politician that is expecting to rule over me.

That's a big difference. I expect someone who wants to use the force of law to run my life to have respect.

If Rev. Graham has no respect for my lifestyle, this is America I don't have to listen to any theologian.