Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I am not sure this thread can get anymore off topic at this point.

It was never on topic, given the idiocy of its premise.

Yeah... it was pretty idiotic for the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality to do what they did, prompting the news reports, wherein an Iowa City Threatens to Arrest Ministers Who Refuse to Perform Same-Sex Weddings Todd Starnes

But ya know what is more idiotic? Denying that which has been public knowledge for nearly three weeks.

 

[ShackledNation]

Oh, you say you're quoting 'nature', but nature didn't invent marriage.

Yes... In fact Nature did invent marriage.

Ya see, Nature provides for every aspect of marriage... First it gives the life, this established through the design intrinsic to human physiology. The hormonal drive to engage in behavior that promotes procreation through the joining with a male through coitus. The requirement for the male to procreate, the the defenseless nature of the female during gestation, thus the need of the female for the protection of the male... further nature provides for the distinct traits inherent in the personalities of the respective genders, which are applied throughout the raising of children, nurtured by the female, trained by the male.

Now I realize that you 'feel' that marriage is a legal contract, which serves to acquire stuff and temporal federal privileges and considerations. You should be advised that such is what is actually known as 'incorporation', wherein any group of individuals join toward whatever purpose they choose, without regard to the number of people or the genders of any individuals at issue.

Of course, such in no way offers any sense of legitimacy, and in no way would produce a popular inference that people of illegitimate nature are anything but what their provides establishes them as. Which means that those of illegitimate nature will natural eschew such otherwise appropriate institutions. They will prefer instead to attempt to establish the elusive legitimacy they crave, through deceit, fraud and ignorance, glomming onto and forcing themselves into institutions which through their established standards enjoy intrinsic legitimacy. Which sadly, given their intellectual limitations, and their sociopathic tendencies, they'll possess no means to recognize that the instant the institution drops the standard that precludes them, the legitimacy otherwise inherent in such evaporates into the ether. Leaving the institution without meaning of purpose and the purpose it served, unserved and the culture that depended upon that service: TOTALLY BONED!

Of course, a spike in socialism and homosexuality is a harbinger of catastrophic societal collapse, which inevitably results in the near extinction of all homosexuals and their most species socialist comrades.

So... I wouldn't spend much time worrying about it.

Nature created homosexuality...which makes your entire diatribe moot.

Yes it did, but human biology indicates that nature made a mistake. All in the genes. There's a reason why homosexuality is the recessive sexual trait in human beings in the first place. Normally such a thing is not the intended result of our evolutionary progression.

Really? So recessive traits are mistakes? White skin is a mistake? Red hair is a mistake? Blue eyes are a mistake? No. You pretend to root your argument in "nature" and "biology" but if you applied your reasoning to all other variations in the human genome you would be faced with absurd and unacceptable conclusions.

That something is a recessive or less common trait does not automatically make it a "mistake." That is a total non sequitur.

"Mistake" is a poorly reasoned conclusion. Such alterations provide some useful purpose, and surges in instances of homosexuality typically portends cultural collapse... . Therefore, normalizing such is a profoundly BAD IDEA!

Right, calling recessive traits a mistake, like homosexuality, is poor reasoning. You argued that because homosexuality was a recessive trait it was a mistake, but now you say other recessive traits are not mistakes. Throw in the gays will destroy society and your true bigotry is revealed.

Recognizing such would likely provide a culture with the means to alter its behavior, such as how it is treating procreation... where such would perhaps be taken lightly, causing unsustainable increases in population. Particular in unsustainable circumstances through inviable individuals, causing unsustainable demands on resources... the solution to such being that coitus be discouraged except where the individuals are capable of bearing the responsibilities common to procreation.

Not the least bit relevant to my comment, nor does it make any sense. We all have the means to alter our behavior. The above is word vomit with no coherent point. I say this honestly.

The problem is that "Religion" is the typical purveyor of the calls for such discipline and the major cause of 'the problem' are found in those areas which eschew religion, which is also the same areas suffering the greatest population stress, which also suffer the highest instances of homosexuality, which are the same areas where one finds the highest popular calls for the normalization of sexual abnormality... .

Considering religions has resulted in some of the worst wars in human history and other brutal atrocities, I think it is hard to take that point seriously. The Middle East is arguably one of the most religious regions on the planet--yet also one of the most war burdened regions.

So, well... you see "The Problem".

Yes. Your attempt at argument.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I am not sure this thread can get anymore off topic at this point.

What's off topic about it? (Other than your obscurant statement of course)

This thread is about should churches be forced to marry gay couples aganist their wishes. Not pedophiles. Want to start a thread about that topic then by all means do so.

Nope, churches shouldn't be forced to marry gay couples at all, and this especially so if they choose not to. They should not be forced to go against their long held charter, beliefs, denomination, religion, ideology or etc. Last I checked America is supposed to be free nation within reason, and not anything less or more unless the majority of the people agree. The problem today is many things are being done without the peoples consent or agreement upon, and so slowly we are all being hearded like cattle to the slaughter by the PC police and the word destroyers.

I agree. Churches should not forced to marry any couple aganist their wishes, gay or otherwise.

Absolutely.

The only ones suggesting that churches should- or will be forced to marry anyone and everyone are the far right.

Churches will no more be forced to marry homosexuals than a Catholic Church would be forced to marry my wife and I.

The Catholic Church is already being forced to cover contraceptives which goes against our beliefs? Now that Obamacare has treaded on the 1st Amendment, why do you think it will stop there?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Yes... In fact Nature did invent marriage.

Ya see, Nature provides for every aspect of marriage... First it gives the life, this established through the design intrinsic to human physiology. The hormonal drive to engage in behavior that promotes procreation through the joining with a male through coitus. The requirement for the male to procreate, the the defenseless nature of the female during gestation, thus the need of the female for the protection of the male... further nature provides for the distinct traits inherent in the personalities of the respective genders, which are applied throughout the raising of children, nurtured by the female, trained by the male.

Now I realize that you 'feel' that marriage is a legal contract, which serves to acquire stuff and temporal federal privileges and considerations. You should be advised that such is what is actually known as 'incorporation', wherein any group of individuals join toward whatever purpose they choose, without regard to the number of people or the genders of any individuals at issue.

Of course, such in no way offers any sense of legitimacy, and in no way would produce a popular inference that people of illegitimate nature are anything but what their provides establishes them as. Which means that those of illegitimate nature will natural eschew such otherwise appropriate institutions. They will prefer instead to attempt to establish the elusive legitimacy they crave, through deceit, fraud and ignorance, glomming onto and forcing themselves into institutions which through their established standards enjoy intrinsic legitimacy. Which sadly, given their intellectual limitations, and their sociopathic tendencies, they'll possess no means to recognize that the instant the institution drops the standard that precludes them, the legitimacy otherwise inherent in such evaporates into the ether. Leaving the institution without meaning of purpose and the purpose it served, unserved and the culture that depended upon that service: TOTALLY BONED!

Of course, a spike in socialism and homosexuality is a harbinger of catastrophic societal collapse, which inevitably results in the near extinction of all homosexuals and their most species socialist comrades.

So... I wouldn't spend much time worrying about it.

Nature created homosexuality...which makes your entire diatribe moot.

Yes it did, but human biology indicates that nature made a mistake. All in the genes. There's a reason why homosexuality is the recessive sexual trait in human beings in the first place. Normally such a thing is not the intended result of our evolutionary progression.

Really? So recessive traits are mistakes? White skin is a mistake? Red hair is a mistake? Blue eyes are a mistake? No. You pretend to root your argument in "nature" and "biology" but if you applied your reasoning to all other variations in the human genome you would be faced with absurd and unacceptable conclusions.

That something is a recessive or less common trait does not automatically make it a "mistake." That is a total non sequitur.

"Mistake" is a poorly reasoned conclusion. Such alterations provide some useful purpose, and surges in instances of homosexuality typically portends cultural collapse... . Therefore, normalizing such is a profoundly BAD IDEA!

Right, calling recessive traits a mistake, like homosexuality, is poor reasoning. You argued that because homosexuality was a recessive trait it was a mistake, but now you say other recessive traits are not mistakes. Throw in the gays will destroy society and your true bigotry is revealed.

I'm calling it what it is: Sexual Abnormality. A Deviation from the human physiological norm, which presents as abnormal reasoning. As is indicated by the demanding the use of illicit government power to force others to accept their perverse sexuality and reasoning.

Recognizing such would likely provide a culture with the means to alter its behavior, such as how it is treating procreation... where such would perhaps be taken lightly, causing unsustainable increases in population. Particular in unsustainable circumstances through inviable individuals, causing unsustainable demands on resources... the solution to such being that coitus be discouraged except where the individuals are capable of bearing the responsibilities common to procreation.

Not the least bit relevant to my comment, nor does it make any sense. We all have the means to alter our behavior. The above is word vomit with no coherent point. I say this honestly.

If we all have the means to alter our behavior, then homosexual BEHAVIOR is readily alterable, thus there is no potential correlation with judicial rulings regarding precedent inter-racial rulings, relevant to marriage and out the door goes the entire rationalization that formal roommate agreements are anything remotely akin to marriage.

I say that honestly... and sure, it helps that it's otherwise incontestable.

The problem is that "Religion" is the typical purveyor of the calls for such discipline and the major cause of 'the problem' are found in those areas which eschew religion, which is also the same areas suffering the greatest population stress, which also suffer the highest instances of homosexuality, which are the same areas where one finds the highest popular calls for the normalization of sexual abnormality... .

Considering religions has resulted in some of the worst wars in human history and other brutal atrocities, I think it is hard to take that point seriously. The Middle East is arguably one of the most religious regions on the planet--yet also one of the most war burdened regions.

Religions? Or religion? Because you're basically pointing out Islam... which is a political cult wrapped around an irrational, thus false religious facade, wherein the fundamental political beliefs are collectivist, which IS the WORLD RECORD holder in 'human lethality', second only to disease.

Hope that clears it all up for ya.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

What's off topic about it? (Other than your obscurant statement of course)

This thread is about should churches be forced to marry gay couples aganist their wishes. Not pedophiles. Want to start a thread about that topic then by all means do so.

Nope, churches shouldn't be forced to marry gay couples at all, and this especially so if they choose not to. They should not be forced to go against their long held charter, beliefs, denomination, religion, ideology or etc. Last I checked America is supposed to be free nation within reason, and not anything less or more unless the majority of the people agree. The problem today is many things are being done without the peoples consent or agreement upon, and so slowly we are all being hearded like cattle to the slaughter by the PC police and the word destroyers.

I agree. Churches should not forced to marry any couple aganist their wishes, gay or otherwise.

Absolutely.

The only ones suggesting that churches should- or will be forced to marry anyone and everyone are the far right.

Churches will no more be forced to marry homosexuals than a Catholic Church would be forced to marry my wife and I.

The Catholic Church is already being forced to cover contraceptives which goes against our beliefs? Now that Obamacare has treaded on the 1st Amendment, why do you think it will stop there?

And don't for a second think that the assault was not planned precisely as it went down, across all fronts.

What we're seeing is little more than the reanimation of OLD TESTAMENT EVIL!

This particular issue is merely the scene highlighting The Sodomites.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

.

Do you realize that nearly all of your posts on this thread have NOTHING to do with the subject of this thread?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

.

Do you realize that nearly all of your posts on this thread have NOTHING to do with the subject of this thread?

No... but if it helps, I do recognize that there is a popular movement to project that nonsense. Fomented by those of no discernible intellectual means.

But in fairness, I'm only basing that upon their (your) posting off-topic comments even as they (you) lament off-topic comments.

Crazy ironic, huh?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The Catholic Church is already being forced to cover contraceptives which goes against our beliefs? Now that Obamacare has treaded on the 1st Amendment, why do you think it will stop there?

And don't for a second think that the assault was not planned precisely as it went down, across all fronts.

What we're seeing is little more than the reanimation of OLD TESTAMENT EVIL!

This particular issue is merely the scene highlighting The Sodomites.

Most homosexuals are very libertarian in their viewpoint and don't go along with forcing any business to violate their conscience. But there exists in the gay community a select group of flaming assholes who hate Christians and are the most intolerant people you'll ever come across. It's the LGBT faggots, and yes I said faggots, that push for forcing everyone to accept and accommodate homosexuals regardless of their beliefs. They once asked Exxon Mobile to reform their hiring and promotion practices to give preference to gay and transgender employees and to force re-education on those employees who disagreed with the perversion around them. This could be so simple as a Christian not calling a transgender by their "re-assigned" gender pronouns. Who would never call a man who mutilated his genitals "her" or "she".

This isn't an issue of gay people, but rather very specific evil, intolerant gays. Most gays are very decent people who are easy to get along with in my experience.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The Catholic Church is already being forced to cover contraceptives which goes against our beliefs? Now that Obamacare has treaded on the 1st Amendment, why do you think it will stop there?

And don't for a second think that the assault was not planned precisely as it went down, across all fronts.

What we're seeing is little more than the reanimation of OLD TESTAMENT EVIL!

This particular issue is merely the scene highlighting The Sodomites.

Most homosexuals are very libertarian in their viewpoint and don't go along with forcing any business to violate their conscience. But there exists in the gay community a select group of flaming assholes who hate Christians and are the most intolerant people you'll ever come across. It's the LGBT faggots, and yes I said faggots, that push for forcing everyone to accept and accommodate homosexuals regardless of their beliefs. They once asked Exxon Mobile to reform their hiring and promotion practices to give preference to gay and transgender employees and to force re-education on those employees who disagreed with the perversion around them. This could be so simple as a Christian not calling a transgender by their "re-assigned" gender pronouns. Who would never call a man who mutilated his genitals "her" or "she".

This isn't an issue of gay people, but rather very specific evil, intolerant gays. Most gays are very decent people who are easy to get along with in my experience.

The issue is about the mouthy minority, who want to force their beliefs upon others... who reject that behavior.

I've a few homosexual friends and they are friends, because in all the time I've known 'em, they've never once mentioned their sexuality, thus do not identify themselves THROUGH their sexuality.

There is nothing about this discussion that is distinct from any thread which involves the Ideological Left and the consistent trait of Left-think that requires that to exercise their rights, someone else has to give something up.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The issue is about the mouthy minority, who want to force their beliefs upon others... who reject that behavior.

I've a few homosexual friends and they are friends, because in all the time I've known 'em, they've never once mentioned their sexuality, thus do not identify themselves THROUGH their sexuality.

There is nothing about this discussion that is distinct from any thread which involves the Ideological Left and the consistent trait of Left-think that requires that to exercise their rights, someone else has to give something up.

Then we agree. So why all the other tripe? Homosexuality isn't the topic here, it's freedom. And we should be promoting love of freedom as the unifier of many divergent camps. It's something we all can agree on, straight or gay. If this is a mouthy minority, then the majority who believe in liberty need to unify to put an end to these despotic bullies.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I am not sure this thread can get anymore off topic at this point.

What's off topic about it? (Other than your obscurant statement of course)

This thread is about should churches be forced to marry gay couples aganist their wishes. Not pedophiles. Want to start a thread about that topic then by all means do so.

Nope, churches shouldn't be forced to marry gay couples at all, and this especially so if they choose not to. They should not be forced to go against their long held charter, beliefs, denomination, religion, ideology or etc. Last I checked America is supposed to be free nation within reason, and not anything less or more unless the majority of the people agree. The problem today is many things are being done without the peoples consent or agreement upon, and so slowly we are all being hearded like cattle to the slaughter by the PC police and the word destroyers.

I agree. Churches should not forced to marry any couple aganist their wishes, gay or otherwise.

Absolutely.

The only ones suggesting that churches should- or will be forced to marry anyone and everyone are the far right.

Churches will no more be forced to marry homosexuals than a Catholic Church would be forced to marry my wife and I.

Another lie, SeaBytch has made it quite clear that she would like forces to be forced to marry gays

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The issue is about the mouthy minority, who want to force their beliefs upon others... who reject that behavior.

I've a few homosexual friends and they are friends, because in all the time I've known 'em, they've never once mentioned their sexuality, thus do not identify themselves THROUGH their sexuality.

There is nothing about this discussion that is distinct from any thread which involves the Ideological Left and the consistent trait of Left-think that requires that to exercise their rights, someone else has to give something up.

Then we agree. So why all the other tripe? Homosexuality isn't the topic here, it's freedom. And we should be promoting love of freedom as the unifier of many divergent camps. It's something we all can agree on, straight or gay. If this is a mouthy minority, then the majority who believe in liberty need to unify to put an end to these despotic bullies.

Yes, the issue is freedom. Which is being threatened by a deviant species of reason... which presents in many ways, not the least of which is the tendency toward any number of perversions... such as their irrational notion of 'fairness', the idea that people of the same gender should have sex together, if they feel like it... even get 'married', etc, etc. All of which inevitably ends up in a movement to force everyone else to accept those irrational notions.

Ya can't recognize just the symptom friend. At some point, one has to consider the underlying problem.

Man... these people are now actively importing EBOLA into the US claiming that "there's no need for concern".

Surely we can agree that their psychosis has crossed the line into "Clear and Present threat to the Species itself...", let alone the nation.

 

[Syriusly]

What's off topic about it? (Other than your obscurant statement of course)

This thread is about should churches be forced to marry gay couples aganist their wishes. Not pedophiles. Want to start a thread about that topic then by all means do so.

Nope, churches shouldn't be forced to marry gay couples at all, and this especially so if they choose not to. They should not be forced to go against their long held charter, beliefs, denomination, religion, ideology or etc. Last I checked America is supposed to be free nation within reason, and not anything less or more unless the majority of the people agree. The problem today is many things are being done without the peoples consent or agreement upon, and so slowly we are all being hearded like cattle to the slaughter by the PC police and the word destroyers.

I agree. Churches should not forced to marry any couple aganist their wishes, gay or otherwise.

Absolutely.

The only ones suggesting that churches should- or will be forced to marry anyone and everyone are the far right.

Churches will no more be forced to marry homosexuals than a Catholic Church would be forced to marry my wife and I.

Another lie, SeaBytch has made it quite clear that she would like forces to be forced to marry gays

Feel free to quote her saying that she believes that churches should be forced by law to marry gays.

 

[Syriusly]

The Catholic Church is already being forced to cover contraceptives which goes against our beliefs? Now that Obamacare has treaded on the 1st Amendment, why do you think it will stop there?

And don't for a second think that the assault was not planned precisely as it went down, across all fronts.

What we're seeing is little more than the reanimation of OLD TESTAMENT EVIL!

This particular issue is merely the scene highlighting The Sodomites.

Most homosexuals are very libertarian in their viewpoint and don't go along with forcing any business to violate their conscience. But there exists in the gay community a select group of flaming assholes who hate Christians and are the most intolerant people you'll ever come across. It's the LGBT faggots, and yes I said faggots, that push for forcing everyone to accept and accommodate homosexuals regardless of their beliefs. They once asked Exxon Mobile to reform their hiring and promotion practices to give preference to gay and transgender employees and to force re-education on those employees who disagreed with the perversion around them. This could be so simple as a Christian not calling a transgender by their "re-assigned" gender pronouns. Who would never call a man who mutilated his genitals "her" or "she".

This isn't an issue of gay people, but rather very specific evil, intolerant gays. Most gays are very decent people who are easy to get along with in my experience.

The issue is about the mouthy minority, who want to force their beliefs upon others... who reject that behavior.
.

Why are you attacking Mormons?

 

[Syriusly]

The Catholic Church is already being forced to cover contraceptives which goes against our beliefs? Now that Obamacare has treaded on the 1st Amendment, why do you think it will stop there?

And don't for a second think that the assault was not planned precisely as it went down, across all fronts.

What we're seeing is little more than the reanimation of OLD TESTAMENT EVIL!

This particular issue is merely the scene highlighting The Sodomites.

Most homosexuals are very libertarian in their viewpoint and don't go along with forcing any business to violate their conscience. But there exists in the gay community a select group of flaming assholes who hate Christians and are the most intolerant people you'll ever come across. It's the LGBT faggots, and yes I said faggots, that push for forcing everyone to accept and accommodate homosexuals regardless of their beliefs. They once asked Exxon Mobile to reform their hiring and promotion practices to give preference to gay and transgender employees and to force re-education on those employees who disagreed with the perversion around them. This could be so simple as a Christian not calling a transgender by their "re-assigned" gender pronouns. Who would never call a man who mutilated his genitals "her" or "she".

This isn't an issue of gay people, but rather very specific evil, intolerant gays. Most gays are very decent people who are easy to get along with in my experience.

I actually agree with you- and would say the same thing about Conservatives, but on somewhat different issues.

 

[Syriusly]

.

Do you realize that nearly all of your posts on this thread have NOTHING to do with the subject of this thread?

I can't actually figure out what his posts have to do with anything.....he does mention EVIL a lot.....

 

[Silhouette]

I can't actually figure out what his posts have to do with anything.....he does mention EVIL a lot.....

Perhaps because this is a topic about homosexuals forcing their lifestyles onto religious people; and those religious people knowing that to acquiesce to that force means an eternity in the pit of fire?

That might be the reason he keeps bringing up "evil". Because that scenario fits perfectly with the passage in Jude 1 that talks about the "smooth speeches" of the offenders trying to force their lifestyles onto christian ones.

 

[beagle9]

Not complicated: children cannot consent.

OH! So why can't children consent?

I ask because there is a segment of "SCIENCE!" which long ago came out and declared that "... some children may actually benefit from a loving sexual relationship with a caring adult."

This being the same group within the Kinsey Institute who are responsible for their other conclusion: THERE IS NOTHING ABNORMAL ABOUT HOMOSEXUAL SEX (which literally is precisely as baseless as it appears to be... particularly given that such is patently absurd, given the standard established by human physiology and the 180 degrees of deviation that homosexuality takes FROM that standard).

And despite all that, you'll recall that it was that 'Professional Medical/Psychiatric Opinion', thus the "SCIENCE!" upon which was stood the basis for the lifting of Sodomy Laws. 'Homosexuality was normal, thus not indicative of deviant reasoning, therefore the individuals participating in or otherwise identified through such were not a threat to society.'

So, tell me, IF "SCIENCE!" came out and declared that 'Children CAN CONSENT TO SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH ADULTS'... would that in any way alter your current position, which in effect rests on the Legality which rests DIRECTLY UPON the common sense recognition that children are no where NEAR capable of understanding the circumstances regarding sexual behavior?

Better than that, heck I believe that if a federal judge declared anything from his or her activist bench, that they (the beneficiaries of the rulings) would run hollering it to the roof top's loud and very clear in a heart beat (i.e. in your face), and they are doing this just like selfish arrogant intellects would do these day's, and especially when they want something that no one else wants, and then they get it. Now somehow they are always getting these things through or by way of a federal judge who is pandering to certain groups these days, and for whom then defies the masses on so many levels that it just isn't funny anymore. Then they look for some kind of JUNK science to somehow back it all up if necessary when challenged, and next they would somehow use it in order to make it all appear legit even if it's a huge stretch in doing so or even if the odds are always against them. The Idolization of Junk Science these days, is something that has gotten way out of control I think, and the federal judges these days who are buying into all of this mess ( I think) have lost their judicial minds it seems anymore.

I am not sure this thread can get anymore off topic at this point.

What's off topic about it? (Other than your obscurant statement of course)

This thread is about should churches be forced to marry gay couples aganist their wishes. Not pedophiles. Want to start a thread about that topic then by all means do so.

Nope, churches shouldn't be forced to marry gay couples at all, and this especially so if they choose not to. They should not be forced to go against their long held charter, beliefs, denomination, religion, ideology or etc. Last I checked America is supposed to be free nation within reason, and not anything less or more unless the majority of the people agree. The problem today is many things are being done without the peoples consent or agreement upon, and so slowly we are all being hearded like cattle to the slaughter by the PC police and the word destroyers.

I agree. Churches should not forced to marry any couple aganist their wishes, gay or otherwise.

Absolutely.

The only ones suggesting that churches should- or will be forced to marry anyone and everyone are the far right.

Churches will no more be forced to marry homosexuals than a Catholic Church would be forced to marry my wife and I.

Shouldn't the same be said for the Christian cake baker/maker who got shut down for not baking a cake for the gay couple as based upon his or her Christian beliefs in life? The double standard and hypocrisy echoes loudly in this here place called America anymore. Everywhere it seems that the attack {once a strategy is formed by groups in order to knock something else over for political gains, and for the empowerment of their cause} is fair game to the various groups out there these days, and then it's all open for the assault to take place next once the setting something up is complete for which a group has targeted or placed into their sights. The Christian cake baker or maker, shouldn't have had to bake a cake for a gay couple either, but so much for fair play in respecting each others beliefs or standards lived by in this new arena of PC/Government thuggery that is taking place now across America. Right now the (reps of this type of thuggery) are attacking for example Christians in their workplaces (Duck Dynasty), (Miss USA contestant), in which both were asked about their beliefs in example of, and then when given by them with all due respect, well they were attempted to be shut down or scorned badly for what they had said after they were asked about their beliefs. Next will it be in the Christian places of worship and/or etc.that will fall or will they be spied upon constantly (Texas Mayors office orders sermons or speeches from the pulpit)?.

There is no escaping this thuggery against ones beliefs or belief systems in which has been intact, lived and operated by peaceful Americans for years and years. They (various groups) will see to it that they are not being denied any where when all is said and done, because if they are denied, well then there must be something wrong with them right ? They won't have anyone suggesting or saying that something is wrong with them, and this no matter where it is that they decide to venture into next or just stroll right on into next in order to start more trouble it seems. I think they are pushing the envelope to far, and they need to respect other peoples spaces and belief systems in life is my opinion, but that ain't happening is it ? How the government of this nation got tied up with all these so called weird causes, and without actually thinking it through is beyond me, but here the nations citizens are getting bullied by federal judges who are being vote garnishing whores for the government pimp who will be paid in full by votes from various voter blocks, and but of course. Talk about selling out this nations freedoms, and it's moral standards for a vote ((WOW)).

I think this nation is one of the most tolerant nations on earth, but it can be pushed to far and then what ? How about people respecting each others space again, and respecting all the belief systems that are proven peaceful in which we have had and do have for the most part today, and how about the government getting out of the vote pimping and voter whore business already, and maybe getting back into the managing business instead.. To side with one group over another, and then the group that has been sided with abuses the other group quickly afterwards? Well that is a business the government shouldn't be a part of anymore. It should reset and then treat all American citizens as Americans as based upon a moral and decency code or standard in which the majority of Americans will agree upon to live by, and then of course protect the weak while not empowering them to abuse the majority by way of the wrongful use of government power as a means to do so, because the weak just might be weak due to their own folly sometimes in life, and the government doesn't want to get pulled into something like that I wouldn't think. Now it should help them not be abused in their weakness of course, but then not allowing them to abuse others just as well. It's a two way street, and everyone should be able to pass on it peacefully and it should be paved with respect when traveling in either direction always.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I can't actually figure out what his posts have to do with anything.....he does mention EVIL a lot.....

Perhaps because this is a topic about homosexuals forcing their lifestyles onto religious people; and those religious people knowing that to acquiesce to that force means an eternity in the pit of fire?

That might be the reason he keeps bringing up "evil". Because that scenario fits perfectly with the passage in Jude 1 that talks about the "smooth speeches" of the offenders trying to force their lifestyles onto christian ones.

Well said... there is that, but at the end of the day, I use the term evil... because 'evil': profoundly immoral and malevolent, is what 'it' is.

Such is what MUST be produced, thus such is the natural product of relativism... and relativism is what collectivism, in all of its innumerable facets, rests upon.

Relativism is the the doctrine which holds that knowledge, truth, and morality exist only in relation to one's culture, society, historical or personal context, and as such can never be subject to, or otherwise the result of, soundly reasoned absolutes. Relativism is, therefore, purely subjective; axiomatically rejecting objectivity, which is of course, the essential element of truth.

Objective truth is the essential element of trust... and objective truth and trust are the essential elements of a soundly reasoned morality.

And truth, trust and a soundly reasoned morality are the foundation upon which JUSTICE rests.

Now... those who've followed this thread have witnessed that each of the Advocates of the Normalization of Sexual Abnormality rest their ENTIRE advocacy upon what? Upon the irrational premise that Sexual Abnormality is NORMAL. What's that based upon? 'WE ARE NOT "ABNORMAL PEOPLE"... therefore our sexuality is not Abnormal!' Their truth is Subjective... .

They claim that their position rests in "SCIENCE!" that they TRUST science... and, that opposition of their need is based upon RELIGION!, which they do NOT TRUST.

Yet the purely scientific position, which incontestably demonstrates that Homosexuality; not only deviates from the standard intrinsic to human physiology, but it deviates as far FROM that standard as can be deviated, where all participants are HUMAN. And they could not care less, they do not trust science... because their trust of science is Subjective... .

Do we need to discuss their rejection of any sense of a soundly reasoned morality? They demand that we accept their subjective reasoning, because: "We're consenting adults and NO ONE has a right to tell us who we can love!"... which seems so reasonable, right up until ya ask them about their feelings for the rest of the culture; particularly the kids... and what they're going to do to defend the children from the sexually abnormal who 'feel' that the only way that they can sooth their obsession for sexual gratification is through sex with a CHILD!

They WANT you to believe that they're flat out against it... and they've told us that "UPON CONVICTION" that such people should be executed or tossed in prison for the rest of their lives. But they can't say what they're basing that upon; they can't WHY they say it and, that is because the basis has NO MORAL COMPONENT... their reasoning rests in LEGALITIES... which minus the moral component, have absolutely NO CONNECTION with the service of JUSTICE.

Think about it... they claim that their rejection of adult/child sex rests in THE LAW! The law says NO, therefore the answer is NO! But is that true?

Were they against Homosexuality when such was against the law? Did they spend any time here, or anywhere else, condemning homosexuality back when the behavior that defines such, against the law?

Nope... of course not. The laws against such were lifted upon specious grounds of false science. Does that concern them?

Nuh huh...

They rests their unwavering demand that 'EVERYONE MUST ACCEPT US', upon "IT'S LEGAL!" Subjective Justice.

All of which does not bode well as the culture continues to spiral into decay... when "SCIENCE!" concludes that children ARE perfectly prepared to consent to 'loving' sexual relationships with 'caring' adults... and some Harvey Milk pens up a bill to lift the Age of Consent... or some Harvey Milk, jurist... hears the evidence that is the "SCIENCE!" and DECIDES that the laws regarding "AGE OF CONSENT" undermine the rights of CONSENTING PERSONS to engage in private behavior.

What then of those of this cult who stepped forward to state that they REJECT ADULT/CHILD SEX... but could not, or would, not tell us why? Will that matter to anyone, not the least of which are THEM? Not a bit... 'Because it's Legal.'

It's all a long but juicy rationalization set toward a destructive end... it's all a lie.

Evil... .

See how that works?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Better than that, heck I believe that if a federal judge declared anything from his or her activist bench, that they (the beneficiaries of the rulings) would run hollering it to the roof top's loud and very clear in a heart beat (i.e. in your face), and they are doing this just like selfish arrogant intellects would do these day's, and especially when they want something that no one else wants, and then they get it. Now somehow they are always getting these things through or by way of a federal judge who is pandering to certain groups these days, and for whom then defies the masses on so many levels that it just isn't funny anymore. Then they look for some kind of JUNK science to somehow back it all up if necessary when challenged, and next they would somehow use it in order to make it all appear legit even if it's a huge stretch in doing so or even if the odds are always against them. The Idolization of Junk Science these days, is something that has gotten way out of control I think, and the federal judges these days who are buying into all of this mess ( I think) have lost their judicial minds it seems anymore.




Shouldn't the same be said for the Christian cake baker/maker who got shut down for not baking a cake for the gay couple as based upon his or her Christian beliefs in life? The double standard and hypocrisy echoes loudly in this here place called America anymore. Everywhere it seems that the attack {once a strategy is formed by groups in order to knock something else over for political gains, and for the empowerment of their cause} is fair game to the various groups out there these days, and then it's all open for the assault to take place next once the setting something up is complete for which a group has targeted or placed into their sights. The Christian cake baker or maker, shouldn't have had to bake a cake for a gay couple either, but so much for fair play in respecting each others beliefs or standards lived by in this new arena of PC/Government thuggery that is taking place now across America. Right now the (reps of this type of thuggery) are attacking for example Christians in their workplaces (Duck Dynasty), (Miss USA contestant), in which both were asked about their beliefs in example of, and then when given by them with all due respect, well they were attempted to be shut down or scorned badly for what they had said after they were asked about their beliefs. Next will it be in the Christian places of worship and/or etc.that will fall or will they be spied upon constantly (Texas Mayors office orders sermons or speeches from the pulpit)?.

There is no escaping this thuggery against ones beliefs or belief systems in which has been intact, lived and operated by peaceful Americans for years and years. They (various groups) will see to it that they are not being denied any where when all is said and done, because if they are denied, well then there must be something wrong with them right ? They won't have anyone suggesting or saying that something is wrong with them, and this no matter where it is that they decide to venture into next or just stroll right on into next in order to start more trouble it seems. I think they are pushing the envelope to far, and they need to respect other peoples spaces and belief systems in life is my opinion, but that ain't happening is it ? How the government of this nation got tied up with all these so called weird causes, and without actually thinking it through is beyond me, but here the nations citizens are getting bullied by federal judges who are being vote garnishing whores for the government pimp who will be paid in full by votes from various voter blocks, and but of course. Talk about selling out this nations freedoms, and it's moral standards for a vote ((WOW)).

I think this nation is one of the most tolerant nations on earth, but it can be pushed to far and then what ? How about people respecting each others space again, and respecting all the belief systems that are proven peaceful in which we have had and do have for the most part today, and how about the government getting out of the vote pimping and voter whore business already, and maybe getting back into the managing business instead.. To side with one group over another, and then the group that has been sided with abuses the other group quickly afterwards? Well that is a business the government shouldn't be a part of anymore. It should reset and then treat all American citizens as Americans as based upon a moral and decency code or standard in which the majority of Americans will agree upon to live by, and then of course protect the weak while not empowering them to abuse the majority by way of the wrongful use of government power as a means to do so, because the weak just might be weak due to their own folly sometimes in life, and the government doesn't want to get pulled into something like that I wouldn't think. Now it should help them not be abused in their weakness of course, but then not allowing them to abuse others just as well. It's a two way street, and everyone should be able to pass on it peacefully and it should be paved with respect when traveling in either direction always.

^^^^ This.