Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Syriusly]

One of the critical arguments emerging against gay marriage is that the children in that home, newly incentivized by the states forced to do so by the limbo SCOTUS has created refusing to hear states' appeals, is that in a gay marriage home, the children there will 100% of the time be missing one of their natural blood parents. They will be missing the influence of the missing gender also 100% of the time, to their developmental and social disadvantage.

If they are in the unhappy position of being the opposite gender of the gay parents, they might likely internalize that "your gender isn't necessary/YOU aren't necessary" message implied and modeled for them every day. Then you might get this as the extreme result of that child's butchered self esteem: a total rejection of his own gender so that he can fit in/be loved...

A LESBIAN couple in California who say their 11-year-old son Tommy wants to be a girl named Tammy are giving their child hormone blockers that delay the onset of puberty, so that he can have more time to decide if he wants to change his gender.
The couple's supporters say the Hormone Blocking Therapy has only minor side effects and is appropriate for a child who is unsure of his gender.
"This is definitely a changing landscape for transgender youth," said Joel Baum, director of education and training for Gender Spectrum, a California-based non-profit group. "This is about giving kids and their families the opportunity to make the right decision."We ll stop puberty so Tommy can become Tammy Lesbian couple want to help boy to become girl

How many members of the LGBT community have openly opposed this? 0%.

I have to say, that of ALL of the hysterical arguments that the Left brings in their Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality, the "Adoption" argument is the most absurd... .

As a parent of three biological children who, along with my wife, adopted a 12 year old from Foster Care, I can tell you that nothing... and I am talking ZERO of what the Left is claiming... has ANY kinship with the reality that is THAT abyss into the education of a lifetime on the fool's errand that is "CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES", Foster Care and the Adoption of the product of same.

CPS and its extension: Foster Care is a GENERATOR of LGBT... Its purpose today, without regard to the shiny pamphlets and the happy, smiling faces that adorn such, is perhaps the most profound evil to which my wife and I have ever been subjected.

It is operated by barely functional illiterates, militant homosexuals and reigns over everyone who comes within its purview through a political correctness which takes the breath from the straights who come to it through the publicly advertised justifications... .

If I were to tell you of our experiences, you simply would have no means to believe them.

Absolutely I would not believe anything that you told us when it comes to attacking homosexuals.

 

[Syriusly]

Here's more on how a same-sexed environment is seen by even the very young .

Here's more on how a same-sexed environment is seen by even the very young boy in that lesbian home from my last post:
.

But of course this doesn't happen just in lesbian homes.

Two Families Grapple with Sons Gender Identity NPR

Three-thousand miles away, on the West Coast of the United States, another family noticed their small son's unconventional tastes.

Jonah was 2 when his father, Joel, first realized that no amount of enthusiasm could persuade his child to play with balls. Trucks languished untouched. Fire engines gathered dust. Joel says Jonah much preferred girl toys, even his stuffed animals were female.

"Like, I would always say, 'What's that guy's name?' and the response would always be, 'Oh, she's bunny, she's, you know, this or that,'" Joel says.

Like Bradley, as Jonah grew older, these preferences became more pronounced. Jonah is physically beautiful. He has dark hair and eyes, a face with China-doll symmetry, and a small and graceful frame. Occasionally, while running errands, casual acquaintances, fellow shoppers, passers-by, would mistake Jonah for a girl. This appeared to thrill him. And, Joel says, Jonah would complain bitterly if his father tried to correct them.

"What began to happen was Jonah started to get upset about that," Joel says. "Like, 'Why do you have to say anything!' … I remember one distinct time when we were walking the dogs and this person came up and said ... 'Oh, is this your daughter?' and I said, 'Oh, no, this is Jonah.'... And Jonah just came running up and said, 'Why do you have to tell! Why do you have to say anything!'"

Then around the age of 3, Jonah started taking his mother Pam's clothing. He would borrow a long T-shirt and belt, and fashion it into a dress. This went on for months — with Jonah constantly adjusting his costume to make it better — until one day, Pam discovered her son crying inconsolably. He explained to his mother that he simply could not get the T-shirt to look right, she says.

Pam remembers watching her child mournfully finger his outfit. She says she knew what he wanted. "At that point I just said, you know, 'You really want a dress to wear, don't you?' And [Jonah's] face lit up, and she was like, 'Yes!'"

(Joel and Pam now refer to their son as "she.")

That afternoon, Pam, her sister and Jonah piled into the family car.

"I thought she was gonna hyperventilate and faint because she was so incredibly happy. ... Before then, or since then, I don't think I have seen her so out of her mind happy as that drive to Target that day to pick out her dress," Pam says of Jonah.

Pam allowed Jonah to get two dresses, but felt incredibly conflicted about it. Even though Jonah asked, she wouldn't allow him to buy any more dresses for a year afterward, so Jonah wore those two dresses every day, nothing else, until Pam got sick of looking at them. After a year, she and Joel finally began to permit other small purchases. But every item, Joel says, provoked a crisis.

"We'd spend a few nights talking: 'Do you think the shoes are like a line that we should cross? Or, you know, the girly hat, or the girly jacket with the frills?' ... Like, what are we doing? Are we encouraging this? Are we doing something that we shouldn't be?" Joel says they would ask.

Joel and Pam also ended up in front of a gender specialist — Diane Ehrensaft, a psychologist in Oakland. Joel remembers an early session when Pam talked about her concerns.

"I remember her talking to the therapist and saying something to the effect of, like, you know, 'I'd be OK if Jonah just was gay, I just don't want ... him to be transgender.' And the therapist just laughed, she said, 'You know, 15 years ago, I had people on this couch saying, 'I don't mind him being a little effeminate, as long as he's not gay,'" Joel says.

In fact, Diane Ehrensaft's approach could not have been more different than the approach of Bradley's therapist. Like Zucker, Ehrensaft is a gender specialist. She says she has seen more than 50 families with children who have what Zucker would describe as gender identity disorder.

Ehrensaft, however, does not use that label. She describes children like Bradley and Jonah as transgender. And, unlike Zucker, she does not think parents should try to modify their child's behavior. In fact, when Pam and Joel came to see her, she discouraged them from putting Jonah into any kind of therapy at all. Pam says because Ehrensaft does not see transgenderism itself as a dysfunction, the therapist didn't think Pam and Joel should try to cure Jonah.

"She made it really clear that, you know, if Jonah's not depressed, or anxious, or having anything go on that she would need to really be in therapy for, then don't put a kid in therapy until they need it," Pam says.

Ehrensaft did eventually encourage Joel and Pam to allow Jonah to live as a little girl. By the time he was 5, Jonah had made it very clear to his parents that he wanted to wear girl clothes full time — that he wanted to be known as a girl. He wanted them to call him their daughter. And though Ehrensaft does not always encourage children who express gender flexibility to "transition" to living as a member of the opposite sex, in the case of Jonah, she thought it was appropriate.

Last year, when he started kindergarten, Jonah went as a girl. He wore dresses, was addressed as "she" by his classmates and teacher. He even changed his name, from Jonah to Jona, without the "h." It was a complete transformation.

Joel and Pam were initially anxious, but Joel says their worry soon faded.

"They have these little conferences, and, you know, we were asking, like, 'How's Jonah doing? Does she have problems with other kids?' and the teacher was like, 'God, I gotta tell you, you know, Jonah is one of the most popular kids. Kids love her, they want to play with her, she's fun, and it's because she's so comfortable with herslef that she makes other people comfortable," Joel recalls.

It was shortly after that that Joel and Pam started referring to their son Jonah as "she."

 

[ShackledNation]

... Ya know, the more we discuss this, the more clear it becomes that entertaining you people is a literal threat to the very survival of the human species itself.

Marriage was not designed by nature.

Well, if that were true, then Nature didn't design the subjects of marriage.

Non sequitur.

So LOL!, you're saying that it 'doesn't follow' that 'Marriage': the joining of one man and one woman who join as one being, providing security for the female during gestation... and serves as a stable environment for the training and nurturing of children through the benefit of the complimenting traits of each respective gender, ... which incontestably follows the human physiological design, wherein the distinct, but complimenting genders join as one being, analogous to wherein the two complimenting bodies join in sustainable coitus... is a direct result of the natural design created by nature?

ROFLMNAO!

And you claim that you're no Relativist... .

No, I'm saying that marriage is not designed by nature. It is a social creation of human beings, not a natural phenomenon. Are you defining everything human beings create as designed by nature? Answer the question.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

... Ya know, the more we discuss this, the more clear it becomes that entertaining you people is a literal threat to the very survival of the human species itself.

Marriage was not designed by nature.

Well, if that were true, then Nature didn't design the subjects of marriage.

Non sequitur.

So LOL!, you're saying that it 'doesn't follow' that 'Marriage': the joining of one man and one woman who join as one being, providing security for the female during gestation... and serves as a stable environment for the training and nurturing of children through the benefit of the complimenting traits of each respective gender, ... which incontestably follows the human physiological design, wherein the distinct, but complimenting genders join as one being, analogous to wherein the two complimenting bodies join in sustainable coitus... is a direct result of the natural design created by nature?

ROFLMNAO!

And you claim that you're no Relativist... .

No, I'm saying that marriage is not designed by nature.

I know... That's how we rest so assured that you're a relativist. Meaning that you're incapable of recognizing objective truth, which so incontrovertibly demonstrates that Marriage IS a function of Nature's design of human physiology.

 

[ShackledNation]

Logic: reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
Validity: the quality of being logically or factually sound; soundness or cogency
Soundness: based on reason, sense, or judgment
Cogent: clear, logical, and convincing

Is there a reason you are listing all of the things your argument lacks?

Now, using the definitions of all those things you claim my position is NOT... take each one and show where my position fails that particular trait.

Now here's the cool part. Whether you do that or not... I will then take what you say in response to that, or what you're said in the past and show where that mates up with the concepts cited below:

Relativism: the doctrine which holds that knowledge, truth, and morality can only exist in relation to culture, society, historical or one's personal context, and not the result of soundly absolutes.

Delusion: an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder

I already showed where you position failed on those traits. An equivocation is an illogical fallacy, making it unsound, invalid, and uncogent. As a result, your argument lacks logic.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The coolest part of this is that while popular whimsy has no bearing on the facts of nature, 90% of those responding to the poll in the OP of this thread, clearly recognize the facts of nature and THAT is very good news indeed.

 

[ShackledNation]

ROFLMNAO! And you claim ya don't believe in relativism. Yet you're a CLASSIC example of such!

Pointing out your pathetic fallacies and falsehoods does not make me a moral relativist.

Oh! Well, that's true... your rejection of objective reasoning, substituting such with conclusions which serve your subjective need, determine THAT.

No, your position is objectively a logical fallacy called an equivocation.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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?

Obviously you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Logic: reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
Validity: the quality of being logically or factually sound; soundness or cogency
Soundness: based on reason, sense, or judgment
Cogent: clear, logical, and convincing

Is there a reason you are listing all of the things your argument lacks?

I list those things, as a means to get you to again claim that my argument lacks them, without the reasonable basis of taking those definitions and setting them against my argument and showing where that argument lacks the traits intrinsic to those definitions. Proving, through the exercise that your claim is BASELESS. All toward establishing evidence that leads to the PROOF that your relativist conclusion is: DELUSIONAL.

Feel better?

Now, using the definitions of all those things you claim my position is NOT... take each one and show where my position fails that particular trait.

Now here's the cool part. Whether you do that or not... I will then take what you say in response to that, or what you're said in the past and show where that mates up with the concepts cited below:

Relativism: the doctrine which holds that knowledge, truth, and morality can only exist in relation to culture, society, historical or one's personal context, and not the result of soundly absolutes.

Delusion: an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder

I already showed where you position failed on those traits. An equivocation is an illogical fallacy, making it unsound, invalid, and uncogent. As a result, your argument lacks logic.[/QUOTE]

LOL! The coolest thing about a text forum, is that it's produced IN WRITING... thus exists AS A RECORD OF ITSELF.

A record in which there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that provides you having taken ANY of those definitions and setting them against my WRITTEN ARGUMENTS and showing through those OBJECTIVE STANDARDS that my argument was fatally flawed.

However a record wherein a Relativist refuses to so specify, choosing instead to remain as vague as possible using subjective 'feelings' over the objective standards... so as to rest their reasoning upon an addled implication... toward the hope of sustaining what they perceive as a popularly held position, IS proof of the delusion common to and typical of, relativism, which is what my argument seeks to establish.

Which is pretty cool, given that THAT is what the record of this thread: DEMONSTRATES.

FTR: 'Illogical fallacy' is a redundancy. Fallacy is illogical. Demonstrating yet again what a graduate of the USMA, would know.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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

Nonsense.

It's not a lie. 14th Amendment jurisprudence applies only to government, not private organizations.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

ROFLMNAO! And you claim ya don't believe in relativism. Yet you're a CLASSIC example of such!

Pointing out your pathetic fallacies and falsehoods does not make me a moral relativist.

Oh! Well, that's true... your rejection of objective reasoning, substituting such with conclusions which serve your subjective need, determine THAT.

No, your position is objectively a logical fallacy called an equivocation.

LOL! Sadly, for you... your argument rests ENTIRELY upon equivocation.

Specifically, wherein you need to cull from the definition of NORMAL, distinction from contexts which rest upon SIMILARITY.

You claim that because homosexuality occurs in nature, it is NORMAL... despite the SAME DEFINITION: ESTABLISHING THAT WHERE SUCH DEVIATES FROM THE STANDARD ESTABLISHED BY NORMALITY, such is ABNORMAL.

Which if you're keeping score, is DOWN THE MIDDLE: the use of ambiguous language to conceal the truth or to avoid committing oneself to that which they otherwise know to be a falsity.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

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

Nonsense.

It's not a lie. 14th Amendment jurisprudence applies only to government, not private organizations.

Correct, so you agree the PA laws are unconstitutional. Thanks

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

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.

Incorrect.

Public accommodations laws are authorized by the Commerce Clause, having nothing to do with same-sex couples and marriage.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

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.

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.

Incorrect.

Public accommodations laws are authorized by the Commerce Clause, having nothing to do with same-sex couples and marriage.

LOL! Except where PA laws are used to ruin principled people who reject homosexual behavior, reasoning and refuse to be involved in the celebration of such. THEN Public Accommodation Laws are intrinsic to the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality.

 

[Syriusly]

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

Nonsense.

It's not a lie. 14th Amendment jurisprudence applies only to government, not private organizations.

Correct, so you agree the PA laws are unconstitutional. Thanks

Unless they are overturned by the courts of course they aren't.

 

[Syriusly]

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.

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.

Incorrect.

Public accommodations laws are authorized by the Commerce Clause, having nothing to do with same-sex couples and marriage.

LOL! Except where PA laws are used to ruin principled people who reject homosexual behavior, reasoning and refuse to be involved in the celebration of such. THEN Public Accommodation Laws are intrinsic to the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality.

I have never seen any principled people who have rejected homosexual behavior

 

[dblack]

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.

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.

Incorrect.

Public accommodations laws are authorized by the Commerce Clause, having nothing to do with same-sex couples and marriage.

PA laws violate the equal protection provision of the 14th.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So... to hear the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality tell it...

Normality: the condition of being normal; the state of being usual, typical, or expected and 'normal': conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected, is perfectly fine, except where it is used to define something that deviates from that standard, where the deviation occurs naturally... because THEN... it's perfectly normal.

Take a wheel bearing which naturally, over time was worn by millions upon millions of revolutions, with the natural effects of friction grinding away sufficient material from the bearing that it no longer adequately serves its purpose... leaving the wheel to deviate from the standard essential to its purpose.

Using the reasoning of the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality... that worn out bearing is PERFECTLY NORMAL! Thus should never be considered a threat the purpose of the wheel that it serves or to the purpose of those who use the wheel... .

Again... Sexual Abnormality presents as a symptom of abnormal reasoning. And it is THERE wherein the risk is realized.

 

[Syriusly]

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.

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.

Incorrect.

Public accommodations laws are authorized by the Commerce Clause, having nothing to do with same-sex couples and marriage.

PA laws violate the equal protection provision of the 14th.

Then get a court to agree with you.

Until then, your opinion and a couple bucks will get you a cup of coffee.

 

[Syriusly]

So... to hear the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality tell it...

Normality: the condition of being normal; the state of being usual, typical, or expected and 'normal': conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected, is perfectly fine, except where it is used to define something that deviates from that standard, where the deviation occurs naturally... because THEN... it's perfectly normal.

Take a wheel bearing which naturally, over time was worn by millions upon millions of revolutions, with the natural effects of friction grinding away sufficient material from the bearing that it no longer adequately serves its purpose... leaving the wheel to deviate from the standard essential to its purpose.

Using the reasoning of the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality... that worn out bearing is PERFECTLY NORMAL! Thus should never be considered a threat the purpose of the wheel that it serves or to the purpose of those who use the wheel... .

Again... Sexual Abnormality presents as a symptom of abnormal reasoning. And it is THERE wherein the risk is realized.

Bat guano crazy.