Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Syriusly]

Back to the topic. (Hey Saint, still have the rainbow in your signature I see ..)...

Gay activists (when they are not role-playing flame wars or drumming up sympathy) are here at this thread trying to assure the 82% who voted up above that they would not take their lawsuits against bakers, photographers or caterers into the churches (the hearts of the religious).

I say it will be within a nanosecond of any Supreme Court finding that changes gay-lifestyle-marraige (to the detriment of children) from a currently state-controlled privelege to a federally-guaranteed "right". Upon that very instant you will find gay people filing lawsuits against churches. You can drive a nail in the wall and hang your hat upon that...

Just more bat shit crazy Silhouette crap.

 

[Syriusly]

I would like the moderators to notice that Saintmichaeldefendthem (in antagonist role), Syriusly and Paint are all LGBT activists engaged in a make-believe flame war calculated to disappear this thread because of the importance of the poll results in it.

This wouldn't be the first time this trick has been used to try to "disappear" threads with subject matter, headings or poll results the cult doesn't like..

God you are really delusional.

Seriously delusional.

 

[Silhouette]

No, that is precisely what you and your buddy Saintmichaeldefendthem are up to.

This thread is about the 82% of people who have reasonable concern and alarm that if the federal government decides to take the word "marriage" out of its current status as a state-extended privelege and into a "federally guaranteed right", the church of LGBT will have a legal gun pointed at the head of sublime faiths forcing them to abdicate core values and participate in promoting the forbidden "gay marriage".

Your ruse has failed. Back to the topic.

 

[beagle9]

Muslim cabbies in Minnesota claimed accepting fares from people carrying booze, drunks, or dogs would violate their religious beliefs. The state ordered them to do so regardless because they were violation of the state's PA laws.

So you have without realizing it, just affirmed what I just said...that your cult is gearing up to sue churches to force them to perform gay weddings. You will no doubt also be gearing up to sue islamics to perform gay weddings in mosques? No?.

Homosexuals are not like your cult of homophobes.

Nobody is proposing to sue churches- and any idiot who does will be laughed out of court- whether he sues to make a church marry an African American, a Jew or a homosexual.

Not sue, but they are willing to ask that someone be fired in a heart beat, if they don't tow the line after they are asked about what they think of gay people or the gay lifestyle. The contestant for Mrs. America knows all about that one because she was attempted to be fired because of her opinion given when asked, and so does Phil of Duck Dynasty along with The former Chic-Filet CEO, and the baker, the photographer and so on and so forth. Now whats the difference in being sued as opposed to the attempt by the militants to oust one from their business or in the stopping of their ability to do business in America any longer and/or for ones business to be shut down in America all because of ?

As are every other special interest group- from the NRA to the Christian Right.

The Christian Right has led several boycotts- including of Disney- because of perception that they were too gay friendly.
Want a list of other business's boycotted because they were perceived as treating gays with too much compassion?

The Million Mom's group tried to get Ellen Degeneres fired from her job as a spokesperson for JCPenney- because of course she is openly gay.

The Million Mom's group also took credit for getting a TV show canceled- that is several hundred people that lost their jobs because those fine Christians thought that show was too gay friendly.

Now do these represent all Christians? Of course not- nor do the persons who called for the firing of the Duck Dynasty folks represent all homosexuals. But every group has the right to speak out- and and speak their mind.

And while I think boycotts are counter productive in most cases- it is every persons right to call for a boycott.

What is the difference between being sued and appealing to public opinion?

One is asking for the legal protections afforded under the law.

The other is trying to use the power of public opinion to bring about change.

Both have their time and place.

I am for boycott's big time, and I am definitely for either side boycotting the other on any occasion now.

I say let the best man or woman or business win. The government however won't allow this freedom to take place in America anymore, and this they won't do if they can help it now, because it (the feds) are on the dole or take big time anymore on this stuff, and they are in the tank for special interest groups in a sick way these days, and that is where it thinks that it gets it's power from for the most part, so the best way to deal with that is to boycott individuals who are attempting to be elected, and to do this by not giving them our vote no matter what they try and lie and say or do.

It's time to role back some of this idiocy that is suffering the Christians in America, and that is my opinion because it just isn't funny anymore upon what is going on in so many ways now. If we can keep the government from engaging in their vote pimping or stop it from whoring itself out in such a bad way for a vote, then we all might stand a chance once again in America, but that is a big if these days and times.

 

[Silhouette]

It's time to role back some of this idiocy that is suffering the Christians in America, and that is my opinion because it just isn't funny anymore upon what is going on in so many ways now. If we can keep the government from engaging in their vote pimping or stop it from whoring itself out in such a bad way for a vote, then we all might stand a chance once again in America, but that is a big if these days and times.

I don't know about that beagle. Congress right now is in a position to impeach some lower circuit judges for calculated overreach and contempt of Windsor 2013 to the detriment of the several states affected and democracy itself.

Roll a couple of those heads and the far left should sit up a little straighter in their chairs...If they want to use the courts to circumvent due process and force their cult values on the states then let the punishment for that artifice be at the court level too. Judges beware..

 

[Skylar]

It's time to role back some of this idiocy that is suffering the Christians in America, and that is my opinion because it just isn't funny anymore upon what is going on in so many ways now. If we can keep the government from engaging in their vote pimping or stop it from whoring itself out in such a bad way for a vote, then we all might stand a chance once again in America, but that is a big if these days and times.

For once, I'd like to see a conservative expression of 'freedom' that doesn't involve treating others like pieces of shit.

 

[Skylar]

It's time to role back some of this idiocy that is suffering the Christians in America, and that is my opinion because it just isn't funny anymore upon what is going on in so many ways now. If we can keep the government from engaging in their vote pimping or stop it from whoring itself out in such a bad way for a vote, then we all might stand a chance once again in America, but that is a big if these days and times.

I don't know about that beagle. Congress right now is in a position to impeach some lower circuit judges for calculated overreach and contempt of Windsor 2013 to the detriment of the several states affected and democracy itself.

With the obvious problem being that Windsor decision doesn't say what you claim. Nor can you quote the parts of the decision where the USSC ruled that gay marriage bans are constitutional. Or even mentions gay marriage bans.

So how, pray tell, can a lower court be in 'contempt' of a passage from the Windsor ruling......that doesn't exist?

But you've set your '30 days or less' time frame for the impeachments. and my laughing and finger pointing will slowly get louder as we approach yet another batshit prediction based on nothing. And you've earned it.

Roll a couple of those heads and the far left should sit up a little straighter in their chairs...If they want to use the courts to circumvent due process and force their cult values on the states then let the punishment for that artifice be at the court level too. Judges beware..

And when no judges are impeached on the basis of your pseudo-legal gibberish, what then? Will you try and pretend you never made such a prediction?

I'm not going to let you, Silo. As your record of accuracy in predicting the future has been worse than guessing.

 

[Skylar]

No, that is precisely what you and your buddy Saintmichaeldefendthem are up to.

This thread is about the 82% of people who have reasonable concern and alarm that if the federal government decides to take the word "marriage" out of its current status as a state-extended privelege and into a "federally guaranteed right", the church of LGBT will have a legal gun pointed at the head of sublime faiths forcing them to abdicate core values and participate in promoting the forbidden "gay marriage".

You may want to read the poll again. As it asks nothing about the 'federal government deciding to take the word 'marriage' out of its current status as a state extended privileged and into a 'federally guaranteed right'. You quite literally hallucinated all of that.

The poll is about churches being forced to accommodate gay weddings. As any reader can verify by simply scrolling to the top of the page. Something so easy to verify, it begs the question......why bother to misrepresent the poll of this thread?

I mean, do you really think we can't read it? Or that we wouldn't notice? There doesn't seem to be an end game here. You're burning through credibility.....and getting nothing in exchange.

 

[Skylar]

True and gay marriage cannot stand on its own merit because states have no business incentivizing marriages that are guaranteed to give children in them a lack of the complimentary gender (which may be the child's own) 100% of the time.

Says who? There's you and......who?

That's essentially the same formatively, as the state granting single parents the right to marry themselves as monosexuals who prefer to be alone.

Except for the whole 'single' part of 'single parent'. You know, the defining characteristic of raising a child alone?

Two parents means twice the financial resources, or a heapload more time that can be spent on the child.

If you want to make the argument that the Supreme Court should "think of the children currently being deprived of the privelege of marriage", there are vastly larger numbers of those children caught up in monosexual homes than homosexual ones.

You seem confused. That's not us 'wanting to make the argument'. That's Justice Kennedy....who has made the argument. And recognized in the Windsor ruling the harm done to the children of same sex parents when the marriages of their parents aren't recognized under the law.

Do you get the difference? Because good ol' Mr. Swing voter certainly does.

 

[Syriusly]

No, that is precisely what you and your buddy Saintmichaeldefendthem are up to.

This thread is about the 82% of people who have reasonable concern and alarm that if the federal government decides to take the word "marriage" out of its current status as a state-extended privelege and into a "federally guaranteed right", the church of LGBT will have a legal gun pointed at the head of sublime faiths forcing them to abdicate core values and participate in promoting the forbidden "gay marriage".

Your ruse has failed. Back to the topic.

You are delusional and now talking to yourself.

 

[Syriusly]

It's time to role back some of this idiocy that is suffering the Christians in America, and that is my opinion because it just isn't funny anymore upon what is going on in so many ways now. If we can keep the government from engaging in their vote pimping or stop it from whoring itself out in such a bad way for a vote, then we all might stand a chance once again in America, but that is a big if these days and times.

I don't know about that beagle. Congress right now is in a position to impeach some lower circuit judges for calculated overreach and contempt of Windsor 2013 to the detriment of the several states affected and democracy itself..

Congress could impeach judges for having the wrong hair color- but just like your pronouncements won't.

 

[Syriusly]

Muslim cabbies in Minnesota claimed accepting fares from people carrying booze, drunks, or dogs would violate their religious beliefs. The state ordered them to do so regardless because they were violation of the state's PA laws.

So you have without realizing it, just affirmed what I just said...that your cult is gearing up to sue churches to force them to perform gay weddings. You will no doubt also be gearing up to sue islamics to perform gay weddings in mosques? No?.

Homosexuals are not like your cult of homophobes.

Nobody is proposing to sue churches- and any idiot who does will be laughed out of court- whether he sues to make a church marry an African American, a Jew or a homosexual.

Not sue, but they are willing to ask that someone be fired in a heart beat, if they don't tow the line after they are asked about what they think of gay people or the gay lifestyle. The contestant for Mrs. America knows all about that one because she was attempted to be fired because of her opinion given when asked, and so does Phil of Duck Dynasty along with The former Chic-Filet CEO, and the baker, the photographer and so on and so forth. Now whats the difference in being sued as opposed to the attempt by the militants to oust one from their business or in the stopping of their ability to do business in America any longer and/or for ones business to be shut down in America all because of ?

As are every other special interest group- from the NRA to the Christian Right.

The Christian Right has led several boycotts- including of Disney- because of perception that they were too gay friendly.
Want a list of other business's boycotted because they were perceived as treating gays with too much compassion?

The Million Mom's group tried to get Ellen Degeneres fired from her job as a spokesperson for JCPenney- because of course she is openly gay.

The Million Mom's group also took credit for getting a TV show canceled- that is several hundred people that lost their jobs because those fine Christians thought that show was too gay friendly.

Now do these represent all Christians? Of course not- nor do the persons who called for the firing of the Duck Dynasty folks represent all homosexuals. But every group has the right to speak out- and and speak their mind.

And while I think boycotts are counter productive in most cases- it is every persons right to call for a boycott.

What is the difference between being sued and appealing to public opinion?

One is asking for the legal protections afforded under the law.

The other is trying to use the power of public opinion to bring about change.

Both have their time and place.

I am for boycott's big time, and I am definitely for either side boycotting the other on any occasion now.

I say let the best man or woman or business win. The government however won't allow this freedom to take place in America anymore, .

Then go ahead and work to repeal the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

And then you can work on the State laws that legislators passed to protect minorities rights.

And then local city ordinances.

Because you don't want States or cities determining their own laws and regulations.

 

[mgh80]

Churches should not be forced to perform gay marriages-and currently they aren't. Legalizing gay marriage doesn't impose on your religion currently.

PS: I'm a practicing Christian (Catholic) for the record...and I believe in "judge not, lest you be judged".

 

[Steinlight]

**** the OP who started this worthless thread. What are the odds this cue ball ****** in a turtle neck has gotten gay married since starting this thread?

 

[Steinlight]

Churches should not be forced to perform gay marriages-and currently they aren't. Legalizing gay marriage doesn't impose on your religion currently.

PS: I'm a practicing Christian (Catholic) for the record...and I believe in "judge not, lest you be judged".

A "practicing Christian", and a real life idiot.

 

[mgh80]

Churches should not be forced to perform gay marriages-and currently they aren't. Legalizing gay marriage doesn't impose on your religion currently.

PS: I'm a practicing Christian (Catholic) for the record...and I believe in "judge not, lest you be judged".

A "practicing Christian", and a real life idiot.

How judgmental of you...I wonder what your bible says about that?

edit: If you're a "practicing Christian" I suggest you pay attention to the New Testament a little more carefully. You know the whole loving your neighbors, not judging, forgiveness, etc.

I hope you're not arrogant enough to suggest that you're in a position to judge other people, when that's clearly up to God? Or are you claiming that you speak on behalf of God?

 

[Syriusly]

Churches should not be forced to perform gay marriages-and currently they aren't. Legalizing gay marriage doesn't impose on your religion currently.

PS: I'm a practicing Christian (Catholic) for the record...and I believe in "judge not, lest you be judged".

churches will never be forced to marry anyone that they do not want to marry.

In the 50 years since the passage of the 1964 Civil rights act- no one has forced any church to marry any person described in the act- no church was forced to marry African Americans or Jews or Muslims etc, etc.

 

[ImGoing2Heaven]

Hell no. Fagotry is a sin and God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for being pickle ticklers

 

[Syriusly]

**** the OP who started this worthless thread. What are the odds this cue ball ****** in a turtle neck has gotten gay married since starting this thread?

f*ggot, n*gger, k*ke, c*nt.....

Words used by bigots for the same purpose.

 

[ImGoing2Heaven]

Fagotry is lead by the love of satan