LOL Christians are hella against the Same sex Marriage Law

[imnew09]

What are your thoughts on them?

[Nanners]

**** em :oldlol:

[UK2K]

They need to be more open minded and less judgemental.

Like those people who sent hundreds of death threats and threatened to burn down that pizzeria here in Indiana.

Tolerance lol

#lovewins

[Bucket_Nakedz]

I'm against Christians so whatever they don't like, I support.

[Draz]

These f****ers love restricting other people lives. I'm talking about in general. All of these religions and beliefs have morons thinking they can control someone else's life. To the point where their own lives are being effected by it.. Wtf? Let them fck each other in the ass who cares.

[senelcoolidge]

Well it's a whole lot better than some other religion that would rather throw gays off roofs and burn them. They don't like same sex marriage but they will not persecute you and murder you. They are a whole lot more tolerable than others. Just thank you lucky stars that you don't live in a Muslim or Communist/Atheist country.

[rezznor]

radical christians and radical muslims are 2 sides of the same coin

[MavsSuperFan]

christians stay losing in north america and europe.

[Jameerthefear]

most christians aren't against gay marriage
get real

[Take Your Lumps]

most christians aren't against gay marriage
get real

Anymore*

Because religious beliefs across the board in America and other western nations are getting less dogmatic and more wishy-washy/deistic.

Progress.

[NumberSix]

christians stay losing in north america and europe.
Wow. You sure are happy about the overthrow of democracy.

[MavsSuperFan]

Wow. You sure are happy about the overthrow of democracy.
:lol this is the case you choose to get angry at judicial review?

stay mad:banana:

[MavsSuperFan]

most christians aren't against gay marriage
get real
If you're a devout christian you should be. But most christians aren't very devout, which is a good thing :cheers:

[NumberSix]

:lol this is the case you choose to get angry at judicial review?

stay mad:banana:
I am now fully convinced that you don't know what the Supreme Courts role is.

To be clear, the Supreme Court does NOT change laws. If you think gay marriage laws were changed, then you simply dont understand the topic.

As I said, the Supreme Court does not change laws or even make new laws. They DEFINE what the constitutional law already is. I know you're happy with the result, but that is not the point. The Supreme Court did not make gay marriage legal. You need to understand that. What 5 of the 9 justices claim, is that gay marriage already was federally mandated in the constitution this entire time.

I know you're pro-gay marriage, but come on. Don't tell me that you believe that. You know you don't believe that gay marriage has been federally mandated since 1868, just nobody noticed. You know you don't believe that.

You really gonna tell me you're fine with Supreme Court justices saying "oh yeah, it's in the constitution. Yeah, that's the ticket" knowing fully well that it isn't. You don't think that's a bad path to go down?

[Dresta]

I am now fully convinced that you don't know what the Supreme Courts role is.

To be clear, the Supreme Court does NOT change laws. If you think gay marriage laws were changed, then you simply dont understand the topic.

As I said, the Supreme Court does not change laws or even make new laws. They DEFINE what the constitutional law already is. I know you're happy with the result, but that is not the point. The Supreme Court did not make gay marriage legal. You need to understand that. What 5 of the 9 justices claim, is that gay marriage already was federally mandated in the constitution this entire time.

I know you're pro-gay marriage, but come on. Don't tell me that you believe that. You know you don't believe that gay marriage has been federally mandated since 1868, just nobody noticed. You know you don't believe that.

You really gonna tell me you're fine with Supreme Court justices saying "oh yeah, it's in the constitution. Yeah, that's the ticket" knowing fully well that it isn't. You don't think that's a bad path to go down?
All that matters is the end outcome! legal technicalities are irrelevant! (even though our civilisation rests on these legal technicalities, and legal precedents always potentially dangerous). No, of course, interpreting the legal document on which the nation was founded, according to the whims of popular opinion, is not at all a problem (though this had already happened before this ruling, this only consolidates the Supreme Court as the third arm of a popular majority of the citizenry).

[embersyc]

Jesus hung out with 12 men all day long.

I'm just saying.

[NumberSix]

All that matters is the end outcome! legal technicalities are irrelevant! (even though our civilisation rests on these legal technicalities, and legal precedents always potentially dangerous). No, of course, interpreting the legal document on which the nation was founded, according to the whims of popular opinion, is not at all a problem (though this had already happened before this ruling, this only consolidates the Supreme Court as the third arm of a popular majority of the citizenry).
This is what he's arguing for......


Supreme Court: (insert issue) is legal. It says so in the constitution.

The people: no it isn't. We're reading the constitution. Where does it say that? That isn't in there.

Supreme Court: it's in there because I say its in there.

[bluechox2]

what other people do with their lives shouldnt concern you. people need to get rid of some of the hate in their hearts

[DonDadda59]

In the New Testament, Jesus never condemns or even mentions homosexuals. All the Christian groups and individuals running around using their 'faith' as a shield for their bigotry are sad, disingenuous people.

If you hate gays for personal reasons, why not just be up front about that? Why hide behind a religion that never even broached the subject?

[Dresta]

In the New Testament, Jesus never condemns or even mentions homosexuals. All the Christian groups and individuals running around using their 'faith' as a shield for their bigotry are sad, disingenuous people.

If you hate gays for personal reasons, why not just be up front about that? Why hide behind a religion that never even broached the subject?
It shouldn't really be that hard to understand, and in most cases, it will have very little to do with 'bigotry.' The point is that they see heterosexual life-long marriage as massively beneficial to society, and so aim to incentivise it by granting it a privileged status. The family unit has been shown repeatedly to be the most effective means of raising the next generation to be balanced and productive individuals, and this is something that has been progressively weakened all throughout the Western world over the past half-century or more - i really don't think this can be denied.

e.g.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzGDIFYV14g

There is nothing bigoted about such people, and it is nothing more than a snide smear to label them as such.

[DonDadda59]

It shouldn't really be that hard to understand, and in most cases, it will have very little to do with 'bigotry.' The point is that they see heterosexual life-long marriage as massively beneficial to society, and so aim to incentivise it by granting it a privileged status. The family unit has been shown repeatedly to be the most effective means of raising the next generation to be balanced and productive individuals, and this is something that has been progressively weakened all throughout the Western world over the past half-century or more - i really don't think this can be denied.

e.g.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzGDIFYV14g

There is nothing bigoted about such people, and it is nothing more than a snide smear to label them as such.

Yet the same people/groups throw hissy fits when gay couples want to adopt orphaned/abandoned children and start a family.

Let's cut the bullshit here. 'Christians' who are against same sex marriage are the same 'Christians' who were against interracial marriage just 50 years ago (some even have in the past decade).

As far as I know, Christ had nothing against Gays or Blacks. Yet many of his followers seem to. But they're just God-loving people trying to preserve the institution of family. :rolleyes:

[NumberSix]

Yet the same people/groups throw hissy fits when gay couples want to adopt orphaned/abandoned children and start a family.
Now, this a a topic I have VERY STRONG feelings about.

Anyone who is of the opinion that gays shouldn't be able to adopt need to seriously reconsider their position. I understand that a mother and a father is the ideal. I'm in full agreement.... But we're talking about children that don't have ANY parents. Surely a couple of gay parents or single parents straight or gay is better than having no parents at all.

I'm also for having an open mind and hearing other people's arguments, but I can't think of any good reason why someone would advocate for parentless children remaining parentless.



Let's cut the bullshit here. 'Christians' who are against same sex marriage are the same 'Christians' who were against interracial marriage just 50 years ago (some even have in the past decade).
No they weren't. The civil rights movement was largely a Christian movement, with a few communist agitators sprinkled here and there.

I've always had a feeling that the left would even go as far as eventually fading MLK out because his explicitly Christian nature.

[UK2K]

If you're a devout christian you should be. But most christians aren't very devout, which is a good thing :cheers:
If you are a devout Muslim...

[UK2K]

This is what he's arguing for......


Supreme Court: (insert issue) is legal. It says so in the constitution.

The people: no it isn't. We're reading the constitution. Where does it say that? That isn't in there.

Supreme Court: it's in there because I say its in there.
The made up answer to gay marriage is the same made up answer that allows my concealed carry to be valid i n any state.

Every state must adhere to other state licences. That's what he said.

Hooray!

[Dresta]

Yet the same people/groups throw hissy fits when gay couples want to adopt orphaned/abandoned children and start a family.

Let's cut the bullshit here. 'Christians' who are against same sex marriage are the same 'Christians' who were against interracial marriage just 50 years ago (some even have in the past decade).

As far as I know, Christ had nothing against Gays or Blacks. Yet many of his followers seem to. But they're just God-loving people trying to preserve the institution of family. :rolleyes:
I don't know who you're talking about when you say 'Christians' - what you are referring to is an abstract generalisation (and thus trivialisation) of the opposing argument. There will always be retards and bigots and savages arguing every side of an argument; i don't base my own response to the whole on the reaction of the least intelligent and most prejudiced among them, but on the arguments provided by the best of them. There's no point listening to the Westboro Christians and thinking 'wow, what a bunch of ****ing cretins these Christians are, anyone who agrees with them on a particular issue, must be wrong by definition.' I think the bulk of believers and non-believers are of limited intelligence, but there are plenty of both that are articulate as well as sensible.

I agree largely with P. Hitchens on this issue (without being Christian): that the matter of gay marriage is a mere sideshow, and that marriage in the old sense is already pretty close to dead (a commitment to something more than transient feelings of intoxication, something that carries as much a sense of duty as self-interest). I think it is also a trifle foolish to throw something away so that has provided stability and self-sufficiency for so many centuries, but there you go: it's been done, and we'll just have to wait and see what the consequences are (i already think that there's been a increased denigration of true intimacy, which becomes more and more risible by the day - and of course, a consequent rise in vulgarity).


And i don't know why you'd bring up blacks when the abolitionist and civil rights movements were heavily Christian. It was the Quakers petitioning congress every month to abolish slavery, right from the early days of the Republic.

edit: agree with what NumberSix said above regarding adoption. I wonder if some arrangement could not be worked out between Christians and gays, one that encourages pregnant women to have their child for gay couples (instead of aborting it).

Surely the 'Christians' couldn't even object to that one? They might be being raised by ****, but they'd only be aborted otherwise!

[DonDadda59]

No they weren't.

You need to read up more on the subject. Much like 'Christian' groups/individuals invoke teachings that don't exist in their religious doctrines to rally against same sex marriage, the same was going on in the middle of the last century (again, still happens today in some parts of the country) in regard to the question of interracial marriage, which was illegal in many states.

Even Harry Truman, former president of the USA, weighed in on the issue in 1963.

When asked if integration would possibly lead to future interracial marriages- "I hope not. I don't believe in it. The Lord created it that way. You read your Bible and you'll find out."

^That was a common talking point from the opposition. Good to see some things never change. :lol


I don't know who you're talking about when you say 'Christians' - what you are referring to is an abstract generalisation (and thus trivialisation) of the opposing argument. There will always be retards and bigots and savages arguing every side of an argument; i don't base my own response to the whole on the reaction of the least intelligent and most prejudiced among them, but on the arguments provided by the best of them. There's no point listening to the Westboro Christians and thinking 'wow, what a bunch of ****ing cretins these Christians are, anyone who agrees with them on a particular issue, must be wrong by definition.' I think the bulk of believers and non-believers are of limited intelligence, but there are plenty of both that are articulate as well as sensible.

I agree largely with P. Hitchens on this issue (without being Christian): that the matter of gay marriage is a mere sideshow, and that marriage in the old sense is already pretty close to dead (a commitment to something more than transient feelings of intoxication, something that carries as much a sense of duty as self-interest). I think it is also a trifle foolish to throw something away so that has provided stability and self-sufficiency for so many centuries, but there you go: it's been done, and we'll just have to wait and see what the consequences are (i already think that there's been a increased denigration of true intimacy, which becomes more and more risible by the day - and of course, a consequent rise in vulgarity).

Who the hell is 'throwing away' marriage? :biggums:

You do realize that any straight person who wants to get married can still do so, right?

[9erempiree]

http://defendingcontending.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/pot-and-kettle.jpg