PDA

View Full Version : Fed judge rules gay marriage law unconstitutional



mrveggieman
07-31-2012, 03:59 PM
http://www.ktul.com/story/19159111/conn-judge-us-gay-marriage-law-unconstitutional

Wickabee
07-31-2012, 04:18 PM
I guess there are a lot of Christian Conservatives who will have to choose between the Constitution and God.


That was in no way a shot at, or insult towards, anyone.

ensbergcollector
07-31-2012, 05:36 PM
I guess there are a lot of Christian Conservatives who will have to choose between the Constitution and God.


That was in no way a shot at, or insult towards, anyone.

i think what you meant to say was conservative christians will have to choose between god and 1 judges interpretation of the constitution. i know it is a common mistake though.

Wickabee
07-31-2012, 06:02 PM
That brings up an intereating point. What good is a constitution that's so open to interpretation?

ensbergcollector
07-31-2012, 06:42 PM
That brings up an intereating point. What good is a constitution that's so open to interpretation?

not sure. regardless of which side you are on, when laws can be made or overturned by one person's idea (and let's be honest, there have been cases from both extremes where it is obviously a personal bias by the judge) we have a problem. that is easily my biggest issue with our current government make up.

Wickabee
07-31-2012, 06:44 PM
not sure. regardless of which side you are on, when laws can be made or overturned by one person's idea (and let's be honest, there have been cases from both extremes where it is obviously a personal bias by the judge) we have a problem. that is easily my biggest issue with our current government make up.

It really calls a LOT of things into question.

ensbergcollector
07-31-2012, 06:44 PM
It really calls a LOT of things into question.

agree completely

jessejordan419
07-31-2012, 07:21 PM
Gays are not interested in equal rights. They want to pervert the Judeo/Christian definition of marriage. They were given the opportunity to have all the full rights of Married Couples, just without the name marriage. However, that is not their goal. If it was, they would accept civil unions and respect the Religious Beliefs of the rest of the country.

Wickabee
07-31-2012, 07:24 PM
Gays are not interested in equal rights. They want to pervert the Judeo/Christian definition of marriage. They were given the opportunity to have all the full rights of Married Couples, just without the name marriage. However, that is not their goal. If it was, they would accept civil unions and respect the Religious Beliefs of the rest of the country.

I will actually agree with this with the addition that no existing group wants equality, but only wants their own agenda taken care of. That goes for gays, minorities, Christians, Muslims...everyone. And also with the addition that "the rest of the country" (ie: non-gays) do not necessarily hold the same beliefs about marriage that Christians do.

jessejordan419
07-31-2012, 08:02 PM
I will actually agree with this with the addition that no existing group wants equality, but only wants their own agenda taken care of. That goes for gays, minorities, Christians, Muslims...everyone. And also with the addition that "the rest of the country" (ie: non-gays) do not necessarily hold the same beliefs about marriage that Christians do.

You are right, now that gays have had some success in forcing their definition of marriage onto others, polygamists and bestiality types are now arguing for their "rights to marriage" as well.

Wickabee
07-31-2012, 08:05 PM
You are right, now that gays have had some success in forcing their definition of marriage onto others, polygamists and bestiality types are now arguing for their "rights to marriage" as well.
I will agree that polygamists will come knocking, but do doubt anyone will ever take bestial marriage seriously. Of course, I could easily be proven wrong.

EDITED:
It really is an interesting situation, gay marriage. On one side you have the gays who, in the secular world are asking for something that, hands down, they should have a right to. Marriage is, in the secular world, a contract between you, your spouse and the government. In the non-secular world, though, they are asking for something they have no right to. Force religions to go against belief by marrying gays. A church or religion should have the absolute right to deny marriage to anyone on almost any grounds.

The non-secular opposition is completely within their rights to say no to this, and I don't blame them for a second. Just because homosexuality is much more prevalent and accepted does not mean a religion should change it's beliefs. Any religion church or preacher who changes his views to go along with the society of his day isn't really trustworthy, is he? One thing a lot of secular people don't seem to understand is that, as society's ideas change, a particular religion's do not and should not, unless irrefutable evidence is presented. As much as I believe gays should be able to marry, I believe religion shouldn't be changed by secular law.

My solution, let them get married, call it marriage. Under no circumstances should a church be forced to hold a homosexual, or any other, wedding. If gays want to get married and can't find a church to do wed in, let them go to City Hall. If non-seculars are uncomfortable with a gay couple introducing themselves as "married" just quietly smile to yourself knowing God had nothing to do with it.

I'd even be fine with not calling it marriage. Call it a civil union or a chaswasser or whatever you want. If it equates the same thing legally for rights and taxes, what do you care what it's called. If the word "marriage" itself is really the tipping point on both sides, this issue is just a stand-off of "who's more stubborn" with no end in sight.

Just for the record, I've said before and I'll say again that I am neither for nor against gay marriage. The reason I seem to tip towards "pro" gay marriage is I've really seen no argument against it that warrants not allowing them to get married.

duane1969
07-31-2012, 08:33 PM
The #1 beef that I have with "gay marriage" is this. As soon as the Fed govt. mandates the social requirement that citizens accept it then it will immediately morph into an all new legal issue where gays demand to be married in churches and places of worship and will file lawsuits demanding that preachers and ministers be forced to marry them.

Wickabee
07-31-2012, 08:40 PM
The #1 beef that I have with "gay marriage" is this. As soon as the Fed govt. mandates the social requirement that citizens accept it then it will immediately morph into an all new legal issue where gays demand to be married in churches and places of worship and will file lawsuits demanding that preachers and ministers be forced to marry them.

I agree 100%. I will go so far as to say it is not an "if" they go after churches like that, but "when". That is wrong and, as much as gays are claiming their rights are infringed, they'd be doing the same thing. I see no reason for gays to not be allowed to marry. I see no reason to force marriage ceremonies on any church for any reason. This is actually a "slippery slope" argument I can agree with.

theonedru
08-01-2012, 02:43 AM
You are right, now that gays have had some success in forcing their definition of marriage onto others, polygamists and bestiality types are now arguing for their "rights to marriage" as well.

Comparing gays to people who have sex with animals.. Hmmm just I want to say something and it would almost be worth the suspension

mrveggieman
08-01-2012, 08:54 AM
I will agree that polygamists will come knocking, but do doubt anyone will ever take bestial marriage seriously. Of course, I could easily be proven wrong.

EDITED:
It really is an interesting situation, gay marriage. On one side you have the gays who, in the secular world are asking for something that, hands down, they should have a right to. Marriage is, in the secular world, a contract between you, your spouse and the government. In the non-secular world, though, they are asking for something they have no right to. Force religions to go against belief by marrying gays. A church or religion should have the absolute right to deny marriage to anyone on almost any grounds.

The non-secular opposition is completely within their rights to say no to this, and I don't blame them for a second. Just because homosexuality is much more prevalent and accepted does not mean a religion should change it's beliefs. Any religion church or preacher who changes his views to go along with the society of his day isn't really trustworthy, is he? One thing a lot of secular people don't seem to understand is that, as society's ideas change, a particular religion's do not and should not, unless irrefutable evidence is presented. As much as I believe gays should be able to marry, I believe religion shouldn't be changed by secular law.

My solution, let them get married, call it marriage. Under no circumstances should a church be forced to hold a homosexual, or any other, wedding. If gays want to get married and can't find a church to do wed in, let them go to City Hall. If non-seculars are uncomfortable with a gay couple introducing themselves as "married" just quietly smile to yourself knowing God had nothing to do with it.

I'd even be fine with not calling it marriage. Call it a civil union or a chaswasser or whatever you want. If it equates the same thing legally for rights and taxes, what do you care what it's called. If the word "marriage" itself is really the tipping point on both sides, this issue is just a stand-off of "who's more stubborn" with no end in sight.

Just for the record, I've said before and I'll say again that I am neither for nor against gay marriage. The reason I seem to tip towards "pro" gay marriage is I've really seen no argument against it that warrants not allowing them to get married.


Can I get some up in here!!

CHURCH!! :love0030:

JustAlex
08-01-2012, 09:09 AM
I agree 100%. I will go so far as to say it is not an "if" they go after churches like that, but "when". That is wrong and, as much as gays are claiming their rights are infringed, they'd be doing the same thing. I see no reason for gays to not be allowed to marry. I see no reason to force marriage ceremonies on any church for any reason. This is actually a "slippery slope" argument I can agree with.
Wikabee....you live in a Country where gay marriage is 100% legal....can you share some insight on ALL of this.

Have you seen Canadian christians rioting because the "sanctity of marriage" is ruined?

Are Gays taking over Canada?

Are kids being forced to accept the "Gay lifestyle"?

Are gays demanding/forcing conservative churches to marry them?


Do these questions sound completely ridiculous.....well as an American these questions are the Norm from very conservative Christians and what they believe will happen when Gay marriage becomes legal.

shrewsbury
08-01-2012, 09:23 AM
alex, so equal rights is only for certain groups?

habsheaven
08-01-2012, 09:30 AM
There is no slippery slope to this issue at all. No one is going to be suing churches for the right to hold a ceremony. Both hetrosexual couples and gay couples need to request permission to be married in any Church. It has always been that way. The Church can and does refuse couples all the time. They do not have to give a reason.

AUTaxMan
08-01-2012, 09:54 AM
Comparing gays to people who have sex with animals.. Hmmm just I want to say something and it would almost be worth the suspension

That was not a comparison of the two groups. It was a comparison of legal positions.

AUTaxMan
08-01-2012, 09:56 AM
There is no slippery slope to this issue at all. No one is going to be suing churches for the right to hold a ceremony. Both hetrosexual couples and gay couples need to request permission to be married in any Church. It has always been that way. The Church can and does refuse couples all the time. They do not have to give a reason.

My primary problem with the issue is Christian churches choosing to marry homosexuals. I don't see a biblical basis for it, and I don't think churches should be doing it.

mrveggieman
08-01-2012, 10:01 AM
My primary problem with the issue is Christian churches choosing to marry homosexuals. I don't see a biblical basis for it, and I don't think churches should be doing it.


You are right. At this day and age I don't see any mainstream christian chruch doing gay marriages. However I do see a day (Im not sure if it will be in any of our lifetimes) where christanity will throw out the ban on homosexuality and gay marriage because it will be bad for business. Just like they already threw out the dietary laws in leviticus.

ensbergcollector
08-01-2012, 11:17 AM
You are right. At this day and age I don't see any mainstream christian chruch doing gay marriages. However I do see a day (Im not sure if it will be in any of our lifetimes) where christanity will throw out the ban on homosexuality and gay marriage because it will be bad for business. Just like they already threw out the dietary laws in leviticus.


dude, "they" did not throw out the dietary laws in leviticus. God did! seriously, we get that you are a vegetarian but that doesn't mean you have to misread, misinterpret, or just lie about scripture to argue for your chosen diet.

mrveggieman
08-01-2012, 11:32 AM
dude, "they" did not throw out the dietary laws in leviticus. God did! seriously, we get that you are a vegetarian but that doesn't mean you have to misread, misinterpret, or just lie about scripture to argue for your chosen diet.


Yes I am veg but do we really need to go there about all thing things in the bible non dietary related that most christians throw out?

ensbergcollector
08-01-2012, 11:40 AM
Yes I am veg but do we really need to go there about all thing things in the bible non dietary related that most christians throw out?

God threw it out. it is in the bible!!

mrveggieman
08-01-2012, 11:46 AM
God threw it out. it is in the bible!!


Really. Show me the verse(s) in the bible where he thew out slavery.

ensbergcollector
08-01-2012, 12:10 PM
Really. Show me the verse(s) in the bible where he thew out slavery.

sorry, misread your previous post where you said non-dietary related

Wickabee
08-01-2012, 12:20 PM
Wikabee....you live in a Country where gay marriage is 100% legal....can you share some insight on ALL of this.
Okay, but you missed a 'c'.


Have you seen Canadian christians rioting because the "sanctity of marriage" is ruined?
No one really seems to have noticed here. Keep in mind, I live in the "Bible Belt" of British Columbia.


Are Gays taking over Canada?
Depends on your definition of "taking over" but I would say no.


Are kids being forced to accept the "Gay lifestyle"?
Accept. Yes. Live. No.


Are gays demanding/forcing conservative churches to marry them?
I've heard/read some things about gay couples getting angry over churches not allowing them to be married, but nothing I can reference right now.



Do these questions sound completely ridiculous
Not all, and not completely.


.....well as an American these questions are the Norm from very conservative Christians and what they believe will happen when Gay marriage becomes legal.
Yeah, I know. The same arguments were made up here. The difference is Canada's population is WAY less religious than America's. That's just fact.
-----

There is no slippery slope to this issue at all. No one is going to be suing churches for the right to hold a ceremony. Both hetrosexual couples and gay couples need to request permission to be married in any Church. It has always been that way. The Church can and does refuse couples all the time. They do not have to give a reason.

I disagree. They will start demanding to be married in churches. This isn't a point against gays, it's a point against people. Any group in this position would eventually do the same.
-----

My primary problem with the issue is Christian churches choosing to marry homosexuals. I don't see a biblical basis for it, and I don't think churches should be doing it.

Well, I also believe if a church wants to perform a gay marriage, there should be nothing stopping them. If your church does it and you don't like it, maybe you're in the wrong church.
-----

Really. Show me the verse(s) in the bible where he thew out slavery.

Someone correct me, but didn't Jesus death fulfill God's contract with Abraham, essentially making Mosaic law null and void? Jesus referenced the laws because they were still effective as he was still alive. He did make sure to say that it was a good idea to follow some of the laws, but did he not say that if you loved God above all else and loved your neighbor as yourself you would immediately be following the law? Slavery doesn't sound like loving your neighbor to me.

mrveggieman
08-01-2012, 12:56 PM
Okay, but you missed a 'c'.


No one really seems to have noticed here. Keep in mind, I live in the "Bible Belt" of British Columbia.


Depends on your definition of "taking over" but I would say no.


Accept. Yes. Live. No.


I've heard/read some things about gay couples getting angry over churches not allowing them to be married, but nothing I can reference right now.



Not all, and not completely.


Yeah, I know. The same arguments were made up here. The difference is Canada's population is WAY less religious than America's. That's just fact.
-----


I disagree. They will start demanding to be married in churches. This isn't a point against gays, it's a point against people. Any group in this position would eventually do the same.
-----


Well, I also believe if a church wants to perform a gay marriage, there should be nothing stopping them. If your church does it and you don't like it, maybe you're in the wrong church.
-----


Someone correct me, but didn't Jesus death fulfill God's contract with Abraham, essentially making Mosaic law null and void? Jesus referenced the laws because they were still effective as he was still alive. He did make sure to say that it was a good idea to follow some of the laws, but did he not say that if you loved God above all else and loved your neighbor as yourself you would immediately be following the law? Slavery doesn't sound like loving your neighbor to me.

I agree that slavery is wrong and it is not an act of love towards your neighboor. My point was that christians like to pick and chose the verses of the bible that are convenient for them. The OT referrs to slavery. Everyone likes to say that Jesus said that Mosiac law is null and void but that is not the case. There is a verse in the NT (I can find it if you like) where Jesus essentially says how can you follow Him if you do not accept Mosiac law. So todays christians like to say that slavery is immoral because it makes them look racist so they throw out any OT references to slavery but the OT also says that homosexuality is immoral and they cling to that. But like I said earlier I believe that eventually christians will throw out any biblical prohibitions on homosexuality because it will be bad for business.

habsheaven
08-01-2012, 01:22 PM
I disagree. They will start demanding to be married in churches. This isn't a point against gays, it's a point against people. Any group in this position would eventually do the same.

Well, I haven't seen any straight couples suing churches to marry them after they have been denied, and it has been happening for 100's of years.

Wickabee
08-01-2012, 01:32 PM
I agree that slavery is wrong and it is not an act of love towards your neighboor. My point was that christians like to pick and chose the verses of the bible that are convenient for them. The OT referrs to slavery. Everyone likes to say that Jesus said that Mosiac law is null and void but that is not the case. There is a verse in the NT (I can find it if you like) where Jesus essentially says how can you follow Him if you do not accept Mosiac law.
That's the thing, Jesus said. That means he was still alive. That means the Mosaic Law was still in effect. What he's saying is, "How can you follow God's new law after I'm dead if you couldn't follow his old law before/while I am alive?"
Being that most of us were born long after Jesus' death, none of us are bound by any particular Mosaic Laws. Jesus said to Love God above all else and love thy neighbor. With those two acts, you will fulfill your duties for salvation.
I agree that many Christians pick and choose. They like to use the OT to say homosexuality is a sin, but then turn around and say it's okay to eat shellfish because the laws don't apply anymore. It's hypocritical, but it's no reason for you to do the same.


So todays christians like to say that slavery is immoral because it makes them look racist so they throw out any OT references to slavery but the OT also says that homosexuality is immoral and they cling to that. But like I said earlier I believe that eventually christians will throw out any biblical prohibitions on homosexuality because it will be bad for business.

You're right, they use the OT against homosexuality. Which is stupid because if you put any thought into the NT, it can be argued that the NT also speaks against homosexuality. I covered that in another thread.

Wickabee
08-01-2012, 01:35 PM
Well, I haven't seen any straight couples suing churches to marry them after they have been denied, and it has been happening for 100's of years.

I don't know of any GROUP that is constantly denied marriage by every church. So I guess that's that. We'll have to wait and see.

shrewsbury
08-01-2012, 01:44 PM
If gay marriage becomes law then anyone who can legally marry someone should have to, churches should not be excluded.

everyone should be equal, if that is the law, no exceptions.

but i hope all of you will back polygamists when the time comes, because if gay marriage becomes legal everywhere, so should polygamy.

veggie started a great thread on a christian church and mosque working together, i bet they would marry gays, because they perhaps have the right idea of the teachings of Jesus.

mrveggieman
08-01-2012, 01:46 PM
That's the thing, Jesus said. That means he was still alive. That means the Mosaic Law was still in effect. What he's saying is, "How can you follow God's new law after I'm dead if you couldn't follow his old law before/while I am alive?"
Being that most of us were born long after Jesus' death, none of us are bound by any particular Mosaic Laws. Jesus said to Love God above all else and love thy neighbor. With those two acts, you will fulfill your duties for salvation.
I agree that many Christians pick and choose. They like to use the OT to say homosexuality is a sin, but then turn around and say it's okay to eat shellfish because the laws don't apply anymore. It's hypocritical, but it's no reason for you to do the same.



You're right, they use the OT against homosexuality. Which is stupid because if you put any thought into the NT, it can be argued that the NT also speaks against homosexuality. I covered that in another thread.

Both the OT and NT speak against all forms of sexual immorality including but not limited to homosexuality and fornication between hetrosexual couples. Funny thing about that is I don't see christians speaking out against hotels or apartment complexes who rent units to straight but unmarried couples.

AUTaxMan
08-01-2012, 01:47 PM
Well, I also believe if a church wants to perform a gay marriage, there should be nothing stopping them. If your church does it and you don't like it, maybe you're in the wrong church.

I agree.

mrveggieman
08-01-2012, 01:49 PM
If gay marriage becomes law then anyone who can legally marry someone should have to, churches should not be excluded.

everyone should be equal, if that is the law, no exceptions.

but i hope all of you will back polygamists when the time comes, because if gay marriage becomes legal everywhere, so should polygamy.

veggie started a great thread on a christian church and mosque working together, i bet they would marry gays, because they perhaps have the right idea of the teachings of Jesus.


I don't really know that much about the church and the mosque that built the park together but I really doubt that anyone one of them would be doing a gay marriage anytime soon. Also you actually have a point with the polygamy. Polygamy was the norm in the bible but why aren't christians wanting to change the law to legalize it?

Wickabee
08-01-2012, 01:53 PM
If gay marriage becomes law then anyone who can legally marry someone should have to, churches should not be excluded.

everyone should be equal, if that is the law, no exceptions.
Why should a religious church be forced to bend to secular beliefs. The government should not get involved with religion just as religion should not get involved with politics. Just because religion does get involved does not mean politics should follow suit. If they want to get married what's wrong with City Hall? Why should a church be forced to go against its beliefs? How is that freedom of religion?



but i hope all of you will back polygamists when the time comes, because if gay marriage becomes legal everywhere, so should polygamy.
I agree. I draw the line at non-humans. I have no problem with polygamy in and of itself. We already have laws against the abuses that often come along with polygamy, but that's not polygamy.


veggie started a great thread on a christian church and mosque working together, i bet they would marry gays, because they perhaps have the right idea of the teachings of Jesus.

I guess we'll have to wait and see. I don't think Jesus would have been for gay marriage at all, but I also don't think he would have been involved in the conversation either.

Wickabee
08-01-2012, 01:55 PM
Both the OT and NT speak against all forms of sexual immorality including but not limited to homosexuality and fornication between hetrosexual couples. Funny thing about that is I don't see christians speaking out against hotels or apartment complexes who rent units to straight but unmarried couples.

Is anyone actually protesting hotels for allowing gay couples to rent rooms?

mrveggieman
08-01-2012, 02:08 PM
Is anyone actually protesting hotels for allowing gay couples to rent rooms?

No but christians are so gun hoe against homosexuality like it's the worst thing in the world but it is nothing more than a form of sexual immorality just like a guy and a girl who are unmarried but still having sex. You never hear about christians going to war against premarital sex with the zeal that they do against homosexuality. That sad part about it is not too long ago some of those same christians were (and still are) against interacial dating. Some people need to stay out of other people's bedroom and handle business in their own.

Wickabee
08-01-2012, 02:17 PM
No but christians are so gun hoe against homosexuality like it's the worst thing in the world but it is nothing more than a form of sexual immorality just like a guy and a girl who are unmarried but still having sex. You never hear about christians going to war against premarital sex with the zeal that they do against homosexuality.
True. You never hear Christians crying "abstinence is the only way" and trying to do away with contraceptives because they will only encourage kids to have premarital sex...wait...


That sad part about it is not too long ago some of those same christians were (and still are) against interacial dating. Some people need to stay out of other people's bedroom and handle business in their own.

I disagree. All people need to stay out of everyone else's bedroom. On the flip side, if you shove them into your bedroom, don't tell them they shouldn't be there.

theonedru
08-01-2012, 03:18 PM
No but christians are so gun hoe against homosexuality like it's the worst thing in the world but it is nothing more than a form of sexual immorality just like a guy and a girl who are unmarried but still having sex. You never hear about christians going to war against premarital sex with the zeal that they do against homosexuality. That sad part about it is not too long ago some of those same christians were (and still are) against interacial dating. Some people need to stay out of other people's bedroom and handle business in their own.

Because a lot of those hard core Christians have no issues with being immoral as long as that immorality is between a man and a woman. Look at all the famous Christians who have been caught cheating on their wives for instance we see it all to much.....

mrveggieman
08-01-2012, 03:27 PM
Because a lot of those hard core Christians have no issues with being immoral as long as that immorality is between a man and a woman. Look at all the famous Christians who have been caught cheating on their wives for instance we see it all to much.....


Ah yes, that explains a lot.....