Advocates seek to expand gay rights

Gays were not discriminated against before. Lots of gays have been married to the opposite sex. I can give you a long list of them of you'd like. Marriage was defined as a union of one man and one woman. Now the word has no meaning at all.

I hardly think that gays were arbitrarily discriminated against. Gays weren't discriminated against because marriage was between one man and one woman for centuries. If it were so important to redefine marriage to allow same sex marriages, then why not do it through a Constitutional Amendment? After all, the recently converted liberals and the democratic party to include Presidents Obama and Clinton and their lovely wives, as well as a majority of the public were suddenly for gay marriage or so I'm told. Americans don't want gay marriage and that is just a farce. Even in liberal California it failed twice miserably. Only a few powerful liberal judges and politicians caved to the every changing demands of political correctness police and pushed this through the courts without any real legal or constitutional justification. It is an illegitimate victory and it will be used to persecute non-believers.

 

The word lost its meaning when 50% of those marriages ended in divorce and adultery became commonplace.
Heteros have done more damage to the sanctity of marriage than gays could ever hope to do.
So relax, if marriage has survived adultery and divorce, it will survive gays getting married.

 

Perhaps if we taught people better morals and perhaps if the federal government didn't have so many anti-family policies we could improve those numbers.

The whole point of gay marriage is to destroy marriage and the church.

 

Got it:

Now, take a deep breath, let out slowly and relax. You will NOT be forced to believe that same sex marriage is right, but you must accept that the Supreme Court said that legal marriage IS a right and open to all couples, straight or gay. And if you run around the workplace, disrupting the functioning of it, you will probably get a warning or two, and then find yourself on the outside looking in. Most businesses have no use for people like that.

 

Go to HR in any corporation and ask them to prove diversity is beneficial to the company and provide evidence. It will end your career because you'll be labeled a bigot and/or racist. That's a fact. The same way if someone openly apposes gay marriage. Those that wanted it will be very vocal and plenty will keep their mouths shut or nod. I agree with it but wouldn't denounced those that don't. I respect people are allowed to have differing opinions without being persecuted. Liberals have no such thought process. Either agree or be destroyed

 

you are ignoring the fact that sexual orientation isn't a protected class there is nothing to discriminate against

 

They can't.

 

What the SCOTUS decided won't be celebrated for long. They will rally around some other form of "just cause victimization" to force their acceptance into normality. Their main target is (and always has been) Christianity, so I expect we'll see plenty of attacks on churches who won't perform gay weddings similar to those we've witnessed on bakeries and other business who sight religious grounds for their refusal to accept gay acceptance. And hell, why not? I mean, they just witnessed the WH lit up with rainbow lights, so they know they have support in high places!

 

What's so hard to understand? I don't get it. You have the freedom of religion - means you don't have to have gay sex, smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, watch bad TV - it doesn't mean you can alter legislation to impact millions of people and use a blatant smear tactic to scapegoat religious belief for your own bigotry.

For decades those of the religious slant have dictated the rights of others to them. No more. Get used to it - your religion, your choice - but you don't get to influence policy that removes the right of others, not any more.

- - - Updated - - -

And rightly so - as it is the main vehicle used by bigots and racists to push their hate filled agenda. You have rights - you get to practice your bologna bull(*)(*)(*)(*) religion - but you don't get to force the morals of that nonsensical BS religion on everyone else.

That's EXACTLY what the founding fathers CAME HERE TO ESCAPE.

 

Gay marriage has no effect what so ever on opposite sex marriage or the church.

- - - Updated - - -

Of course they can

 

Maybe not legally, but, because, after years of effort on their part, they've been awarded victim status, today's cultural does protect them, especially against any form of Christian based morality. Hell, kids are being fed gender fluidity as early as 2nd & 3rd grade and parents who object are basically being told to shut-up and sit-down. So, you can argue they aren't a protected class, but it's a futile argument at this point.

 

A foolish argument. Of course, it has an effect. You can't change the very fundamental concept of marriage as being 1 man & 1 women without it affecting the ones who accept that as it's definition. Furthermore, the traditional concept of marriage is a bedrock of the Christian faith and I dare say most churches, so it's utter nonsense to say it won't "effect" them. And, seeing how quickly the gay rights organizations have pounced on opportunities to sue businesses who claim a right to religious liberty, it won't be long before they strike Christians churches who refuse to perform gay weddings.

 

This scripture was read yesterday by my Southern Baptist Preacher, and couldn't be more meaningful than these days.

Jude 17 - 21

17 But, dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. 18 They said to you, “In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.” 19 These are the people who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.

20 But you, dear friends, by building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, 21 keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.


Even if you're not a religious person, that's got to be interesting if you're able to see the forest from the trees.

 

Not as far as Nature concerns no, they can't. Butt sex never made no children.

 

It isn't an argument. It's a statement of fact.

Are you married? If so, explain for us in detail how your marriage has been affected since Friday.

Won't affect them in any way.

They can strike anyone they wish. Religious institution are not required to marry anyone. This ruling has no effect on that.

- - - Updated - - -

You seem to think homosexuals are sterile. Go back and read the post you originally quoted, and you'll see why you are again wrong.

 

Also, shall we talk about fundamentally different upbringing forced on the children, who are denied their natural right to mother and a father? Nature has always intended to have two role models in the upbringing of kids, a muscular and feminine. Arguing about single mother or father brining children up is nonsense, for they can always remarry.

 

Yeah but who walks into a place and announces their sexuality besides someone fishing for attention? That's a distraction no matter who or what you are and I don't want anyone with that type of persona working with or for me, or eating at my diner or living in my apartment or house. In other words, don't be a drama queen and you won't be treated as such.

 

Imagine the reaction from the left if blacks, illegals, gays, and muslims were all at odds with each other and looking for the usual pass they get from the left. Thank God all the righties are in the same category.

 

You've contradicted yourself. If they can do anything the others can do, then they can refuse service. Gays do it to Christians and get away with it. It's all about being a drama queen. Anyone that fits that is unwelcome in my place of business.

 

Christians have to be the whiniest batch of cry baby demagogues ever coughed up from the gullet of rich-poor oppression, in the history of mankind.

Don't like equality? Move to (*)(*)(*)(*)ing Siberia.

 

I disagree. If you don't want my service, I don't want to give it to you. Then again, I'm not the type that likes to make a scene and attract attention to myself in a public place.

 

That's also another reason I don't show my ass at a restaurant or drive through.

 

What does any of that have to do with the unity between one man and one woman? Kids thinking marriage was just the next step in spicing up a boring relationship and getting married before they were ready is why so many marriages end in divorce. However, the meaning is still the same.

 

Marriage has never been defined in the Constitution. Even you do not have a Constitutional right to marriage.

So if this was really such a huge issue for you, why did you not agitate for a Constitutional Amendment decades ago? Why is this only a big deal now? Did gays not exist decades ago?

There is no Constitutional degradation because this has never been a part of the Constitution. If you rely on implied laws, you will always have situations like this because you are choosing to leave it up to the courts to interpret. It's your own fault.

Of course we understand that. It's a risk. This is what happens when you refuse to enshrine your ideology into explicit law.

But we both know the power precedent carries in our system, and this risk is now very low.

For all practical purposes, yeah, it's over. Not because of this court decision, but because of the ideological drift in the population. There is no longer a majority that wants to fight this, and that is why the fight is over. This is not like the abortion debate, where it is roughly equal...there is a very obvious movement in one direction on the gay marriage issue.

The numbers from all the current polls match those. You've lost the debate.

Probably. And they will still lose. Because of precedent and because of public opinion. You would need to get at least 2 more conservative judges in there to even have a possibility for it to be overturned, and that is not looking likely in the near future.

No, they will be put into prison because of their actions. No one has ever been put in prison because of their beliefs in modern America. That is hyperbole.

Churches can waive their tax exempt status and completely ignore the government. I could start a private club today excluding black people and the government could do nothing to stop me.

If you want to be free of government control over your club, it's easy to do...stop taking government money.

LOL, no. If you believe that then you do not understand how laws work. No law forces you to believe anything. Laws only force you to act certain ways. You can have beliefs and actions that are not the same.

"people who believe that marriage should only be between people of the same race will be targeted, harassed, demonized, called bigots, boycotted, protested, forced out of business or fired from their jobs"

Sound familiar?

 

Having parents is not a legal right.

If Some guy donates sperm, and the kid grows up with only his mother, the kid will not be able to sue the sperm donor because he did not raise the kid. He has no legal right to that.

If our society really believed that this was so, it would be explicitly enshrined in law. But it's not. And there is no major movement active to change that.