Bigotry nonsense

I don't see where my personal sexual preferences come into this discussion.

 

Your "Christian" faith (beliefs, interpretations, indoctrination) is NOT everyone else's.

And that is what this will all boil down to.

Keep RELIGION OUT OF GOVT. and AWAY from the influence thereof.

We need to stop fracking around with this foolishness and take on issues that really matter.

 

Jesus’ disciples are disturbed by his strict teaching on divorce. The disciples say that if divorce is not a ready option, perhaps it would be best for a man not to marry a woman. Jesus responds:


“Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.” (Matthew 19:11-12)

Here Jesus identifies three classes of men who should not marry women. Taking his categories in reverse order, first, there are those who have made themselves “eunuchs” for the kingdom of heaven, i.e., those who foreswear marriage to better serve God.

Second, he mentions those who have been “made eunuchs by others,” an apparent reference to castrated males. But Jesus mentions a third category — eunuchs who were born that way. Some might argue that Jesus was referring to males born without testicles, but this would be extremely rare. Moreover, this interpretation ignores how the term “born eunuchs” was used in other literature of the time.

 

I was refering to judging you as far as religious practices.

The way it works is, someone asks you, is it legal to run red lights ?
And you show them where it is written, thou shalt not run a red light.

The decide to do it anyway and get a traffic ticket, they go before a judge, and are found innocent or guilty, in this particular Court, if you repent for running the red light, this judge will dismiss the case.

We are all guilty of sin, if I lie and cheat and steal and fornicate, I need to repent and ask forgiveness.

Jonah was angry, why ? Because God forgave the people of Nineva, some folks seem to want others to go to hell.

 

Your logic escapes me as well. I heard about Ga, I seem to remember it was more that just gay marriage. Maybe not. Got a poll showing the majority in Ga don't want gay marriage and not just a loud minroity?

A guy with several wives hurt me none. Now how the gov't handles it legally, Not sure. If a gay is gay and a guy marries more than 1 women and a drunk is drunk. How does that affect you if you don't let them into your house. I say it doesn't.

Can the family dog sign on the dotted line for consent. I'm sure you heard this answer a 1000 times but still were juvenile enough to ask it.

Are white supremacists doing it out of love or hate? There is a difference, in case you didn't know.

 

Oh foolish one. You are a bigot because it is a sin in your mind.
But I say you sin every day, either thought, word, or deed. So that would make one a hypocrite on top of a bigot. 5 stages to recovery.

 

Tell us this was a typo so it doesn't show the stupidity of the response. Did the folks at the bakery turn gay? Forced into gayism?

NO. NOT at ALL. Tell us you didn't mean what you typed. For your sake.

- - - Updated - - -

You aren't wrong because of your age. You're wrong because you don't know much about life. Age has nothing to do with it.
Own the bigotry. Be proud. It is who you are, based on your responses in your thread.

 

You have yet to say anything biblical in your defense.
Jesus is about love and tolerance. You don't seem to even be in the same universe as Jesus.

 

Not ALL us the bible as the guide. Matter of fact, most of the world doesn't.
So you go by the bible, and let those who don't, not have to go by what you perceive the bible to say. For you are as wrong as the next christian who says something different that you about the bible.

 

the bakers are now Gay?

if you make a wedding cake that says "Happy Wedding to Paul and Mike", you will start being Gayish?

dude, what planet are you on?

 

Actually, a person who confused homosexuals and pedophiles is ignorant.

- - - Updated - - -

Really? So if the government said you had to go to bed with people of the same sex you'd say, "Okay."

 

Wasn't refering to you personally but in general. If someone has "feelings" to children then he's a pervert.

 

But it is clear and in context.

That's not what the founding fathers wanted. The first amendment states COMGRESS shall make no law respecting an establiment of religion or PROHIBITING the free exercise thereof. The states, according to the constitution, can establish its own religion if it wants.

Like?

 

Take your beliefs and live by them. Trying to impose them upon others doesn't help one damned thing.

Learn and remember that.

 

I will try here. First I do NOT have a position on polygamy yet. I have not formulated one. The decision in Loving Vs Virginia (interracial marriage) actually describes a process of reasoning that courts are to use to balance the perceived affront to equal protection secondary to discrimination (treating a class like gays or polygamists or blacks or jews unequally) that a statute entails, with a perceived public interest or concern that the statute is designed to resolve. The test is NOT never do it. The test is that government can treat classes differently if they have a 'compelling public interest' and they are writing the law to narrowly address that need. In other words they have to have a really good reason and they have to craft the law so that it does no more harm to the class, than is needed to address the public problem.

The mere fact that the government could not prove that it had a really good reason to treat two gays differently in marriage law, does not say anything about whether they have a really good reason to refuse a license based on the number of people requesting one. The government is bound to have very different things to say when it tells the court why it won't marry 3 people or 6 people. The legal brief is not going to say it is 'unnatura'l or it is inconsistent with traditional biblical marriage, or that a man and two wives cannot produce natural offspring. Its going to offer up a bunch of excuses or reasons it has to treat four people differently than two. Maybe those reasons will be more 'compelling' or maybe not. But we have to read the reasons in the legal briefs, before we can ask ourselves if they are good enough. So does the courts.

Oh yeah and link please to the Georgia statute or decisin. I am hoping this isn't the one where the marriage-for-profit business pretends its functioning as a church.

 

No they are not. They are not even "required" to perform opposite sex marriages either and never have been. This aspect of the recently passed "law" is pure redundancy to something already covered by the 1st amendment and designed to scare voters into getting their knickers in a twist. Looks like it worked.

 

You're all over the map and missing the point. The law was passed by a majority close enough that they threatened to try and overturn the governor's veto.

IF the test about whether something affects you or I, then that is an easy one. Be it inter-racial marriage, same sex marriage, people with multiple spouses, etc. ALL of it has a societal impact.

For example, a dude marries a dude. Like it or not, they cannot reproduce. Since they cannot reproduce, when they get old there is not an American taxpayer to be paying into the system they are drawing out of. That means we have to replace that American with a foreigner. So, sure, all of this ultimately affects my life.

It appears that, in your view, if I can teach a dog how to write his name (and it could be done with the pen in the dog's mouth), they are capable of marrying. Dumb people give "consent,' so there's no test to determine if any individual is mentally competent. I guess equal protection could apply to a dog.

As for white supremacists, it doesn't matter what compels a man to have an odd view. Our society loathes and despises the white supremacist that they do not talk openly about what they are or their beliefs - as compared to gays or liberals in general.

 

Again, counselor, IF there were no threat, based upon recent court decisions, the legislature would not have introduced the bill. Forget never have been. You're attempting to build an argument on a lie. And then you presume to know current law (which you don't) to further your erroneous conclusions.

You're wrong. Let's leave it at that.

 

Lots of words... no substantial meaning. The holier than thou, pretend you're a lawyer stuff isn't working.


http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/display/20152016/HB/757

 

I knew this was a total waste of time. It almost always is.

You don't have to be a lawyer. You just have to care enough to understand that just because two math problems use the distributive property of multiplication to find the solution, does not mean that the equations are the same, let alone the answers. You think that because 5 X 4 = 20, it follows that 5 X anything will have to = 20. I am telling you have to know what the 'anything' is going to be to know what the result will be. Your problem isn't that you aren't lawyer. Its that your bias does not allow you to want the legal answers to be different.

By the way your link shows that a bunch of hick legislators felt the need to pass a piece of useless redundant legislation for a leg up with their base come election time. it does not show a problem needing fixing.

 

Of course they would. They do it to scare the gullible into thinking there's a threat (especially in an election year) so said gullible will vote to "protect" them from that threat when the time comes around.

No that's what they're doing since no pastor or religious officiate of any stripe has ever been forced to marry any couple straight or gay. It's different if they're running a for profit business but in church, mosque, synagogue etc. that's never happened in the US and Obergefell does nothing to change that.

Oh, I know the law just fine thanks.

That's going to be a "no" then.

 

Love? Yes, absolutely! Tolerance? No. Not in the way you think. Was Jesus being tolerant when he said "I'm the way, the truth, the life and no man comes to the father except through me"? Jesus was tolerant when he said "I come not to bring peace but a sword". Jesus was being tolerant when he said "if you offend the little one who believe on me it would be better that a millstone was tied to his neck and drown in the depths of the sea". Jesus was being tolerant when he called the Pharisees and Sadducees hypocrites a sons of satan. Jesus was being REAL tolerant when he made a whip and overturned the moneychanger's tables at the temple. You see boys and girls its a one way street on double-standard Avenue. I'm supposed to be tolerant of his beliefs but he doesn't have to be tolerant of mine. After all he isn't all that tolerant of my young earth creationists beliefs.

 

It's a sin period. It's a sin to God, nature, and humanity. It's a sun to God becuase the Bible says so. It's a sin to nature because it does not contribute to the cycle of life. It's a sin to humanity because it spread deseases.

 

I said they did something similar. They forced there gay pride on the bakery infringing on the bakery's rights.

- - - Updated - - -

So in other words you're a bigot to young people.

 

And again you have a tirade and irrelevant rant, you can feel anyway you want and do lots of stuff, However, you can't legally go around punching out gay people.

You do not have to entertain Gay people in your home, however, if you own a public burger joint, you can't legally ban Gay people from it.

Now from a very early age, I was beat up by bullies and tortured as being "GAY" called a (*)(*)(*), queer, homo, and systematically sexually abused and accosted and raped many times by those bullies, so I know a little something about it.

This vile treatment was not a choice, it was forced on me by horrible boys my own age.

No mere acts of simply pushing and shoving, I was beaten severely, kicked mashed into cement and concrete sidewalks, pelted with rocks and bruised badly and bleeding many many times.

I was always thin and frail, blond hair, blue eyes, very naive, feminine somewhat in appearance, and a magnet for bullies.

This is wrong, to abuse Gay people with violence, treat them badly, or to deny an apartment to a lesbian couple then rent it to someone else.

Or to deny any qualified Gay applicant a job, or benefits to a Gay marriage, trouble is when people want to obfuscate the equal civil rights issues with nonsense and hatred and vile second class treatment For Gays and compare it to marrying an animal and other illegal vile practices.

Bottom line is Equal rights for Lesbian and Gay couples.

No special treatment for Gay people but no discrimination either, just the same treatment you afford a straight couple, no forcing a religion to accept them either, there are enough religious groups that welcome all that wish to join.