Can opponents of gay marriage give a single way that it interferes in their lives?

Yep. I've noticed that a lot of homophobic expressions and rhetoric stems from a need to transfer responsibility of one's own choices, onto a scapegoat or proxy. In the end, that stuff just boomerangs right back to the person trying to cast it off.

 

Yeah, it's bad.

 

I have him on ignore but every time he posts it's like I have this morbid fascination and curiosity to see what he said. It like when you can't help gawking a bad accident.

 

Yeah, my ignore list is pretty long. Most stay on it permanently and others go on/off depending upon me wanting to answer them on a specific topic.

 

Make a relevant point if you can

 

Freedom of religion in the first amendment makes no allowance for intolerance based on a persons sexual orientation.

Your freedom of religion does not allow you to encroach upon the freedoms of others. Your religious rights end where my rights begin.

 

Freedom of religion is the First Amendment.

 

Right? So you think you have a right to be served by any business you desire to be served by?

 

I guess you haven't been paying attention. They've been sued, they've been attacked, they've been demonized, they've been forced to accept gay leaders which is against their religious beliefs and they have forced a split in the organization which is tearing it apart. They have used the government to kick them off of public grounds and schools and revoke their tax exempt status.

Of course gays can't form their own scout group the purpose of which would be to recruit children into the gay lifestyle or molest them.

 

Wrong! Individual employers do not have the right to discriminate against you because you're Black, or obese, or an (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) in the way you speak, or a female, or pregnant, or ugly, or a Christian or Muslim.

Why should they have the right to discriminate against you because you love a person of the same sex?

You, as an individual, can be as much as an (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) as you would like. YOU as an employer, cannot discriminate. . .or at least you shouldn't have that right. . .against gay people!

 

In practice homosexuality would be performed in the bedroom. In reality it is forcing it's beliefs on the public and those who refuse to yield to their demands will be punished both civilly and criminally.

 

The battle against gay marriage has long been lost, and it’s inevitable that in time, it will spread out to all 50 states. If West Point is hosting gay marriages, than the Vatican will eventually. Marriage went from being a social institution to civil right with benefits and prizes. But during that battle, I’ve been told over and over that it doesn’t affect me and it doesn’t affect my marriage.

Yet no sooner did the Supreme Court rule, the story changed, and I was told gay marriage meant there is a new (gay) sheriff in town, and his name is Intolerance.

In New Mexico, a photographer who declined a job offer of photographing a same sex commitment ceremony was sued by New Mexico’s Human Rights Commission even though New Mexico doesn’t even have gay marriage or civil unions. The photographer’s defense was on First Amendment grounds, but the First is gradually joining the Second in Amendments the left no longer recognizes.

There is of course the more famous Washington State florist case, and the Oregon bakery case.

These aren’t religious institutions, these are individuals, and it looks like individuals are having their rights peeled away. I can’t be indifferent to gay marriage, or even merely tolerant of it, the law is gradually going to force me to love, love, love gay marriage.

Religious institutions will eventually get theirs. The people on the left who say they support religious freedom sure were supportive of the Obama administration’s initiative to force Catholic institutions to provide contraception. If they can do that, they will eventually force churches to perform gay marriages. That already happens in Europe and our time is coming.

I knew the promise that their marriage wouldn’t affect me would turn out to be a lie, but I admit I’m surprised with how rapidly we’ve gone to, “I just want my partner and I to have what you have,” to “ You’re not allowed to ignore me, you must provide services for my over the top marriage extravaganza! And if you don’t, I’ll see you in court!”

Oh, and please stop calling yourself a social libertarian. You're not. No one who supports the diminishment of the First Amendment as these examples show, is in any way a libertarian.

 

Apparently the gays want to dictate to the rest of us what we must believe.

 

So being gay is a leftist thing now? What are you basing that on.? Are there statistics, studies that confirm that most gays are lefties. Ever hear of GOPROUD or the Log Cabin Republicans?

 

QUOTE=PatriotNews;1063285361] Homosexuals make up only 1.6% of the population. Why must they force their Satanic religion on the rest of us?[/QUOTE]
Satanic religion? Really ? You are a shameless troll and flame baiter! Where the hell to you get this crap from, except those pesky voices in your head?

 

Except you aren't arguing for the right to religious freedom. What you're advocating - the liberty to discriminate against others for their failure to comply with certain religious beliefs - is a mockery of the First Amendment protections of religious freedom. Private religious organizations should be able to discriminate all they like - so long as they don't take a dime of taxpayer money, use taxpayer-funded facilities, or receive taxpayer-funded services. Doing business with the general public and suckling at the teat of taxpayers is not a protected religious practice.

Dodging the questions won't make them go away.

Is it your contention that holding a religious belief entitles one to discriminate against groups of people in business practices regulated by the law?

Is it your contention that religious organizations should enjoy some special exemption from the law that other organizations do not?

Is it your contention that people who hold religious beliefs should enjoy some exemption from the law not afforded to those who hold no religious beliefs?

Answer this time, or I shall take your silence as cowardice.

 

Taking away the First Amendment rights of religious people is discrimination.

 

I am the source. It is my personal belief. I guess you don't believe in my First Amendment right to free speech anymore than you believe in a First Amendment right to freedom of religion. I have come to this conclusion by observation of the behavior of the GBLT community over the last few decades.

 

So you're presenting an opinion as a fact. I think that there is a rule about that too. You are truly shameless!!

 

I believe in free speech and freedom of religion. Your distorting and abusing both

 

From what I've observed in your own statements, it appears that you are the one who thinks you can tell "gays" what they are allowed to think and believe.

Further confirming what I said above. You aren't arguing on behalf of religious freedom, but advocating special rights for persons who hold religious beliefs to discriminate against others who don't conform to their beliefs.

Having a religious belief doesn't entitle you to an exemption from the laws.

I have never once "sodomized" someone in another's place of business or a house of worship. But we can see what this is really about - it's a negative obsession over a sexual act. What other "sinners" do you think religious people have a special right to discriminate against? Clearly it's not based on what the person is doing at the time of the business transaction - it's about having a hissy fit over their ability to exercise their own freedom in the privacy of their own homes in a way that doesn't conform to one's religious beliefs. So it bears repeating - this is not religious freedom. This is asking for a special right to ignore the law in order to discriminate against fellow citizens who don't conform to your religious beliefs.

 

But forcing Christian beliefs on the public one deals with in a business transaction is just fine? Nevermind the ridiculous notion that homosexuals are united by some sort of belief system.

People who break the law will likely face civil and criminal legal consequences. Religious belief does not trump the law.

 

People are still allowed to worship according to whatever religion they choose; that is what comprises religious freedom - not this desire to harm one's fellow citizens through actual discrimination.

 

Hey, no-one procreates spontaneously ,keep it real please ,but I do support your point.

Boy imagine what a boring place this would be with Spontaneous procreation. Or maybe not!

 

What was it, 10 examples, not a one of them in an employment situation, and the first thing you run to is employment discrimination. 10 examples, every one of them regarding homosexuality, and you run to "Black, or obese, or an (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) in the way you speak, or a female, or pregnant, or ugly, or a Christian or Muslim". Are you building the strawman or dashing for refuge into irrelevant tangents? And in fact employers can discriminate because you are obese, or an (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) in the way you speak, or ugly, have freckles or because you are gay, in most local jurisdictions that haven't enacted these silly laws regarding sexual orientation.

For the same reason they do have the right to discriminate because you are obese, or an (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) in the way you speak, or ugly, have freckles or because you are tall, short, have those big floppy ears or bushy eyebrows. They can prefer people who are not obese, not an (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) in the way you speak, not ugly, not have freckles, not tall, short, with those big floppy ears or bushy eyebrows. Nothing special about being gay.