U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-15-2015, 02:25 PM
 
Location: Central Florida
2,063 posts, read 1,727,419 times
Reputation: 1901

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
2 are grown (early 20s), one in 5th grade.

We have been together for a long time, she carried one I carried 2. It wasn't a hard decision at all, we both chose to carry when we were ready and wanted to. We would have possibly adopted but it was not legal for us to do so.

It sounds like you are very brave to enter into a same sex relationship like this in a bible belt state but that you two have lasted through it all . Has it ever been hard ?

About adoption . I have to say with so many unwanted unloved children growing up in foster care maybe the states should expand who is eligible to adopt and who isn't? Children who grow up with love become better more well adjusted adults. How much love do they get in foster care?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-15-2015, 03:01 PM
 
7,399 posts, read 4,439,629 times
Reputation: 8341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
You wanted me to respond to your post, then you post new drivel?

Why can't you anti-religion people understand the difference between "no establishment of religion" vs. the interpretation of separation of church and state? The FF's just did not want the government mandate a religious ruling authority such as the Church of England. However that is a far cry from what atheists are trying to do today be removing every aspect of religion from public life. They forget the part where it reads no law "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" ;

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Simple words to understand unless someone wishes to subvert them for their own warped beliefs.

As to allowing change, yes they were visionary's enough to know societies evolve as times change. So they left a mechanism for us to do so, if the overwhelming majority of citizens wanted such change. So we can amend our Constitution if need be.
However liberals who know their kooky ideas will never be approved by any such large majority it takes to amend the Constitution, so they want to do an end around by having unelected liberal judges do it for them.

`
Not at all. No one is asking for laws to prohibit the free exercise of religion. The concept of "god" is a religious belief. As such, it should be practiced in private life, as individuals see fit. It has no place in public life, as that requires forcing the religious concept of "god" onto others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 04:32 PM
 
103 posts, read 73,122 times
Reputation: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petunia 100 View Post
Not at all. No one is asking for laws to prohibit the free exercise of religion. The concept of "god" is a religious belief. As such, it should be practiced in private life, as individuals see fit. It has no place in public life, as that requires forcing the religious concept of "god" onto others.
Not true. "Religion" is a organization, and does not necessarily have a connection to a God. Some people believe in God and are not religious. Some religions do not have a God. Banning religion from government does not necessarily mean banning the idea of God, or the believe in a God's existence. This is an illogical falsehood perpetrated by atheists and it undermines their legitimacy, IMO because if they are this dishonest and illogical with this false assertion (God means religion), then how wrong are they everywhere else.

Atheists exist only in terms of what they claim to not believe in. They haven't any other reason for existence. Collectively they exist only for the purpose of denying the existence of God, and to contradict the beliefs of others. They have no beliefs of their own and because of this aren't really qualified (as a group) to participate in any democratic process. However some Atheists do assert their existence as a religion, and claim all rights and privileges therein, which directly contradicts your point, since they are a religion that's fundamental perspective is that there IS not God.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 04:55 PM
 
Location: Sunrise
10,869 posts, read 13,653,187 times
Reputation: 8987
How do you manage to get through life day to day?

This is a thread about equal rights. Mythological figures need not enter this. "Gays can't marry because God said so," makes as much sense as "Gays can't marry because the Tooth Fairy said so."

Your dogma has no place in our republic. Because your dogma isn't the same as everyone else's dogma. My mother in law's Buddhist dogma is different from my cousin's Jewish dogma which is different from whatever it is that motivates you. (And whatever it is probably isn't O2 -- just a guess.)

Go find a nice theocracy where everyone believes exactly the way as you. The entertainment will suck. But you'll all go straight to whatever afterlife you think awaits you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 04:56 PM
 
7,399 posts, read 4,439,629 times
Reputation: 8341
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlasphemer View Post
Not true. "Religion" is a organization, and does not necessarily have a connection to a God. Some people believe in God and are not religious. Some religions do not have a God. Banning religion from government does not necessarily mean banning the idea of God, or the believe in a God's existence. This is an illogical falsehood perpetrated by atheists and it undermines their legitimacy, IMO because if they are this dishonest and illogical with this false assertion (God means religion), then how wrong are they everywhere else.
Which part is not true? I did not claim that all religions have a "god", so your point is unclear. The fact that some don't hardly proves that the concept of "god" is appropriate for public life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlasphemer View Post
Atheists exist only in terms of what they claim to not believe in. They haven't any other reason for existence. Collectively they exist only for the purpose of denying the existence of God, and to contradict the beliefs of others. They have no beliefs of their own and because of this aren't really qualified (as a group) to participate in any democratic process. However some Atheists do assert their existence as a religion, and claim all rights and privileges therein, which directly contradicts your point, since they are a religion that's fundamental perspective is that there IS not God.
Atheists are people. Any subset of the population has the same reasons to exist as any other. Religious beliefs are not a prerequisite to participating in the democratic process. What a laughable notion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 10:10 PM
 
7,945 posts, read 3,736,154 times
Reputation: 10418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petunia 100 View Post
Not at all. No one is asking for laws to prohibit the free exercise of religion. The concept of "god" is a religious belief. As such, it should be practiced in private life, as individuals see fit. It has no place in public life, as that requires forcing the religious concept of "god" onto others.
How absurd. No one is forcing religion on others just because it is in a public area. That is like saying billboard advertising is forcing their product on others, yet I do not see atheists going out of their way to protest and file suit against Coke or Pepsi.
If they don't believe that is fine, but looking at a Christmas tree or nativity scene is not suddenly going to turn them into Christians. Nor is that the purpose of such things. Frankly I do not care what other people think religion wise as it is none of my business. However they make it my business when they go out of their way to stop my enjoyment of traditions I have celebrated my entire life.
What this is really about is them wanting to feel included and part of the group. Since they cannot due to their belief system, they want others to be made to recognize them.
In some ways the same goes for homosexual activists. They are not satisfied to just be left alone, they must be try to tear down traditional America because they behavior will never be acceptable to a majority of people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 10:31 PM
 
107 posts, read 95,593 times
Reputation: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlasphemer View Post
Not true. "Religion" is a organization, and does not necessarily have a connection to a God. Some people believe in God and are not religious. Some religions do not have a God. Banning religion from government does not necessarily mean banning the idea of God, or the believe in a God's existence. This is an illogical falsehood perpetrated by atheists and it undermines their legitimacy, IMO because if they are this dishonest and illogical with this false assertion (God means religion), then how wrong are they everywhere else.

Atheists exist only in terms of what they claim to not believe in. They haven't any other reason for existence. Collectively they exist only for the purpose of denying the existence of God, and to contradict the beliefs of others. They have no beliefs of their own and because of this aren't really qualified (as a group) to participate in any democratic process. However some Atheists do assert their existence as a religion, and claim all rights and privileges therein, which directly contradicts your point, since they are a religion that's fundamental perspective is that there IS not God.
I don't want to derail this thread but ****ing lol.

Atheists are under no obligation to be a part of a religion to enjoy equal rights. They are also an implied protected group under various legislation that forbids discrimination on the basis of religion and creed (even if atheism is not a religion, the sentence 'forbids discrimination on the basis of religion and creed' is also including atheists, agnostics, etc), and the establishment clause of the constitution reinforces that. The idea that their entire existence revolves around being nothing and challenging everyone is also hilarious.

Between demonising atheists and homosexuals the two of you have a really sad vision of what America should me. Let me explain petunia means:

"public life" basically means not in the government, judicial system, public education, etc. That doesn't mean banning churches or whatever overreaction you're thinking. Christians can be openly Christian in public, as can atheists, heterosexuals, LGBT people, etc. But religion and atheism have no place in public (i.e. government related) decision making. That way everyone can choose for themselves without fear of retribution!

btw, nobody cares when there is a nativity scene at a church. It's when it's on government property that it becomes an issue (though personally I wouldn't care much). A church is technically "private" property (that term doesn't mean only in your house or w/e). If it was Coke or Pepsi I would be pissed and yeah I would protest it 'cause who wants Coke and Pepsi even more in government affairs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2015, 05:57 AM
 
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
9,286 posts, read 16,139,171 times
Reputation: 11272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
How absurd. No one is forcing religion on others just because it is in a public area. That is like saying billboard advertising is forcing their product on others, yet I do not see atheists going out of their way to protest and file suit against Coke or Pepsi.
If they don't believe that is fine, but looking at a Christmas tree or nativity scene is not suddenly going to turn them into Christians. Nor is that the purpose of such things. Frankly I do not care what other people think religion wise as it is none of my business. However they make it my business when they go out of their way to stop my enjoyment of traditions I have celebrated my entire life.
What this is really about is them wanting to feel included and part of the group. Since they cannot due to their belief system, they want others to be made to recognize them.
In some ways the same goes for homosexual activists. They are not satisfied to just be left alone, they must be try to tear down traditional America because they behavior will never be acceptable to a majority of people.
I don't believe you and yours are in the majority any more..... in fact, I believe that acceptance is in the majority now.......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2015, 06:14 AM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
19,428 posts, read 9,752,402 times
Reputation: 7535
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
How absurd. No one is forcing religion on others just because it is in a public area. That is like saying billboard advertising is forcing their product on others, yet I do not see atheists going out of their way to protest and file suit against Coke or Pepsi.
If they don't believe that is fine, but looking at a Christmas tree or nativity scene is not suddenly going to turn them into Christians. Nor is that the purpose of such things. Frankly I do not care what other people think religion wise as it is none of my business. However they make it my business when they go out of their way to stop my enjoyment of traditions I have celebrated my entire life.
What this is really about is them wanting to feel included and part of the group. Since they cannot due to their belief system, they want others to be made to recognize them.
In some ways the same goes for homosexual activists. They are not satisfied to just be left alone, they must be try to tear down traditional America because they behavior will never be acceptable to a majority of people.
The problem comes when some want special rights to put up their displays on public property, but want to keep all others out. Either everyone is allowed to use public land for their decorations or no one is. Kind of like the whole Oklahoma 10 commandments statue. They want to put their religious decorations up and not allow any others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2015, 07:16 AM
 
10,404 posts, read 7,492,263 times
Reputation: 18356
There are anti-discrimination laws in place for all people. Gays are not more important than anyone else. Enforce the existing laws. (my opinion)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top