Gay marriage bans struck down :) (lawyer, party, money, propaganda)

[thefragile]

Originally Posted by Emigrations

Unrestricted freedom is anarchic. I hate to use the slippery slope argument, but I think it holds some validity here with regard to polygamy, incest, etc - any two adults who want to enter a union can do so.

And? How does that affect you? Who cares, if two consenting adults want to get busy, let them. One can take anything & try to turn it into a slippery slope argument. Waste of time & energy. Gays can get married now, deal.

[jjrose]

Originally Posted by Emigrations

Even though the ruling had wording to "protect religious liberty," I don't remain convinced this will be the case in practice. Like I said previously, a church cannot simply refuse to perform an interracial marriage because they are conscientious objector. That is where this leads.

Churches ALREADY refuse to marry interracial couples (2 years ago), black couples (last year), inter faith couples, and even one case where the preacher didn't approve of the brides dress. As far as I know religion, and race are covered under federal anti-discrimination laws. So if you believe that SSM being legal would lead to churches being forced to marry anyone, please explain how they are not forced to marry people of other religions, or races.

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by Emigrations

Like I said previously, a church cannot simply refuse to perform an interracial marriage because they are conscientious objector.

Of course they can. They do.

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by Emigrations

I hate to use the slippery slope argument...

Then don't. See how easy that was?

[mkpunk]

Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA

Of course they can. They do.

Most gays know not to goto churches for their ceremonies unless their church accepts homosexuality because God is forgiving rather than smiting.

[arctichomesteader]

The danger to religious liberty is not so much to organized religion as individuals who don't want to be forced to offer services to assist with a homosexual marriage, such as baking cakes, hosting a reception, etc. Gay marriage is a non-issue if the rights of religious individuals are protected.

[Serious Conversation]

Originally Posted by mkpunk

Most gays know not to goto churches for their ceremonies unless their church accepts homosexuality because God is forgiving rather than smiting.

But now the law is on their side. These boundaries are going to be pushed, and hard.

[EinsteinsGhost]

Originally Posted by Emigrations

Unrestricted freedom is anarchic. I hate to use the slippery slope argument, but I think it holds some validity here with regard to polygamy, incest, etc - any two adults who want to enter a union can do so.

So you don't believe in personal freedoms, either only selective (that you approve of, or a mob that you consider self to be a part of). Never claim to be a supporter of personal freedoms, especially when you want to influence the freedoms of another person.

Your personal freedoms are yours and should be, as long as you don't push self into the freedoms of others... the essence of first amendment.

[twinArmageddons]

Originally Posted by Emigrations

Unrestricted freedom is anarchic. I hate to use the slippery slope argument, but I think it holds some validity here with regard to polygamy, incest, etc - any two adults who want to enter a union can do so.

I see zero issue with consenting adults entering into any union that they want to.

[Hyperthetic]

Let Freedumb Ring!