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.
Didn't the bible say that man has free will and at anytime can repent and will be forgiven. Jesus forgave Judas even after he sold JC out which led to his death.
Yes, that is true. But it doesn't mean it's okay to sin or approve of sin.
Here's one for ambient: Why does it hurt you to stop making blanket statements?
Not all Conservatives are against gay marriage. The only thing I'm against is making this a federal issue. The Federal government does not belong in your bedroom, but you all just gave the Federal government that power. Why the hell would you do such a thing?
It should have been a state decision. It should have been up to each individual state. Why people in this country want the Federal government all up in their homes I will never understand.
Who do you think ended interracial marriage bans? It was not the states in the end, it was the supreme court. Rights are not up to a vote by the majority, never should be.
conservatives blew it. In order to win the 2004 Presidential election, they pumped up the fear of terrorism and the anti-gay marriage rhetoric.
I remember when homosexuals just wanted civil unions, and conservatives said not only wont you get civil unions we are gonna pass a defense of marriage act to rub it your faces.
To be clear the defense of marriage bill passed during Bill Clinton's presidency not in 2004.
Homosexuals were able to use our society to slowly turn those opinions around. The election of President Obama and his getting Congress to end don't ask don't tell, was a harbinger of that change.
Maybe just maybe if conservatives would have relented on civil unions back then and not passed the defense of marriage bill, we wouldn't be here.
Why people in this country want the Federal government all up in their homes I will never understand.
Well, I would extend that question to state governments as well. No government should be in our homes or bedrooms. Unfortunately, those days are long gone.
Make no mistake, this ruling will not be respected. There is an authority that is over the Supreme Court and the US government, which is God, and this is not within the authority of the Supreme Court or our government to redefine.
There is no such thing as homosexual marriage. There never has been and never will be.
Civil disobedience to this ruling is certainly required from everyone who worships God more than the corrupt humanism that has clearly overtaken our government on this issue. And I expect we will see that.
The decision does not mean that any church or minister has to marry gay people.
It means that civil marriages must be respected from a legal standpoint.
The vast majority of Christians I know support the Supreme Court decision.
a business CAN discriminate if they are asked to do something that goes against their religious beliefs. for instance, if a gay couple wants to buy a bunch cupcakes for a party, thats fine. but if that same gay couple wants to buy a wedding cake for a gay wedding, and the owner of the business is against gay marriage on religious grounds, then that owner should not be forced to provide the couple in question a wedding cake.
the owner should also not have to have the militant gay lobby threaten them with bodily harm, property damage, or even death. like all businesses, if you dont like the fact that a particular bakery doesnt supply gay weddings, then dont frequent that business, go some where else.
remember that one persons rights END where the rights of another begin. you may have the right to get married to your same sex partner, but i have the right to refuse to service that wedding.
and dont forget that state laws allow business the right to refuse service to anyone.
Why should any one of any religion have the right to use that to trump business law that everyone else must follow without getting exemptions. Sorry, that does not gel.
Make no mistake, this ruling will not be respected. There is an authority that is over the Supreme Court and the US government, which is God, and this is not within the authority of the Supreme Court or our government to redefine.
There is no such thing as homosexual marriage. There never has been and never will be.
Civil disobedience to this ruling is certainly required from everyone who worships God more than the corrupt humanism that has clearly overtaken our government on this issue. And I expect we will see that.
Any decision that comes out of such institutions as the USSC is ALWAYS going to have two sides, one that celebrates, the other that is bitter. It is natural. You happen to be on the wrong side on this one, but I'm sure there are other cases you celebrate. No?
This is about extending public benefits that government has engaged in providing to the people. It is logical, and the right thing to do. Religious pandering by governments is a violation of the US Constitution (although, even USSC justices can be guilty of that... they are human).
Roberts is going to be very scrutinized over this in comparison to the Obamacare decisions. He dissented today. Very curious. Read his remarks and it sounds like two different people.
I've disagreed with him all three times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biscuitmom
So what? It's a lifetime appointment, he doesn't worry about the scrutiny.
If he cares about his name and history books, he would. As they say, "wrong side of history." First when that boondoggle Obamacare, which he twisted and contorted to uphold, eventually implodes being that it's basically unsustainable... and then with dissenting on today's decision.
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.