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.
The problem I have with it is that it's just constantly at the forefront--everywhere, everywhere, everywhere.
I wish Hollywood wouldn't glorify it so much.
I wish politicians would not keep harping on gay marriage and abortion as political issues.
I wish gays would stop trying to force businesses to conform to what they want--gay pride t-shirts, wedding cakes or whatever.
The last especially bugs me--business owners should be able to conduct business (or provide a service) with whom they see fit. If gays don't like what one business does, go to another. This raising a stink, lawsuits, et al...is getting OLD.
The last does not translate to hiring or not hiring gays, either. I'm talking business owners who are ostracized for not wanting to provide a product or a service for something they don't believe in, religious or not.
How many movies have you seen that had SS couples? How many prime time shows have SS couples?
The Fact is they sued their way to over turn the will of the people. They may be winning legally but in the end it is a Sin and will not have approval by the Christian Com.
If this is nothing more than equal rights let's call it that, "A Civil Union".
To Call Gay Marriage, a Marriage is entirely anther issue.
The overturned only the will of SOME people. Since some states had already legalized SSM before the SCOTUS hearings, the federal courts have all decided legal marriage is a right for everyone, everywhere.
Since married legal privileges are not called civil unions in state constitutions, using the Civil Union terminology would require every state that does not use the term in their state constitution to re-write their constitution. And most existing federal marriage laws would also have to be re-written to change the terminology as well.
This is why the Civil Union argument has failed in the district courts.
Whether it is a sin or not is no longer defined by federal law. It is now a matter for the churches, as it should be. There is nothing in any of the laws that forbids a church's refusal to marry a gay couple. This law is a return to the constitutional separation of church and state. Any and every faith can decide for itself, which is as it should be.
Here in Utah, there is much weeping and gnashing of teeth over this. On one of the local newsites comments section, many are proclaiming the Lord is coming back soon, this is proof satan has his grip on the land, the end is nigh, etc. I am surrounded by nutjobs!
Take no chances. Stock up on tin foil, just to be safe. it's a guaranteed armor against the wiles of Satan.
According to report, licenses are being granted to SS couples now in Utah. The gov made a statement that the law is the law and Utah will comply. But who will bake the cakes?
Someone will. Most Mormons don't drink beer, but they grow the barley beer is made from.
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The constitution gave states all rights of governing not expressly given in it to federal government. That is why states still control marriage. You don't get a marriage license from federal government. All supreme court did was refuse to rule on a lower courts ruling. We have seen decades of ruling and appeals plus laws re-written on Abortion and death penalties as example. On those the supreme court actually ruled ;so this is long from settled law. There is no federal law allowing gay marriages at all and unlikely to be.
There is no single action that the conservative dominated Supreme Court could have taken to more positively assist the Republican get-out-the-vote effort for this November's election, except perhaps a an actual ruling formally legalizing homosexual marriage. And at the same time, there is nothing the SCOTUS could have done that would have more effectively pacified the sense of urgency to vote by Democrats and the left.
And this was not a ruling. It was the SCOTUS kicking the can down the road until later. There will be a ruling, it is just not going to happen this term.
I seriously doubt SCOTUS will ever agree a revisitation of the issue.
It may well energize the Repbulicans, but it could equally energize the Democrats in the states where some leading Republicans are in trouble.
Either way, I believe this is a single issue that will only work in this single election. By 2016, the issue will be gone as a tool for social divisiveness for use by either party.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 16 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,543 posts, read 16,524,552 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by xboxmas
That wasn't even the point I was trying to make, but thanks for your concern.
your point was that the definition was to "fear" and only fear, you were wrong, which made you wrong in the bigger point of what you were responding to.
Don't lump all baby-boomers in with you because you are unable to accept change. Not all of us are so close-minded. I'm at the very tail end of the baby boomers and I have no problem with gay marriage. My parents are both in their mid-80s and they don't either. The problem has nothing to do with age.
The only reason it's in the forefront right now is because it has finally reached critical mass. Kind of like the 60s were defined by Civil Rights and women's issues--when the time is right, it explodes on the scene. I'm sure you were much happier when gays were still in the closet, right? Just like many people were happier when blacks stayed in their "coloreds only" designated areas and didn't force the rest of society to acknowledge their existence.
Too bad for you, the world moves forward, whether you approve or not.
Even though the gay rights movement is nothing like the Civil Rights movement and Women's issues. Especially since its a small part of the population. The media makes it look like there are more gays than there really are.
your point was that the definition was to "fear" and only fear, you were wrong, which made you wrong in the bigger point of what you were responding to.
but thanks for dodging.
Thanks for your concern, but you don't have to be so technically just because I don't write "hate." Get over yourself.
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.
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.
