California Proposition 8

Does that include bigoted false christians who can't help but reach for the speck of dust in their neighbor's eye?

And yes, the spirit of the law can make a case in the constitutional law.

 

It looks like this will be defeated in the courts.

Apparently California law does not allow constitutional revision with less than 2/3rds majority. The challenge will argue that the amendment is in fact a revision and thus the 2/3rds rule applies.

 

So where does the Constitution support same sex marriage? If you're trying to quote support, show me something about same-sex in print in the Constitution.

 

The constitution is silent on the subject of marriage, gay or straight.

that's why bigots on the right tried to get an amendment passed denying this fundamental right once and for all.

I take issue with the idea that the laws of the land are meant to give public approbation to the exercise of those freedoms enumerated therein. Freedom of speech, for instance, covers the KKK but confers no sense of approval on bigotry and racial intimidation.

Likewise, the argument that allowing gays to enjoy the same rights as straight couples is somehow an injury to traditional marriage is pretty backwards, not to mention un-christian. We are talking about secular marriage. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's.

As far as discrimination, it was always unconstitutional to deny marriage to heterosexual couples of different races, yet it took clarification for the states to recognize that. All your arguments against gay marriage are the same old arguments that were used to resist interracial marriage, and they had all the religious zeal then that they have now.

I have my own theory, that bigots who resist gay marriage are secretly ashamed that they have been attracted to another man or woman at some point in their life. Instead of handling it like grownups, they lash out. That, and some people just get a good feeling from limiting the rights of others. It's the same backwards majoritarian view of political philosophy that seems like a great idea until you become the minority.

 

I guess you can say that the Old Testament of the Bible is un-Christian, since it pre-dates Christ. But it does say this:

Leviticus 20:13
If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
​

Gee, I guess Moses just wasn't handling it like a grown-up.

 

wow, I can't believe you took the bait on that one...

There you have it folks. The religion of salvation and compassion, and its effect on its followers.

 

The pro-gay lobby tried this desperate approach in Oregon a few years ago, and it failed miserably. A concise, narrowly focused amendment is not a "revision."

Marriage is a social compact, not a private contract. Society is free to choose what types of familial arrangements to support and encourage with the legal benefits of marriage. It's hardly "unchristian" to uphold a foundational social institution, nor is heterosexual marriage a uniquely Christian concept.

Again, neither the 14th nor 19th Amendments mandate an androgynous redefinition of marriage. You can spout this drivel all you like, but I'm confident that the Supreme Court won't be following your tortured logic.

:smilielol5:

Now you fancy yourself a psychologist? Stick to comical legal theories!

 

"Took the bait" implies that I fell into some kind of trap unwittingly. Please explain.
Nowhere do I find in the Bible anything like "It's fine for a guy to suck cock", or "It's fine for two women to be lovers and raise a child with no father present." I could be wrong. If so, please enlighten me. If not, don't hand me any more "un-christian" bullshit.
I don't think the Moslem faith will support your gay rights position either. In fact, these guys tend to be pretty intolerant -- I'd keep your views pretty silent if I were in a Moslem country.

 

do you remember what jesus told those very religious fellows who wanted to stone to death a woman for committing adultery?

Huck, here's what you don't get: in 10-15 years, homosexuality will become socially accepted to the degree that a majoritarian view of politics is likely to oppress you instead of gays.

you are making a stupid mistake.

 

If the citizens of the United States would ever push for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment I think all this would be moot. But it still needs 3 more states, and everyone seems to have forgotten about it.

http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/overview.htm

I'd love to see it ratified before I die.

 

No but the 14th amendment does mandate equal protection under the law

Since the rights and privileges of marriage are conveyed through civil law, then to prohibit certain individuals from entering into such a contract, you are denying them equal protection.

 

Do any of you realize it took Alabama until 1999 to repeal it's ban on inter-racial marriages.

But:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17600-2005Feb11.html

And for you christians with a small c that claim same sex anything is an abomination:

Galatians: 3:28

 

ugh, thanks gardener.

I have to admit I was splitting my time answering threads, and my case was getting weaker and weaker. Nice infusion.

 

I am very disappointed with my State, have been since the Governator was imposed on us by the republican party.

Much as Lieberman was imposed on Connecticut.

I am heartened that today's youth may once again hear the voice of reason and justice, instead of being driven by wealth and fashionable popularity. But this was a step backward.

I hope for a day in the near future when our youth don't pick their college studies by what a profession makes but by where their talents and passion lies.

 

oddly, I hope the dems don't make it to 60 with lieberman, because it would be yet another election where the real winner is lieberman.

But I do hope Franken gets in. That would be a hoot.

 

Lieberman was never a democrat. And I'll be glad someday to see the end of his oversized smirk. Even my Jewish friends don't like him.

 

How? Will heterosexual marriage be banned? Will churches be forced to marry homosexuals, scrapping the 1st Amendment? I don't think so.

No, it's the pro-gay lobby that has shot itself in the foot by trying to force its agenda through the courts, instead of persuading the public. They would have (eventually) had less difficulty legislatively overturning California's statutory ban on gay marriage than they'll now have trying to overturn a constitutional amendment.

Again, read this commentary that I cited earlier:

http://www.cpjustice.org/stories/storyReader$1178

Do you seriously want to debate biblical teaching on homosexuality? This verse is specifically talking about the equality of all believers in Christ as heirs of God's covenant with Abraham. It has nothing to do with marriage or sexual morality.

 

Churches are free to install whatever restrictions they wish in their own practice as long as they do not recieve Federal funds, support, or special protections.

But they should be aware that their small minded restrictions only apply within the church not society at large. If people wish to enter into civil unions performed in civil ceremonies, the church has no authority.

In the United States we have freedom to practice whatever religion we wish.

Exactly all believers in Christ. There are no distinctions.

 

I'm not sure how to argue when you believe in going far beyond what the actual text of the law is, but I think Lawrence et al. v. Texas in 2003 specifically applied the 14th amendment to homosexuals.

I'd guess you'd agree with the decent in this case, and agree that there should be sodomy laws now.

 

As secure as you feel as a member of a majority right now, demographic trends are about to sideline you. Nobody cares what your church is going to do. The generation growing up right now is noticing that gays are regular people who want to lead regular lives. They are the next door neighbor, maybe your boss, maybe your teacher, maybe the popular kid, maybe the guy who just gave you a haircut, maybe the gal who just asked you if you needed help finding your way in a new city.

I am married, but not because a church says I am. I am married because the state says I am. I am married to a woman. It has nothing to do with your god. It's none of your business. I don't want your approval, and I don't need it.

Like I said, majoritarian political philosophy loses its appeal when you become a minority. Don't think it could happen to you? You are a fool. As a follower of Christ you should be focusing on helping the least among us, not obsessed with hanging on to your wealth and controlling the lives of others. If you believe homosexuality is a sin, fine. But there is no hierarchy of sin. It is no better or worse than stealing a piece of candy as far as your god is concerned.

It is not your rules that make you like Christ, it is the focus of your life. Based on the example of people like you, I concluded that Christ has no power to change our sin blackened hearts into shining beacons of compassion and love. Prove me wrong.