The Governator Seeks to Terminate Gay Weddings

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
Well since that other thread is closed I will say that I do apologize for threatening physical violence to your person.
It just goes to show what we Christians always say is that noone is perfect but Jesus. I also know our opposition would say "oh look there is another imperfect christian" well yes I am imperfect just like everyone else. I have all the same temptations as everyone else and strive to deal with them. Jesus does help me in so many ways. Name calling angers me very greatly and if anything would tend to make me violent it is that. I wouldn't stand for anyone being called names and belittled in my presence, let alone myself. I pray for the wisdom to handle things how Jesus would.

Thanks. I'm sure name calling is a really big sin but punching someone in the face for namecalling is perfectly acceptable.
BugsBunny's ideal first amendment:

Congress shall make no law denying christianity as the one true religion , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom to punch someone in the face if they don't like what they said, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to pray to the christian god, and to petition the government for the imprisonment of all non-believers.

 

[BugsBunny1078]

lol now you're talkin.

 

[Romans828]

Originally posted by: Shanti

Originally posted by: Romans828

Allthough you appear share my views in the abortion debate.......... I must step in this thread

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

This establishes freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. Infact we laws or rules are pased that prohibit prayer in school, religious ceremonies, Christmas decorations/nativity scenes etc, it flys directly in the face of this very amendment.

You realize the constitution is supposed to be the basis for our laws right?

You realize the Bible/Christian faith is the basis for our Constitution?

To suggest this country was founded on anything but strict Christian princibles is revising history

I agree with you partially. Prohibiting a student from choosing on his own to pray while in school or prohibiting a student from wearing a cross does "fly directly in the face" of the first amendment.
Prohibiting schools from "establishing" a prayer time or having nativity scenes or christmas decorations, however, is perfectly in line with the prohibition against establishing a religion.

Private citizens have the right to practice their religion and freely express themselves in public. Government run agencies like the public school system do not have the right to do anything that promotes one particular religion over another. Having a public school put up christmas decorations is a subtle way of establishing christianity as THE standard religion. Therefore it violates the constitution and should not be allowed.

I agree, we have freedom OF religion not freedom FROM religion when it comes to our personal lives.
But we should also have freedom FROM government sponsored religion.

Yes, I know that our constitution was influenced by biblical law. That does not change the fact that the first amendment prohibits the establishment of religion. This clause was added to prevent the kind of religious prosecution that occurs when the government sanctions and establishes one religion over another. Government should NOT be in the business of favoring one religion over another or even of favoring any religion over the lack of religion. That is not freedom and freedom is what our country should be about.

I agree with you on the abortion issue because of basic moral decency and humanity, not because of religious beliefs.

I can't say I agree with your entire response but I would like to commend you on how well your point is articulated, also your polite and civil tone is very much appreciated.

I think our only real "hang-up" between you & perhaps conjur and I is the "establishment" part. Government officials are not the same thing as "the government", so its not appropriate to prohibit their expressions. Also understanding the framers intentions with respect to "establishment of religion" is to important to omit or otherwise pretend that its not relevant. The framers were concerned with the government proscribing one particular form of Christianity over another NOT WHOLE RELIGIONS over one another. That is a "modern" interpretation.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Romans828

I can't say I agree with your entire response but I would like to commend you on how well your point is articulated, also your polite and civil tone is very much appreciated.

I think our only real "hang-up" between you & perhaps conjur and I is the "establishment" part. Government officials are not the same thing as "the government", so its not appropriate to prohibit their expressions. Also understanding the framers intentions with respect to "establishment of religion" is to important to omit or otherwise pretend that its not relevant. The framers were concerned with the government proscribing one particular form of Christianity over another NOT WHOLE RELIGIONS over one another. That is a "modern" interpretation.

Establishment of religion is certainly open to interpretation.
I believe that government officials are representatives of the government when they are at work performing their government funded jobs.
So while I think it would be ok for a public school teacher to wear a cross, yarmulke, etc., I do not think it is ok for a public school teacher to have the children make christmas decorations for the classroom as a class activity.

But back on topic, I believe that preventing gay couples from marrying or even insisting that they call it a civil union is discrimination. And I believe that regardless of the stated reasoning, the true reason is disapproval based on religious views.

It is rather interesting to be on the same side of this issue as most of the people that I have intensely disagreed with on so many other issues. Along with the national healthcare, that's two issues in one day where I at least partially agree with the libs. Just goes to show that not everyone can be labeled as purely conservative or liberal.

 

[BugsBunny1078]

Gay couples can marry. As long as one gay person is a man and the other gay person is a woman they can marry.
There is no discrimination since I cannot marry a man any more than a gay man can.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
Gay couples can marry. As long as one gay person is a man and the other gay person is a woman they can marry.
There is no discrimination since I cannot marry a man any more than a gay man can.

You bigots keep going round and round in a circle ion your one track circle of bigotry. Your whole thinking process is guided by your bigotry. The meaning of marriage in our society today, right now, aside form the legal rights conferred to married couples, is to take a sacred vow of love before the world to honor and cherish that other person. Gays, some gays, are asking to be able to do that for the person for whom that have that feeling. They want to be able to pursue happiness equally as others Constitutionally can, by marring the person they love. Otherwise we can keep the law as it is but you draw a wife by number if you want to marry. You should straights get to marry an opposite sex of their choice. Marriage isn't fundamentally about the sex but the choice in our society. You just don't want that to happen because you are bigoted toward gays. It's completely irrational and doubtless religiously derived. You are simply too immature to have overcome the obvious bigotry contained within your religion and have swallowed the notion that you can't be wrong on top of everything else. That's what makes religious nut cases that can't be wrong so dangerous. You are totally locked away from a capacity for rational thinking. You have created a mental state called Hell your religion was originally designed to save you from. The key has become the lock to your prison.

We were taught to hate ourselves and that has made us anxious to hate. All we need is something to tell us it's OK. That need for something other than the self to hate, which is the source of it all, has been used from before the time of the Bible, and most certainly in the Bible too, to collect together power groups united by hate. Every Messenger of God has his or her message turned by haters. Hate is the ego that will not die. Hate is a bigoted opinion. Hate turns the Kingdom of Heaven into an insane asylum. You call that insane asylum reality.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
Gay couples can marry. As long as one gay person is a man and the other gay person is a woman they can marry.
There is no discrimination since I cannot marry a man any more than a gay man can.

you have the right to marry a person of the opposite sex that you may love but probably don't just like everyone else!

 

[DealMonkey]

Any-way, back OT:

S.F. Gets a Week to Make Case for Gay Marriage

SAN FRANCISCO ? The California Supreme Court refused to immediately halt this city's same-sex marriages on Friday but decided that it would swiftly consider whether to review the legal challenges to those nuptials.

The state's highest court gave San Francisco seven days to present arguments to the judges why they should not immediately order the city to stop marrying gay couples and invalidate the 3,400 licenses already issued.

The city also plans to ask the court to determine whether the state Constitution protects same-sex unions.

<snip...>

 

[BlackJesus03]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
Well since that other thread is closed I will say that I do apologize for threatening physical violence to your person.
It just goes to show what we Christians always say is that noone is perfect but Jesus. I also know our opposition would say "oh look there is another imperfect christian" well yes I am imperfect just like everyone else. I have all the same temptations as everyone else and strive to deal with them. Jesus does help me in so many ways. Name calling angers me very greatly and if anything would tend to make me violent it is that. I wouldn't stand for anyone being called names and belittled in my presence, let alone myself. I pray for the wisdom to handle things how Jesus would.

Who ever said Jesus was perfect? It certainly doesnt say that in your great book, because even the quacks who wrote that knew it would be too much for the dumbest people to believe. Oh well, i guess they were wrong. If old J-man was perfect he would've found a way to get his message across without dying, because that way everyone wins. And if you're gonna say that the impact would'nt have been the same if he hadn't died, then maybe you need to look up perfect in the dictionary. Here, ill get you started so you don't get confoused since it isn't writen in a 2,000 year-old book. Dictionary.com