Proposition 8 overturned in California

[pgp_protector]

I still read "We the people......" in the beginning of the US constitution. I wonder if it should read 'We the people that are the minority but want to stuff it down the throats of the majority.......".

So was that a Yes or No

(Also it doesn't stop at "We the people")

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

[Jase]

I still read "We the people......" in the beginning of the US constitution. I wonder if it should read 'We the people that are the minority but want to stuff it down the throats of the majority.......".

But it's fine for the majority to stuff their laws down the throats of the minority, regardless if it's constitutional or not?

This is not a democracy. The Us Constitution exists to prevent exactly what you want - tyranny of the majority. It's in place to protect minorities.

 

[BigBadWlf]

I still read "We the people......" in the beginning of the US constitution. I wonder if it should read 'We the people that are the minority but want to stuff it down the throats of the majority.......".

We the people includes ALL the people including minorities. Even minorities you don’t like.

Why should your right to discriminate against minorities trump the rights of those people to equal access and equal protection under the law?

 

[BigBadWlf]

BUMP

By your statement there, should that mean that any marriage not at a Christian church shouldn't be allowed? After all muslims, hindu's, and such don't accept your god, so they arn't accepting his gift, but accepting the gift of a false idol?

Suezybeezy: you were asked a very good question and I for one would like to see your answer.

 

[Hentenza]

But it's fine for the majority to stuff their laws down the throats of the minority, regardless if it's constitutional or not?

This is not a democracy. The Us Constitution exists to prevent exactly what you want - tyranny of the majority. It's in place to protect minorities.

LOL!! Then I guess from now on we should elect our leaders by whoever received the less votes or pass whatever referendum received the less votes.

 

[Hentenza]

We the people includes ALL the people including minorities. Even minorities you don’t like.

You don't know me BBW. You can't possibly know if I dislike anyone.

 

[Gishin]

I believe marriage is a gift from God and thus needs to honor God. I do not feel homosexual marriages are unions that God would join together as one. Since the enemy has such a stronghold on the demise of this world, I'm sure at some point homosexual marriages will be recognized by the states, but I strongly believe they will never be recognized as married in the eyes of the Lord. As the Bible instructs "man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one," - it doesn't say man shall leave his mother and father and cleave to his husband and the two shall become one - the Bible is clear, not ambiguous.

The California government will do what they need to do to get votes, not what's right and proper before God, which is a shame, imo.

If I'm not married (by your definition) why does the government recognize it? Would you vote to have my marriage annulled?

 

[Gishin]

So much for the will of the people.

As history as shown, the will of the people can be terrible and cruel.

When there are two wolves and one sheep, what's for dinner shouldn't be decided by popular vote.

 

[SithDoughnut]

LOL!! Then I guess from now on we should elect our leaders by whoever received the less votes or pass whatever referendum received the less votes.

The Constitution does not stop majority rule, it limits it. The minority are not stuffing anything down your throat, they are asking for exactly the same rights as you have. I guess stuffing black rights down the throats of the majority was bad too, because the majority should have total control over anyone who isn't the majority.

I have a question: how do gay marriages affect straight marriages in any way?

 

[MoonLancer]

LOL!! Then I guess from now on we should elect our leaders by whoever received the less votes or pass whatever referendum received the less votes.

Well that has already been done. Didn't Gore receive MORE votes then Bush?

How about this. lets say gays are the majority. Will you still support the will of the people if straight marriage is voted illegal?

If Christianity is voted illegal by the majority will you still support the will of the people?

I think if these events were to happen you would be chiming a different tune. So please dont hide behind "will of the people" if you dont actually believe it if you become the minority.

 

[Gishin]

If we go up a bit we have:

"And He answered and said to them, 'Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,'"
—Matthew 19:4 (NKJV)
"But from the beginning of the creation, God 'made them male and female.'"
—Mark 10:6 (NKJV)

When Jesus was asked questions about marriage he went straight back to the defining passages in Genesis that say that marriage is between male and female. He saw the creation accounts in Genesis as authoritative. While Jesus did not specifically teach on homosexuality marriage, His establishment of the Genesis passages as the fundamental passages on marriage (even more fundamental than the Law) leaves no doubt as to the outcome.

I do not deny that many homosexuals feel deeply for their partners; however I do assert that no matter how deep the feelings, what they have is not a marriage in God's sight. God will stand as the sole judge of any society that institutes same sex marriages.

What does any of this have to do with our secular government?

 

[Gishin]

LOL!! Then I guess from now on we should elect our leaders by whoever received the less votes or pass whatever referendum received the less votes.

Reductio ad absurdum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thank you come again!

 

[Hentenza]

The Constitution does not stop majority rule, it limits it. The minority are not stuffing anything down your throat, they are asking for exactly the same rights as you have. <snip>

The bill was voted in by the majority not by the minority. That is the way it works in a democracy. That is my beef when a court disregards the will of the people in favor of an agenda.

 

[Gishin]

The bill was voted in by the majority not by the minority. That is the way it works in a democracy. That is my beef when a court disregards the will of the people in favor of an agenda.

Constitutional republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki strikes again!

 

[MoonLancer]

The bill was voted in by the majority not by the minority. That is the way it works in a democracy. That is my beef when a court disregards the will of the people in favor of an agenda.

So you support the majority passing laws that violate rights of a minority. Yes or No.

 

[suzybeezy]

Originally Posted by matthewgar

By your statement there, should that mean that any marriage not at a Christian church shouldn't be allowed? After all muslims, hindu's, and such don't accept your god, so they arn't accepting his gift, but accepting the gift of a false idol?
​

Suezybeezy: you were asked a very good question and I for one would like to see your answer.

Well, if a person is married in another religion they are still following the concept ordain by God, still in his ordinance set forth in Genesis of being a man and a woman.

 

[MoonLancer]

Well, if a person is married in another religion they are still following the concept ordain by God, still in his ordinance set forth in Genesis of being a man and a woman.

except without the whole god part

 

[pgp_protector]

The bill was voted in by the majority not by the minority. That is the way it works in a democracy. That is my beef when a court disregards the will of the people in favor of an agenda.

Psst we're not a democracy.

 

[Gishin]

Well, if a person is married in another religion they are still following the concept ordain by God, still in his ordinance set forth in Genesis of being a man and a woman.

So as long as it looks like we're paying lip service to God's concept it's ok?

 

[Jase]

If we go up a bit we have:

"And He answered and said to them, 'Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning 'made them male and female,'"
—Matthew 19:4 (NKJV)
"But from the beginning of the creation, God 'made them male and female.'"
—Mark 10:6 (NKJV)

Only partly true since we have intersex people and people with gender dysphoria. None the less, making them male and female has nothing to do with sexual orientation. Gay men are still male, and gay women are still female.

When Jesus was asked questions about marriage he went straight back to the defining passages in

Genesis that say that marriage is between male and female. He saw the creation accounts in Genesis as authoritative. While Jesus did not specifically teach on homosexuality marriage, His establishment of the Genesis passages as the fundamental passages on marriage (even more fundamental than the Law) leaves no doubt as to the outcome.

How do you know Jesus considered Genesis literal? Did it ever occur to you that he quoted Genesis, because his target audience believed in it, not because it was necessarily literally true?

And once again, just because Jesus referred to a man and woman in marriage, doesn't exclude any other form. 99% of Jesus' audience (and 100% assumed ) would have fit into that standard mold.

I do not deny that many homosexuals feel deeply for their partners; however I do assert that no matter how deep the feelings, what they have is not a marriage in God's sight. God will stand as the sole judge of any society that institutes same sex marriages.

I think he'll judge all the conservatives who did not show Christian love to their gay brothers and sisters more harshly.