Same Sex Married Ruled the Law of the Land

[muichimotsu]

What was once just common sense that everyone understood, not has become illogical and inane and hate. Morality has become fashionable, and people in our society are sheeple following the fashion leaders, who as often as not are wolves in sheep's clothing.

Way to paint with a broad brush, clearly not everyone behaves in that way.

 

[frenchdefense]

LWU - respectfully can reduce the size of that pic ? Bandwidth is a scarce resource and to be honest it a little large and makes scrolling kind of a hassle.

Thank you for your consideration

 

[SolomonVII]

It is a fact that there are people who are waiting in line for "marriage equality" for polygamy, incest, and inappropriate behavior with animals. So try to give me a logical reason for why it can't happen instead of just saying that it can't.

In terms of what is the law of the land, the bottom of the cliff has already been reached anyway.
Polygamy and incest are both closer to actual marriage, and inappropriate behavior with animals is just weird, and nothing more than just another personal sexual preference, no more or no less weird than what is already acceptable. It is a matter of judgement, and "who are we to judge" crowd defers, now as a matter of legal precedent actually.
That is the judgment of the courts at any rate.

 

[frenchdefense]

But not with His Father's words on the subject of homosexuality.
And didn't Jesus always do the will of His Father?

Since They're both the same entity I fail your see your point

 

[LivingWordUnity]

What was once just common sense that everyone understood, not has become illogical and inane and hate. Morality has become fashionable, and people in our society are sheeple following the fashion leaders, who as often as not are wolves in sheep's clothing.

These videos explain the psychology of why the people who were against changing the definition of marriage suddenly changed their minds in unison with the group.

 

[muichimotsu]

In terms of what is the law of the land, the bottom of the cliff has already been reached anyway.
Polygamy and incest are both closer to actual marriage, and inappropriate behavior with animals is just weird, and nothing more than just another personal sexual preference, no more or no less weird than what is already acceptable. It is a matter of judgement, and "who are we to judge" crowd defers, now as a matter of legal precedent actually.
That is the judgment of the courts at any rate.

You'd really argue that violating familial bonds with romantic love is better than two people who aren't related but happen to be the same sex getting into a committed relationship? Wow...you think you've heard the most reprehensible argument against marriage rights for gays, but you certainly surprised me. So boinking your daughter is better than two men who aren't related at all getting into a faithful relationship? Good to know that's where you stand, at least you're honest

inappropriate behavior with animals has issues for a number of reasons, none of which are religious in nature

There's a difference between "who are we to judge" and "judge not, lest ye be judged by the same standard," I don't agree with the former because it's relativism in its purest form, I advocate the latter because I value integrity.

The courts didn't say "anything goes" or there wouldn't be any need for them to keep looking at precedent and laws from the past, like Loving v. Virginia as establishing a penumbra of privacy that covered marriage as a civil right.

 

[SolomonVII]

Since They're both the same entity I fail your see your point

Catholicism believes in the three persons of the Trinity.

.

 

[muichimotsu]

Wow, thanks for the lesson that I think no one really needed..it's not like that really qualifies much, since it's regard as a "mystery" anyway.

Bottom line, the post seems entirely redundant and self promoting.

 

[SolomonVII]

These videos explain the psychology of why the people who were against changing the definition of marriage suddenly changed their minds in unison with the group.

What would be more interesting is to note the people who resist the group pressure and maintain their own point of view. We all want to fit in, and we are taught from a very early age to conform, to sit in neat rows, to raise our hands in unison, wait our turn with the group, and on and on.
But the person who does not go along with the group, even when the group will turn against him, taunt him with derogatory terms, ridicule him, accuse him of hatred and dishonesty and of being of despicable character, and any manner of things, is the one who needs explaining.

Christ serves as the example of the man who stands alone for many Christians who have resisted the overwhelming pressure of the mass society to conform on this issue.

It is not that Christians are any more immune to group pressures and group dynamics than anyone else, or have stronger will, but to the extent that they have sound understandings of the teaching of their Church, they understand that they never stand alone, because Christ is always standing right there along with them, when they are doing the right thing.

It was really a radical and revolutionary teaching, for Christ to show us how to stand up for what is right, in spite of the overwhelming pressure of the group, including being spat at, mocked, ridiculed, and in his case at least, much, much, much more.

 

[SolomonVII]

...

 

[briquest]

Your cut and paste skills are excellent

1 peter 4:11
King James Bible
If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

 

[briquest]

Don't patronize me, I can crack open a bible and find it myself: I'm also not entirely unfamiliar with these scriptural appeals anyway, because that's most of the arguments I see.

 

[muichimotsu]

Is that supposed to be compelling to me? You have no basis to assume I'm such a simpleton that I'm going to take the testimony of one person as authoritative merely because I prefer the label Buddhist, though atheist might work just as well.

 

[.Mikha'el.]

MOD HAT OFF!

Thread permanently closed for numerous rule violations!

MOD HAT ON!