Tennessee opposes gay marriage with a bit that would allow child marriage.

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Sorry, but you 'know' nothing......
Wrong again. I can support my claims. I think that you may be projecting. I can support my claims and will gladly do so. I have not ever seen you support your claims properly.

Do you want to learn how we know that there was no Flood of Noah? We can go over to the Evolution and Creation part of the forum and have a discussion.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
If you are not willing to respond to questions we are done.

I always answer properly formed questions. You made a demand that I was not willing to obey. And you were given an explanation of why I would not was not a valid explanation. All you could do was to repeat a petty demand.
 
Upvote 0

renniks

Well-Known Member
Jun 2, 2008
10,682
3,445
✟149,430.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Tennessee marriage bill with no age limit sparks backlash over child bride concerns

Okay, to be honest they did fix that by adding a minimum age. But think about it, the person writing that bill thought that it was more important to oppose gay marriage than to protect children from abuse. Not to worry, it will not pass constitutional muster anyway, but why get one's panties in a knot about what other people are doing in the privacy of their own bedroom?
Fake news. So they originally failed to specify an age ..that doesn't mean they approve of child brides.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: rjs330
Upvote 0

civilwarbuff

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 28, 2015
14,720
7,158
✟627,350.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
Wrong again. I can support my claims. I think that you may be projecting. I can support my claims and will gladly do so.
You have been given ample opportunity to do so.....have at it.
 
Upvote 0

civilwarbuff

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 28, 2015
14,720
7,158
✟627,350.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
Have at what? You need to ask questions properly at the correct time. Your request is out of context and I am unsure as to what you are referring to.
Have at it.....Sorry, I only speak Suthern Ahia........
 
Upvote 0

muichimotsu

I Spit On Perfection
May 16, 2006
6,529
1,648
37
✟106,458.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Fake news. So they originally failed to specify an age ..that doesn't mean they approve of child brides.
Doesn't mean they thought it through either, the intention meant nothing when they didn't consider the application, which is legislation 101, as if these goobers seem to have any kind of forethought versus pandering to their base
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,287
Frankston
Visit site
✟750,190.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
Again, marriage is not for one group to dictate, especially with unsubstantiated nonsense like God creating humanity. All this bluster about purpose and stuff being imposed on us is authoritarian tripe and yet you think it's emblematic of "freedom" somehow while prostrating and submitting yourself wholly, leading to self loathing tendencies.

When the only difference between a marriage between a man and a woman and a man and a man or a woman and a woman is superficial at best, you're showing how myopic your view is that your deity somehow has the final answer without substantiating it with anything sound
If same everyone was in a same sex relationship, the human race would never have been established. Hardly a superficial difference. You object to God's ways. That's your problem. Freedom is not licence. No one will agree that we should be able to murder anyone at a whim. Yet God's law also governs marriage. Societies can choose to ignore God's ways. There are consequences. And words do mean something. A dog is not a cat. Same sex unions are not marriage.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
If same everyone was in a same sex relationship, the human race would never have been established. Hardly a superficial difference. You object to God's ways. That's your problem. Freedom is not licence. No one will agree that we should be able to murder anyone at a whim. Yet God's law also governs marriage. Societies can choose to ignore God's ways. There are consequences. And words do mean something. A dog is not a cat. Same sex unions are not marriage.

Let's see if you can figure out why this is a very very bad argument.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: NxNW
Upvote 0

Gene2memE

Newbie
Oct 22, 2013
4,179
6,394
✟280,243.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
If same everyone was in a same sex relationship, the human race would never have been established. Hardly a superficial difference. You object to God's ways. That's your problem. Freedom is not licence. No one will agree that we should be able to murder anyone at a whim.

Do you understand the difference between actions that have informed consent and actions that don't have consent? Comparing marriage to murder is such a poor argument that it does you a disservice.

Yet God's law also governs marriage. Societies can choose to ignore God's ways. There are consequences. And words do mean something. A dog is not a cat. Same sex unions are not marriage.

A marriage is two adults agreeing to a legal union. It doesn't need to involve religion. My marriage didn't involve any religious content.

Historically, for the majority of recorded history, marriage have been a civil matter. Even for Christians. From a Catholic historian (written during Australia's debate about gay marriage):

"In the first millennium the Church accepted marriage as a secular reality and there was no Christian ritual accompanying its celebration. It ‘belonged’ to the family and to civil authorities. The only role that the Church played was to discourage Christians from partaking in any pagan practices contrary to the Christian spirit (like sacrificing to idols).

...

...From the 4th century (when Christianity was recognised as the accepted religion in the Roman Empire) there was the possibility of a liturgical blessing during the household wedding. By the 9th century this mutual consent had to be given in the presence of witnesses but remained a civil and familial ceremony.

...

It was in the Middle Ages that the Church first named marriage as one of the seven sacraments and took its theology of marriage from St Augustine, who saw marriage as a symbol of the insoluble union between Christ and the Church."​
 
Upvote 0

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,295
7,001
72
St. Louis, MO.
✟378,416.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
It has been a religious rite for centuries. Only in the past few hundred years has it been taken over by civil authorities.......$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

That's not quite true. In the days of Puritan New England (no church/state separation in the 1600s) weddings were civil affairs. The Puritans did believe marriage was God's gift. But in the same sense as a good harvest. It served practical needs--to raise children, allow for orderly inheritance of property, and to discourage sexual impropriety. Marriages were performed by civil magistrates and did not take place in their religious meeting houses.

Religion — MayflowerHistory.com
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SilverBear
Upvote 0

muichimotsu

I Spit On Perfection
May 16, 2006
6,529
1,648
37
✟106,458.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
If same everyone was in a same sex relationship, the human race would never have been established. Hardly a superficial difference. You object to God's ways. That's your problem. Freedom is not licence. No one will agree that we should be able to murder anyone at a whim. Yet God's law also governs marriage. Societies can choose to ignore God's ways. There are consequences. And words do mean something. A dog is not a cat. Same sex unions are not marriage.
Thank you for that redundancy that no one is saying should be the norm. Most people will be straight rather than gay, bi or otherwise, just like most people will be allosexual, contrasted with asexual or demisexual.

No one said freedom was license (nice strawman to presume your side is right because "tradition"), there are limits in terms of marriage that exist regardless, like not cheating on your spouse and not abusing them. You don't need a holy text to tell you not to be a psychopath or a narcissist abusing the person you pledged to spend your life with together, but so many people idealize marriage due to religious indoctrination to begin with, so they rush into it and don't think they should ever get a divorce, which just leads to a loveless broken marriage. It's not secular society telling you to just grin and bear it, that's a deity that says you should not question it "binding" you like this is a contract with no outs (divorce was commonly related to fault, though that has limitations that made it so people were committing perjury in court to get out of incompatible marriages, no fault divorce is not the issue either)

A dog and a cat are distinct because of DNA and other physiological structural discrepancies you can see in their skeleton, etc. Marriage is not a matter of whether your parts fit the way we compare to electrical plugs and sockets, because marriage is not exclusively about sex or procreation. Otherwise couples would just cease to be married once they're unable to have children via menopause or even just infertility in general that would be irreversible (hysterectomy or orchiectomy). It's stunning you haven't tried to appeal to childrearing and such, but apparently you think there has to be some complementarian aesthetic or it isn't a "marriage", more nonsense you haven't substantiated remotely, just a bald assertion
 
Upvote 0

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,297
58
Michigan
✟173,606.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
If same everyone was in a same sex relationship, the human race would never have been established. Hardly a superficial difference.
I forget the name of this logical fallacy.

if everyone was a doctor there would be no one to keep the electricity on, pick up the garbage, no one to deliver pizzas (or make them) no one to build the hospitals for all those doctors to work in. Society would quickly break down therefore being a doctor is bad.

You object to God's ways. That's your problem. Freedom is not license. No one will agree that we should be able to murder anyone at a whim.
Same sex couples are not murders or the equivalent of murders and suggesting that they are is just bigotry on your part.

Yet God's law also governs marriage. Societies can choose to ignore God's ways. There are consequences. And words do mean something. A dog is not a cat. Same sex unions are not marriage.
Yes they are, deal with it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,295
7,001
72
St. Louis, MO.
✟378,416.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I forget the name of this logical fallacy.

if everyone was a doctor there would be no one to keep the electricity on, pick up the garbage, no one to deliver pizzas (or make them) no one to build the hospitals for all those doctors to work in. Society would quickly break down therefore being a doctor is bad.

It’s the Reductio ad Absurdum. An attempt to disprove a proposition by fabricating an absurd outcome if the proposition is accepted.

Reductio ad Absurdum

It seems to me that the arguments against same-sex marriage all boil down to the Argumentum ad Antquitatem. It violates tradition. Especially the ancient tradition that homosexuality is taboo.

Appeal to Tradition
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,287
Frankston
Visit site
✟750,190.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
Thank you for that redundancy that no one is saying should be the norm. Most people will be straight rather than gay, bi or otherwise, just like most people will be allosexual, contrasted with asexual or demisexual.

No one said freedom was license (nice strawman to presume your side is right because "tradition"), there are limits in terms of marriage that exist regardless, like not cheating on your spouse and not abusing them. You don't need a holy text to tell you not to be a psychopath or a narcissist abusing the person you pledged to spend your life with together, but so many people idealize marriage due to religious indoctrination to begin with, so they rush into it and don't think they should ever get a divorce, which just leads to a loveless broken marriage. It's not secular society telling you to just grin and bear it, that's a deity that says you should not question it "binding" you like this is a contract with no outs (divorce was commonly related to fault, though that has limitations that made it so people were committing perjury in court to get out of incompatible marriages, no fault divorce is not the issue either)

A dog and a cat are distinct because of DNA and other physiological structural discrepancies you can see in their skeleton, etc. Marriage is not a matter of whether your parts fit the way we compare to electrical plugs and sockets, because marriage is not exclusively about sex or procreation. Otherwise couples would just cease to be married once they're unable to have children via menopause or even just infertility in general that would be irreversible (hysterectomy or orchiectomy). It's stunning you haven't tried to appeal to childrearing and such, but apparently you think there has to be some complementarian aesthetic or it isn't a "marriage", more nonsense you haven't substantiated remotely, just a bald assertion
Of course you would reject what I say. It's not assertion, it is what God has to say. You will reject that also no doubt.

God prohibits same sex acts. God prohibits fornication, stealing, murder, and a whole range of other activities such as drunkenness, dishonesty, theft and so on. God has good reasons. His laws are for the benefit of mankind, not to oppress people. However, people reject God's ways and suffer the consequences.

Sex outside of marriage is so common that it is considered normal in the Western world at least. Let's look at how that works for society.
In the US, single mothers are the most likely to be poor. Obviously their children are raised in poverty also. That limits access to health services, education, good food, paid employment and decent housing. It's not impossible for people to escape those disadvantages, but it is difficult.

Poverty leads to crime, drug abuse, violence and more poverty. This is not opinion. It is statistics. Of course, the socialist response is to throw money at the problem. So they rob the workers to pay for the sins of others. After all, the poor still get to vote.

In Australia, the curse of syphilis has arisen again. Why? Because people refuse to obey God's command with respect to sex. There are other nasty STD's as well. AIDS is still a problem, although it is no longer the death sentence it was once. And all because God's law is rejected.

People often complain to me that God tolerates evil. There is so much injustice, so much that is wrong with the world. And they are right. And the reason why God tolerates evil is simple. The problem is people. In order to destroy evil, He would have to destroy humanity. Instead, He leaves mankind to work it out for themselves. Humanity is quite capable of self destruction. God has been warning the world for thousands of years. One day, God's tolerance will come to an end. I hope not to be around to see it.

God offers escape from His judgement. His offer stands right now. Tomorrow? I don't know. It could be too late then.
 
Upvote 0

civilwarbuff

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 28, 2015
14,720
7,158
✟627,350.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
Religion — MayflowerHistory.com
WHO is this guy? Out side of 'Mayflower History.com' there is nothing about him. Is he a historian? Where did he get his info? How about research?.....and sources? You gotta do better than 'I wanna be a historian'.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,297
58
Michigan
✟173,606.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
It’s the Reductio ad Absurdum. An attempt to disprove a proposition by fabricating an absurd outcome if the proposition is accepted.

Reductio ad Absurdum

It seems to me that the arguments against same-sex marriage all boil down to the Argumentum ad Antquitatem. It violates tradition. Especially the ancient tradition that homosexuality is taboo.

Appeal to Tradition
Thank you
 
Upvote 0