Steers, Queers, and Chicks with Sticks | LGBTetcetera

[Mr. Perfect]

Are you thinking of trying it out then Ymix.

[Ibrahim]

Yeeeeees.

[YMix]

Are you thinking of trying it out then Ymix.

The New Hope Church? Certainly not.

[Typhoon]

Very good.

[Mr. Perfect]

I see an OTNOT threesome developing.

Ibs, what is Islam's view of homosexuality.

[Typhoon]

I see an OTNOT threesome developing.

. . .

Only in your fantasies.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

Ibs, what is Islam's view of homosexuality

.

My rudimentary knowledge of Islam says there is neither a word of "homosexuality" in Koran nor in Islam .. that issue does not exist

Again, as Moh copied pretty much all from Judaism, I would imagine there should be no word of homosexuality neither in Torah nor in Talmud, otherwise Moh would have said something about it



That is specially interesting as in Islam, in Koran and Hadis, SEX is debated extensively, in detail, promoted and regulated .. but no word of homosexuality



.

[Alexis]

Ibs, what is Islam's view of homosexuality.

Morally to be condemned, the Koran refers to castigation of "the people of Loth".

Situation wrt sacred law (Shariah) is less clear and has varied through history and from country to country: some take argument of hadith where Mohammed defines death as punishment for sodomy, some attack those hadith as being unsure, lacking assured testimony chain linking them to Mohammed's time, and conclude that sodomy is morally but not judicially condemnable.

A very small minority of imams argue that homosexuality is not condemnable and that castigation of the people of Loth is because they were practicing rape, not sodomy. All these imams it would seem are citizens of countries where islam is not majority religion (US, France...)

As for legal status of homosexual acts in majority of Muslim-majority countries, they are punished by fines, prison time or death, depending on the country. However, it is not illegal in some Muslim-majority countries: see link for details.

[Alexis]

My rudimentary knowledge of Islam says there is neither a word of "homosexuality" in Koran nor in Islam .. that issue does not exist

Iran is with Afghanistan, Saudia and Yemen one the rare countries where penalty for homosexuality is death

[Mr. Perfect]

I see an OTNOT threesome developing.

. . .

Only in your fantasies.

Not that there would be anything wrong with any fantasies.

[Mr. Perfect]

How is gay marriage doing in Islamic countries.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

.

My rudimentary knowledge of Islam says there is neither a word of "homosexuality" in Koran nor in Islam .. that issue does not exist

.

Iran is with Afghanistan, Saudia and Yemen one the rare countries where penalty for homosexuality is death

.

Alexis,

what I said,

is,

there is no word of "homosexuality" in Koran

if there is

please past the link


AND


homosexuals marry in Afghanistan since 1000s of years

AND

Neither Iran nor Afghanistan has "SHARIA" law as state constitution


As far as I know, only nation, OFFICIALLY enacting SHARIA as constitutional law, is, KSA

and ? ?

have you heard, ever, anybody being beheaded in KSA because of homosexual act ? ?

NO

why not ? ?

because Moh has not said anything about it




.

[Alexis]

there is no word of "homosexuality" in Koran
if there is
please past the link

You know, one minute to check Wikipedia is often useful...

The Quran contains seven references to "the people of Lut", the biblical Lot, but meaning the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah (references 7:80–84, 11:77–83, 21:74, 22:43, 26:165–175, 27:56–59, and 29:27–33), and their destruction by Allah is associated explicitly with their sexual practices:
“And (We sent) Lot when he said to his people: What! do you commit an indecency which any one in the world has not done before you? Most surely you come to males in lust besides females; nay you are an extravagant people. And the answer of his people was no other than that they said: Turn them out of your town, surely they are a people who seek to purify (themselves). So We delivered him and his followers, except his wife; she was of those who remained behind. And We rained upon them a rain; consider then what was the end of the guilty.”[7:80–84 (Translated by Shakir)]
The sins of the people of Lot became proverbial, and the Arabic words for homosexual behaviour (liwat) and for a person who performs such acts (luti) both derive from his name. (...) Several modern day scholars, including Scott Kugle, argue for a different interpretation of the Lot narrative focusing not on the sexual act but on the infidelity of the tribe and their rejection of Lot's Prophethood.

As I said in previous post, a minority of imams disagree on what is otherwise the commonplace interpretation of Koran.

AND
homosexuals marry in Afghanistan since 1000s of years

Don't know what happened in the distant past. For example, before majority of Afghans became Muslims.
As for more recent times: (hey, it's Wikipedia again... and I found it through Google... you should try these before making wild claims, you know)

Three men are buried alive under a pile of stones and a wall is pushed on top of them by a tank, as punishment for sodomy in the town of Kandahar
(...)
Two men are executed via a wall being bulldozed on top of them, as punishment for sodomy in the western province of Herat
(...)
84-year-old man who is impotent, is 'stoned' by collapsing wall as punishment for attempting a homosexual act

These are Taliban-inflicted punishments. Will be more widespred in Afghanistan in the future...

AND
Neither Iran nor Afghanistan has "SHARIA" law as state constitution

Must be why Iran executed 3 men in 2011 on charges of homosexuality, reminding that such are "acts against the Sharia law"

Three Iranian men have been executed after being found guilty of charges related to homosexuality, according to a semi-official news agency.
The men, only identified by their initials, were hanged on Sunday in the south-western city of Ahvaz, the capital of Iran's Khuzestan province.
"The three convicts were sentenced to death based on the articles 108 and 110 of Iran's Islamic penal code, for acts against the sharia law and bad deeds," the Isna agency quoted a judiciary official in Khuzestan as saying.
Iran Human Rights, an independent NGO based in Norway, said the men were charged with "lavat" – sexual intercourse between two men. It is not clear whether the three men were homosexuals or merely smeared with homosexualityaccused of being gay.

have you heard, ever, anybody being beheaded in KSA because of homosexual act ? ?

No, I've read about it.

Saudi executes three Yemeni men found guilty of "committing the extreme obscenity of homosexuality and imitating women". They had also been convicted of molesting boys

Now it seems, from the page which I linked, that most of the times Saudi justice is less harsh on homosexuals:

Nine young Saudi men are each sentenced to at least 2,400 lashes and at least five years in prison for "deviant sexual behavior"
(...)
More than a hundred men are sentenced to imprisonment and flogging after being arrested for “deviant sexual behaviour” (they were arrested for dancing and “behaving like women” at a private party)
(...)
Two homosexual men are sentenced to 7000 lashes each after being convicted of sodomy
(...)
Gay British nurse spends 6 months in jail on charges of homosexuality. Savagely beaten and tormented with the threat of being decapitated

So it could be that Saudi justice is somewhat less radical than Iranian when it comes to people convicted of sodomy.

[Heracleum Persicum]

there is no word of "homosexuality" in Koran
if there is
please past the link

You know, one minute to check Wikipedia is often useful...

The Quran contains seven references to "the people of Lut", the biblical Lot, but meaning the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah (references 7:80–84, 11:77–83, 21:74, 22:43, 26:165–175, 27:56–59, and 29:27–33), and their destruction by Allah is associated explicitly with their sexual practices:
“And (We sent) Lot when he said to his people: What! do you commit an indecency which any one in the world has not done before you? Most surely you come to males in lust besides females; nay you are an extravagant people. And the answer of his people was no other than that they said: Turn them out of your town, surely they are a people who seek to purify (themselves). So We delivered him and his followers, except his wife; she was of those who remained behind. And We rained upon them a rain; consider then what was the end of the guilty.”[7:80–84 (Translated by Shakir)]
The sins of the people of Lot became proverbial, and the Arabic words for homosexual behaviour (liwat) and for a person who performs such acts (luti) both derive from his name. (...) Several modern day scholars, including Scott Kugle, argue for a different interpretation of the Lot narrative focusing not on the sexual act but on the infidelity of the tribe and their rejection of Lot's Prophethood.

As I said in previous post, a minority of imams disagree on what is otherwise the commonplace interpretation of Koran.

AND
homosexuals marry in Afghanistan since 1000s of years

Don't know what happened in the distant past. For example, before majority of Afghans became Muslims.
As for more recent times: (hey, it's Wikipedia again... and I found it through Google... you should try these before making wild claims, you know)

Three men are buried alive under a pile of stones and a wall is pushed on top of them by a tank, as punishment for sodomy in the town of Kandahar
(...)
Two men are executed via a wall being bulldozed on top of them, as punishment for sodomy in the western province of Herat
(...)
84-year-old man who is impotent, is 'stoned' by collapsing wall as punishment for attempting a homosexual act

These are Taliban-inflicted punishments. Will be more widespred in Afghanistan in the future...

AND
Neither Iran nor Afghanistan has "SHARIA" law as state constitution

Must be why Iran executed 3 men in 2011 on charges of homosexuality, reminding that such are "acts against the Sharia law"

Three Iranian men have been executed after being found guilty of charges related to homosexuality, according to a semi-official news agency.
The men, only identified by their initials, were hanged on Sunday in the south-western city of Ahvaz, the capital of Iran's Khuzestan province.
"The three convicts were sentenced to death based on the articles 108 and 110 of Iran's Islamic penal code, for acts against the sharia law and bad deeds," the Isna agency quoted a judiciary official in Khuzestan as saying.
Iran Human Rights, an independent NGO based in Norway, said the men were charged with "lavat" – sexual intercourse between two men. It is not clear whether the three men were homosexuals or merely smeared with homosexualityaccused of being gay.

have you heard, ever, anybody being beheaded in KSA because of homosexual act ? ?

No, I've read about it.

Saudi executes three Yemeni men found guilty of "committing the extreme obscenity of homosexuality and imitating women". They had also been convicted of molesting boys

Now it seems, from the page which I linked, that most of the times Saudi justice is less harsh on homosexuals:

Nine young Saudi men are each sentenced to at least 2,400 lashes and at least five years in prison for "deviant sexual behavior"
(...)
More than a hundred men are sentenced to imprisonment and flogging after being arrested for “deviant sexual behaviour” (they were arrested for dancing and “behaving like women” at a private party)
(...)
Two homosexual men are sentenced to 7000 lashes each after being convicted of sodomy
(...)
Gay British nurse spends 6 months in jail on charges of homosexuality. Savagely beaten and tormented with the threat of being decapitated

So it could be that Saudi justice is somewhat less radical than Iranian when it comes to people convicted of sodomy.



.

Respectfully ,



My info is not from WiKi .. my info is from traditional Muslim society knowledge what is in Koran

and

from same Wiki link you posted :

.

There is, however, only one passage in the Qur'an which can be interpreted as prescribing a legal position, and is not restricted to homosexual behaviour - in fact it deals with public practice of adultery:

“And as for those who are guilty of an indecency from among your women, call to witnesses against them four (witnesses) from among you; then if they bear witness confine them to the houses until death takes them away or Allah opens some way for them. And as for the two who are guilty of indecency from among you, give them both a punishment; then if they repent and amend, turn aside from them; surely Allah is oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.”[4:15–16 (Translated by Shakir)]

Several modern day scholars, including Scott Kugle, argue for a different interpretation of the Lot narrative focusing not on the sexual act but on the infidelity of the tribe and their rejection of Lot's Prophethood.

.

Confirming what I said .. there is no explicit, direct, mentioning of homosexuality neither in Koran nor in Islam

and

Iran has not executed (hanged) anybody for homosexuality .. those 2 who were hanged, were hanged for RAPE of children .. In Iran they hang who rapes, no matter, raping a boy or girl or a woman, that is the community standard (people demand that) and has nothing to do with Islam or Kuran.

Re Saudi they behead for all kind of reasons, is in their blood and culture .. but not because those were homosexuals


and


don't believe what you read in papers, research (Moh the pedophile )




.

[Demon of Undoing]

What is now in question, with these two separate institutions, is the commodification of children.
(...)
This is all very expensive and puts a price on the human body- those surrogates, those willing to sell eggs, the designer children pressured to be a certain way...it is the 21st century form of slavery.

Bingo!

This is the issue with homosexual "marriage"... Issue which does not exist with civil union, which enables a homosexual couple to share and inherit property, that is what they need in order to ensure the survivor from such a pair does not end up in financial distress when the other one has passed away.

Marriage on the other hand is in a fundamental way about children. And the only way for a homo couple to get children is to infringe on the right of other persons: at a minimum the child who will not get two role models father+mother as psychologists recognize is necessary for their best development.

Note that homosexuals are not responsible for the mindframe "I have a right to my own child!"... That unhealthy and selfish inversion of the right of any child to have a father and a mother -including if by adoption- has not begun and is not in the least restricted to homosexuals. The issue is much larger.

So then, since a hetero divorce leads to similar deprivation, may we expect a deluge of civil suits that reference divorces from the swingin' sixties on to the present day? I have grounds based purely on the platform shoes my mother wore ca 1975. I can argue that happened as a direct result of divorce. She was forced into scandalous wardrobe. We all suffered.

Actually, decent role models for father and mother are well shot already. Most now will get such ideals from someone ( if at all) totally unrelated by blood. Been this way since TV. This is something that keeps coming up: the antiGM position argues for the primacy of a family style that has existed mostly in theory only, for quite some time. The people voted with their feet, saying for decades now that those ancient contracts that make one person the property of another for life are outmoded. The gays didn't tell you marriage was no longer interpreted in the traditional biblical mold. The the straights did.

[Ibrahim]

My rudimentary knowledge of Islam says there is neither a word of "homosexuality" in Koran nor in Islam .. that issue does not exist

Iran is with Afghanistan, Saudia and Yemen one the rare countries where penalty for homosexuality is death

Why are we discussing this? There are plenty of gay Muslims, many of whom are activists for social and legal progress on this issue. Its plain as day that Islamic nations lag behind Western nations on the matter of equal rights for homosexuals, but logically one would advocate for progress in all contexts. If you're gay and Muslim in America then the gay rights struggle in America is the logical context for you to work in.


Now, if you want to have a theological discussion about the issue then frankly that beyond the expertise of everyone here. Suffice to say that there are plenty of Muslims and Christians on both sides of the issue. You'll even run into rabidly homophobic atheists, so this isn't really a useful avenue of inquiry except as an excuse to change the subject. If some Saudi cleric wants to rant about homosexuals being evil then I'll disagree with him the same as any Evangelical American hick doing the same.

[Ibrahim]

What is now in question, with these two separate institutions, is the commodification of children.
(...)
This is all very expensive and puts a price on the human body- those surrogates, those willing to sell eggs, the designer children pressured to be a certain way...it is the 21st century form of slavery.

Bingo!

This is the issue with homosexual "marriage"... Issue which does not exist with civil union, which enables a homosexual couple to share and inherit property, that is what they need in order to ensure the survivor from such a pair does not end up in financial distress when the other one has passed away.

But practically speaking how does homosexual and heterosexual marriage differ in the modern era? I don't see an issue here.

Marriage on the other hand is in a fundamental way about children. And the only way for a homo couple to get children is to infringe on the right of other persons: at a minimum the child who will not get two role models father+mother as psychologists recognize is necessary for their best development.

Every part of this is blatantly false. Marriage is not "fundamentally about children" except by your declaration that it is, and moreover there is no difference between homosexuals adopting and heterosexuals adopting, and adoption is an institution as old as human history. You can't attack homosexual adoption without attacking adoption itself, or alleging that homosexuals are inherently unfit to be around children.

Note that homosexuals are not responsible for the mindframe "I have a right to my own child!"... That unhealthy and selfish inversion of the right of any child to have a father and a mother -including if by adoption- has not begun and is not in the least restricted to homosexuals. The issue is much larger.

Suggesting that the rights of a child are infringed by providing them with two parents who both want them and are able to care for them is frankly ridiculous. Spend a day at your local courthouse watching family cases and you'll quickly see what the nuclear family is made out of. Given the rigorous adoption process in most Western nations the average child should be so lucky as to have a homosexual adoptive parents rather than what passes for the norm these days.

All of this assuming that marriage is inextricably and objectively linked to child-rearing, which it is not, despite some people holding the opinion that it is.

[Mr. Perfect]

But there is no reason for gays to get married.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


But there is no reason for gays to get married.


.

Look, guys, nowhere in the world people care about gays marrying, analyzing etc .. except in our beloved US of A


Why spend so much time on this rubbish when there are much more important issues in the world

In the thread , "The great American withdrawal" , future of America depending on it, only 10 post, 9 of them being Azari

But, Gay marriage, MP has probably 20+ posts

Mr. Perfect, during all that time you spending searching for a reason "gays should marry", during all that time, Obama is rubbing your civil rights, assassinating American citizens (f*ck non citizens ) all over the world (without due court case), freezing elements of US con*stitution and and and (sorry, 4got the crooks rubbing you to the last dime) .. AND ? ? ? you still thinkin gays should or not marry .. millions of people feel terrorized by NSA listening to their intimate calls but, NO, central issue is gays "honeymoon" and whether Mr. (gay) matcho Truckdriver can be called "wife"

Pfui, Mr. Perfect .. Pfui

don't you think think western civilization on the cliff : “ Use your head when giving it ”




BTW, best revenge for the hetero folks, let marriage be an exclusive homosexual privilege




.

[Typhoon]

But there is no reason for gays to get married.

There is no reason for anyone to get married.

[Demon of Undoing]

This is a completely ignorant strawman, no one is arguing that God can be killed, they are merely arguing for their right to religious belief and practice, as written expressly into the US Constitution.

Yes, that is exactly what gays are doing, per the " love one another" and "equal protection" clauses of the NT and the Constitution, respectively.

Already got a precedent. Already underway. Already happened before.

So there actually is no real LDS church three miles from my house? It's a Dr Whovian ghost image from an alternate universe that never existed in our own? It's almost like somebody in that faith said it was more important to be a gaggle of church buildings than to hold to the "sacrament" of polygamous marriage. Sorry, in a dispute between God and law, I don't have much sympathy for those that choose the law. Assuming they actually saw God in polygamy. I get the impression they did not, they just wanted to bone a few dozen underage slave girls like the old men in the Bronze Age. Maybe you will hold to the courage of your convictions and have your church refuse to perform marriages at all.

What bible college did Peter go to.

The same one you can go to no matter how much Obama hides under your bed. Pete seemed to do fine. You'll figure it out just as soon as you realize there is actually this "God" guy that does most of the work.

Why.

I dunno. You lot are the one screaming that little baby Jesus is going to wail in pain if a gay guy marries his boyfriend. I thought it meant something to you, that you'd choose to do the holy thing instead of the convenient one. Again, if I believed God was against gay marriage, I'd dissolve my church rather than offend God. Shame it has to happen, but there will be a tension between public sentiment and private belief somewhere. The culture is not yours anymore. You were told from the get-go by the Boss that it never was. Feces occurs.

When the gays sue to have the ceremony then the results become inevitable.

No it isn't. Take your ball and go home. Nobody is going to force you to marry gays. Nobody is going to force you to believe it's right. And nobody said the right to marry was invested solely in a church, anyway. Not in America.

Actually there is already a network in place, the legal registries for all these churches. As gay people sue each one they get dissolved one by one by one.

They could even use a phone book! To ze ovens mit you, courtesy of ze Yellow Pages! March!

Sure. And black people are President now so who cares about slavery. Talk about fighting the last wars. All's well that ends well.

Mormons that can't bone kids by the dozen=400 years of deculturization, rape, murder, kidnapping and torture, plus firehoses and attack dogs and dynamited school girls. Gotcha. You keep pimping that line of crap, and wonder why you're losing pretty much the whole world on the issue.

It just makes it illegal. Which may be ironic considering what this country was founded on.

I dunno. I see something about Congress making no law to establish a religion, or restrict the free expression thereof. Nobody told you you can't have a symbolic ceremony with a JOP doing the paperwork. Can't be too bad, this is what you demanded gays do when you were gloating about all the states that are against it and countries that don't allow it- until they started doing so. Now, "separate but equal" doesn't seem so equal, does it?

And that was a terrible thing.

It was. And you're nowhere near having to do it, so take heart. If I were you, I'd be worrying about the gospel getting preached to the sick and broken instead of worrying on all this mostly irrelevant political maneuvering and your personal train fetish, but that's just me.

God given rights, earned by the shedding of blood.

I'm sorry, those guys died for freedom, not you. The gays have an equal claim on that blood. You don't get to be good and holy and throw everyone that doesn't conform to your standards into the outer darkness.

Two entirely different things.

Yes, they are, and Christianity in the Protestant mold had both for a very long time. Now, you're just a face in the crowd. Sink or swim on the merits of your faith and quit using the law as a specifically Christian crutch.

That's freedom for you. Other people use freedom to smoke pot infinitely and watch porn all day. The nature of freedom my young Trotskyite.

Yep. And some people use it to bring down old orders that enshrine personal beliefs into law, especially when the religion behind it has failed. Deal with it.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Well, folks


4get "Gay Marriage"


Welcome to


"Gay divorce"

.

"Lara and I have decided to end our marriage," . .


Lynch and Embry, 44, tied the knot in a ceremony in Sunderland, Mass. in June 2010, less than one year after meeting at a gala for the National Center for Lesbian Rights.

PHOTOS: Love lives of Glee stars

According to the legal documents, the couple did not have a prenup, and will therefore split their marital assets 50/50. The pair have no children together.


.

What a disaster .. what a disaster



Clash of civilization, pretty much, settled




.

[Mr. Perfect]

Yes, that is exactly what gays are doing, per the " love one another" and "equal protection" clauses of the NT and the Constitution, respectively.

Do you think love one another applied to married people loving other married people or do you think there were caveats on those statements.

So there actually is no real LDS church three miles from my house? It's a Dr Whovian ghost image from an alternate universe that never existed in our own? It's almost like somebody in that faith said it was more important to be a gaggle of church buildings than to hold to the "sacrament" of polygamous marriage. Sorry, in a dispute between God and law, I don't have much sympathy for those that choose the law. Assuming they actually saw God in polygamy. I get the impression they did not, they just wanted to bone a few dozen underage slave girls like the old men in the Bronze Age. Maybe you will hold to the courage of your convictions and have your church refuse to perform marriages at all.

Gobbledegook. Look, you already said that you look forward to putting Christians on rail cars. I believe you. I really do. I think you will enjoy it. I know where you stand.

Poly is still practiced all over the world, outrage threads by Berzer = 0, so please stop yanking my chain on all that. Mormons all over the Middle East are boning underage girls, ask ibs he knows all about it.

You love your 1911 and the Browning Muslim Gun so enough with the Muslims already, they are harmless people low in number.

The same one you can go to no matter how much Obama hides under your bed. Pete seemed to do fine. You'll figure it out just as soon as you realize there is actually this "God" guy that does most of the work.

So what did bible colleges have to do with anything.

I dunno. You lot are the one screaming that little baby Jesus is going to wail in pain if a gay guy marries his boyfriend.

They say Jesus suffered for sins. That's what they say.

I thought it meant something to you, that you'd choose to do the holy thing instead of the convenient one. Again, if I believed God was against gay marriage, I'd dissolve my church rather than offend God.

Why should you have to do that.

Shame it has to happen, but there will be a tension between public sentiment and private belief somewhere. The culture is not yours anymore. You were told from the get-go by the Boss that it never was. Feces occurs.

Yeah. And I know how the tension is going to end.

No it isn't. Take your ball and go home. Nobody is going to force you to marry gays.

Yes they are. Read ibs above. I'm sure he will be much more articulate than I will.

Nobody is going to force you to believe it's right. And nobody said the right to marry was invested solely in a church, anyway. Not in America.

What they are saying now is that it is written in the Constitution. You buddies are telling us that things expressly written into the Constitution aren't there, and things not even breathed on are fundamental human rights. So that's who you signed on with.

They could even use a phone book!

Easier than I thought. There you go. Let your superiors know about that.

To ze ovens mit you, courtesy of ze Yellow Pages! March!

With you cheering right along.

Mormons that can't bone kids by the dozen=400 years of deculturization, rape, murder, kidnapping and torture, plus firehoses and attack dogs and dynamited school girls. Gotcha. You keep pimping that line of crap, and wonder why you're losing pretty much the whole world on the issue.

Why did they move clean out of the country.

On losing the whole world, there is more to the whole world than a handful of Euro countries going extinct + a bankrupting US left, if you consider brown folk human beings. Look at global brown views on GM, let me know what you find out.

I dunno. I see something about Congress making no law to establish a religion, or restrict the free expression thereof. Nobody told you you can't have a symbolic ceremony with a JOP doing the paperwork.

Try to start a private club that excludes blacks, let me know what happens. Ibs is telling all of us exactly how it will come to pass. Just read what he has to say. He's a lawyer.

Can't be too bad, this is what you demanded gays do when you were gloating about all the states that are against it and countries that don't allow it- until they started doing so. Now, "separate but equal" doesn't seem so equal, does it?

I know separate but equal bathrooms no justice no peace. States can vote any way they feel like but that's not the issue here, even though obviously you want to make it the issue, the issue is finding rights in Constitution that simply aren't there.

It was. And you're nowhere near having to do it, so take heart. If I were you, I'd be worrying about the gospel getting preached to the sick and broken instead of worrying on all this mostly irrelevant political maneuvering and your personal train fetish, but that's just me.

Even your buddy ibs can spell it out. I'm not sure what your thing with being cute is. I think you were the guy who said there was no political environment for gun control. So obviously, your judgement and brainpower...

I'm sorry, those guys died for freedom, not you. The gays have an equal claim on that blood. You don't get to be good and holy and throw everyone that doesn't conform to your standards into the outer darkness.

Gay marriage is not about freedom any more than red stop signs are about freedom.

Yes, they are, and Christianity in the Protestant mold had both for a very long time. Now, you're just a face in the crowd. Sink or swim on the merits of your faith and quit using the law as a specifically Christian crutch.

Strawman. The issue is a gov't deleting expressly written rights in the Consitution while it finds right not even conceived of at the time, or until the moment they are created by a court.

Yep. And some people use it to bring down old orders that enshrine personal beliefs into law, especially when the religion behind it has failed. Deal with it.

Strawman. The issue is people like yourself cheering with glee as Christians go to the cars. It's not going end the way you think it will.

There are 4 people on this thread that have come to the same conclusion as me on this without my help and you take issue with me and not them, why is that do you think. I have answers if you don't have any.

[Mr. Perfect]

.


Well, folks


4get "Gay Marriage"


Welcome to


"Gay divorce"

.

"Lara and I have decided to end our marriage," . .


Lynch and Embry, 44, tied the knot in a ceremony in Sunderland, Mass. in June 2010, less than one year after meeting at a gala for the National Center for Lesbian Rights.

PHOTOS: Love lives of Glee stars

According to the legal documents, the couple did not have a prenup, and will therefore split their marital assets 50/50. The pair have no children together.


.

What a disaster .. what a disaster



Clash of civilization, pretty much, settled




.

Welcome to "rights".

[Demon of Undoing]

Because none of them that I can tell are basing their position on the unquestioned primacy of ( their interpretation) of religion as a basis for law. You are, though you insist you are not. That's been my beef from the very beginning, and no other. I'm just tired of people hijacking the law for their own bias' sake and calling it God. It's simply inaccurate.

Incidentally, where'd all the laws banning your guns go? Must not have been a good environment for the legislation.