Supreme Court to Decide on Same-Sex Marriage

[The Sanguinian Islands]

It's about fucking time. Although, I can only imagine the whining I'll hear from my family and friends if same sex marriage is legalized nationwide.

Let them whine
Let them whine
They can't hold it back anymore

Let them whine
Let them whine
Turn away and slam the door

We don't care
What they're going to say
Let bigots rage on
Their ire doesn't matter in any way.

/sjwmu/ time

[Katganistan]

Eh, I could picture Jesus popping open a bottle of champagne in heaven to celebrate, since he had two dads.

Wtf...

Do you not know your Scripture?
Born of the Virgin Mary, impregnated by the Holy Spirit, called Joseph his father.

Two dads.

Where is the right to life in the Constitution? And, the UN Declaration of Human Rights include the right to marry, since marriage is so ingrained in just about every culture and civilization. Its a very human thing, to want to get married.

I never said the right to life is in the Constitution. Although, it is in the Declaration of Independence. And considering that the UN's human rights programs are being led by countries like Iran, it's kind of hard for me to take anything they say seriously.

Quote EXACTLY where the right to life (that is, a ban against abortion) is in the Declaration. Which by the way is NOT part of law anyhow.

When a provincial culture becomes a legitimate excuse for nationwide human rights violations, I'll be ready to take that argument seriously.

Gay people are being beheaded in the middle east, and you're worried about them not being able to get married... Get your priorities straight...

You seem to fail to realize that the US is not in the Middle East. Get your geography straight.

It is government promotion of sin.

Stop eating shellfish then.

And bacon.
And wearing cotton/polyester blends.

[Farnhamia]

I never said the right to life is in the Constitution. Although, it is in the Declaration of Independence. And considering that the UN's human rights programs are being led by countries like Iran, it's kind of hard for me to take anything they say seriously.

Quote EXACTLY where the right to life (that is, a ban against abortion) is in the Declaration. Which by the way is NOT part of law anyhow.

The second paragraph, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." That said, the right to the pursuit of happiness seems to be at odds with denying homosexuals the ability to marry the persons they love.

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

Stop eating shellfish then.

And bacon.
And wearing cotton/polyester blends.

Bacon isn't forbidden in Christianity, at least as far as my knowledge goes.

[The Orson Empire]

Stop eating shellfish then.

And bacon.
And wearing cotton/polyester blends.

Ahh yes. Fundamentalists always like to use that one verse in Leviticus in order to oppose gay rights- yet, they ignore all of the other laws in Leviticus.

[Neu California]

The whole case relies on a marriage-procreation connection, so the case is inapplicable to the LGBT movement.

I don't think anybody believes homosexuality is "fundamental to our very existence and survival." The heterosexual orientation, of course, provides a major incentive for keeping the human race going.

Source on that? Because there's nothing in SCOTUS's decision that mentions procreation, birth, or anything else related to that and nothing I have ever read about Loving v. Virginia mentions anything about procreation, birth, etc.

Jut so you don't forget, CD, I'm still waiting on a response to this.

[The United Territories of Providence]

Quote EXACTLY where the right to life (that is, a ban against abortion) is in the Declaration. Which by the way is NOT part of law anyhow.

The second paragraph, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." That said, the right to the pursuit of happiness seems to be at odds with denying homosexuals the ability to marry the persons they love.

I think you unintentionally made me less pro-choice. Because if we actually have a right to life in this country, I might need to re-evaluate my beliefs.

[Farnhamia]

The second paragraph, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." That said, the right to the pursuit of happiness seems to be at odds with denying homosexuals the ability to marry the persons they love.

I think you unintentionally made me less pro-choice. Because if we actually have a right to life in this country, I might need to re-evaluate my beliefs.

The Declaration is not part of the law of the United States. It is essentially an oratorical statement of the reasons the 13 colonies were declaring themselves independent of Great Britain. I suspect that the "right to life" in that sentence is the right to not be summarily executed for daring to oppose the Crown.

[The United Territories of Providence]

For those of you who like quoting scripture, quote this.

"For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it."
Matthew 19:12

Jesus accepts the eunuchs. The word homosexual is relatively new, and one could argue that eunuch was being used in place of homosexual. The scripture is up for interpretation, but it looks like gays aren't sinners and can go to heaven.

[Katganistan]

Except for the proto Freudian arguments.

And species productivity.

Who gives a fucK? People who would marry the same gender will have precisely the same number of children they'd have without the benefits of marriage.

Which is, like everyone else, none, one or some.

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

For those of you who like quoting scripture, quote this.

"For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it."
Matthew 19:12

Jesus accepts the eunuchs. The word homosexual is relatively new, and one could argue that eunuch was being used in place of homosexual. The scripture is up for interpretation, but it looks like gays aren't sinners and can go to heaven.

If you listen to Leviticus 18:22, then there's a slight problem.
Not to mention there are some sources against homosexual in the bible

[The Orson Empire]

.

[The Sanguinian Islands]

For those of you who like quoting scripture, quote this.

"For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it."
Matthew 19:12

Jesus accepts the eunuchs. The word homosexual is relatively new, and one could argue that eunuch was being used in place of homosexual. The scripture is up for interpretation, but it looks like gays aren't sinners and can go to heaven.

Nobody can be homosexual for god

its like twerking for jesus

[Katganistan]

It'll pass, followed by extremely stringent discrimination laws, (think churches required to ordain gay clergy) followed by extremely stringent hate speech laws (think 'expressing the official views held by the Republican Party right now' becoming illegal.) I'm not saying that's a good thing. It's a massive infraction against freedom of speech. But, historically, that's what's going to happen. And there's not really anything anybody can do about it.

Wrong.
The government has no power to compel a religion to do anything.
FIRST AMENDMENT.

The government has no power to abridge a free press.
FIRST AMENDMENT.

Please, just stop with the persecution fantasies.

[The Orson Empire]

For those of you who like quoting scripture, quote this.

"For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it."
Matthew 19:12

Jesus accepts the eunuchs. The word homosexual is relatively new, and one could argue that eunuch was being used in place of homosexual. The scripture is up for interpretation, but it looks like gays aren't sinners and can go to heaven.

If you listen to Leviticus 18:22, then there's a slight problem.
Not to mention there are some sources against homosexual in the bible

The laws of Leviticus do not apply to Christians. They only apply to Jews.

[Cannabis Islands]

If you listen to Leviticus 18:22, then there's a slight problem.
Not to mention there are some sources against homosexual in the bible

The laws of Leviticus do not apply to Christians. They only apply to Jews.

The laws of Leviticus don't apply to this case, sir.

[The Orson Empire]

The laws of Leviticus do not apply to Christians. They only apply to Jews.

The laws of Leviticus don't apply to this case, sir.

Jesus fulfilled these laws when he died on the cross.

And what do you mean by "this case"?

[The Sanguinian Islands]

It'll pass, followed by extremely stringent discrimination laws, (think churches required to ordain gay clergy) followed by extremely stringent hate speech laws (think 'expressing the official views held by the Republican Party right now' becoming illegal.) I'm not saying that's a good thing. It's a massive infraction against freedom of speech. But, historically, that's what's going to happen. And there's not really anything anybody can do about it.

Wrong.
The government has no power to compel a religion to do anything.
FIRST AMENDMENT.

The government has no power to abridge a free press.
FIRST AMENDMENT.

Please, just stop with the persecution fantasies.

I'm going to screenshot your post, then post it if it actually does happen, which would not surprise me tbh

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

If you listen to Leviticus 18:22, then there's a slight problem.
Not to mention there are some sources against homosexual in the bible

The laws of Leviticus do not apply to Christians. They only apply to Jews.

No, it's treated the same way that Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, and Joshua in some parts.

[Katganistan]

It may cause a civil war.

Just like abortion caused a civil war.

And striking down miscegenation laws.

[Cannabis Islands]

The laws of Leviticus don't apply to this case, sir.

Jesus fulfilled these laws when he died on the cross.

And what do you mean by "this case"?

Firstly, I am not a Christian.

Secondly, the court is not going to rule for or against the same-sex marriages ban in the case based on the laws of Leviticus or any law based on religion.

[Katganistan]

You seem to know nothing about homosexuality or civil wars.

I really can't stand your asinine comments or questions. It's like you're asking not to be taken serious.

States may secede if they don't want to recognize gay marriage.

They can't. Period.

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

States may secede if they don't want to recognize gay marriage.

They can't. Period.

I thought I said that before...

[The Alma Mater]

The laws of Leviticus do not apply to Christians. They only apply to Jews.

No, it's treated the same way that Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, and Joshua in some parts.

No it's not. Christians have no problems with eating shellfish or wearing polyester-cotton clothes for instance; despite those being abominations.

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

No, it's treated the same way that Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, and Joshua in some parts.

No it's not. Christians have no problems with eating shellfish or wearing polyester-cotton clothes for instance; despite those being abominations.

As in all Christians? in which I referenced to "some parts".

Eh, it's not worth pursuing at this point.
Can I just say I was wrong instead of pursuing this?