Supreme Court to Decide on Same-Sex Marriage

[The Orson Empire]

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.

What exactly are you talking about? I never said you were a Christian.

And yes, I know the court is not going to do that. That is not what I was talking about, though.

[Cannabis Islands]

They can't. Period.

I thought I said that before...

You're right, they can't.

[Cannabis Islands]

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.

What exactly are you talking about? I never said you were a Christian.

And yes, I know the court is not going to do that. That is not what I was talking about, though.

Since we the topic of the thread is not about religious rules about marriage, then we really should stop talking about it.

[The Orson Empire]

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.

Oh, you mean how it's cherry-picked? Because I've never seen a Christian that abstains from eating shellfish and wearing clothing of two fabrics because Leviticus said it was wrong,

[The Orson Empire]

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.

Again, after what happened during the American Civil War, the federal government is not going to allow that.

[Cannabis Islands]

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

Oh, you mean how it's cherry-picked? Because I've never seen a Christian that abstains from eating shellfish and wearing clothing of two fabrics because Leviticus said it was wrong,

I have.

[Farnhamia]

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

Oh, you mean how it's cherry-picked? Because I've never seen a Christian that abstains from eating shellfish and wearing clothing of two fabrics because Leviticus said it was wrong,

Appropriate (sorry about the ad at the start).

[Katganistan]

I think they should apply the same reasoning as behind Roe v. Wade: nobody's fucking business except the involved parties and their practitioners.

Ah, but this involves civil marriage, which involves state and federal governments, and quite a bit I may add. Abortion on the other hand does not really involve the state, meaning that a women's termination does is not paid for by the state or is approved by the state. A civil marriage is such a thing.

What does that have to do with the price of wheat? Marriage is marriage.

[Katganistan]

Because they wanted same sex marriage?

Don't be absurd.

Stalin didn't.

Exactly. His comment was absurd.

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

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

Oh, you mean how it's cherry-picked? Because I've never seen a Christian that abstains from eating shellfish and wearing clothing of two fabrics because Leviticus said it was wrong,

Can I just say I was wrong instead of pursuing this?

[Cannabis Islands]

Ah, but this involves civil marriage, which involves state and federal governments, and quite a bit I may add. Abortion on the other hand does not really involve the state, meaning that a women's termination does is not paid for by the state or is approved by the state. A civil marriage is such a thing.

What does that have to do with the price of wheat? Marriage is marriage.

Wait what? No, I am just saying that your comparison to Rove V Wade is a bad one. I agree with you in principle, but it would make for a bad court argument. The right to Abortion does not equal the right to marry civilly.

[The Orson Empire]

Oh, you mean how it's cherry-picked? Because I've never seen a Christian that abstains from eating shellfish and wearing clothing of two fabrics because Leviticus said it was wrong,

I have.

I have already seen that video before.

Oh, you mean how it's cherry-picked? Because I've never seen a Christian that abstains from eating shellfish and wearing clothing of two fabrics because Leviticus said it was wrong,

Appropriate (sorry about the ad at the start).

I don't get ads. I have Adblock Plus.

And yes, this video is very relevant.

[Free Tommainia]

In all honesty I am a strong believer in God who is a homosexual. Yes the bible condemns homosexual prostitution, and gang rape. However, the bible does not condemn loving homosexual relationship. When it comes to the bible many forget the historical context it must be read in order to understand what the many prophets and disciples were saying. Yes, every time the bible talks about homosexuality it was condemned. It was talked about 6 times total. Heterosexual acts have been condemned more than a thousand times in the bible. What does it matter as long as you believe in God and give him your life? God loves everyone unconditionally we are simply asked to believe. As paul says in Romans, the body will die to sin but the soul will live forever. I'm confident that im going to heaven. I repect your opposing belief so respect mine. Jesus already paid my debt!

[Katganistan]

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 was under the impression that applied to people, not clumps of cells.

[The Orson Empire]

Oh, you mean how it's cherry-picked? Because I've never seen a Christian that abstains from eating shellfish and wearing clothing of two fabrics because Leviticus said it was wrong,

Can I just say I was wrong instead of pursuing this?

Alright then.

[Sheltopolis]

...Yes the bible condemns homosexual prostitution, and gang rape...When it comes to the bible many forget the historical context it must be read in order to understand what the many prophets and disciples were saying. Yes, every time the bible talks about homosexuality it was condemned. It was talked about 6 times total. Heterosexual acts have been condemned more than a thousand times in the bible.

But how can you concede all these points and still willingly be a gay Christian?

[Sheltopolis]

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 was under the impression that applied to people, not clumps of cells.

A human is also just a clump of cells if you think long and hard about it.

[The Alma Mater]

Can I just say I was wrong instead of pursuing this?

Of course. As mentioned ad nauseam already, the opinion of the Bible does not matter at all. We are after all talking about state marriages, not holy matrimony. Despite some people having trouble distinguising the concepts.
So pursuing of what the Bible teaches is indeed irrelevant

[The Orson Empire]

I was under the impression that applied to people, not clumps of cells.

A human is also just a clump of cells if you think long and hard about it.

There is a big difference between a person and a fetus.

[Alyakia]

well shit it's finally happening

[Sheltopolis]

A human is also just a clump of cells if you think long and hard about it.

There is a big difference between a person and a fetus.

but they can both be considered "clumps of cells" so I think that particular argument goes down the drain.

[The Orson Empire]

There is a big difference between a person and a fetus.

but they can both be considered "clumps of cells" so I think that particular argument goes down the drain.

Wait...now we are getting on the topic of abortion. Let's not make this a threadjack.

[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 was under the impression that applied to people, not clumps of cells.

Oh, I agree, and I did say later on that that right probably applied to actual born humans.

[Sheltopolis]

but they can both be considered "clumps of cells" so I think that particular argument goes down the drain.

Wait...now we are getting on the topic of abortion. Let's not make this a threadjack.

Only making a point...

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

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.

I hope they enjoy getting their ass kicked.