Surpeme Court Gay Marriage Cases....

[MrFun]

Marriage - unlike Baptism, doesn't work that way. No, it's not a sacrament.

Glad we got this cleared up.

So you can keep your religious shit to yourself, and you shouldn't have any problem with a gay man marrying another gay man through justice of peace.

[kentonio]

Hrm? You are aware I teach privately... I fail to see how it is Marxist to earn enough for my needs and be satisfied with that.

..

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

[kentonio]

JonMillerLite..

[Ben Kenobi]

Orthodox, FWIW, consider you Catholics just as wrong as Protestants.

What they are also saying is that unless the community adheres to the sacraments they are not a part of the community. Presumably this applies to changing the sacraments to fit modern day desires. I thought I smelled Orthodoxy in your earlier argument - because the argument you gave never comes from Protestants.

Anyways, yeah, we are wrong to elevate the Pope, etc. That's about it though. At present there is no theological division between us.

[Kidlicious]

I think we should all agree that Ben clearly understands all of God's wishes for humanity and we should obey Ben Kenobi and make him Pope Emperor of the world. Let's start a movement.

[Ben Kenobi]

So you can keep your religious **** to yourself, and you shouldn't have any problem with a gay man marrying another gay man through justice of peace.

I don't have a problem with it. It's not marriage. I do have a problem with the government pretending that it is.

I think that getting married through justice of peace is just as much of a real marriage as getting married through a church.

So. IOW, you don't believe in sacramental marriage. Good we got that cleared up.

[PLATO]

My preferred outcome for these cases is that DOMA falls as a violation of federalism and the Prop 8 challenge falls as not being an issue of proper federal jurisdiction where the judges shove it back to the CA State courts where it belonged in the first place.

i agree on DOMA. The second issue is a little more difficult. While I think that it is the State's perogative to regulate marriage, I also believe that the States cannot use that perogative to deny equal protection. I think this is the real issue that the court will have to resolve. The DOMA issue, to me, is pretty clear cut.

It may be that the court took these two cases to try and resolve the second issue. If DOMA is outside the federal scope, then the "definition" of marriage goes back in the State's ballpark. Once that issue is back to the States, then the court must resolve the equal protection issue. If they uphold DOMA, it would be hard for them to then grant equal protection to those who do not fit the "definition" of marriage.

[PLATO]

So you can keep your religious shit to yourself, and you shouldn't have any problem with a gay man marrying another gay man through justice of peace.

Ben, like you, has the right to believe what he will. What he does not have is the right to discriminate based on his beliefs.

What is stupid about Ben's arguments are that he wants to apply them to legal interpretations of people's rights. That is nonsensical in the context of the debate before the court.

So, if he wants to say "gays are teh evil" it is no worse that someone else saying "God is teh imagination".

It is the actions that people take that are regulated, not what they think.

So...once again. If we are debating the case before SCOTUS, then we should use the constitution as the guide not the Bible.

If we want to debate the morality of homosexuality or of gay marriage, then somebody should start another thread. That simply isn't the issue here.

[Ben Kenobi]

Finally getting a chance to reply to Sava.

Jesus was quite clear on what actions in life will prevent a person from entering the kingdom of heaven. He made no mention of homosexuality being one of them.

Jesus also never specifically mentions getting hookers and blow in Tijuana as sinful either...

Homosexuality is specifically condemned, AND Jesus tells us how marriage is supposed to work. One man, one woman, for life. That is the ideal.

What is especially hilarious about your beliefs is that you side with the Republicans on economic issues

I have to qualify that. I agree with the Austrians on economic issues. The Republicans don't support spending cuts.

Jesus made it a point to say rich people can't go to heaven.

Jesus made a point of saying that it is difficult for a rich man to enter heaven.

Jesus didn't say anything about teh gays.

Again, Jesus lays out how marriage works. One man and one woman for life. No gays allowed.

Again, your ass backwards priorities reveal your hatred and bigotry.

Actually - it reveals that I believe that scripture is authoritative and that whatever my own personal beliefs - that I believe that Christ gets first say and not me.

You, on the otherhand, since you don't believe scripture is authoritative - this is you and your beliefs.

Your purposeful perversion of the Bible for your own selfish, hateful reasons is what makes you a fundamentalist... a heretic... and probably headed for the lake of fire. It's not my place to say so. I'm just trying to help you find the right path.

Right. The path that says "being gay is ok". No thanks. Pretty sure Jesus had it right the first time.

In the end, it's your soul. You can continue to side with Satan and his child raping cult church... or you can go with God.

Ahh, we haven't had that for several pages! How refreshing.

[Ben Kenobi]

What is stupid about Ben's arguments are that he wants to apply them to legal interpretations of people's rights. That is nonsensical in the context of the debate before the court.

You are arguing that the state should intervene to support what you believe. So yes, you want to apply your own personal opinions and make them law. It is disingenous to argue that you want the state out of marriage when arguing that you want the state to provide gay marriage.

[MRT144]

Jesus' teachings have no place in civil matters Ben. Why don't you understand this? That you can't comprehend morality and civility without your religion says more about you as a person than the reality that it is wholly unnecessary to create things beneficial to society. It's like you choose to ignore philosophy after 33 AD.

[Kidlicious]

You don't believe that scripture is authoritative BK. That's just more crap that you're spewing.

[PLATO]

Ben, I found this doing a little searching around. Have you seen anything on this line of thinking?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Why is all this Christian stuff getting waved around in a thread about marriage?

[Ben Kenobi]

Jesus' teachings have no place in civil matters Ben. Why don't you understand this? That you can't comprehend morality and civility without your religion says more about you as a person than the reality that it is wholly unnecessary to create things beneficial to society. It's like you choose to ignore philosophy after 33 AD.

Do not murder. Do not bear false witness. Do not steal.

Yes, Jesus's teachings have a place in civil matters. This includes marriage.

I dispute that gay marriage will be beneficial to society as a whole. I believe it will be profoundly harmful.