equality blooms with spring - Page 35 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-27-2009, 06:41 PM   #511
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 09:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Some do not want this to hit the Supreme Court, now.

I hope it does, why not let Scalia go down in history as the author of a 'Dred Scott Decision"?
Funny, seems like just yesterday we were being told this isn't a federal or constitutional issue but an issue for each state to decide.
__________________

__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 05-27-2009, 06:50 PM   #512
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:09 PM
I have never believed that.

Why should the Federal Tax benefits along with the Federal Social Security Benefits attached to marriage be a State issue?

That was the same argument used in Civil Rights, that it was for the States to decide.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-27-2009, 07:36 PM   #513
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
Good, it just took you a few days to understand the ruling.
Before you go around hugging people, you might want to read up on the decision. They agreed that a referendum holds, but they cited the need for marriage equality and equal protection under the state Constitution.
__________________
martha is online now  
Old 05-27-2009, 07:38 PM   #514
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Funny, seems like just yesterday we were being told this isn't a federal or constitutional issue but an issue for each state to decide.
You need to get on new email lists. Most marriage equality groups want this to be decided on state levels before it goes to Feds.
__________________
martha is online now  
Old 05-27-2009, 08:20 PM   #515
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 08:09 PM
Thank goodness for the DOMA.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 05-27-2009, 08:33 PM   #516
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,654
Local Time: 09:09 PM
I still want to know how the 34 became one flesh...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 05-27-2009, 08:46 PM   #517
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 08:09 PM
The same way Abraham and King David did, thru a commandment of God until it was taken from the earth. They were called "polygamous marriages" because opposing sexes were united by God.

And they can be defined as marriages because the parties involved were 2 parties of opposing sexes, thus they were marriages - not 2 men or two women establishing a consensual sexual relationship.



Labeling it gay partnerships "marriage" which connotes the uniting of 2 people of opposing sexes, doesn't fit the definition.




<>
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 05-27-2009, 08:48 PM   #518
Self-righteous bullshitter
 
BoMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Soviet Canuckistan — Socialist paradise
Posts: 16,661
Local Time: 11:09 PM
__________________

BoMac is offline  
Old 05-27-2009, 09:10 PM   #519
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
The same way Abraham and King David did, thru a commandment of God until it was taken from the earth. They were called "polygamous marriages" because opposing sexes were united by God.

And they can be defined as marriages because the parties involved were 2 parties of opposing sexes, thus they were marriages - not 2 men or two women establishing a consensual sexual relationship.



Labeling it gay partnerships "marriage" which connotes the uniting of 2 people of opposing sexes, doesn't fit the definition.




<>
So, we change the definition. Thus, the people who are so loyal to the dictionaries can be satisfied too. Done.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 05-27-2009, 09:12 PM   #520
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
Regardless of what

"those Christians
the Mormon"

as you have referred to them here on the boards...it....doesn't circumvent what the Master said about and how He defined marriage.





<>
And no law can be made respecting an establishment of religion, so that argument is automatically out the window.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 05-27-2009, 09:13 PM   #521
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
*sigh*

lecture me here, lecture me there.

People have been predicting drug usage being legalize for the last 40 years and it still hasn't happened.

*yawn*

<>
Two different things. And I'd certainly argue that marijuana should not be illegal as long as alcohol is legal.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 05-27-2009, 09:15 PM   #522
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 11:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
*sigh*

lecture me here, lecture me there.

People have been predicting drug usage being legalize for the last 40 years and it still hasn't happened.

*yawn*

<>
Just proves the country is stupid on both fronts. It certainly doesn't prove you correct.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 05-27-2009, 09:20 PM   #523
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,654
Local Time: 09:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
The same way Abraham and King David did, thru a commandment of God until it was taken from the earth. They were called "polygamous marriages" because opposing sexes were united by God.

And they can be defined as marriages because the parties involved were 2 parties of opposing sexes, thus they were marriages - not 2 men or two women establishing a consensual sexual relationship.



Labeling it gay partnerships "marriage" which connotes the uniting of 2 people of opposing sexes, doesn't fit the definition.




<>
No, it wasn't 2 people of opposite sex. It was one person and 33 people of the opposite sex.

But you said it's "as was intended", the definition was so important to you, but as you just admitted, the definition has changed.

Typical backtracking hypocritical conservative argument...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 05-27-2009, 09:21 PM   #524
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
doesn't circumvent what the Master said about and how He defined marriage.





<>
Master? What master? You mean "master" as in sexual role-playing? So, if one person is playing the submissive role, they can only marry according to the wishes of their dominant master?

Otherwise, I don't get the meaning of "master," and don't really feel that any sort of "master" ought to dictate my behaviour. Outside the bedroom, of course.
__________________
VintagePunk is offline  
Old 05-27-2009, 09:52 PM   #525
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 08:09 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
No, it wasn't 2 people of opposite sex. ...
Sure it was.
Joseph and his wives.

The opposite sexual parties only had intimate sexual relationships with their spouse who was Joseph.


That said, are there any homosexual weddings sanctioned in the Bible, Koran or Talmud?

Polygamous marriages were sanctioned by God in the Bible however.

Last question:

Did God, Christ, any Prophets, or Apostles ever attend or sanction any type of gay weddings anywhere?


Thank you,
<>
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com