SCOTUS makes a good call for once!

[nonameisgood]

My god! that's a big house! How long did it take to walk down to the kitchen for morning coffee?


Interesting historical note: When Charles II gave Pennsylvania to William Penn (to get Quaker Penn out of Anglican England), Penn, at a stroke of the pen, became the largest private property owner on earth.

Yes, a huge house. Everything is big in Texas.

And my family came across as surveyors for Wm Penn. Apparently his grant was so large that he needed many surveyors just to identify it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Citizen]

Homosexuality is the worst form of bigotry and hatred. They hate God and everything he stands for. They try to cram down our throat their immoral deviate behavior and say they are normal. It is not gay and straight it is gay and normal. Gay is not normal and they are not born that way. If they are then child molesters and rapists are born that way also. It is willful chosen behavior. Stop trying to force your filthy ways on normal people.

In regard to hating God, a couple points:

1. I once worked with a gay man. It was apparent from his statements that he didn't hate God. What he hated was self-styled religious guardians of other people's morality cramming their beliefs down his throat. It was the ham-handed tactics that put him off organized religion.

2. The recent troubles in the Catholic church with closeted gay priests belies hating God.

Regarding trying to cram down our throat their immoral deviate behavior, let's bring some precision into it: some gays try to force others to "recognize" their behavior as legitimate. When it comes to a gay couple forcing a photographer or wedding-cake bakery to provide service, I view it as over-reach. But, the only way gays or anybody else can get away with it is because of the existence of a compulsory government willing to pander to a segment of constituency.

-----

SCOTUS didn't get one right. Let me explain. Its right along the lines of what SVG said about asking permission to get permission.

Lets say my boss tells me I have to fly to an industry convention in Las Vegas. I vigorously counter-argue that flying anywhere was not in the job-description. My boss finally relents, giving me permission not to attend the convention. That is just as bad because if my boss did not have legitimate authority to require me to go, then he damn sure ain't got authority to give me permission not to go. Government has no business sticking its nose into marriage, one way or another.

While SCOTUS seems to be for rights (for example, the decision in this thread), a bit of historical research will reveal that SCOTUS has done far more to expand government power at the expense of rights and freedom. They throw us a bone every once in a while, but the historical average is a steep slide toward tyranny.

 

[solus]

http://www.tickld.com/x/pastor-just-said-something-that-blew-his-entire-congregation-away

enufff said...

ispe

 

[WalkingWolf]

In regard to hating God, a couple points:

1. I once worked with a gay man. It was apparent from his statements that he didn't hate God. What he hated was self-styled religious guardians of other people's morality cramming their beliefs down his throat. It was the ham-handed tactics that put him off organized religion.

2. The recent troubles in the Catholic church with closeted gay priests belies hating God.

Regarding trying to cram down our throat their immoral deviate behavior, let's bring some precision into it: some gays try to force others to "recognize" their behavior as legitimate. When it comes to a gay couple forcing a photographer or wedding-cake bakery to provide service, I view it as over-reach. But, the only way gays or anybody else can get away with it is because of the existence of a compulsory government willing to pander to a segment of constituency.

-----

SCOTUS didn't get one right. Let me explain. Its right along the lines of what SVG said about asking permission to get permission.

Lets say my boss tells me I have to fly to an industry convention in Las Vegas. I vigorously counter-argue that flying anywhere was not in the job-description. My boss finally relents, giving me permission not to attend the convention. That is just as bad because if my boss did not have legitimate authority to require me to go, then he damn sure ain't got authority to give me permission not to go. Government has no business sticking its nose into marriage, one way or another.

While SCOTUS seems to be for rights (for example, the decision in this thread), a bit of historical research will reveal that SCOTUS has done far more to expand government power at the expense of rights and freedom. They throw us a bone every once in a while, but the historical average is a steep slide toward tyranny.

+1 with the invention of political parties came bench political appointments, which spells politics in the courtroom. We were doomed as soon as parties controlled the government.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Double post

 

[WalkingWolf]

Well since you are obviously one of the bigot supporters you will not have a chance to see the pearly gates. Since you have obviously rejected God and his values.

Please provide us with these citations directly from God with his values. Man made versions do not count.

 

[Mr Birdman]

gay man (perverted deviate)

In regard to hating God, a couple points:

1. I once worked with a gay man. It was apparent from his statements that he didn't hate God. What he hated was self-styled religious guardians of other people's morality cramming their beliefs down his throat. It was the ham-handed tactics that put him off organized religion.

2. The recent troubles in the Catholic church with closeted gay priests belies hating God.

Regarding trying to cram down our throat their immoral deviate behavior, let's bring some precision into it: some gays try to force others to "recognize" their behavior as legitimate. When it comes to a gay couple forcing a photographer or wedding-cake bakery to provide service, I view it as over-reach. But, the only way gays or anybody else can get away with it is because of the existence of a compulsory government willing to pander to a segment of constituency.

-----

SCOTUS didn't get one right. Let me explain. Its right along the lines of what SVG said about asking permission to get permission.


Lets say my boss tells me I have to fly to an industry convention in Las Vegas. I vigorously counter-argue that flying anywhere was not in the job-description. My boss finally relents, giving me permission not to attend the convention. That is just as bad because if my boss did not have legitimate authority to require me to go, then he damn sure ain't got authority to give me permission not to go. Government has no business sticking its nose into marriage, one way or another.

While SCOTUS seems to be for rights (for example, the decision in this thread), a bit of historical research will reveal that SCOTUS has done far more to expand government power at the expense of rights and freedom. They throw us a bone every once in a while, but the historical average is a steep slide toward tyranny.

See you just proved my point. He was put him off organized religion, because there are some rules. He apperantly does not like the rules and wants to do what ever he wants and thumb his nose at God. Thus sayith the Lord Thow Shalt not do such vile filthy things.

 

[WalkingWolf]

See you just proved my point. He was put him off organized religion, because there are some rules. He apperantly does not like the rules and wants to do what ever he wants and thumb his nose at God. Thus sayith the Lord Thow Shalt not do such vile filthy things.

BUT they are YOUR rules, and your rules are not the rules of others, just like any organization has rules, and those rules only rule the organization, and it's willing members. NOW can you give us some citations of God's rules handed down directly from God. Or do you just have what some preachers claim are the rules?

 

[smokestack420]

Go back to drinking Kool Aid, all this did was affirm that religious marriage is dead , anybody got a fiddle to play, the country is dead

Sent from my Z970 using Tapatalk

 

[Mr Birdman]

citations

BUT they are YOUR rules, and your rules are not the rules of others, just like any organization has rules, and those rules only rule the organization, and it's willing members. NOW can you give us some citations of God's rules handed down directly from God. Or do you just have what some preachers claim are the rules?

So I have to believe you have never read the Bible then. Many quotes there. :shocker: I do not need a preacher to tell me what it says. I have read it my self. :shocker:

 

[Redbaron007]

Gubbermit marriage = $$$$$$

Take the money away, the state/feds wouldn't be involved.

 

[WalkingWolf]

So I have to believe you have never read the Bible then. Many quotes there. :shocker: I do not need a preacher to tell me what it says. I have read it my self. :shocker:

That is not how it works on this board. YOU make the claim, YOU provide the citations, or it just is not true.

But to show you this is how a citation works.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/homosexuality/

The term ‘homosexuality’ was coined in the late 19th century by a German psychologist, Karoly Maria Benkert. Although the term is new, discussions about sexuality in general, and same-sex attraction in particular, have occasioned philosophical discussion ranging from Plato's Symposium to contemporary queer theory. Since the history of cultural understandings of same-sex attraction is relevant to the philosophical issues raised by those understandings, it is necessary to review briefly some of the social history of homosexuality. Arising out of this history, at least in the West, is the idea of natural law and some interpretations of that law as forbidding homosexual sex. References to natural law still play an important role in contemporary debates about homosexuality in religion, politics, and even courtrooms. Finally, perhaps the most significant recent social change involving homosexuality is the emergence of the gay liberation movement in the West. In philosophical circles this movement is, in part, represented through a rather diverse group of thinkers who are grouped under the label of queer theory. A central issue raised by queer theory, which will be discussed below, is whether homosexuality, and hence also heterosexuality and bisexuality, is socially constructed or purely driven by biological forces.

Sure throws a hell of a loop in your whole bible God claim. I hope you appreciated the pink font.

 

[Citizen]

See you just proved my point. He was put him off organized religion, because there are some rules. He apperantly does not like the rules and wants to do what ever he wants and thumb his nose at God. Thus sayith the Lord Thow Shalt not do such vile filthy things.

No. That's not what I said. Go back an re-read the post.

And, don't change your argument. You earlier said gays hate God. Now, you're trying to equate organized religion with God.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Woe unto them that call evil good and good evil. That put darkness for light, and light for darkness , that put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
Isaiah 5:20

OK where does that say a damn thing about homosexuality?

Hear that buzzer? That is the fail buzzer!

[video=youtube;yImkcG7IQeg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yImkcG7IQeg[/video]

 

[solus]

Well since you are obviously one of the bigot supporters you will not have a chance to see the pearly gates. Since you have obviously rejected God and his values.

birdman, you should consider yourself very very fortunate, i consider myself a gentleman, but...

tell me mate... are you absolutely sure the Deity you cherish so dearly will be meeting you? especially from the emotional hate you are spewing...if She is, then i guess you two deserve each other as you spend eternity together!!

and did you have a cite in the book your Deity provides? if so can you provide a cite here let me help ya a bit...
http://www.tickld.com/x/pastor-just-said-something-that-blew-his-entire-congregation-away

you go well mate...

ipse

 

[WalkingWolf]

John 8:7

6They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground. 7But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."


Matthew 7:1-3King James Version (KJV)

7 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

And from the OCDO bible

(6) NO PERSONAL ATTACKS: While you may disagree strongly with another poster based upon their opinion, we will NOT tolerate any personal attacks or general bashing of groups of people based upon race, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender-identity or choice of occupation (e.g., being a law enforcement officer, in the military, etc). NOTE THAT THIS RULE APPLIES TO PMs AS WELL AS FORUM POSTS!!!

Again I put the color pink in there so you would take notice.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

That is not how it works on this board. YOU make the claim, YOU provide the citations, or it just is not true.

Well, I wouldn't put it that way. I'd say if you make a (contentious) claim (of fact, as opposed to merely stating your opinion) and then fail/refuse to provide supporting citations, then it's considered acceptable for the other forum members to dismiss the claim. The claim could still be true, not matter how poorly presented or cited.

I head a pastor say today that it's critical for us to have both truth and grace. We see many people focusing so much on truth, and not enough on grace, that they become judgmental (not our purpose on earth) and condemn, perhaps even hateful. On the other hand, some don't forget grace but forget truth, which leads to compromises and neglect of morals. He pointed to the story of when the woman caught in adultery was brought before Jesus, and they challenged Jesus saying how the law provided that she be stoned. Jesus replied "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." Everyone in the crowd was convicted, and left (And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.) But, Jesus didn't neglect truth, "And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."

Notice that Jesus challenged that someone without sin cast the first stone, and no one did as none of them were without sin, but there was someone without sin there, Jesus, and he, even though he was without sin, he still didn't cast a stone. Nor did he neglect the fact that what she did was sin. Grace and truth.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

LOL WalkingWolf, I guess great minds think alike? We quoted the same scripture, but maybe not for the exact same reason. Still, though, perhaps the scripture is pretty applicable to the situation, no?

 

[WalkingWolf]

LOL WalkingWolf, I guess great minds think alike? We quoted the same scripture, but maybe not for the exact same reason. Still, though, perhaps the scripture is pretty applicable to the situation, no?

Did you read the citation Solus provided? I thought it was very well stated by the preacher. But he was wrong that the bible says homosexuality is a sin since the word did not exist. There are numerous references to fornication though. Which fornication is fornication, no matter what the sexual orientation.

 

[solus]

bird, i think the Bard said it best in the MoVenice...

“The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
An evil soul producing holy witness
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart.
O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!”

lol...you are a treat bird...your darn foot nailed to the floor all the while you believing it is a cross...keep on with your foolish preaching (1 Corinthians 4:10) you shall discern who the strong & distinguished are, and you are without honor therefore the weakness!! as She is taking notes for your discussion before you get to sit next to Her Matthew 7:1-3

ipse