Advocates seek to expand gay rights

No thank you, all the other countries in the world are dung heaps.

 

So all the other countries are dictatorships as well like you claim the u.s. Is? the hypocrisy in your comments is pathetic and disgusting.

 

Which statement do you not understand? Obama is not a Christian. He's a muslim.

- - - Updated - - -

When did I say I want religious laws?

 

Not by a long shot. As others have pointed out, only two of the Commandments are law, and they are laws that you find in every other civilization. They did not come from the 10 Commandments. Several of the Commandments are incompatible with our Bill of Rights. You can have the Commandments or you can have the 1st Amendment. You can't have both. They contradict each other.

Besides, our laws are based on the idea of individual justice and accountability. The Ten Commandments are based on what is known as "corporate guilt". They say that God will punish children for the sins of their parents (Exodus 20:4-5).

Anyone who says that our laws are based on the 10 Commandments is either unfamiliar with our laws or unfamiliar with the Commandments.

 

So you now think the executive is the dictator? Just last week you said it was the judiciary. Make up your mind.

 

Uh, what?

 

Provide proof he is a Muslim or shall I just report your post as a violation?

I see you didn't address my other comments. Please show how we are under a dictatorship. Your comments are lies and hyperbole.

 

We don't have laws against murder? Stealing? Bearing false witness? Bigamy?

 

We have laws against murder and stealing (those are the two I was referring to in the previous post . . . I'm not sure how you missed that). As far as bearing false witness goes, if you are talking about in court, then sure. So, giving you the benefit of the doubt, that's 3/10. The 10 Commandments don't outlaw bigamy. OT law allowed men to marry multiple wives, so marrying one while you were already married to another wouldn't be a crime.

We have no laws establishing the God of the Bible as the Lord God, we have no laws saying you can't worship other gods, we have no laws saying you can't make or graven images or use them in worship, we have no laws saying you can't use the Lord's name in vain (people do it everyday when they say "hallelujah"), we have no laws forcing people to keep the Sabbath, we have no laws forcing you to honor your mother and father, we have no laws criminalizing adultery, and we have no laws criminalizing the coveting of wives, homes, slaves, etc.

And again, our laws treat people as individuals, unlike the God described in the 10 Commandments.

Advocates scratch and claw and plead just to keep slightly less than half of the 10 Commandments relevant to our laws.

 

Both branches have taken liberty with their Constitutional duties. Both to further leftism or leftist causes.

 

Go ahead and report me, but that is my true opinion. He is a closet muslim. He said it in his book that he stands with the muslims. And this slip on TV:

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

I think that is why he goes easy on all the muslim terrorists. I think that is why he traded 5 top muslim terrorists for a deserter. I think that is why he favors Iran over Israel. So if saying that is not permitted then so be it, but I think that the evidence is pretty good that he's a muslim and it is time that we admit it. He lied about gay marriage to get elected and he's lied about his faith for the same reason.

He's acting like a dictator by using executive orders to create laws and ignoring the US Supreme Courts decisions.

 

And that is enough proof for me.

 

What do the homophobes expect to happen "in the future" that will guarantee them a "victory" after they lost 2 weeks ago?

Some mass movement in 2016 demanding a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriages?

Not likely.....the polls show majority support for gay marriage rights, even among young Republicans. So where will the impetus come for State legislatures to pass such an Amendment? In fact, where will the impetus come for the House and Senate (even under GOP control) to pass such an Amendment out to the States?

Do they expect some "popular uprising" against Obergfell v. Hodges? Why....here we are two weeks into it...and there is ZERO sign of that in the polls.

And most of the "outraged" Republican 2016 Presidential Hopefuls, except for a few fanatics like Huckabee and Santorum, have DROPPED the whole issue and have "moved on" to illegal immigration, taxes, regulations, Iran, etc.

Where do they see their "delayed win" coming from...and when???

Or are they just going to spend the rest of their lives WHINING and CARPING about a war....

they've lost and have no hope of ever winning? And they know it?


I'm thinking the latter.

 

What is enough proof regarding what? All I did was spell out the 10 Commandments and point out which ones are actually part of our laws -- at most, 3. Most of the rest are in direct contradiction with our Bill of Rights. You couldn't have the 10 Commandments as law unless you did away with the 1st Amendment. Period. There is no rational way to deny that.

If you think anything here is incorrect, then feel free to point it out. That's what a discussion and debate forum is for.

 

The last two US Supreme Court rulings were to uphold Obamacare subsidies and to make gay marriage legal nation-wide.


Should the President ignore those decisions or uphold them?

Should a potential REPUBLICAN President in 2017 ignore those decisions or uphold them?

 

I never said the 10 Commandments were the Bill of Rights.

- - - Updated - - -

Exactly. If Obama doesn't have to obey the laws, then why would a republican obey the laws?

 

No, you said that our laws were based on them, which is why I pointed out that over half of them are completely incompatible with our laws. You have, at most, 3 laws which didn't even originate with the 10 Commandments in the first place. You can find laws against murder and theft all over the world, throughout history, regardless of religious context.

 

I skimmed the OP and I was pretty confused about it too. The world will keep spinning on as normal regardless of whether we allow gay rights or not, what's the big deal?

The surface is simple, its been socially acceptable to sideline the gay community for a long time and they feel uncomfortable about that changing.

The deeper issue is "identity". (The ID of sex, the ID of marriage, the ID of morality and traditional values.) Many of them feel that our objective identities are being shredded by modern culture. Which is true except that it happened way before gay rights became an issue. Modern identity is completely subjective and if something bad is going to happen because of this, denying gays the right to marry will have no effect at all to stop it.

Most people are so enmeshed in modern non-identity that they have no concept of any different way to be. We are who we make ourselves, we are who we choose to be.

Ironically most of the people strongly against gay rights are also for subjective identity (the right to make and choose who they want to be) in every other sense.

 

Yeah, and in a more general sense. Our laws are based in Judeo-Christian beliefs.

 

Our laws are based on Enlightenment principles, much of which had a (late) Judeo-Christian tradition and much of which didn't. Anyone who says that our laws are based on the 10 Commandments either doesn't understand our laws or doesn't understand the 10 Commandments.

 

Well what about the third branch? Why don't they do anything?

 

Because we have weak leaders McConnell and Boehner.

 

I said they were based in Judeo-Christian beliefs. I didn't say our laws were based on the 10 Commandments.

 

Newsflash:Without the 10 commandements,there would be no laws.
This country (USA) is based on Judeo-Christian principles.Do you care to debate that?
I AM your Huckleberry if so.

 

Newsflash: even a passing knowledge of history or the Bible will tell you that you are wrong. Ancient Egypt had laws, Babylon had laws, Ancient Persia had laws. Places well outside the influence of Judaism had laws. Even according to the Bible, there were laws that predated the Commandments. Read up on the Noahide laws.

If you are willing to not be vague about those principles, if you've read what I've already said on this thread and if you are willing to produce evidence and not just assertions, then sure. We can have that discussion. And as I've already said, there are certain concepts that I'm sure can be traced back to Judeo-Christian principles, but there are other principles, such as the freedom of religion and the rejection of the divine right of kings (something clearly, clearly spelled out in the Bible), that didn't come from there.

The NT says that government authorities are personally ordained and appointed by God, that they act as his ministers on earth and that it is sinful to rebel against them. Clearly the formation of our country was a rejection of this doctrine.