I copied and pasted an article concerning yesterday's decision. The man who wrote this has used compelling and historical arguments to present his case. He used footnotes to back up his arguments. In case you are wondering, I stand by what this man says and I am not afraid to do so.

https://www.fimfiction.net/blog/504617/statement-on-the-supreme-court-decision-

If you want to read the original:

http://wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=169861

For Christ I stand,

David Crespo

4502738
You are not ashamed to state your own opinion, that I approve of.

Thank you for leading us to our daily reminder of how backwards the United States are at times, by the way.

4502738 I'm sorry but that is backwards.

can we just stop with these posts? they have no relevance to this group and i tire of seeing them and people's deluded attempts to justify why gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry.

4502738

4502738 Well then, I'm not afraid to voice my opinion on your opinion. And your opinion is wrong. And let's be honest,
this world would be a better place without religion.

4502738

Go. The. Fuck. Away.

The thread that unravels the article is this: Marriage has civil status. That brings it under the purview of government. Once it's under the purview of government, it can be legally changed.

As long as marriage was solely a personal or religious affair - and brought no legal benefits or responsibilities - the government had no hold on it. That this case could be brought up in the first place is due to Christians bringing this institution into government. They wanted the government to outlaw bigamy, suppress marrying of cousins, put an end to Mormon polygamy, punish adultery, etc. These usages of government power to enforce religious doctrine are what forged the link that allows the Supreme Court to be making this decision. They made a deal with the Devil for power and control and expected it to end well.

4502738

"Thou shalt not lie with a man as thou wilt with a woman" doesn't apply if you never lie with a woman...

Lesbians?

Well... Ummmm... They don't lie with men like they lie with women either, so it's all good. Really, the only ones screwed by the bible are those who do the begeting and bisexuals. (Sorry bisexuals...)

P.S. To paraphrase the immortal words of Daniel Tosh:

"If God is really against homosexuality, then it's not like he's going to suddenly stop preventing them from getting into heaven just because of some human law. So, what are you worried about?"

4502738
I don't give a shit what religion has to say about anything. The bible could condemn homosexuality on every page and it still wouldn't be a valid argument against gay marriage.

4502881

this world would be a better place without religion.

>ignoring the billions of dollars donated by various religious groups to various charity groups and who routinely risk their lives trying to help others.

4502962 Just voicing my opinion.

4502932

The bible could condemn homosexuality on every page and it still wouldn't be a valid argument against gay marriage.

It would be, and it is a valid religious argument.

4502962
But it's not manna from God. People risk their lives for others with religion or without it. People donate their time and energy because they care for others and want to see them do well. It's easy enough to be religious and not care about people - there's plenty of examples to demonstrate that - so it's not religion that causes this, but peoples' own internal moral compasses.

4502881

this world would be a better place without religion.

We have the secular version of religion in ideology. It's not appreciably better. People will come up with excuses for bad behavior with or without religion.

4502738

For Christ I stand,

If Christ died for all sins, why do people like to exclude one?

4503000

so it's not religion that causes this, but peoples' own internal moral compasses

Peoples' moral compasses are often very heavily influenced by their religion.

4503014 Good question. It's one thing to struggle with sin and want to defeat it. It's another to condone it. There lies the difference. All sins can be forgiven and God will help those who struggle with it, but it doesn't give us the license to lead sinful lives. We have to strive to obey all of God's commands and not murder, steal, lie, dishonor our parents, etc. So homosexuality is not a special sin. It can be forgiven and it can be defeated. We come to God the way we are and He will change us. Hope this answers your question.

As followers of Christ it is not our place to judge those who live in a way we do not agree with or even in a way that the Bible does not agree with. Our ONLY responsibility is to love them as Human beings and to demonstrate God's love through our actions and interactions with others. To God, one sin is just as bad as any other, all are wrong. We are fallen creatures and I do not have the right to go about telling people they're going to Hell because they are sinners when I am one as well. My wife and I have several very good friends who are homosexuals, heck my own aunt is a lesbian. We do not treat them any differently from other people.

I do not believe that homosexuality is natural, heck I think it's about as unnatural as it can get, HOWEVER I have not and will not detest, dislike, or persecute somebody who is. We are called to love others as Christ loves us, whether or not we agree with them. The Bible even says that Jesus did not come to the world to condemn it, but that through him the world might be saved. The only thing my wife and I do is gently encourage ALL SINNERS to come to accept Christ.

Our only objective should be to help them come to love God. Once they are right with our Heavenly Father, our job is done. God himself will work in their life as HE sees fit and our only job at that point is to encourage our friends to keep seeking Him with all their heart. We tend to stick our noses into places and situations where we do not belong. We ARE NOT Westborough Baptist Church! We are to love them, nothing more.

For other positive points of view in regard to this topic look to the works of Sy Rodgers. Good bless and peace out.

4502986

It would be [a valid argument]

Only if they were good arguments in and of themselves that could have been made by anyone, but I've read the bible and it doesn't contain any thorough field research on all the social ramifications of gay marriage in the early 21st century (not even in "Numbers").

and it is a valid religious argument.

That's cool, then practice your religion that way. But the rest of humanity is under zero obligation to take it seriously as a statement about the world or how things should be.

Gonna say a couple of things some people have already said, but I figure it's fine. No disrespect to the people who already made any of these points.

I'd say religion isn't so much the problem as the excuse. We don't need a religion to turn us into bigots, just like we don't need a religion to make us compassionate or brave.

Ideologies inform our consciences, but it can't be the only thing that shapes our sense of right and wrong, or how can we explain the people who change their belief systems because they decide their former beliefs were unconscionable? And our consciences can change the way we interpret our own ideologies as well. If a devout Christian sees an interpretation of the bible that, if true, would mean God is in the wrong, he or she has a choice. Option one, he or she can either assume that, since God is good by definition, any interpretation of the bible that makes God look like the bad guy must be wrong. Option two, the bible must not be a perfect holy work of infinite and infallible goodness (that'd be the one I picked). Option three, since God knows more than we do, clearly we're wrong and He's right.

I like to think no one goes with option three. If God says something that seems evil and someone blindly accepts it anyway, they've got no business trying to assume the moral high ground, because obviously they're going against their own principles.

e: here's what my conscience says: All sexual relationships between consenting individuals are good. DOMA was disgusting and evil, and I was ashamed to be in a country that put that into effect. I can hardly believe humans chose to do that to humans.

4503052
That answered nothing. People all treat the sins rather differently. While people are all up in arms about homosexuality, no one pays attention to the fact that the divorce rate in the US right now is 41% among couples marrying for the first time, the average amount of time a marriage has lasted before divorce is eight years, and remarriage is on the rise, and 4 in 10 people who are divorced eventually remarry. Divorce is looked on sternly unless in the case of infidelity by a wife, but infidelity itself (including remarriages) carried the same penalty as homosexuality - stoning or death - in biblical law. And yet while the homosexuals have been shamed, divorced and remarried couples are not. The bible also approved of slavery of foreign peoples and polygamy, as well, and yet no one follows any of these anymore.

To add to all this, marriage is not necessarily a religious institution. It can be enhanced by the marriage ceremony that takes place in a church, but the legal precedent of marriage is a certificate handed out by the government and signed by both parties like a contract, and the whole process of the church ceremony can be skipped altogether. So you could boycott marriage ceremonies in churches, but when the legal version of a marriage is a certificate that has nothing to do with the church, I fail to see where the problem is in the marriage component.

Also, this may differ by belief system, but I've always learned that sin is conquered both in the cleansing of our baptism and if we have hope of forgiveness through belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and that defeat by sin is found when we have no hope. Furthermore, Mark 12 states that one of the greatest commandments is "Love your neighbor as yourself"; my problem is not so much the fact that people have their set of beliefs that they wish to spread, but that they're being somewhat passive-aggressive in touting them.

EDIT: More and more research has been showing a genetic influence in if someone is gay, and only 2-4% of the population at any one point is gay. Furthermore, about 1500 species share this gene, and the same gene is also showing in research as helping out in female reproductive chances and fetal/newborn survival. If you're going to start hating on a group of people for a certain facet of biology that they cannot control, you sound a little like a proponent of eugenics, which on all previous occasions has not ended well for people as a whole.

EDIT 2: Forgot to mention: I'm straight. I just don't like seeing people putting down others like this.

4503052

It can be forgiven and it can be defeated.

I already have a bone to pick with religion. My mother was pregnant as a teen and the church told her to give me up for adoption. Her parents forced her to go to "counseling" sessions to try to convince her to give me up. But my mom didn't listen. So I was born, and I'm here now with a good life. Fuck your shit religion, I would be way worse off now if my mom was a complete idiot. I don't have a religion but I do think it's a possibility there is a god. But if he's the way some people say he is, then fuck him, damn me to hell a million times over, I don't care.

And as for you, I have a question for you:
WHY THE FUCK DO YOU CARE IF OTHER PEOPLE ARE MARRYING THE SAME GENDER?

4503034
This is true. Many people hemmed and hawwed when the Holocaust was going on because it was doctrine that it was the duty of a good Christian to live in obedience to the laws of the state. So they struggled and agonized because they felt they had to choose between being a good person and being a good Christian. This is why you find so many of the heroes - such as Oscar Schindler - of the era from outside of the Church. His moral compass was uninhibited.

And, of course, the reverse is true with regard to religion and ideology alike.

4503034

Peoples' moral compasses are often very heavily influenced by their religion.

There was recently a guy on the Daily Show who revolutionised the way I look at religion and morality. His point was that while religion theoretically tries to instill morals, in reality people generally define their religion by their pre-existing morals.

That's how you can get the local mosque and ISIS practicing the "same" religion. That's how you can get Westboro and the Pope practicing the "same" religion. That's how you get an aggressive, vengeful God in some parts of the Bible and a very different, more forgiving God in others.

It makes sense to me because it explains why there's such a vast difference in interpretations across the board for the same source material.

To paraphrase Rufus, the 13th Apostle, "Don't have a codified religion; have a 'good idea' and then follow your heart. You'll be a better person."

4503149
You claim Christians to be bigoted, and yet you yourself act like one. Unlike you, I was put up for adoption (which, unlike what you claim, is not the worst thing in the world and it doesn't ruin peoples' lives), and I have a great life with two parents who love me, a family of my own, a job I love, and I am religious. In fact, if it wasn't for that religion, my life would be significantly worse. Would you have had a better one if your mother listen to them? Maybe. Would you have had a worse one? Maybe. Your mother decided to not listen to others who, most likely thought that they were trying to help her. Have you seen the statistics on what a child does to an unmarried underage woman? It's not pretty. For anyone involved. It sounds like she beat the odds, but that is no reason for you to be so blatantly hostile and bigoted toward a group that had the best intentions at heart for your mother.

The only thing you've shown is that you are a very hateful person, and I feel pity for you that you think that to express such hate is an acceptable action toward your fellow man.

4503322 Oh I'm not against Christianity only, my grandparents were Mormons. It doesn't matter to me, I don't like any religion. But does that mean I'm going to go parading about the streets demanding he government ban all religious practicies? No! And does that mean I won't tolerate other people having one so long as it doesn't hurt people for not following their demands? No! You can worship a fucking brick and I wouldn't care until you started bashing people's heads in with that brick.

Still though, why the fuck do these religions care so much if someone is in a relationship with a person of the same gender? I don't give a shit if they think they're "helping" those people, it's morally wrong on so many levels. And what about some of their hate towards the transgender community, how about that shit? It just disgusts me.

4502738
You have spammed this copypasta in several groups already.

You have now been reported for spam.

You'd think all the downvotes the first few times would have helped you figure out where you can stick your opinion.

4502830

And yet you don't mind when they post why they should

4503571 So I guess two groups is considered too many and this is my first and only time doing this. I guess I'm really starting to understand the definition of what love and tolerance means. To silence those who will not go with the flow. (Shakes head in disbelief.)

4503646

Like you you have any right to tout the "love and tolerance" line.

4503646
We're sorry we are being intolerant of your intolerance.

4503060
4503052

I agree with you both. And I feel that must if not all people see those that follow God, are one in the same. No it is not true. We are many that follow different paths and lessons, just as any one with or without religion.

And I won't lie when I say even with in our fate, there have been, and are those who use our beliefs as a mains to do hurm. Or to make themselves seem greater and mightier then others, when they too sin.

We all fuose too much on what makes us differnt, what makes one think he or she is better then the other, even what we look when we all bleed the same blood. I'm not saying let's shut it and put on false smiles. But let us understand one another. See past that makes us look apart.

I....I had made the mistake of letting my hate rule me.

4503646
I'd care, but with your username and demonstrated penchant for spamming, I'm pretty sure you're a troll account.

4503646

love and tolerance

One definition of that statement would be willing to befriend homosexual people and tolerating their sexuality.

Also, I don't see any Christians protesting divorce (Luke,) pork (Leviticus,) the cutting of beards (again, Leviticus,) mixed fibers (Leviticus yet again) and premarital sex (Corinthians.)

4503364

And does that mean I won't tolerate other people having one so long as it doesn't hurt people for not following their demands?

And yet that is the exact thing you are doing. By saying "I already have a bone to pick with religion," and "Fuck your shit religion," you are not being tolerant. You're being intolerant. If you want to be tolerant, you'd let them have their say and just not even acknowledge them.

it's morally wrong on so many levels.

So it's okay for you to be morally outraged about something, and then say it, but it's not okay for another group of people to do the same thing...

why the fuck do these religions care so much if someone is in a relationship with a person of the same gender?

Because according to them, it's a sin. And since they actually care about peoples' souls (whether you think they are right or wrong), and they don't want them to suffer for the rest of eternity, they want to help them make a better choice. At the end of everything, it's the individual's choice. They'll be held to account for what they choose to do.

I don't give a shit if they think they're "helping" those people...

And this is where you become like the Pharisees and priests from the days of old.

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’{b}”

28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
[a] Deut. 6:5
{b} Lev. 19:18
[c] A denarius was the usual daily wage of a day laborer (see Matt. 20:2).
[Luke 10:25-37, NIV]

According to these teachings, you are not only leaving the man to die on the road, you are also championing others to do the same. That's why your hypocrisy/double standard and moral high ground claim are disturbing. The only hatred here from the christian side is toward the sin, not the sinner. The act, not the actor. For some reason, both sides of this issue have trouble distinguishing between the two. There are some like WBC who take the hatred of the sin too far and condemn the sinner (going against the very words that Jesus stated in the above verse), and then there are some on the other side who see the hate for the sin and say that they all are homophobic. There is a clear difference, and any who confuse the two (on either side) should be corrected.

By extension, you are also telling them to ignore this:

2 “Son of man, speak to your people and say to them: ‘When I bring the sword against a land, and the people of the land choose one of their men and make him their watchman, 3 and he sees the sword coming against the land and blows the trumpet to warn the people, 4 then if anyone hears the trumpet but does not heed the warning and the sword comes and takes their life, their blood will be on their own head. 5 Since they heard the sound of the trumpet but did not heed the warning, their blood will be on their own head. If they had heeded the warning, they would have saved themselves. 6 But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet to warn the people and the sword comes and takes someone’s life, that person’s life will be taken because of their sin, but I will hold the watchman accountable for their blood.’
[Ezekiel 33: 2-6, NIV]

While this is a little out of context, you can also apply it to a larger audience. By staying silent, the watchman (Christians) wouldn't be sounding the horn.

And what about some of their hate towards the transgender community...

They aren't hating the sinner, they are hating the sin. And it's a sin because according to them, it is a sin. And since they actually care about peoples' souls (whether you think they are right or wrong), and they don't want them to suffer for the rest of eternity, they want to help them make a better choice. Any who hate because of a sinful choice, is not a christian, but rather a false convert (which isn't a "No True Scot" fallacy, given that the requirements were just listed: "Love thy God" and "Love thy Neighbor").

My opinion, I think that SCOTUS should have thrown the case out. I agree with the dissenting opinion in that this isn't a 14th Amendment issue, but a 10th Amendment issue, and that by making this ruling, they've performed judicial activism and superseded their authority by, basically, rewriting a law. They could have also avoided the whole issue by splitting marriage into two different definitions. One for a religious definition, and another for a governmental definition. This way, all religious institutions that don't agree with gay marriage are protected from "denying homosexuals the right to marry" and the homosexuals get "their fair and equal treatment". Both sides are happy, and so are the bureaucrats, since they get more paperwork to fill out.

4503622
Unfortunately, most people have a double standard hiding somewhere in their beliefs. I'm also entertained by the fact that no one has apparently read the articles as it brings up good secular points, of which no one seems to refute (in this thread at least).

4503659
Only intolerance I'm seeing is one guy spewing hatred for religion, and people patting him on the back for it. Every professed Christian here has already made the comment about how they aren't hating homosexuals, just the act of homosexuality, which is a sin according to their beliefs.

4503679
Says the blatant troll.

4503688
Do you want a list of how out of context every single piece of "evidence" that picture is? Because I can tell you that it'll be a very long list. A doctoral thesis would be shorter.

EDIT: Corrected a small segment that got deleted.

4503693

Sorry. I removed the picture just now in case someone took it wrong. I was just using that.

I kind of suck with context at times.

4503697
Going back to Leviticus, which was a specific set of rules made for a specific tribe of Jews, in a much different environment then we are, is not just "slightly" out of context.

And as a head's up, Christians are upset about divorce and premarital sex. They just aren't as flashy as the "hip" and "new" homosexuals "hate" so they get buried.

4503693
Says the sockpuppet account.

4503708
[citation needed]

4503711
You provide yours; I'll provide mine.

4503713
Here's a quick example.
There's also that thread (which has since been buried) where you outright admitted to it.

4503718
Marriage HAS changed though.
Making people laugh =/= trolling.
Try again.

4503732
Really, Happy. Do you want to go down that path?

Notice on the right-hand side where it says "My Alt Accounts".
That second name there. What is it? Oh yes. Aryame. You can change the account name all you want, but the same troll is sitting behind the screen.

4502738 You are now on the list of people I want to meet face to face to so I can tell them that they're wrong.

4503706

Okay, thanks!

4503735

That might be a joke sidebar, just to be honest. Also, I don't think anyone would be able to have so many alt accounts, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

When it comes to Happy, I'm never sure whether it's serious or not.

4503796
Happy pulled the exact same stunt before, claiming I was an alt account (after I called out another of his alt accounts "Smiles"). I filed a complaint with the site mods, and they took care of it. They both pull the exact same stunts, with the exact same wording, with the exact same beliefs. You hang around certain people long enough (by choice or not) and you learn their personality. They are the same person.

4503816

Okay. Thanks for clarification.

4503825
No problem.