Major Blow to Homophobes: SCOTUS Refuses to Block Gay Marriage in DC

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Show me where I said I teach at a university. You people are very good at jumping to conclusions. You're given an inch and you take a mile.

I saw that about this crowd a while back. Now that you're on to making up stuff that wasn't said, we are off an running.

Then you are a student?

Show me where I said I teach at a university. You people are very good at jumping to conclusions. You're given an inch and you take a mile.

I saw that about this crowd a while back. Now that you're on to making up stuff that wasn't said, we are off an running.

What have I made up?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Just admit that your ilk has run out of steam and now resorts to making up "facts" about what I've said.

Then you are a student?

What have I made up?

The last several posts.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Just admit that your ilk has run out of steam and now resorts to making up "facts" about what I've said.

What facts have I made up?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

This Sofiyya teaches at a University?

I have a class to conduct now, so I'm going to ask the opposition to do some heavy lifting while Im away, if you please. I'll adress the objections one at a time.

She never said anything about a university.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Then you are a student?

Tell me how you reached either conclusion involving a university, or that I have claimed that "oooh gay marriage will discriminate against me because I'm muslim".

I'm just wondering how you get from what actually been said to those two statements.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I read them because they were all directed at me; libs piling on with their group think. There has been nothing offered about how gay marriage will benefit society at large, only how it doesn't bother you all and how you all just KNOW that it won't damage anything. In addition, anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot and homophobe.

And yet, you still fail to acknowledge the central arguments made in this thread. And you still fail to acknowledge that an argument was presented as to how homosexual marriage will benefit society at large even if that's not really the central issue. Why? Repeating falsehoods in hopes to elevate them to fact might be a working strategy for some propagandists out there but it sure isn't working here. In case you haven't noticed, your smoke doesn't impress anyone.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

okay fair enough that's why I asked

Tell me how you reached either conclusion involving a university, or that I have claimed that "oooh gay marriage will discriminate against me because I'm muslim".

I'm just wondering how you get from what actually been said to those two statements.

I guessed by your age you might be working on a Masters etc. if that's not the case so be it, I did ask.

You claimed earlier gay marriage will cause religious discrimination.

[HeatDeath 431]

There is a very peculiar form of heresy, seemingly unique to the Christian church in North America, which states that one of, if not the primary goal of Christians is to socially engineer our society towards Biblical standards, and that this will somehow prolong, prosper, and/or stabilize it.

While it is true that societies organized along the lines of the Covenant of Noah will reap material blessings, they will still, purely by virtue of being composed, organized, and implemented by tainted, fallible, fallen human beings (and I include all Christians in this), tend inexorably towards entropy, decay, chaos, and dissolution. They just might take a little longer to get there. We are already pretty far down this road in North America, and slapping whitewash over the cracks, in the form of implementing a discrimination against homosexuals which is clearly contrary to the basic secular principle of equality under the law that secular North American democracy is founded upon will not help things. A consistent secular society, while still ultimately doomed, is probably more stable than a hypocritical hybrid of secularism and "Christian" theocracy. [As if the purely pragmatic "stabilization of society" was an important goal to Christians and mattered in the slightest bit to God.]

The job of Christians is to reveal God to the world, knowing that the vast majority of them will not care in the slightest. We can try to encourage society to work justice (as part of the Covenant of Noah - God's will for humanity in general), but that is of even less than secondary importance. Holding society to it's stated principle of "equal justice under the law" is at least part of God's will for the unsaved. Building a Christian theocracy, and holding the unsaved world to it won't save them, and will most assuredly damn us.

Better to make sure a secular society walls itself away from interference with religion, then to try to bend it to religious so-called "principles" that are no better than works-based salvation, and will damage what justice still exists, while accomplishing nothing whatsoever in the Spirit.

Edited March 4, 2010 by HeatDeath

[Peikko 1,575]

I read them because they were all directed at me; libs piling on with their group think. There has been nothing offered about how gay marriage will benefit society at large, only how it doesn't bother you all and how you all just KNOW that it won't damage anything. In addition, anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot and homophobe.

Cliff notes arent even necessary for this thread.

Always smart to play to the level of your audience.

Why does allowing gay unions to have the same rights and benefits as hetrosexual ones have to benefit society? It is your argument that the fabric of society disintigrates the more one 'panders' to homosexuality, and that allowing homosexuals to have a union enshrined in law as 'marriage' hastens its decline. However, you have totally failed to demonstrate any such cause and effect; the how and the why are conspicuously absent. Without a demonstrable argument, your refusal to accept that which you do not believe to be moral is merely emotional and petty. It is up to you to prove that it is detrimental, and how not up to me to demonstrate that it's not. How you fail to see that the 'how is it not'? postion is complete bull ####### beggers belief. Therefore, I don't believe it. You are either being coy about your objections as if somehow you hold power over the argument by keeping it secret or you don't have any.

I'll ask one more time, in case you missed it, would you vote for civil unions for homosexexuals if some way could be found to deny such couples ussage of the term marriage to describe themselves? Or is your claim to have 'no objection' to such unions a disingenuous attempt to deflect from the reality that you fear homosexuality, and consider it an abomination?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

okay fair enough that's why I asked

I guessed by your age you might be working on a Masters etc. if that's not the case so be it, I did ask.

You claimed earlier gay marriage will cause religious discrimination.

I have two Masters and a Ph.D. I never said that being Muslim affects my views of gays, but I am concerned about freedom for religion, association, and speech for anyone who believes that gay marriage and the obligations it creates on members of sociey affects them adversely.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I have two Masters and a Ph.D. I never said that being Muslim affects my views of gays, but I am concerned about freedom for religion, association, and speech for anyone who believes that gay marriage and the obligations it creates on members of sociey affects them adversely.

How will gay marriage affect freedom of religion and speech?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I'll ask one more time, in case you missed it, would you vote for civil unions for homosexexuals if some way could be found to deny such couples ussage of the term marriage to describe themselves?

Whether she votes for it or not is not important. Consensus in the American gay political community is that such a distinction is discrimination and they won't settle for it. This is one example of the homosexual political community being unreasonable and intransigent.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Secularism intrudes far more deeply into religious life than religious life intrudes into secularism.

There is a very peculiar form of heresy, seemingly unique to the Christian church in North America, which states that one of, if not the primary goal of Christians is to socially engineer our society towards Biblical standards, and that this will somehow prolong, prosper, and/or stabilize it.

While it is true that societies organized along the lines of the Covenant of Noah will reap material blessings, they will still, purely by virtue of being composed, organized, and implemented by tainted, fallible, fallen human beings (and I include all Christians in this), tend inexorably towards entropy, decay, chaos, and dissolution. They just might take a little longer to get there. We are already pretty far down this road in North America, and slapping whitewash over the cracks, in the form of implementing a discrimination against homosexuals which is clearly contrary to the basic secular principle of equality under the law that secular North American democracy is founded upon will not help things. A consistent secular society, while still ultimately doomed, is probably more stable than a hypocritical hybrid of secularism and "Christian" theocracy. [As if the purely pragmatic "stabilization of society" was an important goal to Christians and mattered in the slightest bit to God.]

The job of Christians is to reveal God to the world, knowing that the vast majority of them will not care in the slightest. We can try to encourage society to work justice (as part of the Covenant of Noah - God's will for humanity in general), but that is of even less than secondary importance. Holding society to it's stated principle of "equal justice under the law" is at least part of God's will for the unsaved. Building a Christian theocracy, and holding the unsaved world to it won't save them, and will most assuredly damn us.

Better to make sure a secular society walls itself away from interference with religion, then to try to bend it to religious so-called "principles" that are no better than works-based salvation, and will damage what justice still exists, while accomplishing nothing whatsoever in the Spirit.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I never said that being Muslim affects my views of gays ...

No, you didn't say it. But how could it not

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Whether she votes for it or not is not important. Consensus in the American gay political community is that such a distinction is discrimination and they won't settle for it. This is one example of the homosexual political community being unreasonable and intransigent.

I'm not even convinced that most gays want gay marriage. I am convinced that a vocal minority, bolstered by Leftists seeking power do. Their claims are magnified as if they represent the majority, similar to how the wishes of terrorist Muslims have been projected upon the rest and the Islamic faith.