Obama comes out......

[lhprop1]

You do realize that the whole idea of marriage came from religion? Name one place before modern times there was marriage absent any religion.

Yes, it did come from religion, but not one specific religion.  Marriage is not a concept exclusive to christianity.  Seeing as how the government shall make no laws endorsing a specific religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, if one religion wants to allow gays to marry, they should be allowed to do so and the government should recognize it just as they have done with other religious marriages for the last 2+ centuries.  

[lhprop1]

Ok, JdePietro leave religion out of it. My main beef against homosexuality is that it goes against the laws of NATURE. Humans beings are not designed to have sex with other humans of the same sex. Whether you believe in religion (of which none condones homosexuality) or evolution (also doesn't advance without a man and a woman) Any way you slice it, homosexuality is an unnatual act.

Lots of things go against the "laws of nature";  Processed foods, mood altering drugs, shoes, driving a Prius . . . yet we don't prohibit people from poisoning their bodies with shitty foods or drinking beer or driving a really gay ass car.  

And if sexual attraction to the same sex were against the laws of nature, you wouldn't see instances of it elsewhere in the animal kingdom, yet it's common in dolphins and many ape species.

As far as I'm concerned, if it doesn't restrict me from doing what I want to do and providing for my family, I couldn't care less.  If you can show me how allowing two people of the same sex to get married will restrict my freedom in any way, I may change my tune.  Otherwise, I couldn't care less.  

[Timothy]

This conversation/argument is the reason that Obamanation endorsed gay marriage after "evolving"!

It's taken the conversation to a trivial, theoretical and divisive direction rather than speak to his lack of accomplishments during his tenure in the White House!


Read my lips fingertips...."IT'S THE ECONOMY, STUPID!"

[JC5123]

Lots of things go against the "laws of nature";  Processed foods, mood altering drugs, shoes, driving a Prius . . . yet we don't prohibit people from poisoning their bodies with shitty foods or drinking beer or driving a really gay ass car.  

And if sexual attraction to the same sex were against the laws of nature, you wouldn't see instances of it elsewhere in the animal kingdom, yet it's common in dolphins and many ape species.

As far as I'm concerned, if it doesn't restrict me from doing what I want to do and providing for my family, I couldn't care less.  If you can show me how allowing two people of the same sex to get married will restrict my freedom in any way, I may change my tune.  Otherwise, I couldn't care less.  

I agree, this shouldn't even be a political issue. Why is the government involved with it at all? I may not agree with the practice, but the government should have no say in it since it is not violating anyone elses rights.

[tombogan03884]

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+20%3A13&version=KJV

Leviticus 20:13

King James Version (KJV)

13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Forced acceptance of homosexuality violates the 1st Amendment.

[Sponsor]

[lhprop1]

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+20%3A13&version=KJV

Leviticus 20:13

King James Version (KJV)

13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Forced acceptance of homosexuality violates the 1st Amendment.

To say that the government shall not restrict the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof is meant to allow anyone to worship as they see fit.  It doesn't force you or your religion to accept or condone the practices of other religions.  Allowing the Amish to live as they live doesn't mean you have to give up technology or have sex with your wife through a hole in a sheet.

Claiming that this somehow forces you to accept and/or partake in the practice of homosexuality is absurd.  It doesn't force you to believe or accept anything.  It simply allows the religions who want to allow gay marriage to do so.  For them not be allowed to is more a violation of their first amendment right of free exercise of religion.  The whole "your beliefs are different than my beliefs and therefore wrong" argument is the basis for many a holy war/jihad and has caused the death of many millions of people throughout the centuries.  Your beliefs don't apply to everyone and to try to force those beliefs on others is a true restriction of that concept of freedom upon which this country was founded.   

Again, the government shouldn't have anything to say about it.  Let the individual churches decide who they will marry or not marry.     

[JdePietro]

As was pointed out there is clear evidence of homosexuality within the animal kingdom. If you are not swayed I suppose I can dig up countless entries on the web of this existance. Point is it shouldn't matter. Homosexuality in no way shape or form detracts from your existance so why concern yourself with others affairs?

Yes I am very aware of the ten commandments. I am also aware that after they were put out God ordered the Isrealites to kill everyone in Jerico because any left alive could spread the worship of false gods among them. That what I was talking about earlier.

This arguement is a simple and clear one. People believe that we only have religion to provide us with morals and that anyone who goes against these morals makes society corrupt. I will argue that mankind has derived his morals based soley on the understanding of the world around him.  

I will give you chaps something to ponder in this regard.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7xt5LtgsxQ&feature=share&list=PL0EFCB22DFCD4F2E7

[tombogan03884]

To say that the government shall not restrict the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof is meant to allow anyone to worship as they see fit.  It doesn't force you or your religion to accept or condone the practices of other religions.  Allowing the Amish to live as they live doesn't mean you have to give up technology or have sex with your wife through a hole in a sheet.

Claiming that this somehow forces you to accept and/or partake in the practice of homosexuality is absurd.  It doesn't force you to believe or accept anything.  It simply allows the religions who want to allow gay marriage to do so.  For them not be allowed to is more a violation of their first amendment right of free exercise of religion.  The whole "your beliefs are different than my beliefs and therefore wrong" argument is the basis for many a holy war/jihad and has caused the death of many millions of people throughout the centuries.  Your beliefs don't apply to everyone and to try to force those beliefs on others is a true restriction of that concept of freedom upon which this country was founded.   

Again, the government shouldn't have anything to say about it.  Let the individual churches decide who they will marry or not marry.     

Your reply seems intentionally obtuse.
You have it exactly wrong, the 1st Amendment guarantees that people who practice Judeo/Christian or Muslim morality will not be forced to accept what their beliefs classify as an abomination punishable by death.
It also guarantees that Catholic organizations will not be required to fund contraception.

[lhprop1]

You have it exactly wrong, the 1st Amendment guarantees that people who practice Judeo/Christian or Muslim morality will not be forced to accept what their beliefs classify as an abomination punishable by death.

Nowhere in any part of the Constitution or Bill of Rights does it say Judeo/Christian or Muslim morality.  It simply says "religion".  You are not being forced to accept anything other than to coexist with other human beings who have different beliefs than you.

The first amendment gives the freedom of speech, yet it doesn't give anyone the right to not be offended by someone's speech. 

The fact that gay people exist in the same geographic part of the world where you live does not by any means that you have to accept their lifestyle.  Do muslims have to accept people around them eating bacon or drinking beer, even though in their belief system, that is an abomination punishable by death?  Are you being forced to accept the Gaiaistic beliefs of native Americans, even though that would be considered worshipping false idols?  Are you forced to believe that Joseph Smith made up some cockamamie story about gold tablets in a language only he could understand?  No.  But the Constitution guarantees everyone the right to believe what they want to believe without restriction or persecution.     

The right to the free exercise of religion is a right bestowed to everyone by the first amendment.  To deny anyone that right, whether you agree with their belief system or not is wrong as long as they are a law abiding citizen.

If you want to go the biblical route, please refer to Luke 6:31.  "Do onto others as you would have them do onto you."   

[Tyler Durden]

a few years ago San Francisco had an employee. That employee had a partner at the time.  The partner went through a sex change operation(s) paid for by the city's health insurance plan.

Is Obamacare going to pay for sex change surgeries?