This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Supreme Court Strikes Down DOMA
In what is likely to cause a storm of controversy, the Supreme Court ruled against the 17-year-old anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act:
- *DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT PROVISION STRUCK DOWN BY TOP U.S. COURT
- *SUPREME COURT VOTES 5-4 ON U.S. DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT
- *COURT SAYS MARRIAGE LAW VIOLATES EQUAL PROTECTION GUARANTEE
Kennedy: DOMA "humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples"
Scalia: "By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex marriage an enemy of human decency, the majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition,"
"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment."
Full Timeline of Gay Marriage (via Global Post):
Following is a timeline of important events in the history of gay marriage in the United States.
1969
- The modern gay liberation movement unofficially kicks off with the Stonewall Riots, demonstrations by gays in response to a police raid in New York City.
1972
- The U.S. Supreme Court lets stand a Minnesota Supreme Court ruling that the law does not allow for same-sex marriage, and that the issue is different from interracial marriage.
1973
- Maryland becomes the first state to pass a statute banning gay marriage.
1977
- Harvey Milk becomes the first openly gay elected official in San Francisco, winning a seat on the Board of Supervisors. He later appeals to gays to come out and run for office, saying "for invisible, we remain in limbo." Milk was shot and killed in 1978.
1986
- The U.S. Supreme Court says "we are quite unwilling" to find a fundamental right to sodomy, even in the privacy of one's home, in Bowers v. Hardwick ruling.
1996
- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy writes an opinion striking down a Colorado ban on protections for gays, saying the ban "seems inexplicable by anything but animus."
- President Bill Clinton signs the Defense of Marriage Act, defining marriage as between a man and a woman for federal purposes.
1997
- Comedian Ellen DeGeneres reveals she is gay. Shortly afterward, her TV situation comedy character says "I'm gay" - inadvertently speaking into an airport public address system.
1998
- Debut of television show "Will and Grace" about a gay man and his best friend, a straight woman.
2000
- Vermont becomes the first U.S. state to allow civil unions for same-sex couples.
- Republican vice presidential candidate Dick Cheney, who has a lesbian daughter, indicates he supports gay marriage, saying "freedom means freedom for everybody" and "people should be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to enter into." He said states should regulate the matter, not the federal government. Cheney serves as vice president for eight years.
2003
- The U.S. Supreme Court, in another decision written by Kennedy, strikes down Texas anti-sodomy law in Lawrence v. Texas case and reverses the 1986 Bowers ruling. Kennedy writes that this does not mean the government must recognize gay relationships. "Do not believe it," Justice Antonin Scalia dissents, saying the logic of the opinion points to allowing same-sex marriage.
- The Massachusetts Supreme Court rules in favor of same-sex marriage, and gay weddings begin in 2004.
2004
- San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom directs the county to allow same-sex marriages, arguing the state's voter-approved ban on gay marriage, Proposition 22, is unconstitutional. The state Supreme Court stops the weddings on grounds unrelated to the constitutionality of marriage.
2005
- U.S. northern neighbor Canada allows gay marriage.
2008
- California gay marriages become legal when the California Supreme Court strikes down the Proposition 22 ban. That November, voters add a ban to the state constitution - Proposition 8 - ending a summer of gay marriage.
2009
- Iowa state Supreme Court legalizes same-sex marriage.
- Federal court challenge to Proposition 8 filed, days before California Supreme Court lets Proposition 8 stand as a valid change to the state constitution. Eventually, federal district and appeals courts agree to strike down the ban, which heads to the U.S. Supreme Court.
2010
- The U.S. Congress passes legislation to end a policy put in place in 1993 called "don't ask don't tell" that had barred gays from serving openly in the U.S. military. President Barack Obama signs the measure. The policy officially ends in 2011.
2012
- Obama becomes the first U.S. president to endorse gay marriage, acknowledging that his views on the matter had evolved.
- North Carolina approves a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in May. In November, Maine, Maryland and Washington become the first states where voters approve same-sex marriage, and Minnesota rejects a new ban.
2013
- The U.S. Supreme Court in March hears oral arguments on the constitutionality of California's Proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
- The Boy Scouts of America organization votes in May to lift a century-old ban on openly gay scouts in a victory for gay rights activists. A prohibition on openly gay adult leaders remains in place.
- Minnesota, Rhode Island and Delaware in May become the latest U.S. states to allow same-sex couples to marry, bringing to 12 the number of states permitting it. The other states allowing same sex marriage are: Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington state, as well as the District of Columbia.
- Supreme Court Strikes down DOMA...
Full opinion below:
»
- 28087 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I have no idea what you mean about Rhode Island Avenue. Don't care.
Mikey Weinstein - the guy fighting for religious freedom in the military?
So what do you think, the military should be a fundamentalist christian organisation?
“You will be hollow. Big Administration shall squeeze you empty, and then it shall fill you with itself.” GO 1984
Now that's done let's move on to marrying people with animals.
Good luck with those vet bills as they get older...
Oh wait - is that covered under ObamaKare? I mean, now that they passed the fucking bill, we can know what's in it, right?
I want to marry a ham sandwhich. Can we make that happen? Ohhh, that flavorful ham, ohhh, her moist and creamy mayonnaise, ummm her crispy, colorful lettuce, uhhhh her soft and tangy cheese, and oooooh her firm buns... I could just eat her up. Damn-I guess I'll have to collect on that life insurance policy...
idiot. your IQ must be negative. NON HUMANS, do not give consent so there can be no marriage. GAY HUMANS can give consent so there can be marriage.
I wonder what is the correlation between dipshits giving comments like this & losing every trade they make. It takes a real mental fuckup to come to your conclusions.
Sorry - no consent, hence no marriage. Now, if you want to grant animals the ability to freely contract, you're going to have big problems with all those factory feed lots. . . so watch out what you wish for.
BIGOT!
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=51ybp_YFo7I#
OT. WTF is trans gender?
Still working on it...
Thx. I'm actually Googelizing that now. I will report back if I comprehend it.
Cheers.
_________________________________
Update:
Oh shit! It's Pat! SNL.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VwT1kp0C3Ss#
Communist propaganda, mostly. Always keep in mind that communist ashkenazis like Elena Kagan harbour three main objectives:
- Abolishing private property
- Abolishing the family
- Abolishing Christianity
Pure evil.
and all those "christians" raging holy war & genocide throughout history, that wasn't Pure Evil(tm) ?
You know, all that rape, burning people at the stake, etc., for "heresy", you feel no evil in that?
How about you go research some history and while you're at it, go fuck yourself.
Atheism - the path to peace (eventually) & truth (now).
It's not like athiest marixsts murdered a hundred million souls in the 20th century, or anything.
Here are the stats:
http://www.savageleft.com/poli/mbc.html
no, they didn't. No "Marxists" actually have ruled anything.
Lenin on the other hand was not actually a Marxist.
that's why often his era & regime was referred to as "Leninist" because he made his own way.
Same for Joseph Stalin.
Tell the Islamic clerics the US will force Gay mariiage on them and will enrage the middle east. Now they have something to fight against.
Ya Allah! There's liable to be more than a few saliva-slinging, Qur'ran-waving, infidel-cursing khutbahs this Friday.
Good times.
What? You never been to mosque on Friday?
Ironicially, juding by all the comments in this thread, it appears the smoke screen is working. What is the best way to quell the loud voices of descent?? Have them turn on each other over some idiotic issue that affects 1% of the population.
Dissent, but I know what you meant.
On second thought, the loud voices of descent works - all that screaming and shouting as the empire fails.
Nevermind.
The state should not give a shit about to whom I am married. That is a church and personal issue.
The state should not use the state of marriage to determine if my worth in terms of taxable income.
This is all bullshit.
Marriage from the standpoint of the state is a legal institution that invokes laws of mandatory heirship, division of property upon dissolution, duty of support, etc.
If marriage is ignored by the state, I would agree with you. But, since it is not, there has to be a definition of what does and does not constitute a marriage.
Wonderful - more social decay from the libtards. On the bright side, gays now get to experience divorce. I'm sure lawyers everywhere are cheering.
http://vegasxau.blogspot.com
only in the mind of a republi-tard, which you clearly are, would more freedom equate to "social decay". Social decay is STATE TYRANNY and you appear to be in support of THAT.
So the next question is, how will Family Courts f-ck over the Father in a male-male marriage during divorce and child custody rulings? How will they give everything to the Mother in a female-female marriage?
Fem-butch. Top-bottom. Yeah?
I don't get all this homophobia. If you are truly a fiercely heterosexual male, you should be in favor of gay marriage. Wouldn't that leave you a wider selection of viable women to choose from? I couldn't give a crap if every dude was gay, as long as they don't infringe on my rights. Who cares? Personally, I don't think fundamentalist Christians (or any religion) should reproduce, but I'm not going to mandate a law that restricts that right.
This is a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy. If the majority of the people want slavery, there needs to be laws in place that over-ride the will of an ignorant majority, to protect those who would be subjected to it. If the majority are in favor of government spying, I wish I still had a 4th Amendment to restrict that.
If two consenting adults love each other, and don't threaten anyone else's personal freedom, then no one has a right to take their rights away. If you don't like to see two dudes holding hands, look the other way. If I see religious fanatics coming to my door, I don't answer it. It makes life a lot easier. Why is it so difficult for people to mind their own business, and quit being repressive toward others who are different?
Great logic. Who decided it was wrong for my neighbor to marry his dog? He isn't hurting anyone. Who determined the age of consent is 18? Seems like an arbitrary age. Who are you to say necrophila is sick - necromaniacs aren't hurting anyone. Why is it wrong for me to smoke dope in my house but it's OK to get drunk? Why can't I marry two women if we all agree?
I said "two consenting adults". I didn't say an "adult and child", "an adult and an animal" (the dog would be a victim) or an "adult and a dead body" (you're infringing on the rights of the dead person's family). Maybe you should brush up on your reading skills... I don't agree with the law that says you can't smoke weed, so your point is moot. You can smoke all the weed you want; you can cornhole that homely chick you met in Bible study; you can go to your Klan rally... It's none of my business.
Oh, it will be your business, dumbass. Because it won't stop there. Just like the homo boys haven't stopped. They won't go do their thing and leave the rest of us alone. They have to have special rights and priviledges. They want it taught in school. Not the fact that they suck on one another and stick their dick in each other's ass, they want it taught to grade school kids that they are NORMAL. What a crock of bs!
Evil (calling good evil and evil good) is agressive and will never leave others alone until it has corrupted everyone. They have to corrupt others so they can get crowd approval to say they are right when they know all along THEY ARE WRONG!
Don't get me wrong, I don't want any legislation on this either. Problem is they will legislate it is okay and THEN want to make a law that says I have to agree with it. THAT I WILL NEVER DO.
I have no problem with people doing "their thing" whatever that may be and leaving the rest of us alone. I am fed up with the fag boys pushing this bs down my throat.
Gives new meaning to "Milkbone"
"If two consenting adults love each other, and don't threaten anyone else's personal freedom, then no one has a right to take their rights away."
Then, according to your reasoning:
• If your wife/husband has an affair, it is none of your business
Yeah, if a husband cheats on his wife or visa versa, it's none of your business. That's an issue between the spouses. There may be a mutual agreement that "fooling around is ok". Not everyone believes in "thou shalt not commit adultry", including a lot of Christians (Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker, etc). They shouldn't go to jail for it, and I don't think there are any current laws that incarcerate people for such an offense.
• If a father and child of age have sex, it is none of anyone else's business
I assume you mean a child of the legal "age of consent" (an adult 18 or over). Well, it's perverted as all hell, but if they're both adults then yes it's none of my business or yours, and there's no law against it. Probably happens a lot where you come from.
• If a prostitute and a client have sex, it is none of anyone else's business
I always thought that was a bullshit law anyways. It's legal to go on a blind date, and it's legal to pay for a night out, and then to have sex, so why is prostitution illegal? Once again, your religious dogma blinds you from logic. It's nobody's business unless a spouse is being cheated on (and once again, that's between the spouses), but it certainly shouldn't be a legal issue.
• If a man has multiple wives, it is none of anyone else's business.
That's your own moral issue, but shouldn't be a legal issue. Polygamy is accepted in many cultures. I wouldn't personally choose it; but I don't think there should be laws against it. If consenting women/men want multiple sex partners, it's none of my business.
You misread my first comment: "If your wife/husband has an affair, it is none of your business."
As long as it's between consenting adults, right? Why did you term it "cheating"?
What's the difference between "cheating" and "having an affair"? Means the same.
It is my business, but certainly not yours or the government's. Does the government have a right to tell you what race you can marry? What religion you can marry into? What sexual position you can use? Or whether you can perform cunnilingus? (might be pretty gross to people who hate fishy smells)... Face it, you homophobes are fascists. You want to push your warped interpretation of an ancient outdated book on people whose lives you should have no influence over, whatsoever. Is that your right? Do you want me or society telling you how to live?... Sorry, I don't get your way of thinking.
and now it's your business. thanks for coming around.
idiot. That's not CONSENTING. Consenting means not being married and having a private on-the-side sexual relationship or boyfriend/girlfriend. On the other hand there's married couples that TOGETHER date a 3rd person, or have an additional sexual partner. That's what freedom is for. if you don't like it, you're a fucking Nazi.
Look up the definition of "consenting", and post the link where it is defined as "...[meaning] not being married and having a private on-the-side..."
consenting, as pertains to marriage: your spouse CONSENTS to the agreement of MARRIAGE that you can have an additional sexual / romantic partner. MARRIAGE is about CONSENT so there's no consent outside of your own marriage to have OTHER partners in secret.
Dumbass. Please stop taking the pills marked DERP.
"If a prostitute and a client have sex, it is none of anyone else's business"
AND it isn't. Never should be. It's cruel & nasty to think otherwise and your nastiness in comparing this to sex with children means you were smacked in the head too many times with a hammer.
Stalin loved killing kulaks. The Taliban love stoning homos. And so on.
You certainly keep good company
Which fact are you disputing?
Most of you here miss the whole truth, principle, point, etc. because you want to take one of a few dogmatic positions and become divided rather that focusing on the issue in a manner that unites the majority.
The issue here is simply this: Calling what is wrong, deviant, or un-natural, okay, good, normal, etc. THAT is the problem.
If you freaks want to go and suck on another man's dick and call it love, knock yourself out. If you wimps who don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, just want to go along to get along, I clearly understand. BUT no one no matter how educated, high ranking, with what degree or academics or experience is going to make me say that this un-normal, bass-ackwards activity is ......okay. It is just not and I will never agree and if you try to punish me for saying so, you had better do and good job and never let me up.
The principle here is there are many areas of life in this country that have been perverted by taking a wrong and making it right for what ever purpose.
Women killing their own unborn children.....is okay.......because she needs to finish college first, because the law says it is, because it will get in the way financially, etc.
The fed printing money destroying the wealth and hard labor of millions and turning them into slaves.......is okay.....because it makes the world go round, because the alternative would be much worse, because they can, etc.
Paying people to sit on their ass and do nothing......is okay....because it is humanitarian, because they might riot, because it is what we want if we decide to sit on our asses, because that is what they want, etc.
Letting killers, rapist, and molesters out of prison and not hanging the SOB's .....is okay....because they will never do it again, because we are all guilty of something, because killing them won't bring back the victim, etc.
I could go on all day with the list. The point is there is always someone willing to JUSTIFY the wrong because it somehow benefits them. So drop the religion, drop the legal, and every other "expert" bs opinion that gives us whatever reason for this or that and just call it what it is by common sense, WRONG! If you don't thing it is wrong for two hairy ass men to lie together and play with each others equipment, then YOU are wrong, twisted, and deviant. And the bottom line.........if you can say it is okay for a man to put his dick in another man's ass, or put another man's dick in his mouth and suck on it AND CALL IT NORMAL OR "LOVE", .................then there is no limit to what you would try to say is okay and justify by your actions.
God help us when our society has reached a point of moral decay to the point that this is a "non-issue" or is okay. There will be no safety or security anywhere. There will be no help from anywhere else. All the problems in our society today are as a result of some group somewhere fighting to call, prove, or make good evil and evil good.
Our sexual organs exist for one purpose: reproduction. Not to play with, not to measure against others, not to sword fight. Reproduction.
TPTB want us to believe that there are multiple sexualities when in reality there is only one sexuality (heterosexuality) and other, damaged, versions of it.
All part of the plan to turn the proles into a mass of purely physical beings only concerned with sex, sport and screen.
Is it ok to urinate? I know it isn't exactly a sexually reproductive function, but fluids do pass out of the same area. Reverend Lovejoy says that according to the Bible, technically we aren't allowed to go to the bathroom. This keeps me up at night.
Also, I'm really scared about the coming Islamic invasion of America. But I'm also really scared about the gay and athiest movements taking over America. What if these bedfellows unite and force me to convert to gay godless Islamism? Could that happen?
And F TV and F Hollywood. (Shout out to Chris O'Donnell, Michael Vick and Sean Hayes, happy birthday guys!)
if you were right there'd be no more joy in sex than eating a burger, or salad for that matter. You're an idiot.
An idiot that's forgetting various animals (not humans) also turn out to exhibit homosexuality. It's just plain science, biology, fact, not an opinion.
Obviously you haven't known many women (gluttony?). And my point still stands: sexual organs exist on our body in order to reproduce. Not to pleasure another individual of the same sex.
Anyway, shouldn't you be "We All Trayvon"-ing somewhere, moron?
Dear Intelligent Design person,
Sexual organs don't exist to do anything. However, they can be used to reproduce, or masturbate, or swordfight with, or circumsize, or have anal sex with your sister.
Our eyes don't exist to witness the glory of god's creation either
And our ears don't exist to hear the glory of his word
then by your logic if a woman suffers ovarian cancer or for some reason must have them removed so to avoid death, that woman has no business having sex anymore.
Or, you're a fucktard.
Occam's razor, bitchez.
I love liberty. Unless someone is doing something somewhere that I don't like.
uh, guys? weren't we worried about the collapse of the economy or the collapse of gold or the collapse of the right to privacy or something collapsing before all this gay stuff?
Somebody get this guy the latest memo...
Jeebus.
I got distracted by the horny donkey chasing the unfortunate man (slightly NSFW, male bottom shown), back on the economy now.
gold drops under 1200 briefly.
gays are suddenly told their liberty does matter.
everyone screams about the gays.
American republi-tards posing as libertarians are like cats chasing laser-pointers. It's so, so easy to figure out who's a dumb animal chasing a laser-pointer up a wall and who's a real thinking human too smart to believe in skyfairies.
Religion is a mental illness and so is hatred of sex, marriage or race.
true libertarians believe in live and let live.
AKA what you do with your personal life is your fucking business, not mine.
The notion of "live and let live" is a myth. There's no such thing because the nature of mankind is aggressive, selfish, social, and sinful.
There's only one religion, in the West, that captures the truth about mankind's nature and it's not Marx-ism and it's not Islam-ism.
The Gods of the Copybook Headings always have their revenge.
The problem with your argument is that "gay marriage" is not about "live and let live." It's about forcing everyone else to affirm and subsidize their lifestyle using the force of government.
Whereas we should only be forced to affirm and subsidize the lifestyles of married straight couples. Got it.
Bullish. We will all be filthy rich:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaKtDeGRZFI
i get it now. gay people caused the economy collapse because they couldn't resist being buggered by the bernank.
Shit shouldnt be an issue to begin with frankly.
Do we not have bigger fish to fry than controlling people's lives to the Nth degree?
These last few administrations, both sides of the pew, remind me of the 1930s in Germany. The spying, the paranoid govt, the hatred towards anyone from the middle-east or 'terrorist'......gays, traitors, ex-pats, tea party IRS stuff....
it's just eeirly similar.
How about the "equal protection" of citizens who are NOT married? The real issue is the goodies that government grants for being married. They should be abolished for straight and gay marriages. Marriage should be a simple civil incorporation that any adults can enter, even siblings or multiple partners. Government shouldn't care if you love each other, will have sex, will be faithful or take care of your partner when sick. Leave it up to the individual to decide what their conecpt of marriage is. At the same time, religious institutions and the private sector should have every right to refuse to perform a ceremony for any reason.
Cheeseus: If marriage is promoted culturally and for tax purposes in order to encourage the procreation and raising of children, would that affect your view? I noticed that you left kids out entirely from your statements.
Humans reproduced before government ever existed and had monogamous relationships. Humans who are married in a church with governemnt consent have gone on to abandon their kids and cheat on their spouse.
Parents should not get subsidized to have kids. Bad parents should not get subsidized to raise their latest mistake. Personal choices should be controlled by personal responsibility.
If there are no children, who will pay for future taxes ?
"Humans reproduced before government ever existed and had monogamous relationships."
Traditionally in many parts of the world at the start of civilization that was definitely NOT the case. there were polygamous tribal marriages.
If I'm a single parent, shouldn't I be allowed to marry myself under Justice Kennedy's analysis? After all, my children are being humiliated too.
If you can't afford your kids you can always have government become their surrogate Daddy.
Gay people deserve to be as miserable as anybody else.
The next hit reality tv show will be "Gay Divorce Court".
The entertainment will come from who pays support and why.
Joe Eszterhas may have been right.
With DOMA struck down and traditional (man-woman) definition in the toilet, I can hardly wait for 3-way marriages! No philosophical barrier now you luddites.
No matter how you come down on the morality and/or ethical side of this....Mitt Romney and the Utah gang are happy that they can now press once again for polygamy. The barn door is WIDE open for this. Moo-slums and the return of harems anyone?
NAMBLA.....yeah....they're getting lubed up for sure. Hey man....that goat sure looks good today.
It's the gilded age where everything and anything goes. I guess it was just a matter of time. Hard to argue that if the Vampire Squid has the right to fuck us all in the ass that the common man should have that right too with the man of his choice. Quid Pro Quo I guess.
Forget God for a moment....and just consider this. How did Rome fare under Caligula ? Oh yeah....right.....what was sown in that day and age paved the way for Berlusconi and BUNGA BUNGA baby....until, of course, he got convicted of it and will now be taking it up the ass in jail. At least someone now in America could sponsor him if he decided to request asylum.
KOW a bunga !!!
LET'S CELEBRATE!!
RUSTY TROMBONES FOR ALL!!
Why did it even GET to the high court in the first place????
"we hold these truths to be SELF-EVIDENT.....ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL"......
how can you misinterpret that? cut and dried. And, if you dont like it...tough shit.
With DOMA struck down and traditional (man-woman) definition in the toilet, I can hardly wait for 3-way marriages! No philosophical barrier now you luddites.
Just wait for the Beastiality crew to show up, and the other perversions of natural law, not to mention God's Law.They have inadvertently opened the floodgates.
And the sex with kids crowd.
Jamie Dimon and Goldman Sachs both spoke out today in favor of the sodomite SCOTUS ruling.
For those of you who haven't woken up to the fact that this attack on the traditional family is part and parcel of the plan to enslave humanity under a one world government, if you haven't gotten it yet, you never will.
there's no such thing as a "traditional family". Those using that line are actually trying to use state-enforced tyranny to take away rights of others. If you don't want a gay marriage don't have one. if gays want to enjoy child support & bankruptcy from divorce, y'all are suckers and welcome to it.
Plain and simple, homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of God.
This decision, and the overall push to normalize this lifestyle, should scare the crap out of everyone.
In the past, those nations that have practiced it extensively, that encouraged it or gave "hearty approval".... have been dealt with severely.
Leviticus 18:22
"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin."
Leviticus 20:13
"If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense."
Romans 1:18-32
But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness.... Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn't worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused. Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools. And instead of worshiping the glorious, ever-living God, they worshiped idols made to look like mere people and birds and animals and reptiles.
So God abandoned them to do whatever shameful things their hearts desired. As a result, they did vile and degrading things with each other's bodies. They traded the truth about God for a lie. So they worshiped and served the things God created instead of the Creator himself, who is worthy of eternal praise! Amen.
That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.
Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done. Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness, sin, greed, hate, envy, murder, quarreling, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They invent new ways of sinning, and they disobey their parents. They refuse to understand, break their promises, are heartless, and have no mercy. They know God's justice requires that those who do these things deserve to die, yet they do them anyway. Worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
Don't you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people-none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God.
Jude 7
And don't forget Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring towns, which were filled with immorality and every kind of sexual perversion. Those cities were destroyed by fire and serve as a warning of the eternal fire of God's judgment.
If you want to be anti-gay take responsiblity for it. Own it. Don't project it on your imaginary authority in the sky.
And if you want to be pro-gay, put your money where your mouth is.
Or should I say, your mouth where their mouth is.
being pro-freedom automatically and must include being pro-gay, pro-immigration, pro-human (meaning all races, genders) at all times. if you're against that stuff you're a statist Nazi.
Also the point's been made already in case you missed it: as a non-gay man I'm happy to let gay men leave alone the hot ladies so I have less competition.
The Guy in the Sky had plenty to say about it. You might want to check it out sometime.
Which one? Zeus? Jehovah? Odin? Ahura Mazda perhaps?
no one is there. Take any look you want with any devices whatsoever - nada.
plain and simple. 'god' is an abomination in the eyes of logic, reason, rationality and peace.
Yeah, because all that "logic" and "reason" that it took to build the structure of the universe, the composition of the atom, etc., just came to be randomly, right?
"Logic and reason" is against God? Hilarious.
You're confusing "logic" with "emergent complex systems" which are not "logical". Hence quantum mechanics is NOT a subset of logic. Logic does not dictate the structure of the universe but quantum mechanics does.
And yes, 'random' is a far better explanation than 'god'. 'god' is no better than 'witches' and 'faerie magic' and 'the Secret'
The Gods of the Copybook Headings always have their revenge:
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!
A CAP of lead across the sky
Was tight and surly drawn,
We could not find the Mighty Face,
The figure was withdrawn.
A chill came up as from a shaft,
Our noon became a well,
A thunder storm combines the charms
Of Winter and of Hell.
"plain and simple. 'god' is an abomination in the eyes of logic, reason, rationality and peace."
LOL.....you mean human derived logic, reason, rationality and peace.
Good luck not only in finding that but proving it ever existed.
Stop Feeding The Beast!
finally ONE finding in favor of the Constitution. Too bad they seem to be ignoring 4th, 2nd and 1st.
You gotta love these kind of posts in ZH. Because everyone here is a Ron Paul thumping libertarian until these kind of social issues come forward. It is then that the true color of these folks show for real as mostly retrogrades whom the only liberty they want is the liberty to impose unto others what they believe to be the morally correct (and libertarianism flies out the window).
Nahhh. Completely different animal.
Homosexuality is a vile act despised and rightfully viewed as immoral in most cultures, it is rarely condoned and has nothing to do with liberty.
It is the root of tremendous evil, a major contributing factor to the degradation of society, is at the heart of some of the most gruesome homicides (ask any cop) and, like it or not, is responsible for propagation of a modern-day black plague.
It has nothing to do with genetics. It is a lifestyle choice.
Spot on. Here's an archetypal example of sodomites in action:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/canadian-psycho-defence-u...
I see a lot of value judgements there. As in your personal values against the values of other individuals. And that has a lot to do with liberty.
homosexuality "has nothing to do with liberty"
and "It is a lifestyle choice"
I disagree with your premises but personal "choices" are possible because of individual liberty. You are experiencing cognitive dissonance.
You should have gone with gay genetics to keep the logic of your argument intact.
not at all. It's been common in culture in the past for millenia.
It's only the very recent advent of christianity (spit) and islam (spit) that have caused such strife. gays, wrong-colored skin, got a vagina, got a brain so you can't believe in sky fairies - and voila, it's time to kill the heathens. Dude, you're with the bad guys.
Lifestyle choice? Not even close. Gays don't choose to be gay any more than blacks choose to be blacks.
If it were all just about "wedge issues," and economics were all that mattered, then there would be no discernible direction in where they are taking it all. But on the contrary there is a very discernible, obvious direction to it all.
The Frankfurt school recommended (amongst other things):
the creation of racism offences
continual change to create confusion
the teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
the undermining of schools and teachers' authority
huge immigration to destroy national identity
the promotion of excessive drinking
emptying the churches
an unreliable legal system with bias against the victim of crime
dependency on the state or state benefits
control and dumbing down of media
encouraging the breakdown of the family
All part of the plan. One world government from Jersualem under the rule of the Antichrist (the beast) who gets his power from the Dragon (Satan).
Charles Silberman:
"American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their belief -- one firmly rooted in history -- that Jews are safe only in a society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming majority of American Jews to endorse 'gay rights' and to take a liberal stance on most other so-called 'social' issues."
p 350 Silberman, C. E. (1985). A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today.
New York: Summit Books.
What amazes me is not so much the ones that are 'in on it,' but all the other ones who have never stepped foot inside a synagogue in their lives yet somehow pick up all the satanic Marxist opinions and arguments organically as though they receive it in vibrations through the atmosphere.
Try reading the Talmud for Jewish cultural tolerance.
More like Jewish hatred for everyone else.
He seems to be admitting that they are so evil that they would not be tolerated, at all, in a rational civilization.
“By great wisdom sodomy and usury were seen coupled together. If there comes ever a rebirth or resurrection of Christian Church, one and Catholic, a recognition of divinity as
La somma sapienza e il primo amore (the highest wisdom and first love)
it will come with a recognition and an abjuration of the great sin contra natura, of the prime sin against natural abundance.”
- Ezra Pound, 1935
Psychopolitik
Bunch of fucking homos. Where's the fair and equal benefits for single people?
This has to be the possibly the most revealing thread ever on the Hedge. I am truly amazed at the number of faux libertarians that will use any means possible to justify their hypocrisy...
I knew they were intellectually bankrupt before, but this seals the deal...
Amen! I figured out a while ago that many (NOT all, but many) people who identify themselves as libertarians merely want to impose their own belief systems on everyone else with the same gun barrel that they decry in other contexts.
And that is exactly what you are doing by advocating that gays should be able to force everyone else to affirm and subsidize their lifestyle through the power of the state.
If the argument were about anti-sodomy laws (which I don't support), you would have a point. But it's not. It's about "gay marriage," and the affirmative rights that come along with that in virtually every public setting in this country are apparently too great for you to wrap your tiny media-brainwashed mind around.
"Rights" do not exist in a vacuum. One person's "right" is another person's DUTY to fulfill that right.
You do realize that the case at bar involved a person who had to pay more tax to the Federal Government because of DOMA, right? And that the Court in its decision is reigning in Federal power and recognizing greater States' rights? And speaking of brainwashing, how's the magical all-seeing man in the sky doing?
Exactly. And if you understood economics, you would know that lower tax rates function as subsidies vis a vis higher tax rates.
As for God = brainwashing, kinda funny how someone who considers themselves intelligent can nevertheless argue with a straight face that the interwoven LAWS of physics came to be randomly. Because it is LOGICALLY impossible for order to come from pure randomness. But given your lack of understanding of economics, your loose grasp of logic isn't a surprise.
Wow -- you're a lost cause my friend. And by the way, believing that the universe was created by something we don't understand most certainly does not mean there is a magic man in the sky who hates gay people and who caused humans to write a bunch of books that are selectively taught by competing religions. The two are not mutually exclusive.
looks random.
Also logic is what humans use to determine patterns. It is not what the universe is built from or should be. It's your imagination the universe should be so. Merely fiction. The universe tells YOU what the rules are NOT the other way around.
You think there's "order" now! Hahahahahaha
the universe decides what order is & it has gained none, truly, since its origin. You merely delude yourself.
The beatings will continue until somebody orgasms.
" 'Rights do not exist in a vacuum. One person's "right" is another person's DUTY to fulfill that right. "
Lie.
A right need not be "affirmed" to exist.
A right is universal and above your opinion.
However, if you want to oppose that right it's good you stand up and be counted so others can be ready with a list.
LTER,
we may not see eye-to-eye on a few issues but we both see through the narcissist sociopathic veil that cloaks the low brow libertarianism that pervades this place....
Edit: I predict the voting on my the leading posts will finally break on the highside of 2:1 in favour of the nays... That is a tell for the demographics here...
It's the funniest thread in years!
Amusing, but in a very sad way....
No. Not sad. These comments will really have no effect on those who are effected by the subject matter. Think of the above as cartoon characters running around screaming and flailing their arms about in a Loony Tunes way. At the end of the day their opinion does not matter. By the way, your opening salvo gave me a great snorting laugh.
Cheers!
According to the Atlantic magazine, gay couples have a lot to teach us heteros. For example, fidelity is unnecessary: "This is, to be sure, a difficult argument to win: a husband proposing non-monogamy to his wife on the grounds that it is in the best interest of a new baby would have a tough time prevailing in the court of public opinion." (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/06/the-gay-guide-to-wed...)
Sadly, women can't get hip to this new reality.
Many fags are hardworking, patriotic citizens.
It's the 1% radicals that cause all the problems and claim the right to speak for the other 99% (which they don't).
Very smart people in this thread: understand that this sudden media and government emphasis on all things "gay," despite homosexuals comprising barely 2% of the population, is merely the latest in a long line of Frankfurt School social engineering cogs (see also women, blacks, illegal immigrants, etc.) aimed at breaking down western Christian civilization so as to replace it with a sick Bolshevist 1984 'utopia' of identity-less proles ruled over by "the Party."
Pretty smart people in this thread: understand that there is something fishy about this sudden emphasis on all things "gay," but dismiss it as a "wedge issue" designed to distract people from the only thing that really matters--i.e., economics.
Complete f'in idiots in this thread: see nothing strange whatsoever about this sudden media and government emphasis on all things "gay," despite homosexuals comprising barely 2% of the population, and don't understand why anyone in their right mind would be opposed to gay marriage since 'it doesn't affect you anyway.'
So much for that 'warrior" caste.
There's clearly more money in interior design.
"WHO BENEFITS?"
The Sodomites will get their's in the end.
Look, Christians, and Jews and Muslims believe "marriage" a "God" thing. Not a "legal thing". This is why the question of marriage for gays is always inflamitory. Gays say "marriage" is a word. People of faith disagree. If you asked Christians and Jews if they as people support "civil unions" I think many would. Ask a gay if they support "fag union legal marriage status" as compromise, they'll get mad, remind them "faggot", well, it's just a word. See how that goes. But, but...
(P.S. yes, I'd support legal "civil unions" called "partnerships" or what not, and do not advocate calling gays "fag"...just makin' a point about "words")
(P.P.S. I suppose they just want the marriage cert fees(tax?) from this 4% of the population, and of course all judges were regular lawyers once, so they will generate divorce legal fees...man, that's much better than creating jobs, taxing payroll...go Gubmint!!/sarc)