1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A way forwarded (Obergefell)

Discussion in 'North American Politics' started by Truth in love, Jun 26, 2022.

  1. F1fan

    F1fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2021
    Messages:
    9,856
    Ratings:
    +9,589
    Religion:
    Buddhist
    So you are claiming that Obergefell is a fake law (ruling)?


    So the right for gay people to have equal access to the benefits of marriage harms the religious liberty of other people? How does that happen? What religious liberty is taken away by gays having the liberty to marry?

    Then why are you bringing up religious liberty? Make up your mind.

    The courts decide what is legal under the constitution. As we progress into more tolerant and equal times the courts interpret the constitution to be more inclusive and expand liberty in broader ways. But that might be going backwards thanks to intolerant, far right Christians.

    The courts ought to be moderate and reflect the will of the majority of society. But McConnell has worked hard to exploit the senate and change the rules to confirm judges by simple majority, and nominate very right wing members. To my mind this is a violation of public service. It exploits power to push political agendas that are not popular. It's a risk republicans have gambled on and I doubt it will pay off for them in the long run. The supreme court will have an imbalance that will have serious and detrimental effects on the USA for several generations.
     
  2. Truth in love

    Truth in love Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2022
    Messages:
    2,467
    Ratings:
    +550
    Religion:
    Restored Church of Jesus Christ
    Constitution 101 the Legislature makes the laws. They made one. If the US is going to define marriage as something very different than what it has been it needs to be done in the proper way.

    When the Supreme Court issued their ruling many people faced loss of job and other punishment because they worked in marriage related business and their religious convictions would not let them be involved in gay weddings.

    McConnel is a punk, but the core concept of rule of law needs to be upheld.
     
  3. F1fan

    F1fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2021
    Messages:
    9,856
    Ratings:
    +9,589
    Religion:
    Buddhist
    You seem to be confusing the unconstitutionality of discrimination against gay couples with making a law.

    Marriage has stayed the same. It's not different. It's just been expanded to more citizens. This includes divorce for all, which many Christians get.

    You avoided my question about how this harmed peoples religious liberty. Does this mean you were mistaken about that?

    Well intolerance is not a very good value. If religious values are such that you are intolerant of other peoples love and liberty then you might not be a very good theist. Many Christians missed something valuable in Sunday school, mostly the bit where Jesus taught to not judge others.

    Which depends upon ethics and duty, which McConnell lacks.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    60,322
    Ratings:
    +40,265
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Churches did not invent marriage. The concept does not belong to any church.

    So why shouldn't gay people get married to each other if they want to?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Truth in love

    Truth in love Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2022
    Messages:
    2,467
    Ratings:
    +550
    Religion:
    Restored Church of Jesus Christ
    If we want there to be 32 letters in the alphabet it needs to be done by law.

    “expanding” marriage means that it was redefined as we had a clear defiant of marriage that was in federal law.

    religious liberty means that a person can live by their religion. When “gay marriage” became a thing many people lost their business, face legal actions etc for living by their beliefs. That was wrong.

    And the personal insults of my beliefs. Not okay. Either have an adult conversation or go away.

    Most of DC is ethically impaired.

    I agree intolerance is a problem. So why does some little cake shop in Colorado face so much of it?
     
  6. F1fan

    F1fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2021
    Messages:
    9,856
    Ratings:
    +9,589
    Religion:
    Buddhist
    So, what is the problem? Do you support gay marriage? If so, why rock the boat?

    Give us examples of this actually happening. As I noted even religious people who own businesses can't discriminate in a secular society. The USA is not a theocracy.

    And as I also noted, when Christians are anti-gay these days, it's kind of pathetic. Not only does that attitude violate what Jesus taught about loving thy neighbor, the negative attitude is derived from the Old Testament. There's nothing in the New Testament about being gay. Even Jews are cool with gay marriage, and the Old Testament is THEIR book.

    So if Christian bigots are violating the law of business, violating what Jesus taught, and interpreting the oT in ways even Jews don't, then the Christians have a few moral lessons to learn, and losing their businesses might be God trying to help give them a clue.

    It's good I have not insulted your beliefs. If I made statements about Christians in general that happen to apply to you then feel free to explain how my criticisms are misunderstood, and defend the goodness and morality of any views that get criticized. I have no idea what you believe, specifically. You have been referring to these topics abstractly, and so have I.

    And I can make a factual argument about who is unethical, and who is ethical. Members of congress take an oath, and are elected to serve the public. When politicians violate ethics and work against the people and democracy then they are unethical.

    Ask them why they hold bigoted views that are contrary to what Jesus taught, and are based in the Old Testament and interpreted in ways that even jews don't agree with. That suggests it is a problem these cake makers are causing themselves with their bigotry.
     
  7. Truth in love

    Truth in love Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2022
    Messages:
    2,467
    Ratings:
    +550
    Religion:
    Restored Church of Jesus Christ

    1. I do not support "Gay Marriage" it has been a tool to abuse people of traditional faiths for many years. I do support a system that ensures full rights for everyone without the abuses.

    2. The laws that prohibit discrimination in many cases cause discrimination. Colorado baker who won Supreme Court battle calls gender transition cake case 'a trap' This guy has been a target for many years of abusive practices by anti religious freedom bigots. The attempts to deny him his right to live by his belief in the name of non discrimination are absurd. He is far from the only one who has been attacked, but his case did go to the supreme court. It is abusive to try to deny him his right to live in society and to live by his beliefs. It's pretty messed up up to demonize a person for living as they honestly believe God want them to.

    3. You clearly did not read the NT carefully.
    Romans 1: 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
    27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
    1 Cor 6:9 9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
    1 Tim 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
    10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

    The Jews are welcome to their beliefs. This would hardly be the first time they turned their backs on the commandments of God. I'll let Him deal with them as He sees fit. In short the law is there to protect the rights of all people. To say that it is illegal to live by a persons beliefs is to abuse that person. The stuffing all the Christians into the closet and demanding they violate their beliefs as a condition of living, working etc. is a total violation of the first amendment.


    Yes congress takes an oath and they ignore it, the vast majority of them should be in prison for their crimes, but that is not about to happen.


    "If religious values are such that you are intolerant of other peoples love and liberty then you might not be a very good theist." It funny you are here promoting intolerance of others liberty. How is it okay to attack people for "intolerance" while promoting intolerance?
     
  8. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    60,322
    Ratings:
    +40,265
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Where was marriage ever defined in "federal law"?
     
  9. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    60,322
    Ratings:
    +40,265
    Religion:
    Atheist
    What "abuses"?

    Yes, and it is discrimination to allow one group to marry the one that they love and not another group. And yes, if you discriminate in a business there will often be a backlash. If a restaurant did not allow black people in don't you think that there would be some backlash against that restaurant?

    Yes, he screwed up a bit there. I think that he was referring to the teachings of Jesus. Paul's ranting about homosexuals so much and his shame that he was never fully open about has led many biblical scholars to conclude that he was at the very least a latent homosexual. Jesus said nothing about homosexuality. There is no record of him condemning it.

    And how is allowing people to marry the person that he loved a violation of the First Amendment? You may have gone off the deep end on that one.

    How so? Are you talking about the Republicans and how dishonest they were during Trump's impeachment? The first one especially where the Republican controlled Senate did not allow the presentation of any evidence against Trump.

    When a person breaks the law, and especially a very moral law such as the legalization of gay marriage, then there are going to be results. If a person walks down the street punching a random passerby here and there there will be a reaction.
     
  10. ADigitalArtist

    ADigitalArtist Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Messages:
    10,383
    Ratings:
    +16,872
    Religion:
    Irreligious Agnostic Atheistic Apatheist
    It's not up to churches to decide what the "proper way" to define what civil marriage is. Doctrine should not be used to prop up secular law. And that's what was happening with DOMA. Striking down of DOMA prevented churches from using religious doctrine from limiting civil marriage access to gays.

    If you don't want to be involved with gay weddings because it's against your religious beliefs, that's on you, not the government. We don't allow religious based discrimination in business practice. You can no more deny gays service for being gay than I can deny Christians service for being Christian. Allowing localized discrimination sets up zones where people are trapped with no access to services, much how Jews in ww2 were unable to get services in Germany right up until 'discrimination tolerance' advanced to 'arrests and executions.'
     
    #30 ADigitalArtist, Jun 27, 2022
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2022
    • Winner Winner x 1
  11. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Certified People sTabber

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    87,502
    Ratings:
    +40,419
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain
    It's a simply question. How are you using the term discrimination?
     
  12. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Certified People sTabber

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    87,502
    Ratings:
    +40,419
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain
    Why should we cater to bigots? Why should we shed a tear for them? We told them to bugger off when it came to interracial marriage and racial integration. They can, and will, bugger off again.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    219,262
    Ratings:
    +85,024
    Religion:
    Atheist
    My town (Ann Arbor) had an unusual discriminatory approach....
    The unmarried SO of a City employee was eligible for spousal
    benefits only if they were same sex. If different sex, they were
    required to be married, even if their circumstances warranted
    otherwise.
    Yes...my town was so liberal they were heterophobic.
     
  14. ADigitalArtist

    ADigitalArtist Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Messages:
    10,383
    Ratings:
    +16,872
    Religion:
    Irreligious Agnostic Atheistic Apatheist
    Probably something like this:
    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    219,262
    Ratings:
    +85,024
    Religion:
    Atheist
    When one is in a business of public accommodation,
    one must obey all current & future laws, eg, Fair Housing,
    anti-discrimination. We accept this when we open.
    If one's religion requires limiting one's customer base,
    that's a risk one should consider first.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  16. GardenLady

    GardenLady Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2020
    Messages:
    492
    Ratings:
    +536
    Religion:
    ELCA Lutheran
    Deciding that a law forbidding same sex marriage is unconstitutional is not writing a new law. It's ruling on the constitutionality of a law, which is exactly their job.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    219,262
    Ratings:
    +85,024
    Religion:
    Atheist
    But if their ruling is based upon personal desire
    rather than sound constitutional reasoning, then
    this is properly called "legislating from the bench".
    Of course, the law is so murky that reasonable
    people will disagree.
     
  18. ADigitalArtist

    ADigitalArtist Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Messages:
    10,383
    Ratings:
    +16,872
    Religion:
    Irreligious Agnostic Atheistic Apatheist
    That's not actually what happened if you're talking about domestic partnership fights from 2012 to 2015.
    The bans against domestic partnership went into place due to city budget concerns, and it was bans on all domestic partnerships of city employees. This was under Rick Snyder who was not a liberal.

    But after bans on gay marriage were lifted, an appeals court put the ruling on hold and removed marriage benefits from gays who got married the day after the ban was lifted. An injunction was filed that required gays to be given spousal benefits until their marriage classification was restored. Another domestic partnership ban was tried but struck down as unconstitutional.

    So really it's more like Republicans cutting off their nose to spite their face.
     
  19. Sand Dancer

    Sand Dancer Crazy Cat Lady

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    6,868
    Ratings:
    +4,530
    Religion:
    Agnostic Buddhist
    Marriage used to be one man and as many women as he could afford. How is gay marriage worse than that?
     
  20. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    219,262
    Ratings:
    +85,024
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I remember it differently.
    Did you live here then?
    Anyway, that reason doesn't change
    the reality that it was discriminatory.
     
Loading...