Started By
Message
re: Random thoughts from an independent (Please move to the Off-Topic Board)
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:03 pm to Vols&Shaft83
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:03 pm to Vols&Shaft83
Does gay people getting married have any negative impact on your livelihood whatsoever?
2
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:04 pm to Korin
Nothing has been different here.....so far.
The smoke coming out of the BBQ place down the road is the same color, so that's always a good sign
The smoke coming out of the BBQ place down the road is the same color, so that's always a good sign
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:05 pm to Gradual_Stroke
Bigot- a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
quote:
frick the church
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:06 pm to boogiewoogie1978
The middle has shifted left.
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:07 pm to Vols&Shaft83
What right are you defending? Your right to persecute?
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:07 pm to Korin
quote:
Does gay people getting married have any negative impact on your livelihood whatsoever?
None, whatsoever. I don't give a shite. I will give a shite if/when a religious institution is forced to perform the ceremony against their will. And I say that as an agnostic.
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:07 pm to blue_morrison
As long as they keep their meat hooks off of me...
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:09 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
I will give a shite if/when a religious institution is forced to perform the ceremony against their will
I support the SC ruling but I agree 100% with you on this. But why make an issue when so far there isn't one? Is it possible? Of course, but it hasn't happened yet.
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:13 pm to AgCoug
quote:
But why make an issue when so far there isn't one? Is it possible? Of course, but it hasn't happened yet.
I'm not making an issue of it, until the issue arises.
But, we've already seen bakers and property owners punished for not catering to gay weddings, churches are the next likely target.
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:13 pm to Mizzou4ever
This is a football board. FOOTBALL! not a place to express your political fears of concerns.
that being said, marriage is not guaranteed but freedom from discrimination in any contract is. Marriage can be a religious ceremony, but in in the eyes of a government, it's a contract. There are legal and financial benefits to officially marrying someone. Gays want them. Why is that wrong?
No one wants to be married in your religion if you don't want it, they just want the same legal rights as you. Gays only agenda is to be accepted and treated properly, not to destroy your incorrect ideas about morality and tradition.
Back to football now please.
that being said, marriage is not guaranteed but freedom from discrimination in any contract is. Marriage can be a religious ceremony, but in in the eyes of a government, it's a contract. There are legal and financial benefits to officially marrying someone. Gays want them. Why is that wrong?
No one wants to be married in your religion if you don't want it, they just want the same legal rights as you. Gays only agenda is to be accepted and treated properly, not to destroy your incorrect ideas about morality and tradition.
Back to football now please.
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:23 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
None, whatsoever. I don't give a shite. I will give a shite if/when a religious institution is forced to perform the ceremony against their will. And I say that as an agnostic.
Good lord, people, take stupidity to the Poli board. Religious ceremonies aren't legal ceremonies. Therefore a church is under no obligation, and will never be under an obligation, to perform a ceremony. As far as the government is concerned, a naked mime with a feather duster up his arse can perform the fricking "ceremony" and it won't matter a whit because the government isn't in the business of caring about the ceremony. They're in the business of issuing the license and granting the rights offered by marriage. Frankly, the government shouldn't be recognizing marriage period, but people insist that the government validate them in that manner, and then get upset when other people insist that the government likewise validate them, and all we have as a result is a clusterfrick that belongs on the Clusterfrick Board.
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:23 pm to Purplehaze44
quote:
This is a football board. FOOTBALL! not a place to express your political fears of concerns.
I've RA'd to move, twice
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:27 pm to Vols&Shaft83
I'm guessing legalized polygamy will be next.
I don't care, but seems like the next logical step.
I don't care, but seems like the next logical step.
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:28 pm to randomways
quote:
Therefore a church is under no obligation,
Correct
quote:
and will never be under an obligation, to perform a ceremony
We'll see. If the government can force a baker to bake a gay wedding cake, and they can, and have, never say never.
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:40 pm to Vols&Shaft83
I've actually gained a newfound respect for you in this thread. You sound like an intelligent human being when you aren't flaming my fan base
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:42 pm to lefty08
Agreed
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:47 pm to tWildcat
My apologies guys. I thought I posted this on the off-topic board. I would have changed it sooner, but I found a tick on my dog and have been attempting a mass genocide of my yard since.
This post was edited on 6/27/15 at 1:48 pm
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:47 pm to lefty08
quote:
You can bet your arse a homosexual couple will test the limits on a Christian pastor
And it won't get any further than a non-Catholic couple contesting a Catholic Church denying them a wedding in their cathedral because they don't adhere to Catholic doctrine.
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:48 pm to boogiewoogie1978
quote:
The political system needs to be purged of 100% of all the current politicians.
No need leaving any of them in there to infect the new ones.
This post was edited on 6/27/15 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 6/27/15 at 1:52 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
We'll see. If the government can force a baker to bake a gay wedding cake, and they can, and have, never say never.
Bakers are a business. They're not defined by their beliefs, they're defined by economics. Churches aren't classified as a business -- though a huge number of them operate precisely in that manner -- and courts have repeatedly upheld their right to abstain from practices that contradict their beliefs. Teachers at parochial schools have lost court cases over firings, churches have been given broad latitude to run their hierarchy as they see fit, etc. I get the principle that worries people, but it's a false principle based on mistaken assumptions mixed with fearmongering. There's no precedent for comparing a church to a place of employment like a baker or Hobby Lobby.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News