A Political and Moral dilemma solved: Homosexuality

[JakeStarkey]

Share the truth all you want.

But always remember our country is governed by the Constitution, not by a doctrine by a far right contentious Christian sect.

For instance, don't be a self loathing projector like the author of this: "But if you feel you must litter the thread with your own addled rationalizations, you're entitled to do so,"

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

MR.RIGHT SAID:

“The Constitution says nothing about protecting sexual deviants.”

No one ever said it did.

It does, however, protect the right to due process and equal protection of the law, requiring the states to allow same-sex couples access to marriage.

Equal protection under the law, does not protect those advancing deceit as truth. Not in reality anyway.

It apparently does in this perverse Far-Side variation that has recently settled upon us.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

SILHOUETTE SAID:

“But will you defend children of legitimate marriage and the state's rights to incentivize that environment to include a father for sons and a mother for daughters?”

The states have no 'right' to deny same-sex couples access to their marriage laws absent objective, documented evidence in support. And there is no 'evidence' whatsoever that children in homes headed by same-sex parents are in any way 'disadvantaged.'

 

[TemplarKormac]

The Second was a rationalization, posed as a question... and a means to imply that THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS NORMAL

Er, you're missing the fact t....

It's not a complex equation TK...

This is precisely what happened:

LOL!

Let's REVIEW:

The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is based in deceit, which is held up as truth.

Nobody is asking to normalize anything.

Homosexuality is a 180 degree deviation from human physiological normality. (dot dot dot See Post #144)

And in what reality are you allowed to dictate what is normal?

You implied that Normalization was irrelevant, then ran to make Normality relevant.

That is pulled precisely from the record. Doesn't require all your recent hysteria.

You lost this debate the moment you clicked on the Post Thread icon.

But if you feel you must litter the thread with your own addled rationalizations, you're entitled to do so, unlike the those of mental disorder who feel that marriage will render them legitimate, because their mental disorder precludes objective reason, thus precludes their means to understand that the instant that marriage drops its exclusion of them, all legitimacy for which the former standard provided, will vaporize back into the ether.

You keep repeating yourself. First, you made normalization the topic of discussion. When I insisted it was irrelevant, you insisted on carrying on with it. You have all this time ranted about the normalcy of homosexuality, ignoring the fact that I am asking for the fair treatment of homosexuals under the law. Normalcy is irrelevant where the law is concerned. But you, yes YOU are demanding that the law should only apply to normal people only. So, why are we using your definition of normalcy to direct the law?

You are now resorting to personal insults, which tell me you cannot stand that your positron is being so soundly defeated.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Sounds more like a surrender document than a reasoned post

Nope. The words "I surrender" don't appear anywhere in the post.

If I cared enough (I don't) I could give you a five page thesis on why the 'equal treatment' fallacy is just that -- A fallacy.

Equality is a myth, but equal treatment is not. Treat them the same way you want to be treated. Equal treatment, as described in the Bible:

Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.

John 13:16

The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.

Mark 12:31

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Leviticus 19:33-34

But that's okay, Temp.

Whatever floats your boat

I appreciate your understanding.

I would suggest that you don't understand Biblical principles, the Constitution, or the institution of marriage if you're contesting that gay marriage is about equal rights and somehow supported by The Bible.

 

[TemplarKormac]

MR.RIGHT SAID:

“The Constitution says nothing about protecting sexual deviants.”

No one ever said it did.

It does, however, protect the right to due process and equal protection of the law, requiring the states to allow same-sex couples access to marriage.

Equal protection under the law, does not protect those advancing deceit as truth. Not in reality anyway.

It apparently does in this perverse Far-Side variation that has recently settled upon us.

LLOLOLOL

Did you really just say that out loud? It is not deceit to ask for equal treatment under the law. It is deceitful to say one group of people are more entitled to the benefits of the law than another. You know, the same way the Jim Crow laws were implemented.

 

[rdean]

Republicans have wanted to "solve" the gay problem for a very long time. Seems they think they have a "permanent solution".

 

[JakeStarkey]

Victory? That you "proved" it is good to support people's disobedience of God's commands, knowing that when they stand before Him they risk eternal condemnation?

Answer this question:

Is it Christlike to selectively apply the law? Hmm? Did Jesus not apply his commands equally?

"44 But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 "For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?"

Matthew 5:44-46

Don't you think that sharing the truth with people in the hope that truth would set them free is more in-line with the victory Christ desires us to have?

Spare me your piousity. How can you use the teachings of Christ to purposefully put others at a disadvantage?

You are correct. God's law is applied equally to everyone. That's why it is our responsibility to help everyone know His laws.

That is not the secular government's duty because it is governed by the Constitution.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Sounds more like a surrender document than a reasoned post

Nope. The words "I surrender" don't appear anywhere in the post.

If I cared enough (I don't) I could give you a five page thesis on why the 'equal treatment' fallacy is just that -- A fallacy.

Equality is a myth, but equal treatment is not. Treat them the same way you want to be treated. Equal treatment, as described in the Bible:

Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.

John 13:16

The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.

Mark 12:31

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Leviticus 19:33-34

But that's okay, Temp.

Whatever floats your boat

I appreciate your understanding.

I would suggest that you don't understand Biblical principles, the Constitution, or the institution of marriage if you're contesting that gay marriage is about equal rights and somehow supported by The Bible.

You must not understand that I really don't care who they marry. But I'd wager that when you pass laws, those laws are subject to Constitutional jurisprudence, whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant, therefore the 14th Amendment demands that said laws be applied to all, not to some.

I also know not to abuse the teachings of Christ to make law that discriminates against others.

My faith in God, my understanding of the Constitution, and the sanctity of marriage are fine. It is you who wishes to selectively apply those things.

Good day madam.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sounds more like a surrender document than a reasoned post

Nope. The words "I surrender" don't appear anywhere in the post.

If I cared enough (I don't) I could give you a five page thesis on why the 'equal treatment' fallacy is just that -- A fallacy.

Equality is a myth, but equal treatment is not. Treat them the same way you want to be treated. Equal treatment, as described in the Bible:

Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.

John 13:16

The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.

Mark 12:31

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Leviticus 19:33-34

But that's okay, Temp.

Whatever floats your boat

I appreciate your understanding.

I would suggest that you don't understand Biblical principles, the Constitution, or the institution of marriage if you're contesting that gay marriage is about equal rights and somehow supported by The Bible.

You clearly do not understand we are governed by a secular government under the Constitution. Marriage Equality is certainly about equal rights and application of the 14th Amendment. That is how SCOTUS is almost certainly to rule this summer.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Victory? That you "proved" it is good to support people's disobedience of God's commands, knowing that when they stand before Him they risk eternal condemnation?

Answer this question:

Is it Christlike to selectively apply the law?

The law is not being selectively applied... In point of FACT: The law is APPLIED EQUALLY... .

The idiocy that claims legal kinship with racial inequities has NEVER been relevant to Sexuality.

Sexual Abnormality is the result of a perversion of human reasoning which causes the individual to rationalize that sexual gratification with a member of their own gender is acceptable, suitable or otherwise plausible, presents delusion. Which is an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

What you are suggesting is that we elevate those saddled with the inability to discern reality from illusion, to positions in the culture which sets them in positions of influence and authority over children... where they will train their children to accept their illusions, sets the culture up for catastrophe beyond your wildest imagination.

Look at it this way: The same set of ideas which are Advocating for the Normalization for Sexual Abnormality, spent decades coercing the financial markets to set aside the sound, actuarial lending principle for their irrational sense of "Fairness".

When reasonable people protested... OH HOW THEY FLAILED... demanding that all of those contests supporting the essential principles of those sound lending principles, noting that such was all that sustained the LEGITIMACY OF THE INDUSTRY... when reasonable people said that "Fairness" was intrinsic to those principles, they claimed that we HATED BLACK PEOPLE and other people who have been duped by their perverse species of reasoning, thus as chronically poor.

But... over the years, they managed to gain ascending levels of popular support, and when they finally granted federal guarantees, they succeeded in supplanting sound principle, with their irrational notions... and as was predicted it would, it ignited a run on the highly coveted mortgage, which caused the value of the underlying real estate to skyrocket, until the market could no longer sustain those values... at which time the international financial markets crashed... causing what is now 8 years of depression... causing the loss of Hundreds of Millions of jobs around the planet, the closing of MILLIONS of Businesses and lowering the lifestyles of MOST of Americans... .

And THAT is absolutely NOTHING, by comparison to the potential for catastrophe that the OP has recently decided to support.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Victory? That you "proved" it is good to support people's disobedience of God's commands, knowing that when they stand before Him they risk eternal condemnation?

Answer this question:

Is it Christlike to selectively apply the law?

The law is not being selectively applied... In point of FACT: The law is APPLIED EQUALLY... .

The idiocy that claims legal kinship with racial inequities has NEVER been relevant to Sexuality.

Sexual Abnormality is the result of a perversion of human reasoning which causes the individual to rationalize that sexual gratification with a member of their own gender is acceptable, suitable or otherwise plausible, presents delusion. Which is an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

What you are suggesting is that we elevate those saddled with the inability to discern reality from illusion, to positions in the culture which sets them in positions of influence and authority over children... where they will train their children to accept their illusions, sets the culture up for catastrophe beyond your wildest imagination.

Look at it this way: The same set of ideas which are Advocating for the Normalization for Sexual Abnormality, spent decades coercing the financial markets to set aside the sound, actuarial lending principle for their irrational sense of "Fairness".

When reasonable people protested... OH HOW THEY FLAILED... demanding that all of those contests supporting the essential principles of those sound lending principles, noting that such was all that sustained the LEGITIMACY OF THE INDUSTRY... when reasonable people said that "Fairness" was intrinsic to those principles, they claimed that we HATED BLACK PEOPLE and other people who have been duped by their perverse species of reasoning, thus as chronically poor.

But... over the years, they managed to gain ascending levels of popular support, and when they finally granted federal guarantees, they succeeded in supplanting sound principle, with their irrational notions... and as was predicted it would, it ignited a run on the highly coveted mortgage, which caused the value of the underlying real estate to skyrocket, until the market could no longer sustain those values... at which time the international financial markets crashed... causing what is now 8 years of depression... causing the loss of Hundreds of Millions of jobs around the planet, the closing of MILLIONS of Businesses and lowering the lifestyles of MOST of Americans... .

And THAT is absolutely NOTHING, by comparison to the potential for catastrophe that the OP has recently decided to support.

You know, for such a concrete argument, one wonders why you keep trying to make it?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Sounds more like a surrender document than a reasoned post

Nope. The words "I surrender" don't appear anywhere in the post.

If I cared enough (I don't) I could give you a five page thesis on why the 'equal treatment' fallacy is just that -- A fallacy.

Equality is a myth, but equal treatment is not. Treat them the same way you want to be treated. Equal treatment, as described in the Bible:

Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.

John 13:16

The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.

Mark 12:31

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Leviticus 19:33-34

But that's okay, Temp.

Whatever floats your boat

I appreciate your understanding.

I would suggest that you don't understand Biblical principles, the Constitution, or the institution of marriage if you're contesting that gay marriage is about equal rights and somehow supported by The Bible.

You must not understand that I really don't care who they marry. But I'd wager that when you pass laws, those laws are subject to Constitutional jurisprudence, whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant, therefore the 14th Amendment demands that said laws be applied to all, not to some.

I also know not to abuse the teachings of Christ to make law that discriminates against others.

My faith in God and my understanding of the Constitution are fine. It is you who wishes to selectively apply those things.

Good day madam.

The 14th amendment is based upon equal rights based upon race and sex. It doesn't regard rights based upon sexual orientation. I'm sure you know that and have conveniently overlooked it for who the hell knows why. But Lincoln wasn't thinking well we got to get gays married....We all know that.

Discriminate? Do you think the institution of marriage is about the family or about socially validating any imaginable sexual lifestyle?

Your understanding of the Constitution is dookie if you're arguing that the 14th amendment is about gay marriage. You've bought the liberal kool aid that is meant for the ignorant masses. You ought to know better; but somehow, you decided that you should believe in a lie in the name of your Christian conscious. Well, let me tell you a little something about my man, Jesus; he's not a subversive. Keep searching if you're sincere. If you've decided that character is over-rated, then go ahead and peddle your lies.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

SILHOUETTE SAID:

“But will you defend children of legitimate marriage and the state's rights to incentivize that environment to include a father for sons and a mother for daughters?”

The states have no 'right' to deny same-sex couples access to their marriage laws absent objective...

States, actually have the right to decide upon what is and is not acceptable behavior. And that is because EVERY HUMAN BEING HAS THAT RIGHT and the State is merely an extension of the sum of those individuals.

And THAT is what is at issue here: BEHAVIOR. Just as Theft is unacceptable, Deceit is also unacceptable and homosexuality is behavior resting upon a DECEIT.

There is no right to advance deceit as truth, because to do so injures those who are misinformed by the deceit to make sound choices...

And as a result, not only is the State within its collective RIGHT to OUTLAW such, it is insanely foolish to NOT DO SO!

There's a reason that 99.9999~% of human history, that homosexuals have been hiding in the closet... and that reason is that during the .000001% of Human History that they were OUT... THEY WRECKED THE JOINT!

And there's no right, or a POTENTIAL OF A RIGHT to do THAT!

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Sounds more like a surrender document than a reasoned post

Nope. The words "I surrender" don't appear anywhere in the post.

If I cared enough (I don't) I could give you a five page thesis on why the 'equal treatment' fallacy is just that -- A fallacy.

Equality is a myth, but equal treatment is not. Treat them the same way you want to be treated. Equal treatment, as described in the Bible:

Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.

John 13:16

The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.

Mark 12:31

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Leviticus 19:33-34

But that's okay, Temp.

Whatever floats your boat

I appreciate your understanding.

I would suggest that you don't understand Biblical principles, the Constitution, or the institution of marriage if you're contesting that gay marriage is about equal rights and somehow supported by The Bible.

You clearly do not understand we are governed by a secular government under the Constitution. Marriage Equality is certainly about equal rights and application of the 14th Amendment. That is how SCOTUS is almost certainly to rule this summer.

I do believe in the so-called secular government. I believe in the Constitution. You can take Christianity out of the equation. There is no legal justification for compulsory gay marriage in the Constitution.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sounds more like a surrender document than a reasoned post

Nope. The words "I surrender" don't appear anywhere in the post.

If I cared enough (I don't) I could give you a five page thesis on why the 'equal treatment' fallacy is just that -- A fallacy.

Equality is a myth, but equal treatment is not. Treat them the same way you want to be treated. Equal treatment, as described in the Bible:

Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.

John 13:16

The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.

Mark 12:31

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Leviticus 19:33-34

But that's okay, Temp.

Whatever floats your boat

I appreciate your understanding.

I would suggest that you don't understand Biblical principles, the Constitution, or the institution of marriage if you're contesting that gay marriage is about equal rights and somehow supported by The Bible.

You clearly do not understand we are governed by a secular government under the Constitution. Marriage Equality is certainly about equal rights and application of the 14th Amendment. That is how SCOTUS is almost certainly to rule this summer.

I do believe in the so-called secular government. I believe in the Constitution. You can take Christianity out of the equation. There is no legal justification for compulsory gay marriage in the Constitution.

Who is compelling gays to marry?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Victory? That you "proved" it is good to support people's disobedience of God's commands, knowing that when they stand before Him they risk eternal condemnation?

Answer this question:

Is it Christlike to selectively apply the law?

The law is not being selectively applied... In point of FACT: The law is APPLIED EQUALLY... .

The idiocy that claims legal kinship with racial inequities has NEVER been relevant to Sexuality.

Sexual Abnormality is the result of a perversion of human reasoning which causes the individual to rationalize that sexual gratification with a member of their own gender is acceptable, suitable or otherwise plausible, presents delusion. Which is an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

What you are suggesting is that we elevate those saddled with the inability to discern reality from illusion, to positions in the culture which sets them in positions of influence and authority over children... where they will train their children to accept their illusions, sets the culture up for catastrophe beyond your wildest imagination.

Look at it this way: The same set of ideas which are Advocating for the Normalization for Sexual Abnormality, spent decades coercing the financial markets to set aside the sound, actuarial lending principle for their irrational sense of "Fairness".

When reasonable people protested... OH HOW THEY FLAILED... demanding that all of those contests supporting the essential principles of those sound lending principles, noting that such was all that sustained the LEGITIMACY OF THE INDUSTRY... when reasonable people said that "Fairness" was intrinsic to those principles, they claimed that we HATED BLACK PEOPLE and other people who have been duped by their perverse species of reasoning, thus as chronically poor.

But... over the years, they managed to gain ascending levels of popular support, and when they finally granted federal guarantees, they succeeded in supplanting sound principle, with their irrational notions... and as was predicted it would, it ignited a run on the highly coveted mortgage, which caused the value of the underlying real estate to skyrocket, until the market could no longer sustain those values... at which time the international financial markets crashed... causing what is now 8 years of depression... causing the loss of Hundreds of Millions of jobs around the planet, the closing of MILLIONS of Businesses and lowering the lifestyles of MOST of Americans... .

And THAT is absolutely NOTHING, by comparison to the potential for catastrophe that the OP has recently decided to support.

You know, for such a concrete argument, one wonders why you keep trying to make it?

Appealing to doubt?

Tisk tisk...

(The Reader should note the time distinction between the post to whic the above contributor is responding and its response... which will help you recognize the hysteria in that whopper.)

 

[JakeStarkey]

Where r my Keys is the only one showing any sign of hysteria, and he has been for the last three pages.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Sounds more like a surrender document than a reasoned post

Nope. The words "I surrender" don't appear anywhere in the post.

If I cared enough (I don't) I could give you a five page thesis on why the 'equal treatment' fallacy is just that -- A fallacy.

Equality is a myth, but equal treatment is not. Treat them the same way you want to be treated. Equal treatment, as described in the Bible:

Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.

John 13:16

The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.

Mark 12:31

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Leviticus 19:33-34

But that's okay, Temp.

Whatever floats your boat

I appreciate your understanding.

I would suggest that you don't understand Biblical principles, the Constitution, or the institution of marriage if you're contesting that gay marriage is about equal rights and somehow supported by The Bible.

You clearly do not understand we are governed by a secular government under the Constitution. Marriage Equality is certainly about equal rights and application of the 14th Amendment. That is how SCOTUS is almost certainly to rule this summer.

I do believe in the so-called secular government. I believe in the Constitution. You can take Christianity out of the equation. There is no legal justification for compulsory gay marriage in the Constitution.

Who is compelling gays to marry?

Come on dude; there's one contrived court decision after another (regarding compulsory gay marriage)....And it's basically a liberal core belief at this point as well.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Come on dude; there's one contrived court decision after another (regarding compulsory gay marriage)....And it's basically a liberal core belief at this point as well.

The decisions are not contrived but very well grounded. The libertarians and Democrats and some conservatives certainly support it. The courts overwhelmingly support it; the American population is in favor if it; and by generation descending in age, the support grows to super majorities.

This is not a monster emerging from the swamp.