Alito Warns: Defenders of Traditional Marriage Now Risk Being Treated as Bigots by Governments,

[Faun]

...gays can have the same rights under the law regarding their families...

how do qweers create "families" ????

They get married and adopt or have babies.

 

[G.T.]

How come rabbifail seems to be the only mind on the planet that doesnt realize the lifelong commitment being referred to was marriage?

I know why! Hes retarded. Clearly.

 

[Faun]

Your linked to a biased conservative propaganda site doesn't say what you think it does. When Verrilli said, "I don't deny that," he wasn't speaking about religious colleges being at risk of losing tax exemptions -- he was speaking of it is going to be raised as an issue.

While rightwing Fox hacked up his response in order to dumb down rightwingers, what Verrilli actually said was, "You know, I don’t think I can answer that question without knowing more specifics, but it’s certainly going to be an issue. I don’t deny that. I don’t deny that, Justice Alito. It is –it is going to be an issue."
9In reality, the Solicitor General didn't answer the question. Brain-dead righties don't know that because they get their news from Fox, which manipulated Verrilli's response to the question to make it appear as though he didn't deny it.

You're such dishonest turd:

They point to an exchange between Justice Samuel Alito and the administration's top lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli. Alito asked if, in the event the Supreme Court holds that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, would religious colleges risk losing their tax-exempt status if they continued to advocate for traditional marriage only.

Verrilli responded, "I don't deny that ... It is going to be an issue."

Yes he cannot predict the future. But he doesnt deny that it will be raised and in light of the Court's opinion not only will it be raised but the objections will be sustained and religious colleges will be branded as racists/bigots/homophobes and action will be taken against them.
The homo activvists will stop at nothing to destroy those who disagree with them. Look at Brendon Eich.
If I hold a ball and drop it it does not require rocket science or prophecy to see that it will hit the ground.

You remain the fathful imbecile Fox News needs you to be. When Verrilli was asked if such a decision would lead to religious colleges losing their tax exempt status if they opposed same-sex marriage and Fox News edited his response to make it appear as though he said he doesn't deny it; when in fact, his answer was that he could not answer that question without knowing more specifics.

Fox News has you so dumbed down, you don't even realize how dumb you are.

LOL. He didnt deny it would become an issue, which it will.
You lose.

I lose nothing. I just showed how Fox News lied and you fell for it.

They did not lie. Your spin cannot change that.

They hacked up his reply. That's a lie.

And being the ever faithful imbecile you are, you fell for it.

 

[Faun]

How come rabbifail seems to be the only mind on the planet that doesnt realize the lifelong commitment being referred to was marriage?

I know why! Hes retarded. Clearly.

Correct, that is exactly why.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Who has called for the ending of traditional marriage?

How stupid.

Marriage is marriage.

If anything this ruling has strengthened the concept of marriage.

 

[Seawytch]

They are at risk of being treated like bigots because they are.

Noomi, nice to see you again BUT let me point out please that many do not see the attraction of an asshole.

Let's put this on the line here. It's not that people are bigots. It's just that heteros really are not attracted to assholes.

So to try to embrace the gay world is something so foreign to the majority they reject the gay world.

We're talking gay marriage and heteros can't even wrap their brains around that.

Hell's bells ask a poor hetero soul to go thru a "house of dicks" where you have men sucking off men anonymously and you are going to get joe average creeped completely out.

So for crying out loud have some mercy on the poor hetero out there who doesn't "get it". Just because they prefer vaginas shouldn't be a stamp of bigotry.

You know what I find disgusting? The thought of fat people fucking. Totally grosses me out.

I would never, in a million years, think to keep them from civilly marrying because the thought of their screwing makes me throw up in my mouth a little.

 

[boilermaker55]

Maybe the tables needed to be turned against the bigots you are trying to defend.
At every turn, they should be stopped,harassed , hated,ridiculed , shunned, vilified and whatever else has been happening to the other sectors of our society. The ones, you right winged holier than thou group have hated and looked down on all your lives.
It sucks when someone gets a bit of power to defend themselves,
Real moral and human individuals have seen the hypocrisy that has surrounded this so-called "christian"' attitude for so long
You better get used to your side losing some of its power.
The day or reckoning is here a bit sooner than you hoped.

Alito Warns: Defenders of Traditional Marriage Now Risk Being Treated as Bigots by Governments,
CNSnews ^ | 6/26/15 | Terence P. Jeffrey

Posted on ‎6‎/‎26‎/‎2015‎ ‎7‎:‎22‎:‎11‎ ‎PM by Nachum

(CNSNews.com) - In his dissent from the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which declared that same-sex marriage is a right, Justice Samuel Alito said the court had falsely likened opposition to same-sex marriage to racism and that its decision “will be used to vilify Americans unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy.”
Alito warned that in the wake of the court’s ruling, Americans who dare to publicly express views in favor the traditional understanding that marriage is between a man and a woman will risk recrimination.
“I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools,” Alito wrote.
“By imposing its own views on the entire country,” he said, “the majority facilitates the marginalization of the many Americans who have traditional ideas.”
Here is a key excerpt from Alito’s dissent:

Pretty soon these bastards will start arresting people that speak our minds. I hate liberals as they're nothing more then fascist.

 

[SwimExpert]

 

[mikegriffith1]

Even the Roman Empire did not seek to force Christian vendors to service gay weddings, even though gay marriage existed in Roman society. Roman sources document gay marriage in Roman culture as early as the first century A.D. Yet, as oppressive as the Romans could be against unpopular religions, there is no record that they ever tried to force Christian vendors to service gay weddings nor force Christian churches to host them.

So modern American liberals are more bigoted and coercive toward Christians than the ancient Romans when it comes to gay marriage.

Another interesting fact is that even Roman writers recognized homosexuality as deviant, unnatural behavior, even though homosexuality was widespread in Roman society.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Even the Roman Empire did not seek to force Christian vendors to service gay weddings, even though gay marriage existed in Roman society. Roman sources document gay marriage in Roman culture as early as the first century A.D. Yet, as oppressive as the Romans could be against unpopular religions, there is no record that they ever tried to force Christian vendors to service gay weddings nor force Christian churches to host them.

So modern American liberals are more bigoted and coercive toward Christians than the ancient Romans when it comes to gay marriage.

Another interesting fact is that even Roman writers recognized homosexuality as deviant, unnatural behavior, even though homosexuality was widespread in Roman society.

Disingenuous hogwash!

The writings of early Christians were clearly homophobic so it is ludicrous to make the leap that the Romans would impose a requirement on what was little more than a minor upstart cult.

And the Romans were not oppressive towards Christians. The myth of the Romans throwing Christians to the lions is grossly exaggerated.

The Myth of Persecution - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[NYcarbineer]

They are at risk of being treated like bigots because they are.

Noomi, nice to see you again BUT let me point out please that many do not see the attraction of an asshole.

Let's put this on the line here. It's not that people are bigots. It's just that heteros really are not attracted to assholes.

So to try to embrace the gay world is something so foreign to the majority they reject the gay world.

We're talking gay marriage and heteros can't even wrap their brains around that.

Hell's bells ask a poor hetero soul to go thru a "house of dicks" where you have men sucking off men anonymously and you are going to get joe average creeped completely out.

So for crying out loud have some mercy on the poor hetero out there who doesn't "get it". Just because they prefer vaginas shouldn't be a stamp of bigotry.

Why are conservatives so focussed on gay sex? Several of you have posted graphic descriptions of gay sex.

There is a vast difference between anonymous sex and marriage. What gays won this week wasn't the right to go to bathhouses but the right to make a lifetime commitment to the person they love. One would think that heterosexuals can relate to the importance of such a relationship in a person's life.

Your obsession with the lurid details of gay sex, while supposedly being repulsed by it, is creepy.

Mp pme ever denied anyone the ability to make a lifelong commitment. Another lie by the Left.

Civil marriage is a legal commitment. Gays were denied that.

You are a dishonest turd. The claim was they were denied the ability to make a lifetime committment. That is wrong.

Given the context apparently everyone but you understood that a legal commitment was being talked about.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The SG did no such thing. Rabbi is lying.

Fuck you, Jakehole.
Are religious colleges at risk if Supreme Court approves same-sex marriage Fox News

All the SG said is that yes it could be a tax issue. Yes it will be an issue just like Bob Jones University's racist policies were a tax issue.

You're such a dishonest turd. If they lose their tax status they essentially cease to exist.
But at least you admit Jake is wrong and I wasnt lying when the SG admitted this.

Is Bob Jones University no more? I'm pretty sure it still exists.

 

[Faun]

Even the Roman Empire did not seek to force Christian vendors to service gay weddings, even though gay marriage existed in Roman society. Roman sources document gay marriage in Roman culture as early as the first century A.D. Yet, as oppressive as the Romans could be against unpopular religions, there is no record that they ever tried to force Christian vendors to service gay weddings nor force Christian churches to host them.

So modern American liberals are more bigoted and coercive toward Christians than the ancient Romans when it comes to gay marriage.

Another interesting fact is that even Roman writers recognized homosexuality as deviant, unnatural behavior, even though homosexuality was widespread in Roman society.

We're not the Roman Empire. So what? BTW ... the Roman Empire fell ... your point is ... ?

 

[Faun]

Noomi, nice to see you again BUT let me point out please that many do not see the attraction of an asshole.

Let's put this on the line here. It's not that people are bigots. It's just that heteros really are not attracted to assholes.

So to try to embrace the gay world is something so foreign to the majority they reject the gay world.

We're talking gay marriage and heteros can't even wrap their brains around that.

Hell's bells ask a poor hetero soul to go thru a "house of dicks" where you have men sucking off men anonymously and you are going to get joe average creeped completely out.

So for crying out loud have some mercy on the poor hetero out there who doesn't "get it". Just because they prefer vaginas shouldn't be a stamp of bigotry.

Why are conservatives so focussed on gay sex? Several of you have posted graphic descriptions of gay sex.

There is a vast difference between anonymous sex and marriage. What gays won this week wasn't the right to go to bathhouses but the right to make a lifetime commitment to the person they love. One would think that heterosexuals can relate to the importance of such a relationship in a person's life.

Your obsession with the lurid details of gay sex, while supposedly being repulsed by it, is creepy.

Mp pme ever denied anyone the ability to make a lifelong commitment. Another lie by the Left.

Civil marriage is a legal commitment. Gays were denied that.

You are a dishonest turd. The claim was they were denied the ability to make a lifetime committment. That is wrong.

Given the context apparently everyone but you understood that a legal commitment was being talked about.

Looks like the forum jester is pouting because everyone got it but him.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

The fecal faggot fiends require a ferocious flaying.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Those who are of the faith can not force those who don't share in their beliefs to except a particular view, when they don't even understand nor accept the existence of a God. It is not their place to do so, or setting the best example of those Christians who believe religion has no place being mixed with politics (it's oil and water to a worldly society). Only a true separation of church and state, as the left does contest to its division, acknowledges still that the personal beliefs of one's own conscience also has importance for the individual, and that no government authority has a right to press an opposing view that the believer doesn't happen to accept as part of their faith. To accept the former and not the latter signifies there is no real "wall" at all, but an excuse to use government to forcibly subject another towards it's ideological view. Such a mindset shares no unique difference to one that uses government to force the nation to submit to the acceptance of public Christian prayers, a view that is just as contrary to an opposing individual's conscience. We are a nation of diversity among faiths as well as immigrants and heritage, and we need to begin to demonstrate as well as understand what it means to truly have tolerance towards an opposing set of values.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Shakles, welcome.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Even the Roman Empire did not seek to force Christian vendors to service gay weddings, even though gay marriage existed in Roman society. Roman sources document gay marriage in Roman culture as early as the first century A.D. Yet, as oppressive as the Romans could be against unpopular religions, there is no record that they ever tried to force Christian vendors to service gay weddings nor force Christian churches to host them.

So modern American liberals are more bigoted and coercive toward Christians than the ancient Romans when it comes to gay marriage.

Another interesting fact is that even Roman writers recognized homosexuality as deviant, unnatural behavior, even though homosexuality was widespread in Roman society.

Disingenuous hogwash!

The writings of early Christians were clearly homophobic so it is ludicrous to make the leap that the Romans would impose a requirement on what was little more than a minor upstart cult.

And the Romans were not oppressive towards Christians. The myth of the Romans throwing Christians to the lions is grossly exaggerated.

The Myth of Persecution - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

LOL. What a joke of an article, clearly written by people intent on denying the ferocity of Roman persecution of Christians. One could spend hours reading ancient Roman and Christian accounts of Roman persecution of Christians, and also of Jews.

And by "homophobic" you mean rational comments about the fact that homosexuality is unnatural and destructive? You guys call any criticism of homosexuality "homophobic."

Care to comment on the well-documented fact that for the last several years STD rates among gay men have been astronomically higher than the rates among other demographic groups? Gee, why is that?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Mike writes silly stuff like the above and Joseph Smith was a true prophet, etc. Give him the respect he deserves.

Alito is wrong. Treat everyone equally.

 

[Dragonlady]

I'm a Christian, an elder in my Church, and a Sunday School teacher, but I have friends who are of different faiths, Jews, Muslims, and even atheists. I have worked in law firms where everyone in the firm was Jewish but me.

I strongly believe that government and religion must be kept separate. Even Israel, which is a Jewish country, can't agree whose version of Judaism that they follow. Worse, their treatment of the Muslim minority is so appallingly bad, that Jewish friends of mine who have witnessed it firsthand are ashamed to be Jewish.

You can use the Bible to justify just about any kind of abhorrent behaviour you choose: blood sacrifice, incest, revenge, stoning, slavery, etc. We have seen it time and time again. My own Church had a passage in its manifesto that says a cannon of our beliefs is that the Bishop of Rome is the Anti-Christ. Muslim countries run by Sharia Law are still meting out barbaric punishments straight out of biblical times.


All of the great religions are base on documents that are hundreds if not thousands of years old. Societies have advanced since those times. We don't stone adulterers any more. Not in North America at least.

Countries need to be run according to secular laws based on societies' current moral standards, not 2000 year old documents "inspired by God".