Breaking News: Supreme Court Has Chosen Not To Hear Any Of The 7 Marriage Equality Cases.

[Vigilante]

Because Marriage HISTORICALLY and TRADITIONALLY has always been a man and a woman. Why do you intolerant queers have to change that, now that you are completely EQUAL in the eyes of the law?

ROFL you're the one refusing to tolerate gays and you are calling me "intolerant." Yeah I'm intolerant of your intolerance... ROFL

.... You perverts have gotten 99% of what your demands were, and yet you queers STILL want more...

Yes. You know what 99% equality is? INequality. People are only equal when they are 100% equal.

Sorry, YOU don't get 100% when the Constitution gives RELIGION the right to reject you legally... Unfortunately we have courts that are filled with queers as judges and MAKE their own law, and a POSER president that now (but didn't in 2007!) goes along with your agenda. THAT is one reason why people fight your perversion. YOU don't get to tell others they must BAKE YOU A CAKE, or for that matter, when the president of a corporation DONATES to pro Christian, anti queer marriage groups, by boycotting their chicken sandwich's....you saw how successful you were and how many DECENT PEOPLE flocked to that store to protest you perverts!

100% equality is not a question of what religions do. It is a question of what secular society does. You do have to bake cakes for anyone who comes into your bakery that you have opened to the public. The courts even said as much. You can scream, spit, stomp your feet, and throw as many temper tantrums as you like. It doesn't change the fact that you do not get to run a public business, and engage in bigotry in your business practices.

You really do need to understand that you do not get to impose your personal moral judgements on other people through the law.

Sorry, if it was just a secular society the Constitution would NOT have mentioned religious freedom so prominently, and NOTHING about your perversion!

 

[Vigilante]

Because Marriage HISTORICALLY and TRADITIONALLY has always been a man and a woman. Why do you intolerant queers have to change that, now that you are completely EQUAL in the eyes of the law?

You do get that an argument to tradition is, by definition, a logical fallacy, right? So, what you're basically admitting is that you have no actual logical, rational reason for opposing this, and your entire position is built on emotion.

Okay. Thanks for admitting that. You are dismissed.

No dumbass, making up shit as you go just makes people laugh at you!....We ALL laugh at your fail!

Now, YOU are dismissed!

Appeals to antiquity assume that older ideas are better, that the fact that an idea has been around for a while implies that it is true.
source
Thus endeth the lesson. You are dismissed.

Your perversion has been recorded in history since before the GREEK culture, and has been rejected by humanity for centuries! Read a little history, when you can get your husband to withdraw!

You can say it as many ways as you like, an appeal to "Well it's always been this way" is an irrational, illogical emotional argument.

Okay. Since you have lost the ability to debate logically, you are dismissed.

No, it's not. That's what YOU would like to believe. OK, I'm dismissed and you lost the debate!

 

[Czernobog]

You do get that an argument to tradition is, by definition, a logical fallacy, right? So, what you're basically admitting is that you have no actual logical, rational reason for opposing this, and your entire position is built on emotion.

Okay. Thanks for admitting that. You are dismissed.

No dumbass, making up shit as you go just makes people laugh at you!....We ALL laugh at your fail!

Now, YOU are dismissed!

Appeals to antiquity assume that older ideas are better, that the fact that an idea has been around for a while implies that it is true.
source
Thus endeth the lesson. You are dismissed.

Your perversion has been recorded in history since before the GREEK culture, and has been rejected by humanity for centuries! Read a little history, when you can get your husband to withdraw!

You can say it as many ways as you like, an appeal to "Well it's always been this way" is an irrational, illogical emotional argument.

Okay. Since you have lost the ability to debate logically, you are dismissed.

No, it's not. That's what YOU would like to believe. OK, I'm dismissed and you lost the debate!

Well, since the level of your debate has reduced to:

I'mrightI'mrightI'mright!!! I am1 I am! I am!! so, there!


Then yeah, you are dismissed, and if declaring yourself the winner helps you sleep tonight, you do that sweetpea.

Now...back to the kiddie table with you...

 

[Czernobog]

[ You perverts...

This was my favorite part of this. Vigilante gets all pissy about calling him a religious zealot, or a religious apologist, yet he constantly keeps doing shit like this. As if calling a person a "pervert", which means a person who has been perverted, lead astray morally, is not making a religious, moralistic judgement of another person.

Now, don't get me wrong. He can believe that, in his private life, all he wants. However, when his personal opinions translate into attempts to force everyone else to behave in accordance to those beliefs, he can insist that he is not judgmental, or a religious zealot all he likes.

The words he choses, prove him to be a liar when he claims that.

Isn't it a shame that this is one agnostic that stands with his brothers and sisters of FAITH, over your perversion.... I see you never reject the word perversion in all the times I posted it.... Thanks for the confirmation of what you and yours are!

Of course I don't. Why would I? That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. Don't mistake my tolerance your opinion as admission to the accuracy of your opinion. And you can keep clinging to your agnosticism like a security blanket all you like. A closet Christian is still a Christian. I don't know why you don't just come out of the closet.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Where is that cuckoo icon at?

I just knew Flakey was a secret queer! He's out of his closet now!

You continue to mindlessly chatter.

Don't like it, don't reply to my posts. I know that's beyond your ability to resist!

You arguments will splatter as you mindlessly chatter.

You are now for only grins and chuckles.

Flakey just can't keep up, but every 5-10 posts throws some shit on the fire!.... YOU are part of my entertainment tonight!

So you admit you can't take what you try to dish. No one is surprised.

 

[JakeStarkey]

[ You perverts...

This was my favorite part of this. Vigilante gets all pissy about calling him a religious zealot, or a religious apologist, yet he constantly keeps doing shit like this. As if calling a person a "pervert", which means a person who has been perverted, lead astray morally, is not making a religious, moralistic judgement of another person.

Now, don't get me wrong. He can believe that, in his private life, all he wants. However, when his personal opinions translate into attempts to force everyone else to behave in accordance to those beliefs, he can insist that he is not judgmental, or a religious zealot all he likes.

The words he choses, prove him to be a liar when he claims that.

Isn't it a shame that this is one agnostic that stands with his brothers and sisters of FAITH, over your perversion.... I see you never reject the word perversion in all the times I posted it.... Thanks for the confirmation of what you and yours are!

Of course I don't. Why would I? That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. Don't mistake my tolerance your opinion as admission to the accuracy of your opinion. And you can keep clinging to your agnosticism like a security blanket all you like. A closet Christian is still a Christian. I don't know why you don't just come out of the closet.

Vigi is not Westboro but a real Christian he is not.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Sorry, YOU don't get 100% when the Constitution gives RELIGION the right to reject you legally... " privately, but I agree that religion cannot reject anyone publicly in terms of law. Tuff that.

 

[Czernobog]

Sorry, YOU don't get 100% when the Constitution gives RELIGION the right to reject you legally...

Churches are doing this? There are churches that are refusing to let homosexuals attend their services? Really? Other than Westboro, can you point to a few of them. Cuz, I must have missed this...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sure, some misguided denominations that call themselves Christian do not allow homosexuals to attend and belong to their organizations. Perfectly constitutional, perfectly despicable.

 

[Vigilante]

Damn, I just hate to give you guys this CURRENT information about what the PEOPLE think of your same sex marriage (well, not really! ) but perhaps you queers might get some new ideas on where you stand...

Insistent media messages claim surging and overwhelming public support for redefinition of marriage but recent numbers from major surveys and the Census Bureau tell a very different story.

In late September, a Pew Center poll found less than half of respondents – 49% to be exact – saying that they “favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally” – a sharp five point drop since February. Without the biased wording of the question, gay marriage might have received even weaker public backing: if a survey asks you if you want to “allow” other people to do something they say they ardently desire, you’d have to be deeply committed to traditional matrimony to say no. Had Pew asked “Do you want your government to redefine marriage so that male-male and female-female couples are treated identically to traditional marriages?” the response to sweeping change could have been still less favorable.

That’s particularly obvious in light of another surprising result in the poll: a full 50% of respondents agreed with the statement that “homosexual behavior is a sin,” including 77% of black Protestants and a crushing 82% of white Evangelicals. Moreover, the overall percentage of those viewing homosexuality as “sinful” has been soaring, not declining: it’s up from 45% in May of 2013. Considering the demographics in the 31 states that have so far resisted the nationwide push for gay marriage, it’s tough to imagine that these electorates, with their heavy concentration of Evangelicals and blacks, will endorse government sponsorship of same sex couples at any time in the near future.

Supporters of gay marriage consider such resistance irrelevant and cite the “tidal wave” of same sex couples who have already legalized their unions in the nineteen states that have changed their laws to back what sloganeers call “marriage equality.” In fact, the Census Bureau recently agreed to begin counting same sex unions as official marriages in their new figures of married vs. single people, and many experts predicted that these freshly minted gay couples would give the institution of matrimony a visible boost. Alas, the incidence of homosexual wedlock remains so rare that the overall percentage of adults who are married continued to decline –to 50.3%, an all time low --according the 2013 American Community Survey. At the same time, “same-sex cohabiting partners made up an even smaller share of 2013 households than in 2012.”

The official government figures suggest that 252,000 households were headed by same-sex married couples in 2013 –less than one-half of one percent of the overall figure of 56,000,000 marriages counted by the Census Bureau. Despite the fact that a majority of the US population and an overwhelming majority of the gay population now live in states that authorize same sex marriage, the numbers suggest that well below 4% of gay adults are currently married. That compares to slightly more than 50% of straight adults – an indication that the nation remains a long way from “marriage equality.” The heavily-hyped gay marriage tidal wave remains in actuality little more than a trickle.

One more aspect of the Pew Center survey similarly suggests that the march toward same sex marriage may not prove as inexorable as its boosters suppose. The pollsters posed the question: “At the present time, do you think religion as a whole is increasing its influence on American life or losing its influence?” Some 72% believed they saw declining influence for religious faith, but by an astonishing margin of 4 to 1 they identified this trend as a “bad thing” rather than “a good thing.” In other words, the American public sees religion with a diminished role in our national culture but they overwhelmingly prefer to see its old power restored or enhanced.

As recently as November, 2001, the figures on religious influence amounted to a virtual mirror image of their status today: in the aftermath of 9/11 and the “turn toward God” that many observers discerned, Americans saw faith increasing its impact rather than reducing it by a lopsided edge of 78-12%. That advantage quickly evaporated along with the popularity of the Bush administration, while the relentless push toward gay marriage fed the growing perception that traditional faith had lost its clout. The same way that a few big events in the early years of the new century, and shifting political trends since that time caused radical reverses in attitudes toward religion’s role, it’s hardly inconceivable that public impressions could change again.

A few victories for supporters of traditional marriage, in court rooms or at the ballot box, could well convey the idea of resurgent religiosity. A clear majority of church-going Americans, after-all, currently affiliate with denominations that passionately oppose redefining marriage: Catholics, white and black Evangelicals, Eastern Orthodox, Mormons, Muslims, and Orthodox Jews. The great bulk of such believers tell pollsters they want a more vigorous role in public debates for their churches, synagogues and mosques. Just under half of all Americans already oppose gay marriage, 50% consider homosexuality sinful and close to 80% think it’s a bad thing for religion to lose its influence. With those figures in mind, it’s wildly premature to herald the movement to redefine matrimony as a sweeping and unstoppable force, and to write off all resistance as a futile gesture.

New Figures Show Gay Marriage Tidal Wave Is Only a Trickle Truth Revolt

 

[Noomi]

The Supreme court just decided it will not hear the Same Sex Marriage cases from IN, OK, UT, VA, or WI. So that means two things.

First, since, in all of those cases, the lower court ruling was to strike down the state ban on Same Sex Marriage, that now means that Marriage Equality is now the "Law of the Land" in those 7 states.

Second, and more importantly, all of those states had a stay on their rulings until the Supreme Court acted. Well, guess what? It just did. So, the stays in all of those states are about to run out.

Bad news for the religious fanatics.

Supreme Court declines to hear gay marriages case in surprise move

Excellent news.

 

[Vigilante]

The Supreme court just decided it will not hear the Same Sex Marriage cases from IN, OK, UT, VA, or WI. So that means two things.

First, since, in all of those cases, the lower court ruling was to strike down the state ban on Same Sex Marriage, that now means that Marriage Equality is now the "Law of the Land" in those 7 states.

Second, and more importantly, all of those states had a stay on their rulings until the Supreme Court acted. Well, guess what? It just did. So, the stays in all of those states are about to run out.

Bad news for the religious fanatics.

Supreme Court declines to hear gay marriages case in surprise move

Excellent news.

Yes, that will have BIG PERCUSSIONS in Australia!

 

[Pop23]

I'm takin off from this thread for awhile

While I'm gone can you all decide whether procreation is or isn't a part of the marriage discussion?

It wasn't part of the discussion when my Granny got remarried.

I know right. Was granny allowed to marry you ?

Incest is against the law.

Why? Procreation?

Thanks for the assist

Always appreciated

What's your point? Just because there are laws against incestuous relationships/marriage, doesn't mean everyone else must procreate in order to get married.

Ohhhhh, anyone else aye

Quite an argument

 

[Pop23]

Because Marriage HISTORICALLY and TRADITIONALLY has always been a man and a woman. Why do you intolerant queers have to change that, now that you are completely EQUAL in the eyes of the law?

ROFL you're the one refusing to tolerate gays and you are calling me "intolerant." Yeah I'm intolerant of your intolerance... ROFL

.... You perverts have gotten 99% of what your demands were, and yet you queers STILL want more...

Yes. You know what 99% equality is? INequality. People are only equal when they are 100% equal.

Sorry, YOU don't get 100% when the Constitution gives RELIGION the right to reject you legally... Unfortunately we have courts that are filled with queers as judges and MAKE their own law, and a POSER president that now (but didn't in 2007!) goes along with your agenda. THAT is one reason why people fight your perversion. YOU don't get to tell others they must BAKE YOU A CAKE, or for that matter, when the president of a corporation DONATES to pro Christian, anti queer marriage groups, by boycotting their chicken sandwich's....you saw how successful you were and how many DECENT PEOPLE flocked to that store to protest you perverts!

100% equality is not a question of what religions do. It is a question of what secular society does. You do have to bake cakes for anyone who comes into your bakery that you have opened to the public. The courts even said as much. You can scream, spit, stomp your feet, and throw as many temper tantrums as you like. It doesn't change the fact that you do not get to run a public business, and engage in bigotry in your business practices.

You really do need to understand that you do not get to impose your personal moral judgements on other people through the law.

100% has already been achieved

 

[JakeStarkey]

We have 100% because we don't permit the Vigis and the Pops from deciding how or what is the 100%%

There is no "surge" against SCOTUS and marriage equality: that is all hot air puffery.

 

[Seawytch]

ROFL you're the one refusing to tolerate gays and you are calling me "intolerant." Yeah I'm intolerant of your intolerance... ROFL

.... You perverts have gotten 99% of what your demands were, and yet you queers STILL want more...

Yes. You know what 99% equality is? INequality. People are only equal when they are 100% equal.

Sorry, YOU don't get 100% when the Constitution gives RELIGION the right to reject you legally... Unfortunately we have courts that are filled with queers as judges and MAKE their own law, and a POSER president that now (but didn't in 2007!) goes along with your agenda. THAT is one reason why people fight your perversion. YOU don't get to tell others they must BAKE YOU A CAKE, or for that matter, when the president of a corporation DONATES to pro Christian, anti queer marriage groups, by boycotting their chicken sandwich's....you saw how successful you were and how many DECENT PEOPLE flocked to that store to protest you perverts!

100% equality is not a question of what religions do. It is a question of what secular society does. You do have to bake cakes for anyone who comes into your bakery that you have opened to the public. The courts even said as much. You can scream, spit, stomp your feet, and throw as many temper tantrums as you like. It doesn't change the fact that you do not get to run a public business, and engage in bigotry in your business practices.

You really do need to understand that you do not get to impose your personal moral judgements on other people through the law.

100% has already been achieved

Not quite, but we're getting there. When my civil marriage license is treated exactly like yours in all 50 states, we'll be even closer.

 

[Carla_Danger]

It wasn't part of the discussion when my Granny got remarried.

I know right. Was granny allowed to marry you ?

Incest is against the law.

Why? Procreation?

Thanks for the assist

Always appreciated

What's your point? Just because there are laws against incestuous relationships/marriage, doesn't mean everyone else must procreate in order to get married.

Ohhhhh, anyone else aye

Quite an argument

You may not like it, but in most states incest is illegal, and there is no law that states two people must procreate in order to get married.

If you are unhappy with our laws, get your ass out there and try to change them.

My suggestion to you, is get over yourself. The fact is, gay marriage will soon be legal in every state. We're half way there.

 

[Vigilante]

We have 100% because we don't permit the Vigis and the Pops from deciding how or what is the 100%%

There is no "surge" against SCOTUS and marriage equality: that is all hot air puffery.

Always the

What the 'gay marriage' debate is really about

WND ^

Exclusive: Matt Barber warns, 'The courts are tossing around spiritual nitroglycerin' It’s called Pandora’s Box. And the Supreme Court just opened it. Did you actually think the debate over “gay marriage” was about marriage? Have you really come to believe that this cultural kerfuffle has anything to do with “civil rights” or “equality”? Have you bought into the popular premise that this is a legitimate discussion on federalism – that it’s a reasonable disagreement over whether the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause requires that newfangled “gay marriage,” something rooted in same-sex sodomy, a deviant and disease-prone behavior our Constitution’s framers...

 

[Pop23]

We have 100% because we don't permit the Vigis and the Pops from deciding how or what is the 100%%

There is no "surge" against SCOTUS and marriage equality: that is all hot air puffery.

So now we must allow incest? It is the only way to reach your magical goal

 

[Pop23]

I know right. Was granny allowed to marry you ?

Incest is against the law.

Why? Procreation?

Thanks for the assist

Always appreciated

What's your point? Just because there are laws against incestuous relationships/marriage, doesn't mean everyone else must procreate in order to get married.

Ohhhhh, anyone else aye

Quite an argument

You may not like it, but in most states incest is illegal, and there is no law that states two people must procreate in order to get married.

If you are unhappy with our laws, get your ass out there and try to change them.

My suggestion to you, is get over yourself. The fact is, gay marriage will soon be legal in every state. We're half way there.

So procreation matters when we discuss THEM, but not when we discuss YOU.

Ok, got it

Now what's this equality you were speaking of?