Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Stops Gay Marriage In Utah

[Whig_Out]

Utah: "Gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage. Now continue to marry ten women." IDIOTS.

 

[Kondor3]

Utah: "Gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage. Now continue to marry ten women." IDIOTS.

But, according to Liberal tolerance-philosophy, it's OK when a Muslim marries four.

Personally, I'll side with a bigamist over a fudge-packer any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

 

[Nosmo King]

Utah: "Gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage. Now continue to marry ten women." IDIOTS.

But, according to Liberal tolerance-philosophy, it's OK when a Muslim marries four.

Personally, I'll side with a bigamist over a fudge-packer any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

How did you reach that conclusion?

 

[Kondor3]

Utah: "Gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage. Now continue to marry ten women." IDIOTS.

But, according to Liberal tolerance-philosophy, it's OK when a Muslim marries four.

Personally, I'll side with a bigamist over a fudge-packer any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

How did you reach that conclusion?

The 'Lib-tolerance' conclusion, or the 'side with' conclusion?

 

[Nosmo King]

This is indeed great news to hear. I am glad the SCOTUS stepped in and overruled a radical judge's ruling. Gay marriage should not be tolerated in the United States since it is a abomination. What we all should be promoting is the traditional marriage between man and woman. This is a win for moral family values and common decency.


Supreme Court puts gay marriage on hold in Utah | Fox News


The Supreme Court on Monday put gay marriage on hold in Utah, giving the state time to appeal a federal judge's ruling against Utah's same-sex marriage ban.

The court issued a brief order Monday blocking any new same-sex unions in the state. The ruling comes after a Dec. 20 ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby that the state's ban on same-sex marriage violates gay and lesbian couples' constitutional rights.

Thanks for good news for States' Rights!

That was the intentnion of the Founders--a loose union of unique state countries for the purpose of standing up to world bullies interested in inflicting disintegration on new world people uncooperative with their bullying. Certain agreements were made to ensure that each state would have certain rights and governances.

One-worlders are seeking to abolish our roots. Down with them and their divers inanities. I'm tired of them throwing states' rights under the bus. The purpose of the fed is to protect Americans from outside inflluences, not beat up the sovereignity of the people in a state whose forbears were given rights of governance that were never to be exploited by a strong fed.

States don't have the right to bully their citizens. Arguing for a state's right to erode personal freedoms was last used during Jim Crow. Before that, it was used to justify slavery.

One has to wonder if state's rights isn't just cover for bigoted, backward policies and repression.

 

[Nosmo King]

But, according to Liberal tolerance-philosophy, it's OK when a Muslim marries four.

Personally, I'll side with a bigamist over a fudge-packer any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

How did you reach that conclusion?

The 'Lib-tolerance' conclusion, or the 'side with' conclusion?

Please explain. You see, I'm a Liberal and I can't understand your conclusions.

 

[Whig_Out]

Utah: "Gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage. Now continue to marry ten women." IDIOTS.

But, according to Liberal tolerance-philosophy, it's OK when a Muslim marries four.

Personally, I'll side with a bigamist over a fudge-packer any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

Another fucking idiot on this forum. No, no one has said that. Not one person and you have no source or proof of that. Go back to FOX news 24/7 scumbag.

 

[LeadRoundNose]

If you acted as a Christian, you would respect the teachings of Jesus

And you wouldn't pervert those teachings.

Matthew 19:1-8 — Did Jesus say anything about homosexuality? Of course, when asked about marriage, Jesus issued a sweeping condemnation of all sexual relationships outside of the male/female model established in Gen 1:27, which he specifically cited.

Romans 1:18-32 —Though most of the passages deal with the male perspective, for the first time there is a specific mention of female homosexuality. And as the verdict comes in, we discover it too is a depraved condition brought on by a sinful nature.

1Cor 6:9-11—The only passage of scripture that clearly acknowledges former (ex) homosexuals in the church. They are listed along with other ex-sinners who have been changed by the power of Christ. It is certain that Pastor Paul knew there were former homosexuals in his local church and he celebrated their freedom in Christ Jesus. With a completely different tone in comparison to the volume of harsh, negative reaction to the unrepentant homosexuality, scripture here ends with the tremendous hope and goodness of God.

Galatians 5:19 — Many areas that the apostle traveled to take the gospel indeed were very accepting of homosexual practices, yet he did not back away from communicating the sinfulness of such practice. Corinth, Ephesus and Rome as well as other major cities of the ancient world, were all too often cesspools of all forms of sexual immorality. Undeterred, Paul drew from sources familiar to him and forged them with New testament teachings of God’s grace to forgive and cleanse. In the letter to the Galatians, he teaches that the “works [not plurality] of the flesh are manifest. The flesh or sinful human nature is always considered and enemy to God.

Ephesians 5:3-7— Paul repeats his warnings against “uncleaness” to the church at Ephesus.

Colossians 3:5-7 — Paul issues his third warning against “uncleaness” to the church at Colosse. This time he adds instructions on overcoming/controlling the sin. Believers are to mortify or deaden themselves and exercise self control (a fruit of the Spirit) over such actions. Homosexuals claim that denying the free expression of homosexuality is "suppressing one's true self", but scripture clearly instructs that we are hold our bodies in check and refuse it participation in sexual immorality. This passage further emphasizes that no one should expect to escape the “wrath of God” except they repent.

1 Tim 1:10 — the law was not made for the righteous, but for the “lawless and disobedient.” The law (of Moses) encompassed the ceremonial, judicial and moral components of human interaction. Christ neutralized the ceremonial aspects but upheld the judicial and moral aspects, tendered with grace and mercy. Hence, homosexuality remains a sin "worthy of death" but yet qualified for forgiveness through repentance. The phrase Paul uses “defiling themselves with mankind” is another link of homosexual behavior to disobedience and uncompatible to sound or acceptable Christian doctrine.

Titus 1:16 — This is an aggressive attack and exposure of the psychosis of those who are “defiled” and commit “abominations". Again, let us identify the source of the Apostle Paul’s strong condemnation. When one accepts what God has pronounced abominable (by God’s own definition) and rejects the created model which God has pronounced good, a process of hardening and mental perversion begins to take root in the mind. Such is the danger of justifying sin. Sin corrupts the mind and conscience (the seat of individual integrity and morality) rendering it incapable of making spiritually sound decisions.

Jude 1:4,7,19 — Jude forcefully revealed that like the Sodomites, certain men in the church had gone after “strange flesh.” I believed Jude was describing contemporary "gay christians". His choice of phraseology is a combination of two words: heteros and sarx meaning “another flesh with the same quality.” His inclusion of the word flesh pointed to the homosexuality (not the inhospitality) of the Sodomites. Similar to the Apostle Paul, Jude selected strong language to convey the serious of the charge facing the church. Allowing unrepentant homosexuals into Christian fellowship without applying the same standards of admission applied to other sinners would be a spiritual death nell for the church. Repentance is the major action a sinner must take to be accepted into the family of God.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Utah: "Gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage. Now continue to marry ten women." IDIOTS.

But, according to Liberal tolerance-philosophy, it's OK when a Muslim marries four.

Personally, I'll side with a bigamist over a fudge-packer any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

Pretend Christians like you sully the faith.

 

[Silhouette]

Utah: "Gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage. Now continue to marry ten women." IDIOTS.

But, according to Liberal tolerance-philosophy, it's OK when a Muslim marries four.

Personally, I'll side with a bigamist over a fudge-packer any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

Another fucking idiot on this forum. No, no one has said that. Not one person and you have no source or proof of that. Go back to FOX news 24/7 scumbag.

What Whig-out, you don't like that polygamy and the discussion of it is going to be a natural evolution of topics in the US Supreme court when the Utah case is heard?

Engage in denial much? For it will be discussed. In case you missed your US History lesson when Utah [then "Deseret"] was admitted as a state, the condition that it could be was to abandon the objectionable practice of polygamy.

How Harvey-Milk/teen predator-worshipping LGBT cultists are going to convince the High Court that polygamy is somehow not up for discussion should be a very interesting deployment of pretzel logic. I look forward to the gyrations, backpeddling, stuttering and stammering from gay attorneys.

Also I'll look forward to the gyrations, backpeddling, stuttering and stammering from gay attorney's on their angle of "legalize gay marriage because not doing so is bad for the children caught up in these couplings". You don't use children for sex and you don't use them for political leverage. ie: as long as Harvey Milk the drugged-orphan-teen-boy sodomizer is the icon of the LGBT movement, they have NO PLACE whatsoever to discuss child welfare as "augmented" by gay-anything. LEAST of all the bitter irony of calling them "married parents".

Harvey Milk called himself a parent too: of the minor orphaned homeless boy he was simultaneously sodomizing; who later killed himself on Milk's birthday. And this guy as a matter of law and on a US postage stamp now is the value-foundation leader for the LGBT movement. Anyone who supports him or the cult who worships him and calls themselves a supporter of child welfare is a "fucking idiot"...

 

[Barb]

Engage in denial much? For it will be discussed. In case you missed your US History lesson when Utah [then "Deseret"] was admitted as a state, the condition that it could be was to abandon the objectionable practice of polygamy.

But they didn't "abandon the objectionable practice," did they? They simply made one wife sanctioned by the state and the rest paid for by the government. Quietly as its kept, the FDLS routinely uses aide to children of unmarried ―plural wives to enrich the collective coffers of their husbands and the FDLS Church, while their child brides and children are routinely left wanting.

Also, this enrichment at the public trough is in addition to public funding that states and the federal government granted to polygamous FDLS towns that have incorporated.
When Arizona permitted Colorado City to incorporate in 1985, after using the Establishment Clause as grounds to deny the same status to a ―cult city led by an India ―guru, the newly incorporated FDLS stronghold in Colorado City became eligible for public funds.

in 1985, a year after the Rajneeshpuram decision in federal court, Arizona allowed Colorado City to incorporate anyway, which made the town eligible to receive state and federal grants. Since then it has received over $1.8 million from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to pave streets, upgrade fire equipment and build a water-storage tank. Hildale got $94,000 for its fire station. And the government-financed airport on the edge of Colorado City cost $2.8 million. Mayor Dan Barlow discounts the claim that the airport was built for FLDS leader Rulon Jeffs to land his chartered Learjet for Sunday meetings. "That wasn't part of it at all,'' He could fly into St. George just as easy.

So who would you think wouldn't want THIS conversation to take place?

 

[Silhouette]

Engage in denial much? For it will be discussed. In case you missed your US History lesson when Utah [then "Deseret"] was admitted as a state, the condition that it could be was to abandon the objectionable practice of polygamy.

But they didn't "abandon the objectionable practice," did they? They simply made one wife sanctioned by the state and the rest paid for by the government. Quietly as its kept, the FDLS routinely uses aide to children of unmarried ―plural wives to enrich the collective coffers of their husbands and the FDLS Church, while their child brides and children are routinely left wanting.

Also, this enrichment at the public trough is in addition to public funding that states and the federal government granted to polygamous FDLS towns that have incorporated.

When Arizona permitted Colorado City to incorporate in 1985, after using the Establishment Clause as grounds to deny the same status to a ―cult city led by an India ―guru, the newly incorporated FDLS stronghold in Colorado City became eligible for public funds.
Yet in 1985, a year after the Rajneeshpuram decision in federal court, Arizona allowed Colorado City to incorporate anyway, which made the town eligible to receive state and federal grants. Since then it has received over $1.8 million from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to pave streets, upgrade fire equipment and build a water-storage tank. Hildale got $94,000 for its fire station. And the government-financed airport on the edge of Colorado City cost $2.8 million. Mayor Dan Barlow discounts the claim that the airport was built for FLDS leader Rulon Jeffs to land his chartered Learjet for Sunday meetings. "That wasn't part of it at all,'' He could fly into St. George just as easy.

So who would you think wouldn't want THIS conversation to take place?

We are in agreement. Polygamy will be the topic du jour in the Utah Hearing this year in SCOTUS halls.

The funds were provided to a community likely because there were children there who needed infrastructure. Not because the government condoned illegal activity of the adults. You don't abandon children because the adults are up to no good.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Please cite a legitimate legal reason for opposing marriage equality.

My State constitution forbids and it is State matter.

 

[Barb]

Engage in denial much? For it will be discussed. In case you missed your US History lesson when Utah [then "Deseret"] was admitted as a state, the condition that it could be was to abandon the objectionable practice of polygamy.

But they didn't "abandon the objectionable practice," did they? They simply made one wife sanctioned by the state and the rest paid for by the government. Quietly as its kept, the FDLS routinely uses aide to children of unmarried ―plural wives to enrich the collective coffers of their husbands and the FDLS Church, while their child brides and children are routinely left wanting.

Also, this enrichment at the public trough is in addition to public funding that states and the federal government granted to polygamous FDLS towns that have incorporated.

When Arizona permitted Colorado City to incorporate in 1985, after using the Establishment Clause as grounds to deny the same status to a ―cult city led by an India ―guru, the newly incorporated FDLS stronghold in Colorado City became eligible for public funds.
Yet in 1985, a year after the Rajneeshpuram decision in federal court, Arizona allowed Colorado City to incorporate anyway, which made the town eligible to receive state and federal grants. Since then it has received over $1.8 million from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to pave streets, upgrade fire equipment and build a water-storage tank. Hildale got $94,000 for its fire station. And the government-financed airport on the edge of Colorado City cost $2.8 million. Mayor Dan Barlow discounts the claim that the airport was built for FLDS leader Rulon Jeffs to land his chartered Learjet for Sunday meetings. "That wasn't part of it at all,'' He could fly into St. George just as easy.

So who would you think wouldn't want THIS conversation to take place?

We are in agreement. Polygamy will be the topic du jour in the Utah Hearing this year in SCOTUS halls.

The funds were provided to a community likely because there were children there who needed infrastructure. Not because the government condoned illegal activity of the adults. You don't abandon children because the adults are up to no good.

The same were denied to another religious community that also had kids, chica. Not white, not Christian, even as a sect. And that "You don't abandon children because the adults are up to no good" flies in the face of "conservative" philosophy. Rhetorical gymnastics should be an Olympian sport. You all might win something in the coming years.

 

[LeadRoundNose]

Please cite a legitimate legal reason for opposing marriage equality.

My State constitution forbids and it is State matter.

Agreed. Even more................see below.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Please cite a legitimate legal reason for opposing marriage equality.

My State constitution forbids and it is State matter.

Agreed. Even more................see below.

My state and I personally do not base opposition on biblical principal.

 

[LeadRoundNose]

My State holds that queer marriage is illegal.

 

[Barb]

And when you're called out as the American Taliban, you balk, bitch, and

 

[GreenBean]

Utah: "Gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage. Now continue to marry ten women." IDIOTS.

But, according to Liberal tolerance-philosophy, it's OK when a Muslim marries four.

Personally, I'll side with a bigamist over a fudge-packer any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

How did you reach that conclusion?

Liberal Tolerance - Liberals will basically be taught to show "tolerance" towards all groups which promote anti-american - anti-family and pro Big Brother agendas - while hypocritically denouncing the mythologies of American Society. Primarily Christianity . I personally am no Bible Thumper and have even written some agnostic material , but I find it reprehensible that Liberals have the audacity to ridicule Christians while preaching tolerance for a religion which is 500 years behind Christianity in its Social evolution.

American Liberalism is guided by conflicting desires; fear and a need to control. Liberals are like those intrusive relatives who can't get their own lives together but want to be dictator of your life.

Liberals espouse multi-culturalism as an appeasement of Islam. If Muslims are left alone, they'll most likely leave us corrupt, immoral Americans alone. Unfortunately, this does not work in reality. Islam is about control - absolute control. Which is another good reason Liberals like Islam.

Getting back to the OP - Gray Marriage- Utah - SOTUS yada yada yada .... carry on

 

[LeadRoundNose]

And when you're called out as the American Taliban, you balk, bitch, and

It's expected that a liberal would compare American Christians to Taliban.

To the liberal, outrageous comparisons are the norm in conversation.

A lot of it you can't help because you have been conditioned to respond that way. You get a peanut everytime you repeat a democrat talking point.

It's a conditioned reflex on your part.