Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[JakeStarkey]

Sil, you have demonstrated long ago that you cannot objectively interpret material that goes counter to your confirmation bias.

 

[Silhouette]

Sil, you have demonstrated long ago that you cannot objectively interpret material that goes counter to your confirmation bias.

This material? Why won't you address it directly instead of hurling ad hominems when you have no lucid rebuttal..[obviously]

The poll reflects the board members who voted willingness to protect religious rights in their private business.
LGBT overwhelmingly would support that poll.
Yet more than 55 percent support marriage equality, and the election this fall will do nothing to change that or indicate a willingness to return to the bad old way.

I don't read it that way. The question's answer with an 82% response says, "No, I THOUGHT this was AMERICA". Most LGBTs at this website will refuse to vote on a loaded answer like that, and they've told me as much repeatedly. You've seen the posts. Also, the LGBT schills here at USMB, the spammers and their buddies line up unanimously to make anything they could look pro-gay. Voting essentially "Oh HELL no" on gay weddings at churches doesn't line up with that consistent pattern...

 

[mdk]

Sil, you have demonstrated long ago that you cannot objectively interpret material that goes counter to your confirmation bias.

This material? Why won't you address it directly instead of hurling ad hominems when you have no lucid rebuttal..[obviously]

The poll reflects the board members who voted willingness to protect religious rights in their private business.
LGBT overwhelmingly would support that poll.
Yet more than 55 percent support marriage equality, and the election this fall will do nothing to change that or indicate a willingness to return to the bad old way.

I don't read it that way. The question's answer with an 82% response says, "No, I THOUGHT this was AMERICA". Most LGBTs at this website will refuse to vote on a loaded answer like that, and they've told me as much repeatedly. You've seen the posts. Also, the LGBT schills here at USMB, the spammers and their buddies line up unanimously to make anything they could look pro-gay. Voting essentially "Oh HELL no" on gay weddings at churches doesn't line up with that consistent pattern...

I am pretty sure the handful of gay posters in this thread stated that they do not support the government forcing to a church to marry anyone against their wishes. I have stated as much as about a dozen or so times. You continue to dismiss that because it doesn't fit your narrative. You believe that gays want to force churches to marry them against their wishes and that simply isn't the case. There hasn't been a single church that has been forced to marry any couple. Not one; nevertheless, you continue to use the results of this poll to confirm your bias.

 

[Silhouette]

A handful? To a question about "should people have to allow gay marriage at venue [x]" [paraphrased] to which the answer wasn't just "no" but instead "oh HELL NO!"???

You expect that suddenly a whole bunch of gays gay-sychophants got really excited enough to pack the most popular poll here at USMB to answer essentially "yes" to a question "should gay marriage not occur at...." Like suddenly the gay mafia is all somber about church and wants to paint a picture that they are fully OK with their cult's dogma being excluded there?

Yeah, right. Got any oceanfront property in Arizona to sell me too?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your poll means nothing in terms of support for marriage equality.

Fact that.

 

[mdk]

A handful? To a question about "should people have to allow gay marriage at venue [x]" [paraphrased] to which the answer wasn't just "no" but instead "oh HELL NO!"???

You expect that suddenly a whole bunch of gays gay-sychophants got really excited enough to pack the most popular poll here at USMB to answer essentially "yes" to a question "should gay marriage not occur at...." Like suddenly the gay mafia is all somber about church and wants to paint a picture that they are fully OK with their cult's dogma being excluded there?

Yeah, right. Got any oceanfront property in Arizona to sell me too?

The poll in no way addresses gay marriage, it asks should churches be forced to marry gays. That is a big difference that you willingly ignore so you claim that majority of respondents also do not support gays getting married. The poll isn't detailed to enough for you to make that claim, naturally that doesn't matter to you. All that matters is your anti-gay narrative. All of your twisting and flailing doesn't change the fact that there hasn't been a single church that has been forced to marry any couple against their wishes, gay or otherwise. I admire your passion and persistence but that alone is enough to convince others that your logic is sound.

 

[Silhouette]

The poll in no way addresses gay marriage, it asks should churches be forced to marry gays. That is a big difference that you willingly ignore so you claim that majority of respondents also do not support gays getting married. The poll isn't detailed to enough for you to make that claim, naturally that doesn't matter to you. All that matters is your anti-gay narrative. All of your twisting and flailing doesn't change the fact that there hasn't been a single church that has been forced to marry any couple against their wishes, gay or otherwise. I admire your passion and persistence but that alone is enough to convince others that your logic is sound.

The poll could've just as easily asked if bakeries or photographers [or adoption agencies...many of which are run by churches...the next legal nightmare...] should be forced to serve gay weddings. What makes churches so special to gays?

Rhetorical question because they're not. So, once again, your "smoke and mirrors" is really just

 

[mdk]

The poll in no way addresses gay marriage, it asks should churches be forced to marry gays. That is a big difference that you willingly ignore so you claim that majority of respondents also do not support gays getting married. The poll isn't detailed to enough for you to make that claim, naturally that doesn't matter to you. All that matters is your anti-gay narrative. All of your twisting and flailing doesn't change the fact that there hasn't been a single church that has been forced to marry any couple against their wishes, gay or otherwise. I admire your passion and persistence but that alone is enough to convince others that your logic is sound.

The poll could've just as easily asked if bakeries or photographers [or adoption agencies...many of which are run by churches...the next legal nightmare...] should be forced to serve gay weddings. What makes churches so special to gays?

Rhetorical question because they're not. So, once again, your "smoke and mirrors" is really just

As it has been explained to numerous time already churches are not subject to public accommodation laws. And nor should they be. If you open a business, in a state where gays are covered under such laws, then you can't refuse them a service you offer on the grounds that they are gay.

I am going to answer your question anyway, not that it matters because your mind is already made up on the issue but I have a dash of free time before the Steelers game. Believe it or not, many gays grew up with religious upbringings. I was one of them. I think matters of the church should be left to the church without fear of government intervention. The government should stay out of matters of the church and the church should stay out of matters of the government.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sil is merely being fractious because it cannot carry the day with its flawed argument.

 

[Silhouette]

As it has been explained to numerous time already churches are not subject to public accommodation laws. And nor should they be. If you open a business, in a state where gays are covered under such laws, then you can't refuse them a service you offer on the grounds that they are gay.

I am going to answer your question anyway, not that it matters because your mind is already made up on the issue but I have a dash of free time before the Steelers game. Believe it or not, many gays grew up with religious upbringings. I was one of them. I think matters of the church should be left to the church without fear of government intervention. The government should stay out of matters of the church and the church should stay out of matters of the government.

But the orphanges they run may very well be. And as soon as you shoe-horn your way into forcing gay marriage on the 50 states who expressed numerous times at the ballot box that they don't want it, you'll be suing adoption agencies or individual agents themselves for daring to "discriminate against gays [homosexuals who perform lewd acts at/or support gay pride parades in front of kids].

Bank on it. You'll use the ramrodded "gay judge" win on that case to launch a platform against the church itself. All it takes is a toe in the door, right? Look how far that wedge has gotten you so far. I'm glad the European Court saw it for what it was and put a stop to it.. European Court Rules Gay Marriage not a Human Right ... US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[JakeStarkey]

"But the orphanages they run may very well be."

(1) Not if they are run as private associations, and (2) the issue is heterosexual predation on children

 

[Kosh]

So according to the far left left on this thread the answer to the question is they would force churches.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Show us where the far left said any such thing.

If they did, I will oppose it, and I will oppose you from invalidating marriage equality.

 

[mdk]

So according to the far left left on this thread the answer to the question is they would force churches.

I think one person in this thread may said churches should be forced to marry gays against their wishes. Maybe two if I've miscounted. The vast and overwhelming majority of the people in this thread have stated churches should not be forced to do so.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So according to the far left left on this thread the answer to the question is they would force churches.

I think one person in this thread may said churches should be forced to marry gays against their wishes. Maybe two if I've miscounted. The vast and overwhelming majority of the people in this thread have stated churches should not be forced to do so.

Which further confirms the idiocy of the OP premise to begin with.

 

[mdk]

As it has been explained to numerous time already churches are not subject to public accommodation laws. And nor should they be. If you open a business, in a state where gays are covered under such laws, then you can't refuse them a service you offer on the grounds that they are gay.

I am going to answer your question anyway, not that it matters because your mind is already made up on the issue but I have a dash of free time before the Steelers game. Believe it or not, many gays grew up with religious upbringings. I was one of them. I think matters of the church should be left to the church without fear of government intervention. The government should stay out of matters of the church and the church should stay out of matters of the government.

But the orphanges they run may very well be. And as soon as you shoe-horn your way into forcing gay marriage on the 50 states who expressed numerous times at the ballot box that they don't want it, you'll be suing adoption agencies or individual agents themselves for daring to "discriminate against gays [homosexuals who perform lewd acts at/or support gay pride parades in front of kids].

Bank on it. You'll use the ramrodded "gay judge" win on that case to launch a platform against the church itself. All it takes is a toe in the door, right? Look how far that wedge has gotten you so far. I'm glad the European Court saw it for what it was and put a stop to it.. European Court Rules Gay Marriage not a Human Right ... US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Does it matter that the judge was gay? His ruling was sound and upheld upon review. Besides, the vast majority of judges that have struck down these bans are...wait for it...straight.

What cases should judges be barred from hearing? Should a female jurist recuse herself from hearing a case that deals with male to female sexual harassment? Of course not. Should a black jurist recuse from a case that deals with civil rights violations of other African-Americans? Of course not.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We have seen the far righties righteously rebuked and unmasked as the hater they are so often.

 

[Kosh]

Show us where the far left said any such thing.

If they did, I will oppose it, and I will oppose you from invalidating marriage equality.

The far left does not understand the word equality, it is just a term used to rally the far left base, as you keep proving being a far left religious zealot.

 

[Kosh]

So according to the far left left on this thread the answer to the question is they would force churches.

I think one person in this thread may said churches should be forced to marry gays against their wishes. Maybe two if I've miscounted. The vast and overwhelming majority of the people in this thread have stated churches should not be forced to do so.

Many have said they disagree, but as you keep reading their posts, they actually agree with forcing churches.

I am all for the government getting out of the business of marriage..

 

[mdk]

So according to the far left left on this thread the answer to the question is they would force churches.

I think one person in this thread may said churches should be forced to marry gays against their wishes. Maybe two if I've miscounted. The vast and overwhelming majority of the people in this thread have stated churches should not be forced to do so.

Many have said they disagree, but as you keep reading their posts, they actually agree with forcing churches.

I am all for the government getting out of the business of marriage..

I am still not seeing a bunch of posters stating they feel churches should be forced to marry anyone, gay or otherwise. That view has very very little support in this thread.