Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Silhouette]

So you mean Americans should never file lawsuits?

Do you think Christians should not file lawsuits if they think their rights are being violated?

Sounds like you're stumping for the lawsuits-to-come against churches as an LGBT 'right'....

Notice you spammed out another page.

In 2009 nobody was thinking "I'll bet christian florists will never be forced to participate in a gay wedding"...

...how wrong they were. In six years from any federally-mandated "gay marriage" churches (merely a congregation of individual christians) will be sued also to accomodate them..

 

[Silhouette]

So if you want to help me tear down some normalized delusion, let's start with this thread and the delusion that Christians are under attack and it won't stop until the government is forcing churches to marry homosexual couples.

It's no delusion that individual christian florists, bakers, photographers etc. are being sued. It isn't a stretch to imagine that congregations of individual christians (churches) will be sued.

 

[beagle9]

Victim-hood works I guess, but who wants to live their lives claiming to be a victim all the time ?

Christians opposed to equal marriage in this thread, apparently.

No I think Christians just want to keep traditional marriage between a man and a woman, and they want to keep it sacred in that way. Now they don't have a problem with people wanting something new and then calling it something new, because their job is not to control peoples lives or minds at all, but to freely accept those who have lived a hard and confusing life, and that might be ready to give their sinfulness up freely, and to join a good Church where their lives can be changed hopefully forever. I think that their are many Christians who are afraid of the slippery slope that these things are all sitting on now, and so they are asking for marriage to be preserved to a man and a woman in the traditional sense is all. The reasons the Christians feel they are under attack as in victims now also as you put it, is due to the heated debate that has caused people to go out and to try and set people up over the situation.

The Christians on this thread, including yourself, have made their own victimhood a core pillar of their argument. You've all spent nearly 700 pages arguing "lots of bad things are happening to Christians..."

That's not just false, it's absurdly false.

Recognizing abnormality as normal is delusion.

There's no upside to normalizing delusion scamp... nothing good can possibly come from it.

Now, maybe you would like to disagree with that.

Please, pray tell... what are the potential cultural upsides of normalizing delusion?

None at all. So if you want to help me tear down some normalized delusion, let's start with this thread and the delusion that Christians are under attack and it won't stop until the government is forcing churches to marry homosexual couples.

The government might not actually walk into the door of the church literally to declare victory over it as of yet, but it will push the Christians all the way back to the church yard 1st, and then up and onto the porch of the Church next where it figures they (the Christians) all belong and/or need to stay anyways.

It seems to be proven these days, because every where one looks the Christian religion in this nation is under attack anymore. I mean the only reason Christmas (celebrated as the birthday of Christ), has since survived so far I think, is because the government doesn't want to cause a catastrophe in the economy at this time of the year, and this by it acting to extreme or radical during this time of the year against the retailers / big money tax payers. So Christmas will stand for now, but for how much longer before someone tries to call it something else or tries to change it's name to mean something else or tries to ban it altogether ? Right now it's being chipped away slowly, and everybody knows this now.

There now are groups and/or as we have seen in some cases (just a few persons) who have the power to persuade a lost and miss-guided government to then act against the majority or against an American group or against an American individual be it wrongfully now in a heart beat these days, and they will do this even if the action taken by them our (government) is found wrong in the eyes of the people when it has done so, yet it still does it anyway ?

We have seen this a lot now in America, and the activist judges are reeking havoc in this nation by their crazy rulings, interpretations, and/or actions in which they had taken upon themselves to rule in some kind of weird justifying way to themselves these days. They abuse their powers I think these days, and it shows in their rulings they make. They have left the understanding of the American people, along with the constitution in this nation, and they have become the servants of another in this nation since, and not the servants of the two mentioned above as it should still be.

One talked about how some judges should just laugh some cases out of court, but I wish they had done this along time ago when the nation became under attack by those who sought to change it over night.

True "Christians" just want to be left alone in order to practice their religion as they have always done, and to raise their families without so much dog gone drama going on in their lives, and so it appears that they are having a harder and harder time doing this these days, and especially as the walls keep closing closer and closer to them. They feel as if they are being trapped within it all somehow, but I think it will all work out somehow to satisfy everyone in the end, so lets hope and pray for that now, and this instead of not praying for anything at all.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, it is "a stretch to imagine that congregations of individual christians (churches) will be sued."

What a bunch of sillies. Want to create false slippery slope charges while ignoring their own being pointed out.

The only evil here is the so called crusaders of Christian hate. Yes, we are calling out you haters of good and doers of evil, Where and Sil.

 

[mdk]

You want a logic fail? Here you go..

Another day and another church not forced to marry any couple against their wishes. It is a shame we cannot harness fear mongering as an alternative energy source because we would be energy independent from this thread alone.

mdk postulates that because TODAY no church is being forced to perform gay weddings, that this congregation of individual christians is somehow safe from future lawsuits to do just that.

Like I said...Meanwhle back in 2009...they were saying...

"Another day and another christian baker/photographer/florist not forced to participate in the marriage of any homosexual couple against their wishes..."

Gee, if you could go back in time 6 years you'd be able to tell those people how wrong they were...

Oh the drama. There hasn't been a single case where a church was forced to marry any couple, gay or otherwise, against their wishes in this nation. Not one. Nobody is buying your silly slippery-slope and fear peddling.

And yes, back 2009 it was still safe to say that people could not use their faith as an excuse to violate civil laws.

 

[Paperman299]

So if you want to help me tear down some normalized delusion, let's start with this thread and the delusion that Christians are under attack and it won't stop until the government is forcing churches to marry homosexual couples.

It's no delusion that individual christian florists, bakers, photographers etc. are being sued. It isn't a stretch to imagine that congregations of individual christians (churches) will be sued.

It is a delusion that people defending their right to equal access to goods and services means some day churches will be forced to change their private practices. And I don't know how many times this has to be said to you: churches are not just congregations of Christians. Legally, they have a whole special set of protections.

 

[Silhouette]

Oh the drama. There hasn't been a single case where a church was forced to marry any couple, gay or otherwise, against their wishes in this nation. Not one. Nobody is buying your silly slippery-slope and fear peddling.

And yes, back 2009 it was still safe to say that people could not use their faith as an excuse to violate civil laws.

Back in 2009 people were certain christians couldn't be forced to accomodate so-called "gay weddings". Six short years later and what do we have?

Churches are nothing more than aggregates of individual christians.

It's going to happen, the minute the ink is dry on any Overturning of Windsor 2013.

 

[Paperman299]

Christians opposed to equal marriage in this thread, apparently.

No I think Christians just want to keep traditional marriage between a man and a woman, and they want to keep it sacred in that way. Now they don't have a problem with people wanting something new and then calling it something new, because their job is not to control peoples lives or minds at all, but to freely accept those who have lived a hard and confusing life, and that might be ready to give their sinfulness up freely, and to join a good Church where their lives can be changed hopefully forever. I think that their are many Christians who are afraid of the slippery slope that these things are all sitting on now, and so they are asking for marriage to be preserved to a man and a woman in the traditional sense is all. The reasons the Christians feel they are under attack as in victims now also as you put it, is due to the heated debate that has caused people to go out and to try and set people up over the situation.

The Christians on this thread, including yourself, have made their own victimhood a core pillar of their argument. You've all spent nearly 700 pages arguing "lots of bad things are happening to Christians..."

That's not just false, it's absurdly false.

Recognizing abnormality as normal is delusion.

There's no upside to normalizing delusion scamp... nothing good can possibly come from it.

Now, maybe you would like to disagree with that.

Please, pray tell... what are the potential cultural upsides of normalizing delusion?

None at all. So if you want to help me tear down some normalized delusion, let's start with this thread and the delusion that Christians are under attack and it won't stop until the government is forcing churches to marry homosexual couples.

The government might not actually walk into the door of the church literally to declare victory over it as of yet, but it will push the Christians all the way back to the church yard 1st, and then up and onto the porch of the Church next where it figures they (the Christians) all belong and/or need to stay anyways.

It seems to be proven these days, because every where one looks the Christian religion in this nation is under attack anymore. I mean the only reason Christmas (celebrated as the birthday of Christ), has since survived so far I think, is because the government doesn't want to cause a catastrophe in the economy at this time of the year, and this by it acting to extreme or radical during this time of the year against the retailers / big money tax payers. So Christmas will stand for now, but for how much longer before someone tries to call it something else or tries to change it's name to mean something else or tries to ban it altogether ? Right now it's being chipped away slowly, and everybody knows this now.

There now are groups and/or as we have seen in some cases (just a few persons) who have the power to persuade a lost and miss-guided government to then act against the majority or against an American group or against an American individual be it wrongfully now in a heart beat these days, and they will do this even if the action taken by them our (government) is found wrong in the eyes of the people when it has done so, yet it still does it anyway ?

We have seen this a lot now in America, and the activist judges are reeking havoc in this nation by their crazy rulings, interpretations, and/or actions in which they had taken upon themselves to rule in some kind of weird justifying way to themselves these days. They abuse their powers I think these days, and it shows in their rulings they make. They have left the understanding of the American people, along with the constitution in this nation, and they have become the servants of another in this nation since, and not the servants of the two mentioned above as it should still be.

One talked about how some judges should just laugh some cases out of court, but I wish they had done this along time ago when the nation became under attack by those who sought to change it over night.

True "Christians" just want to be left alone in order to practice their religion as they have always done, and to raise their families without so much dog gone drama going on in their lives, and so it appears that they are having a harder and harder time doing this these days, and especially as the walls keep closing closer and closer to them. They feel as if they are being trapped within it all somehow, but I think it will all work out somehow to satisfy everyone in the end, so lets hope and pray for that now, and this instead of not praying for anything at all.

Look at your own post. You take umbrage at having your position described as delusional, then explain how the government wants to destroy Christmas. And you want me to believe a handful of especially charismatic individuals have taken the reigns of government, which is basically what the Illuminati is. It's a Dan Brown novel.

Doesn't this get exhausting? Look how much work goes into keeping your position viable in your own mind. You literally have to create two (at least) government conspiracies to sustain it.

But you have to know this part is fiction: "True "Christians" just want to be left alone in order to practice their religion as they have always done." This whole issue ONLY exists because Christians want to control who else can get married. Just think of the arrogance: They want to control marriage itself in this country, as if Jesus invented that shit.

If ever you actually want to stop feeling like you're in conflict with others, it's entirely in Christians' hands to end it. Just let other people live their fucking lives.

 

[Silhouette]

If ever you actually want to stop feeling like you're in conflict with others, it's entirely in Christians' hands to end it. Just let other people live their fucking lives.

That goes for you too bro. Stop forcing other people to participate in your cult.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If ever you actually want to stop feeling like you're in conflict with others, it's entirely in Christians' hands to end it. Just let other people live their fucking lives.

That goes for you too bro. Stop forcing other people to participate in your cult.

Equality isn't a cult Sil, and you're fucked on this one since you lost, big time.

 

[Skylar]

mdk postulates that because TODAY no church is being forced to perform gay weddings, that this congregation of individual christians is somehow safe from future lawsuits to do just that.

There's zero indication that churches will be forced to accomidate gay weddings. PA laws only apply to businesses, which churches aren't. PA laws explicitly exempt churches. There's no significant support to extend PA laws to churches. There's no credible legislation proposed to extend PA laws to churches.

And not a single example in history of it ever happening in this country.

You're fear mongering, Silo. And you can't back up your fear with anything more than the fear itself.

"Another day and another christian baker/photographer/florist not forced to participate in the marriage of any homosexual couple against their wishes..."

Gee, if you could go back in time 6 years you'd be able to tell those people how wrong they were...

Its the business that is subject to the PA laws. Churches are exempt from all PA laws.

You ignore this. But you can't make us ignore it. Which is why you fail.

 

[Skylar]

Victim-hood works I guess, but who wants to live their lives claiming to be a victim all the time ?

Christians opposed to equal marriage in this thread, apparently.

No I think Christians just want to keep traditional marriage between a man and a woman, and they want to keep it sacred in that way.

And you're more than welcome to your beliefs. But your religious beliefs won't be reflected in our laws.

Now they don't have a problem with people wanting something new and then calling it something new, because their job is not to control peoples lives or minds at all, but to freely accept those who have lived a hard and confusing life, and that might be ready to give their sinfulness up freely, and to join a good Church where their lives can be changed hopefully forever.

There's no 'mind control', Beagle. There's disagreement. Just because a Christian says something doesn't mean that no one is allowed to disagree. Your idea that any Christian should be able to say anything they want....with no response from anyone, is outrageously unreasonable. Christians have the freedom to believe as they wish, to say what they will without any interference from the government.

They don't have the right to be free from consequence, disagreement or response to their statements.

 

[Seawytch]

It seems to be proven these days, because every where one looks the Christian religion in this nation is under attack anymore. I mean the only reason Christmas (celebrated as the birthday of Christ), has since survived so far I think, is because the government doesn't want to cause a catastrophe in the economy at this time of the year, and this by it acting to extreme or radical during this time of the year against the retailers / big money tax payers. So Christmas will stand for now, but for how much longer before someone tries to call it something else or tries to change it's name to mean something else or tries to ban it altogether ? Right now it's being chipped away slowly, and everybody knows this now.

Hmmm, or maybe it could be that America self identifies as 77% Christian Captain Hyperbole.

There now are groups and/or as we have seen in some cases (just a few persons) who have the power to persuade a lost and miss-guided government to then act against the majority or against an American group or against an American individual be it wrongfully now in a heart beat these days, and they will do this even if the action taken by them our (government) is found wrong in the eyes of the people when it has done so, yet it still does it anyway ?

You mean like in 1967 when the Supreme Court was persuaded by just one case to go against the majority of the country? Only 20% of Americans approved of marriage between blacks and whites in 1967. How could they still do that?

We have seen this a lot now in America, and the activist judges are reeking havoc in this nation by their crazy rulings, interpretations, and/or actions in which they had taken upon themselves to rule in some kind of weird justifying way to themselves these days. They abuse their powers I think these days, and it shows in their rulings they make. They have left the understanding of the American people, along with the constitution in this nation, and they have become the servants of another in this nation since, and not the servants of the two mentioned above as it should still be.

What you have seen is the judicial process working as it was designed to do. Tax paying gay Americans are using the system set up by the founders to redress their grievances.

They are winning because you have no rational bases to deny equality. There have been dozens and dozens of rulings now. Out of all those rulings, only one agrees with you that gays don't have a right to civil marriage for their partnerships. You really think all those rulings, by justices appointed by both Republican and Democratic administrations, equate to "judicial activism"?

One talked about how some judges should just laugh some cases out of court, but I wish they had done this along time ago when the nation became under attack by those who sought to change it over night.

Trust me, it hasn't changed over night. Oh, I'm sure it has seemed really fast for the bigots. Yes, gay rights has been on a fast track in the last few years, but it's been a long haul since Stonewall.

True "Christians" just want to be left alone in order to practice their religion as they have always done, and to raise their families without so much dog gone drama going on in their lives, and so it appears that they are having a harder and harder time doing this these days, and especially as the walls keep closing closer and closer to them. They feel as if they are being trapped within it all somehow, but I think it will all work out somehow to satisfy everyone in the end, so lets hope and pray for that now, and this instead of not praying for anything at all.

Nobody is stopping them from practicing their religion. You can practice away. What you can't do is use your religion as an excuse to violate civil law.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh the drama. There hasn't been a single case where a church was forced to marry any couple, gay or otherwise, against their wishes in this nation. Not one. Nobody is buying your silly slippery-slope and fear peddling.

And yes, back 2009 it was still safe to say that people could not use their faith as an excuse to violate civil laws.

Back in 2009 people were certain christians couldn't be forced to accomodate so-called "gay weddings". Six short years later and what do we have?

Churches are nothing more than aggregates of individual christians.

It's going to happen, the minute the ink is dry on any Overturning of Windsor 2013.

(1) Marriage equality does not overturn Windsor: anyone who says so is a liar.

(2) No church is going to have to perform weddings it does not want to perform: anyone who says so is a liar.

 

[mdk]

Oh the drama. There hasn't been a single case where a church was forced to marry any couple, gay or otherwise, against their wishes in this nation. Not one. Nobody is buying your silly slippery-slope and fear peddling.

And yes, back 2009 it was still safe to say that people could not use their faith as an excuse to violate civil laws.

Back in 2009 people were certain christians couldn't be forced to accomodate so-called "gay weddings". Six short years later and what do we have?

Churches are nothing more than aggregates of individual christians.

It's going to happen, the minute the ink is dry on any Overturning of Windsor 2013.

Your track record of predictions around here is abyssal so pardon me if I take it with a very small grain of salt.

In the states where these cases originate gays were already covered under PA laws. So yes, in 2009 these same businesses couldn't use their faith as an excuse to not offer gays a service they freely offer to the public. PA laws have been around for many decades and there hasn't been a single church forced to marry anyone as a result.

 

[Seawytch]

Oh the drama. There hasn't been a single case where a church was forced to marry any couple, gay or otherwise, against their wishes in this nation. Not one. Nobody is buying your silly slippery-slope and fear peddling.

And yes, back 2009 it was still safe to say that people could not use their faith as an excuse to violate civil laws.

Back in 2009 people were certain christians couldn't be forced to accomodate so-called "gay weddings". Six short years later and what do we have?

Churches are nothing more than aggregates of individual christians.

It's going to happen, the minute the ink is dry on any Overturning of Windsor 2013.

Your track record of predictions around here is abyssal so pardon me if I take it with a very small grain of salt.

In the states where these cases originate gays were already covered under PA laws. So yes, in 2009 these same businesses couldn't use their faith as an excuse to not offer gays a service they freely offer to the public. PA laws have been around for many decades and there hasn't been a single church forced to marry anyone as a result.

And there was no civil marriage equality in the states where the cases took place either...so trying to equate marriage equality and Public Accommodation laws is ridiculous.

 

[mdk]

Oh the drama. There hasn't been a single case where a church was forced to marry any couple, gay or otherwise, against their wishes in this nation. Not one. Nobody is buying your silly slippery-slope and fear peddling.

And yes, back 2009 it was still safe to say that people could not use their faith as an excuse to violate civil laws.

Back in 2009 people were certain christians couldn't be forced to accomodate so-called "gay weddings". Six short years later and what do we have?

Churches are nothing more than aggregates of individual christians.

It's going to happen, the minute the ink is dry on any Overturning of Windsor 2013.

Your track record of predictions around here is abyssal so pardon me if I take it with a very small grain of salt.

In the states where these cases originate gays were already covered under PA laws. So yes, in 2009 these same businesses couldn't use their faith as an excuse to not offer gays a service they freely offer to the public. PA laws have been around for many decades and there hasn't been a single church forced to marry anyone as a result.

And there was no civil marriage equality in the states where the cases took place either...so trying to equate marriage equality and Public Accommodation laws is ridiculous.

You're correct. Sil was hoping the rest of us did know that fact but she is sadly mistake. A common theme it seems.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Look at your own post. You take umbrage at having your position described as delusional, then explain how the government wants to destroy Christmas. And you want me to believe a handful of especially charismatic individuals have taken the reigns of government, which is basically what the Illuminati is. It's a Dan Brown novel.

The fact that there is an attack by a group of mind-numbingly obtuse bureaucrats, who simultaneously find a basis that someone is offended by Christianity, but find no basis in Christians being offended by them... provides that 'it', is reality.

See how that works?

Doesn't this get exhausting? Look how much work goes into keeping your position viable in your own mind. You literally have to create two (at least) government conspiracies to sustain it.

Reality sustains itself... so, there's no effort involved, given that we're not the one's doing 'it'.

But you have to know this part is fiction: "True "Christians" just want to be left alone in order to practice their religion as they have always done." This whole issue ONLY exists because Christians want to control who else can get married. Just think of the arrogance: They want to control marriage itself in this country, as if Jesus invented that shit.

Christians did not create the universe, we do not set the laws of nature... and the laws of nature define the standard for marriage, as it has defined the species.

Wherein two distinct, but complimenting genders join together, forming one sustainable body from two, through which is conceived a new body, to be sustained through that union, until it becomes able to sustain itself... and the process begins anew.

So, if you've a grievance with Nature's design of humanity... you should probably take it up with the Creator of Humanity. We're merely those who recognize, respect, defend and adhere to the laws which nature has established, to govern human behavior.

If ever you actually want to stop feeling like you're in conflict with others, it's entirely in Christians' hands to end it. Just let other people live their fucking lives.

We're not the aggressor... and the aggressor determines when the conflict is over. So at the moment, you've the choice to stop and where ya take that choice, it will stop.

But we're human beings... and we have limits. And I want you to think about this... That closet is one which you people created for yourselves. We didn't create... you did.

For the vast majority of human existence, you people have been locked in there.

Now why do you suppose that is?

Do you suppose that in the brief, interval periods throughout that history, the normalization of sexual abnormality produced a long and distinguished list of cultural benefits, which when set against a tiny short list of cultural liabilities, that the net result to those now long since extinct cultures was a HUGE SOCIETAL PLUS; therefore, the survivors of the collapse were quick to re-establish the normalization of sexual abnormality which had provided such a profound benefit to the previous, but defunct society...?

Do ya think that is why you people have locked yourselves in the closet for the vast majority of the 5000 years of human civilization, because the result of accepting your behavior nets the culture more benefit than it cost them in liabilities?

I gotta be honest with ya... in just the 30 years that I've watched ya work. I get the sense that you people are ALL liability. I can't find a single potential benefit. You're a cancer, or maybe a virus; there's a good argument for both analogues... because ya spreads like the wind once it is activated, or once the cultural body is infected and the effect you bring can only be described as decay and destruction.

So knowing that... what would you say would be "A" reason that you would like to latch onto, which could give you ANY HOPE to believe that the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality will stand?

When ever you're ready, I'll be hear for ya.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

And there was no civil marriage equality in the states where the cases took place either...so trying to equate marriage equality and Public Accommodation laws is ridiculous.

There's no marriage equality... because Marriage is one thing and one thing only:

Marriage: is the joining of one man and one woman.​

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Nobody is stopping them from practicing their religion. You can practice away. What you can't do is use your religion as an excuse to violate civil law.

Law?

Ya mean like: "Congress shall make no law with respect to the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...? Did I get that right? Ya know... I'm a survivor 70s, so I sometimes need to reference the foundation of American Law to remember...

US Constitution... Amendment 1:

Ahh... yes! Not bad for an old man.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

So there it is... A law which forces a Christian to take action which is anathema to the practice of their religion... is forbidden by the foundation of US Law. Therefore, such law is axiomatically invalid, thus no American is obligated to recognize it as law; thus we are not bound to obey it, as no consent to be governed by such has been extended, as the basis of that consent, is set forth in the US Constitution.

Of course, you likely disagree... which is perfectly understandable. But you need to understand that this is not a point which is debatable and we, the Americans, have no intention of compromising in this point... therefore... well, you should probably consider this, from the Charter of American Principles:

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. ..."

People often disagree. And often a given perspective is incline to concede to the mouthy demands of a fractious minority, as a means to quiet them. And sometimes that tolerance extends for generations until the assumption becomes, particularly by those most recently brought to the stage, that such is simply 'what happens', one merely, "Bitches enough and one "gets".

Ahh... but alas, such was merely a function of cause and effect, and not a law unto itself... And that, from time to time, (Twice in the history of the US, so far...) has forced the society into a state of war; as this is nature's way.

So, don't sweat this... as someone recently noted, this will all work itself out. And I'm sure that when it's all said and done, that the homosexuals will be free to go forth and propagate and all will be well in the world. Or not...