Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

Should places of worship be required to hold gay weddings

  • Yes, Denmark does it, the Scandinavians are enlightened

    Votes: 17 7.0%
  • No, I THOUGHT this was AMERICA

    Votes: 198 81.8%
  • You are a baby brains without a formed opinion

    Votes: 5 2.1%
  • Other, explain

    Votes: 22 9.1%

  • Total voters
    242
Contraceptives and taking protective measures to prevent disease when having sex is two different things, and are really in two different categories wouldn't you agree ?

Well, yessir, of course.

I'll agree that one 'category' seeks to keep somethin' in and the other seeks to keep somethin' out.

In terms of the need to keep something in... ya probably shouldn't be considering intercourse. :blowup:

In terms of the need to keep something out, best DOUBLE that. :ack-1:
 
Last edited:
The First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions, just as it forbids religious institutions from imposing their will on the public.

So churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?

How about against racial minorities as well?

What religion bans minorities?

Do you think religions should be able to behead gays and people of other religions?
 
No, freedom of speech does not end when a parishioner enters a church, but the law is crystal clear as to what makes for tax-exempt status, and what does not. You are aware of this fact, right?

Does Rev. Wright still have tax exempt status? Did Al Sharpton lose his? Jesse Jackson? If not, then the left does not take that law seriously, at least when it comes to radical left activists.
 
The First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions, just as it forbids religious institutions from imposing their will on the public.

So churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?

How about against racial minorities as well?

ROFLMNAO!

Do you possess the capacity to recognize that there is absolutely NO COMMONALITY between the disordered mind that causes abnormal sexual behavior and RACE?
 
Last edited:
Contraceptives and taking protective measures to prevent disease when having sex is two different things, and are really in two different categories wouldn't you agree ?

Well, yessir, of course.

I'll agree that one 'category' seeks to keep somethin' in and the other seeks to keep somethin' out.

In terms of the need to keep something in... ya probably shouldn't be considering intercourse. :blowup:

In terms of the need to keep something out, DOUBLE that. :ack-1:
Yes double that or better yet live by a moral code... I think the latter is the best, but many people just can't help but to let their uncontrollable lustful mind get the best of them. Especially in these days and times where so much craziness is going on against just about every moral code that one can think of today. The funny thing is, is that when it gets them in trouble, well they go into this great big ole denial upon what happened to them, and worse they try and stay silent about it in order that others may fall victim to what hurt them also (how evil is that?). Pride is an evil thing, because it hides the truth about things, and that isn't good at all.
 
Contraceptives and taking protective measures to prevent disease when having sex is two different things, and are really in two different categories wouldn't you agree ?

Well, yessir, of course.

I'll agree that one 'category' seeks to keep somethin' in and the other seeks to keep somethin' out.

In terms of the need to keep something in... ya probably shouldn't be considering intercourse. :blowup:

In terms of the need to keep something out, DOUBLE that. :ack-1:
Yes double that or better yet live by a moral code... I think the latter is the best, but many people just can't help but to let their uncontrollable lustful mind get the best of them. Especially in these days and times where so much craziness is going on against just about every moral code that one can think of today. The funny thing is, is that when it gets them in trouble, well they go into this great big ole denial upon what happened to them, and worse they try and stay silent about it in order that others may fall victim to what hurt them also (how evil is that?). Pride is an evil thing, because it hides the truth about things, and that isn't good at all.

'Yes double that or better yet live by a valid, viable, thus OBJECTIVE moral code.'


Agreed and whole heartedly.

(Just to be clear... 'the doubling' was specifically speaking to the advice: 'Probably should avoid intercourse...'. LOL! Not the prophylactics.)
 
Last edited:
No, freedom of speech does not end when a parishioner enters a church, but the law is crystal clear as to what makes for tax-exempt status, and what does not. You are aware of this fact, right?

Does Rev. Wright still have tax exempt status? Did Al Sharpton lose his? Jesse Jackson? If not, then the left does not take that law seriously, at least when it comes to radical left activists.


Nice necro!!!!

Slow day at Stormfront for you?
 
Nice necro!!!!

Slow day at Stormfront for you?

What a LOVELY concession!

Noted and accepted.


When a liberal immediately insults instead of answering the question, you know you've won.


Oh, that's how your super duper Unicorn code works these days....

I heard the sound of sand, coming from someone's vagina...

WOW~

A Re-Concession!

You should know scamp, that once ya concede to a standing point, you're not required to keep doing it.

But it's super-duper sweet of ya, to do so.

Your Re-concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.
 
Nice necro!!!!

Slow day at Stormfront for you?

What a LOVELY concession!

Noted and accepted.


When a liberal immediately insults instead of answering the question, you know you've won.


Oh, that's how your super duper Unicorn code works these days....

I heard the sound of sand, coming from someone's vagina...

WOW~

A Re-Concession!

You should know scamp, that once ya concede to a standing point, you're not required to keep doing it.

But it's super-duper sweet of ya, to do so.

Your Re-concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.


Ahhh, you got the same decoder ring out of your cereal box, eh, l'il slugger?

Cool!

Now, run off and play with the unicorns some more.
 
Nice necro!!!!

Slow day at Stormfront for you?

What a LOVELY concession!

Noted and accepted.


When a liberal immediately insults instead of answering the question, you know you've won.


Oh, that's how your super duper Unicorn code works these days....

I heard the sound of sand, coming from someone's vagina...

WOW~

A Re-Concession!

You should know scamp, that once ya concede to a standing point, you're not required to keep doing it.

But it's super-duper sweet of ya, to do so.

Your Re-Concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.


Ahhh, you got the same decoder ring out of your cereal box, eh, l'il slugger?

Cool!

Now, run off and play with the unicorns some more.

OH! A RE-Re-Concession? SWEET!

You're RE-Re-Concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.
 
I acknowledge God as giving us the codes to live by, and I also acknowledge a more sinister being who wants every human being to fall somehow, and in someway. Who do you work for ?

But we're not stripping anyone of their rights because of your conceptions of God or the devil. Nor are we exempting you from the law because you believe in God or the devil.

Those are your subjective beliefs.
 
I acknowledge God as giving us the codes to live by, and I also acknowledge a more sinister being who wants every human being to fall somehow, and in someway. Who do you work for ?

But we're not stripping anyone of their rights because of your conceptions of God ...

So what?

What you're doing is selling perverse reasoning as sound reasoning, demanding that people accept deviancy as normality... and that's a danger to you as well as everyone else.

Ya see scamp, it turns out that there's no potential for a right to promote the injury of innocent people.

So... No SALE! We're going to have to ask ya to :anj_stfu:... . (And we're not actually askin'. )
 
I acknowledge God as giving us the codes to live by, and I also acknowledge a more sinister being who wants every human being to fall somehow, and in someway. Who do you work for ?

But we're not stripping anyone of their rights because of your conceptions of God ...

So what?

So gay and lesbians have the right to marry in 37 of 50 States. And in June, its likely to be 50 of 50 states. That some random theist on a message board believes otherwise is irrelevant. As we don't use some random theist's personal opinion as the basis of our laws.
 
The First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions, just as it forbids religious institutions from imposing their will on the public.

So churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?

How about against racial minorities as well?
Homosexuals do not really have a religion and if they do they are going against it by choosing their way. There is no discrimination at least from a Christian standpoint but there are guidelines to be followed for any couple in any church if they want to be married by a certain pastor or in a certain chruch. Now I'm positive some church's will let them use the premisis but you would probably have to find your own minister. And if they don't why should they care because they go against what they belive. Its not descrimination it is the principal of the matter. If any pastor is cruel about it well that is just wrong.
 
I acknowledge God as giving us the codes to live by, and I also acknowledge a more sinister being who wants every human being to fall somehow, and in someway. Who do you work for ?

But we're not stripping anyone of their rights because of your conceptions of God or the devil. Nor are we exempting you from the law because you believe in God or the devil.

Those are your subjective beliefs.
But you want to force your beliefs on an unwilling public, while stating that others are the problem when they were just minding their own business before hand. Wow!
 
I acknowledge God as giving us the codes to live by, and I also acknowledge a more sinister being who wants every human being to fall somehow, and in someway. Who do you work for ?

But we're not stripping anyone of their rights because of your conceptions of God or the devil. Nor are we exempting you from the law because you believe in God or the devil.

Those are your subjective beliefs.
But you want to force your beliefs on an unwilling public, while stating that others are the problem when they were just minding their own business before hand. Wow!

I want to protect constitutional guarantees. Rights like....marriage. And equal protection.

I have no horse in the 'gay' race. Gay marriage doesn't effect me. But I definitely have a horse in the constitutional guarantees race. Which is why I support gay marriage.
 
I acknowledge God as giving us the codes to live by, and I also acknowledge a more sinister being who wants every human being to fall somehow, and in someway. Who do you work for ?

But we're not stripping anyone of their rights because of your conceptions of God or the devil. Nor are we exempting you from the law because you believe in God or the devil.

Those are your subjective beliefs.
But you want to force your beliefs on an unwilling public, while stating that others are the problem when they were just minding their own business before hand. Wow!

There is no forcing... that is a twisted opinion.. it may seem that way but it's just not true, well maybe some take it too far but it's just the simple fact that we care about others and are strong in our beliefs due to the truths we see at hand and experiences in life... I know I would not be here today if it were not for God watching over me. No one is every minding their own business.. every move you make has an impact on someone, somewhere, at some point in time.
 

Forum List

Back
Top