Author Topic: The Big Gay Marriage Lie  (Read 10527 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rangerrebew

  • Guest
The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« on: July 25, 2015, 02:25:25 pm »
 
The Big Gay Marriage Lie
 
Gay marriage, we've been told, will not affect you. What a crock.

 
Daniel Payne
By Daniel Payne
July 24, 2015
 


It has become devastatingly clear that virtually the entirety of the gay-marriage activist effort was built on a lie. That lie, repeated ad nauseam, was this: gay marriage will affect nobody outside of the gays who wish to partake in it. This will become abundantly false as the Supreme Court-instituted gay marriage regime takes effect.


We did not actually need to nationalize gay marriage to realize this. We have had examples for years from the states that already legalized the practice. Combined with the growing public hostility towards supporters of traditional marriage, it is impossible at this point to deny that gay marriage is a growing and serious threat to the liberty of those who disagree with it.

 




Gay Marriage Doesn’t Hurt Anyone

Exhibit A comes to us from Gresham, Oregon, a state in which gay marriage has been legal since 2014. In Gresham, a couple of bakers declined to make a wedding cake for a lesbian wedding. Because the lesbians in question endured “emotional and mental suffering” after their cake request was turned down, the state’s labor commissioner demanded that the bakers—a husband-and-wife team—pay the plaintiffs $135,000.


In addition to this astronomical charge, the excitable commissioner ordered that the couple was not allowed to publicly proclaim their desire to not bake cakes for gay weddings. That is to say, the state slapped the Christian bakers with an enormous fine, then forbid them from advocating the point of view for which they were being fined.


Gay marriage, we’ve been told, will not affect you.


Exhibit B is found near Albany, New York, a state in which gay marriage has been recognized since 2011. At the Liberty Ridge Farm, another husband-and-wife team was fined $13,000 for refusing to host a gay wedding on their property (at which they host other public and private events). In 2012, a lesbian couple requested to use the property for their wedding. Believing in traditional marriage, the couple declined. Unluckily for the owners of the property, the phone call was being recorded. A judge subsequently determined the farmers guilty of “sexual orientation discrimination,” hence the fine. The farmers were also ordered to attend “staff re-education training classes.” The defendants have appealed the decision.


Just legalize it, we were told for years. It’s not going to affect you!


No More Churches For You

Exhibit C comes from the laughably-misemployed religion writer for The New York Times, Mark Oppenheimer: “Now’s the time,” he announced after the ruling, “to end tax exemptions for religious institutions.” Oppenheimer, you see, believes that a tax exemption is functionally identical to a “subsidy,” and because religious institutions and other non-profits can be “quite partisan,” they don’t deserve to receive “subsidies” that require the rest of us to “faithfully cut checks to them.”


Newspapers are using freedom to silence differing opinions on a critical, complex issue of serious public interest.

As a result of the Supreme Court declaring that homosexuals have the right to marry, in other words, we’re now facing an energized progressive intelligentsia that wishes to effectively shutter many if not most of America’s churches.


They told us over and over again: Gay marriage has nothing to do with you! You don’t have to worry about it!


Exhibit D—perhaps the most foreboding—is in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, in which the editor of PennLive/The Patriot-News announced the paper “will no longer accept, nor will it print, op-eds and letters to the editor in opposition to same-sex marriage.” Under the First Amendment, the paper is free to refuse to print any letters it wants, of course. It is unfortunately utilizing that precious freedom to silence differing opinions on a critical, complex issue of serious public interest.


It is wholly plausible that many newspapers will follow suit, believing that opposition to or even skepticism about gay marriage is equivalent to, as the above newspaper’s editor put it, “racist, sexist, or anti-Semitic” opinions. Overnight, the sincerely-held opinions of a great many good, well-intentioned Americans became verboten. Reasonable dissent will not be tolerated.


Cheer Gay Marriage Or Face an Angry Mob

Over and over and over, the refrain went: Gay marriage is not a threat to you! Legalize it and nothing will change!


A ruling in favor of ‘love’ has instead resulted in open and unapologetic hate.

We have known for some time that this refrain was a lie—that it was a willful lie, and that these assurances were nothing more than a smokescreen of dishonesty and political chicanery. It is obviously not enough for gay marriage to be merely legal; progressives take it as a matter of personal offense that anybody, anywhere might not get behind homosexual matrimony as enthusiastically as the Left has done.


The Supreme Court’s decision will only galvanize this tendency. Thus comes the deluge, now on a national scale: the fines, the gag orders, the unfavorable tax treatment, the refusal to entertain the opposition’s opinion in polite society. The Supreme Court has unleashed a strange, almost comical beast upon the American body politic: a ruling in favor of “love” has instead resulted in open and unapologetic hate, and a public campaign made in the name of “tolerance” has instead resulted in a ruthless regime of intolerance.


Endlessly, it was repeated: if gay marriage is legalized, it will have nothing to do with you. Well, here we are. Gay marriage is legal. And it is clear that it will have everything to do with every one of us. We were lied to, and we will have to deal with the consequences, one silenced baker and bankrupt church at a time.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/24/the-big-gay-marriage-lie/
« Last Edit: July 25, 2015, 02:26:13 pm by rangerrebew »

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,277
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2015, 02:43:03 pm »
It has become devastatingly clear that virtually the entirety of the gay-marriage activist effort was built on a lie. That lie, repeated ad nauseam, was this: gay marriage will affect nobody outside of the gays who wish to partake in it. This will become abundantly false as the Supreme Court-instituted gay marriage regime takes effect.

It was certainly repeated ad nauseam around here...


"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"The sole purpose of the Republican Party is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party." - GourmetDan

Offline MACVSOG68

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,792
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #2 on: July 25, 2015, 03:29:42 pm »
It was certainly repeated ad nauseam around here...

Guess I'm one of the lucky few whose heterosexual marriage wasn't utterly destroyed by the SCOTUS decision...or maybe I'm just too screwed up to realize how bad my life became because two gays down the street have legalized their relationship... :laugh:
It's the Supreme Court nominations!

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,277
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2015, 01:11:38 am »
Guess I'm one of the lucky few whose heterosexual marriage wasn't utterly destroyed by the SCOTUS decision...or maybe I'm just too screwed up to realize how bad my life became because two gays down the street have legalized their relationship... :laugh:

That's because you'll bake the cake or anything else the gays want you to do...


"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"The sole purpose of the Republican Party is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party." - GourmetDan

Online Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,595
  • Gender: Male
  • Dumbest member of the forum
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #4 on: July 27, 2015, 01:46:58 am »
Call me off-the-wall if you wish, but I still believe that enough states could be found to pass a "marriage amendment" to the Constitution, via Article V.

I truly believe that the conventional wisdom that "the nation as a whole accepts this" is completely wrong.

I'll take the tin foil hat off now.

Offline MACVSOG68

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,792
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #5 on: July 27, 2015, 01:07:20 pm »
That's because you'll bake the cake or anything else the gays want you to do...

That's not much of an answer Dan.  Are you aware of any heterosexual marriage in the US that was harmed by gay marriages?  Mine is just fine, and I'm not being asked to do anything for gays.  Just how wonderful has marriage been in the US over the past few hundred years.  We have marriages arranged by families, marriages arranged for political purposes, multiple husbands and multiple wives, marriages where no children were wanted, open marriages and cheating galore, and of course, continual increases in divorce.

Is all of this caused by gay marriage?  Is any of it?
It's the Supreme Court nominations!

rangerrebew

  • Guest
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2015, 05:40:54 pm »
It was certainly repeated ad nauseam around here...

That is a concept Hitler understood well and used against the Jews.  I believe 56 is the number of times repeated required to make people start believing just about anything.

Offline evadR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,190
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #7 on: July 27, 2015, 05:48:37 pm »
That is a concept Hitler understood well and used against the Jews.  I believe 56 is the number of times repeated required to make people start believing just about anything.
That's also the number of states...and a Heinz number.  Very popular number :)
or is it Heinz 57..I get so confused.
November 6, 2012, a day in infamy...the death of a republic as we know it.

Offline MACVSOG68

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,792
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2015, 08:36:19 pm »
Call me off-the-wall if you wish, but I still believe that enough states could be found to pass a "marriage amendment" to the Constitution, via Article V.

I truly believe that the conventional wisdom that "the nation as a whole accepts this" is completely wrong.

I'll take the tin foil hat off now.

The Nation as a whole doesn't accept anything.  But a majority of Americans have come to accept gay marriage if not outright embrace it.

Quite a few states over the past few years have petitioned Congress for an Article V convention.  I doubt there are any two though with the exact same agenda.
It's the Supreme Court nominations!

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,277
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #9 on: July 28, 2015, 01:22:38 am »
That's not much of an answer Dan.  Are you aware of any heterosexual marriage in the US that was harmed by gay marriages?  Mine is just fine, and I'm not being asked to do anything for gays.  Just how wonderful has marriage been in the US over the past few hundred years.  We have marriages arranged by families, marriages arranged for political purposes, multiple husbands and multiple wives, marriages where no children were wanted, open marriages and cheating galore, and of course, continual increases in divorce.

Is all of this caused by gay marriage?  Is any of it?

Sure it is Mac, if you understand it...

Have muslim 4-wife max ever harmed my marriage?  Nope.  Must be OK then.

Have under-age polygamists ever harmed my marriage?  Nope.  Must be OK then.

Have bestialists ever harmed my marriage?  Nope.  Must be OK then.

Such is the kernel of your 'argument'...

"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"The sole purpose of the Republican Party is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party." - GourmetDan

Offline evadR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,190
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #10 on: July 28, 2015, 01:30:30 am »
Sure it is Mac, if you understand it...

Have muslim 4-wife max ever harmed my marriage?  Nope.  Must be OK then.

Have under-age polygamists ever harmed my marriage?  Nope.  Must be OK then.

Have bestialists ever harmed my marriage?  Nope.  Must be OK then.

Such is the kernel of your 'argument'...
Yes, a false premise if there ever was one.

I like the answer Obama got over in his home country regarding SSM.

"The future and foundation of our country, Kenya, is based on the family. We are not interested in anything that will destroy that."
November 6, 2012, a day in infamy...the death of a republic as we know it.

Offline MACVSOG68

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,792
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2015, 01:56:10 am »
Sure it is Mac, if you understand it...

Have muslim 4-wife max ever harmed my marriage?  Nope.  Must be OK then.

Have under-age polygamists ever harmed my marriage?  Nope.  Must be OK then.

Have bestialists ever harmed my marriage?  Nope.  Must be OK then.

Such is the kernel of your 'argument'...

Well, none of the 50-75 percent divorces have hurt my marriage either, so what?  I know you like to speak about fallacious arguments (which I enjoy reading from time to time), but I would say you are engaging in the fallacy of the bad analogy.

I agree that none of those on your list would be acceptable to me, nor to most Americans.  But to take your analogies further, the terrible divorce rates, the child abuse cases, the propensity of heterosexual couples to live together outside of marriage, the single parent households are all problems, and none of them are harming my marriage.  Nor is any of that considered as bad by some as a gay marriage.

Gay marriage is the law today, and most Americans have accepted it.  Proponents point to a fact that no one can deny, which is that monogamous relationships are better than polygamous or random relationships.

I argue not from a religious point of view but simply a secular one that usually speaks to more not less freedoms and rights.   :beer:
It's the Supreme Court nominations!

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,277
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2015, 02:07:42 am »
Well, none of the 50-75 percent divorces have hurt my marriage either, so what?  I know you like to speak about fallacious arguments (which I enjoy reading from time to time), but I would say you are engaging in the fallacy of the bad analogy.

I agree that none of those on your list would be acceptable to me, nor to most Americans.  But to take your analogies further, the terrible divorce rates, the child abuse cases, the propensity of heterosexual couples to live together outside of marriage, the single parent households are all problems, and none of them are harming my marriage.  Nor is any of that considered as bad by some as a gay marriage.

Gay marriage is the law today, and most Americans have accepted it.  Proponents point to a fact that no one can deny, which is that monogamous relationships are better than polygamous or random relationships.

I argue not from a religious point of view but simply a secular one that usually speaks to more not less freedoms and rights.   :beer:

Actually, yours is the fallacy of the bad analogy.

'More freedoms and rights' sound great... how about more 'freedoms' for adulterers, pedophiles and bestialists?

You can't be against that... can you?


"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"The sole purpose of the Republican Party is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party." - GourmetDan

Offline EdinVA

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,584
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #13 on: July 28, 2015, 02:21:44 am »
Well, none of the 50-75 percent divorces have hurt my marriage either, so what?  I know you like to speak about fallacious arguments (which I enjoy reading from time to time), but I would say you are engaging in the fallacy of the bad analogy.

I agree that none of those on your list would be acceptable to me, nor to most Americans.  But to take your analogies further, the terrible divorce rates, the child abuse cases, the propensity of heterosexual couples to live together outside of marriage, the single parent households are all problems, and none of them are harming my marriage.  Nor is any of that considered as bad by some as a gay marriage.

Gay marriage is the law today, and most Americans have accepted it.  Proponents point to a fact that no one can deny, which is that monogamous relationships are better than polygamous or random relationships.

I argue not from a religious point of view but simply a secular one that usually speaks to more not less freedoms and rights.   :beer:

I tolerate it but will never accept it.

But isn't the issue in the article more of social damage than damage to a single person?
The issue in the article is not one of mistreatment of gays, they are not being hunted down.
When you own/rent property to run a business, you have the right to determine what activity is acceptable on that property, it is called property rights.
You have the right not to accept checks or credit cards, you can refuse service for no shoes no shirts, if someone is drunk the bar can refuse service.
Yet, gays have the full access and backing of the federal government to force a business to "participate" in their behavior, i.e. baking a "gay cake" for example.

The scouts now must allow openly gay leadership.  So how do you prevent the scout leader and their partner from preaching gay is great to his scouts because they are asking why they sleep together?

So what if a muslim comes in and wants to buy a car.  Muslims are forbidden to pay interest.
Should they be able to force a business to sell a car at no interest?

Offline MACVSOG68

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,792
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #14 on: July 28, 2015, 03:00:15 am »
Actually, yours is the fallacy of the bad analogy.

'More freedoms and rights' sound great... how about more 'freedoms' for adulterers, pedophiles and bestialists?

You can't be against that... can you?

We don't live in a completely lawless society.  Adultery is one of the big issues in heterosexual relationships along with all those other problems I mentioned.  Is a marriage between two gays worse than all of those issues which really are tearing down our society?

Throwing in pedophilia and bestiality truly is the bad analogy and I think you know that.  Both are illegal and will likely always be as innocent beings unable to make sound, adult decisions are forced or coerced into sexual acts.  Nor would most Americans see the comparisons.
It's the Supreme Court nominations!

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,277
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2015, 01:23:58 pm »
We don't live in a completely lawless society.  Adultery is one of the big issues in heterosexual relationships along with all those other problems I mentioned.  Is a marriage between two gays worse than all of those issues which really are tearing down our society?

Throwing in pedophilia and bestiality truly is the bad analogy and I think you know that.  Both are illegal and will likely always be as innocent beings unable to make sound, adult decisions are forced or coerced into sexual acts.  Nor would most Americans see the comparisons.

Nope... all are sexual peversions.  As homosexuality was once illegal and became 'legal', so they can become as well... despite your empty assurances.

The bad analogy started when you claimed that a lack of personal impact legitimizes a behavior and I think you know that.

"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"The sole purpose of the Republican Party is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party." - GourmetDan

Offline Free Vulcan

  • Technical
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,762
  • Gender: Male
  • Ah, the air is so much fresher here...
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2015, 01:55:58 pm »
We don't live in a completely lawless society.  Adultery is one of the big issues in heterosexual relationships along with all those other problems I mentioned.  Is a marriage between two gays worse than all of those issues which really are tearing down our society?

Throwing in pedophilia and bestiality truly is the bad analogy and I think you know that.  Both are illegal and will likely always be as innocent beings unable to make sound, adult decisions are forced or coerced into sexual acts.  Nor would most Americans see the comparisons.

First off, your cherry picked, artificial construct of an argument from your first post is willful obtuseness. You ask how gay marriage is harming us - the article addresses that in the reverse, in that gay marriage advocates promised us it wouldn't. Yet it does because we as a society are forced to accept it via baking cakes, having it proselytized in our schools, having churches lose tax exemption, newspapers not accepting any letters against it.

This argument is equally as bad. And as Gourmet Dan points out homosexuality was once illegal as well, so the illegal stance is a line in the sand you can't enforce. It's also a diversion, as it is all based on sexual orientation, a broad definition that doesn't exclude what is now illegal someday being legal.

In fact your equal protection argument DEMANDS them becoming legal, as discrimination against sexual orientation applies to them too. Otherwise you are advocating that a holy govt tribunal playing God (and likely violating separation of church and state). By deciding who is and who is not equal based on arbitrary declarations of legalityand illegality, your are also also doubly violating the very equal protection they claim to uphold by telling others they can't discriminate while the govt can because it can play God and choose who falls under equal protection and who does not.
The Republic is lost.

Offline MACVSOG68

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,792
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #17 on: July 28, 2015, 03:22:12 pm »
Nope... all are sexual peversions.  As homosexuality was once illegal and became 'legal', so they can become as well... despite your empty assurances.

The bad analogy started when you claimed that a lack of personal impact legitimizes a behavior and I think you know that.

I said a specific thing, gay marriage, had no impact on my marriage...or for that matter any other.  You then threw in pedophilia, bestiality, etc.  That is the classic definition of the bad analogy.

In any case, neither of us can see the future; well I'm not particularly prescient anyway.  But suggesting that two adult homosexuals that want to get married will lead to pedophile marriages is no different from suggesting that two heterosexuals who want to get married will lead to the same thing.  Pedophilia has been around since the dawn of time, and I don't know where it's been approved by society recently, other than a few states in the South, the bastion of Christian morals, where girls as young as twelve were allowed to marry with their parents permission.  I believe today the youngest with parental permission is 16.
It's the Supreme Court nominations!

Offline MACVSOG68

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,792
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #18 on: July 28, 2015, 03:56:34 pm »
First off, your cherry picked, artificial construct of an argument from your first post is willful obtuseness.

I know that on these issues with some, any argument is considered willful obtuseness. But then the on your side it must be considered serious thoughtful debate.  I'm learning... :pondering:

Quote
You ask how gay marriage is harming us - the article addresses that in the reverse, in that gay marriage advocates promised us it wouldn't. Yet it does because we as a society are forced to accept it via baking cakes, having it proselytized in our schools, having churches lose tax exemption, newspapers not accepting any letters against it.

Business rules within a state have nothing to do with mine or anyone else's marriage.  Nor am I aware of any church losing its tax exemption based on gay marriage issues.  If a case comes up, I have little doubt the USSC will come down similar to its decision on Hobby Lobby.  Newspapers are free businesses, and can pick and choose what letters they want to print. Again if my local paper doesn't want to print a letter condemning...or supporting gay marriage, it has no effect on my marriage or life for that matter.  If I don't like what my paper is doing, I can cancel it.  Schools have been spouting liberal thought for years.  Good parenting doesn't preclude sitting down with your kids and giving the other side to issues being taught in school.

Quote
This argument is equally as bad. And as Gourmet Dan points out homosexuality was once illegal as well, so the illegal stance is a line in the sand you can't enforce. It's also a diversion, as it is all based on sexual orientation, a broad definition that doesn't exclude what is now illegal someday being legal.

Lots of things were once illegal.  Women couldn't vote; interracial marriages were illegal in some states; homosexuals had less privacy protection than heterosexuals; blacks were discriminated against in the Army.  Lots more examples, not just gay marriage.  Though I'm not sure what you mean by the line in the sand that is unenforceable.

Quote
In fact your equal protection argument DEMANDS them becoming legal, as discrimination against sexual orientation applies to them too. Otherwise you are advocating that a holy govt tribunal playing God (and likely violating separation of church and state). By deciding who is and who is not equal based on arbitrary declarations of legalityand illegality, your are also also doubly violating the very equal protection they claim to uphold by telling others they can't discriminate while the govt can because it can play God and choose who falls under equal protection and who does not.

With all due respect, I'm not sure where you're headed with that, but I'll give it a shot.  The 14th Amendment does call for due process and equal protection of the laws.  When a case is filed under either, the state is given the opportunity to show a compelling interest in continuing the alleged discrimination.  If an 80 year old wants to pilot a commercial aircraft he is prohibited by the mandatory restrictions on age by the FAA.  Is that discrimination?  Of course, but the government can show a compelling interest in not having someone of that age piloting a commercial aircraft.

There will continue to be cases filed under the equal protection clause when any one or any group believes that a state or other jurisdiction is treating them differently.  Sometimes they win; sometimes not.  The Constitution is intended to protect everyone, not just the majority.
It's the Supreme Court nominations!

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,277
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #19 on: July 28, 2015, 03:58:43 pm »
I said a specific thing, gay marriage, had no impact on my marriage...or for that matter any other.  You then threw in pedophilia, bestiality, etc.  That is the classic definition of the bad analogy.

The bad analogy was when you compared a societal change with your marriage and claimed that the lack of effect on your marriage means that the societal change is therefore benign.

Quote
In any case, neither of us can see the future; well I'm not particularly prescient anyway.  But suggesting that two adult homosexuals that want to get married will lead to pedophile marriages is no different from suggesting that two heterosexuals who want to get married will lead to the same thing.  Pedophilia has been around since the dawn of time, and I don't know where it's been approved by society recently, other than a few states in the South, the bastion of Christian morals, where girls as young as twelve were allowed to marry with their parents permission.  I believe today the youngest with parental permission is 16.

Actually, it is different.  Homosexuality is a perversion just like pedophilia is a perversion.  You support one perversion yet oppose another simply because you do not approve of the other...

"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"The sole purpose of the Republican Party is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party." - GourmetDan

Offline musiclady

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,682
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #20 on: July 28, 2015, 04:09:53 pm »
Quote
A ruling in favor of ‘love’ has instead resulted in open and unapologetic hate.

The persuasiveness of the 'love' argument has always amazed me.

The left is filled with hatred for those who disagree with them, or dare oppose them.

Anyone who thought that legalizing 'gay' marriage would not result in punishment of those who dare disagree is frighteningly naïve.

The left doesn't work that way.  They use the words "those you love" to expose their abject hatred of the majority of Americans.
Character still matters.  It always matters.

I wear a mask as an exercise in liberty and love for others.  To see it as an infringement of liberty is to entirely miss the point.  Be kind.

"Sometimes I think the Church would be better off if we would call a moratorium on activity for about six weeks and just wait on God to see what He is waiting to do for us. That's what they did before Pentecost."   - A. W. Tozer

Use the time God is giving us to seek His will and feel His presence.

Offline musiclady

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,682
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #21 on: July 28, 2015, 04:11:05 pm »
First off, your cherry picked, artificial construct of an argument from your first post is willful obtuseness. You ask how gay marriage is harming us - the article addresses that in the reverse, in that gay marriage advocates promised us it wouldn't. Yet it does because we as a society are forced to accept it via baking cakes, having it proselytized in our schools, having churches lose tax exemption, newspapers not accepting any letters against it.

This argument is equally as bad. And as Gourmet Dan points out homosexuality was once illegal as well, so the illegal stance is a line in the sand you can't enforce. It's also a diversion, as it is all based on sexual orientation, a broad definition that doesn't exclude what is now illegal someday being legal.

In fact your equal protection argument DEMANDS them becoming legal, as discrimination against sexual orientation applies to them too. Otherwise you are advocating that a holy govt tribunal playing God (and likely violating separation of church and state). By deciding who is and who is not equal based on arbitrary declarations of legalityand illegality, your are also also doubly violating the very equal protection they claim to uphold by telling others they can't discriminate while the govt can because it can play God and choose who falls under equal protection and who does not.

 goopo
Character still matters.  It always matters.

I wear a mask as an exercise in liberty and love for others.  To see it as an infringement of liberty is to entirely miss the point.  Be kind.

"Sometimes I think the Church would be better off if we would call a moratorium on activity for about six weeks and just wait on God to see what He is waiting to do for us. That's what they did before Pentecost."   - A. W. Tozer

Use the time God is giving us to seek His will and feel His presence.

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,621
  • Gender: Male
    • Boiling Frogs
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #22 on: July 28, 2015, 04:38:33 pm »
First off, your cherry picked, artificial construct of an argument from your first post is willful obtuseness. You ask how gay marriage is harming us - the article addresses that in the reverse, in that gay marriage advocates promised us it wouldn't. Yet it does because we as a society are forced to accept it via baking cakes, having it proselytized in our schools, having churches lose tax exemption, newspapers not accepting any letters against it.

This argument is equally as bad. And as Gourmet Dan points out homosexuality was once illegal as well, so the illegal stance is a line in the sand you can't enforce. It's also a diversion, as it is all based on sexual orientation, a broad definition that doesn't exclude what is now illegal someday being legal.

In fact your equal protection argument DEMANDS them becoming legal, as discrimination against sexual orientation applies to them too. Otherwise you are advocating that a holy govt tribunal playing God (and likely violating separation of church and state). By deciding who is and who is not equal based on arbitrary declarations of legalityand illegality, your are also also doubly violating the very equal protection they claim to uphold by telling others they can't discriminate while the govt can because it can play God and choose who falls under equal protection and who does not.

I'm just going to add one point here, MAC pretty much covered the rest of your points very well.

That "we as a society" that you spoke of includes a significant number of people that do not agree with you on any point that you made. They (right or wrong as "they" may be) support the idea that bakeries should be forced to bake cakes, that it should be proselytized in schools, that churches should have their tax exempt status taken from them, and that newspapers should be free to NOT publish something that they don't want to publish.

The "we as a society" argument fails because "we" have many different opinions on what constitutes the right way for society to be structured.

They are all in fact wrong.

You are, and "they" are.

The entity know as "society" has no rights. Only individuals have rights, and all rights are individual in nature.

To argue that the rights of individuals are subservient in some way to the rights of the collective (society) is collectivism, and true conservatism (I seldom use that qualifier) is centered around the idea of individualism and individual rights. Our Republican form of government was constructed to defend the rights of the individual, every individual, and in turn minorities, which when extends to its logical conclusion to the defense of all. Ergo, the defense of the majority.

Society at large, and laws in general, is a construct of individuals banding together in order to provide for mutual defense of the group's lives and property.
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, i have others." - Groucho Marx

Offline MACVSOG68

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,792
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #23 on: July 28, 2015, 05:44:42 pm »
The bad analogy was when you compared a societal change with your marriage and claimed that the lack of effect on your marriage means that the societal change is therefore benign.

Actually, it is different.  Homosexuality is a perversion just like pedophilia is a perversion.  You support one perversion yet oppose another simply because you do not approve of the other...

Of course I compared this USSC ruling to my marriage.  That's been the majority of the argument against gay marriage...that it destroys the "sanctity" of marriage.  Whether its benign or malignant will come to light in the future.  But I can certainly argue that many of our cultural and societal changes among heterosexuals as we've discussed have been very damaging to a moral society.  Is a committed gay marriage any less moral than the heterosexual divorce rate, or the single parent households, or the rate of unfaithfulness among spouses.  Is a gay marriage more damaging than what goes on at a gay bath house with multiple partners?

As for comparing gay marriage to pedophilia, would you then also agree that a slap in the face is similar to murder as both are forms of assault? 
It's the Supreme Court nominations!

Offline GourmetDan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,277
Re: The Big Gay Marriage Lie
« Reply #24 on: July 28, 2015, 05:58:10 pm »
Of course I compared this USSC ruling to my marriage.  That's been the majority of the argument against gay marriage...that it destroys the "sanctity" of marriage.  Whether its benign or malignant will come to light in the future.  But I can certainly argue that many of our cultural and societal changes among heterosexuals as we've discussed have been very damaging to a moral society.  Is a committed gay marriage any less moral than the heterosexual divorce rate, or the single parent households, or the rate of unfaithfulness among spouses.  Is a gay marriage more damaging than what goes on at a gay bath house with multiple partners?

Your argument is that preceding errors justify continuing the trend of normalizing perversion?  How are you going to stop pedophile and bestial marriage?  Homosexuality has always been malignant to society.  No need to wait for the 'future' to find that out...

Quote
As for comparing gay marriage to pedophilia, would you then also agree that a slap in the face is similar to murder as both are forms of assault?

Homosexuality is sexual perversion just as pedophilia is sexual peversion.

"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

"The sole purpose of the Republican Party is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party." - GourmetDan