GOP lawmakers in North Carolina introduce bill to restore ban on same-sex marriage

[DiogenesLamp]

The guarantee of the law's equal protection is explicitly provided for in the Constitution.

Homosexuals have always been regarded by the law as "Non Compos Mentis."    To declare them to have "rights"  stemming from their insanity is as reasonable as pretending males dressed like females are actually women.   



It is a war on reality. 

[INVAR]

The fact is that "Marriage" is a religious institution and the state has no right to redefine it. This is why liberals don't want civil unions which confer every single right to gay couples that are afforded to married couples. Instead they want to redefine the religion itself to fit their degenerate view of society.

Even without that the issue of gay marriage was not for 5 unelected judges to decide over the will of millions of Americans and the people they elected to represent them.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Yes.  Only today law has been made by the courts demanding respect for the establishment of the secular hedonist/Socialist religion while prohibiting the free exercise of the biblical Christian religion if it can be seen by anyone in public via lawsuit, fine and jail time.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

You sure seem like to put down other people while upholding a Confederation of States that fought a war over slavery.

That lie being repeated just won't cut the mustard anymore.

And exactly how did a guy uphold the CSA when he was never even born?

[Hoodat]

Even without that the issue of gay marriage was not for 5 unelected judges to decide over the will of millions of Americans and the people they elected to represent them.

Article III, Section 2

The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

Gee, no mention of federal judicial power extending to cases between a state and citizens of that state.

[Hoodat]

@Jazzhead

Still waiting.  Show me how California's marriage law violates equal protection.

[DiogenesLamp]

The SCOTUS's decision didn't affect your marriage in the slightest.   Why do are so resentful that your neighbors can marry just as you can?   

It lights fire to the Monotheistic foundation of the society.   


Maintaining a civil order with a minimum of bloodshed is far more important than letting 2% of the insane portion of our population feel good about themselves. 

[musiclady]

Homosexuals have always been regarded by the law as "Non Compos Mentis."    To declare them to have "rights"  stemming from their insanity is as reasonable as pretending males dressed like females are actually women.   



It is a war on reality.

 

And those of us who continue to argue on behalf of reality are called "troglodytes."

To the left up is down and down is up. 

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I'm not interested in debating the Civil War with you, but I thought it was important to verify that Joshua Chamberlain was very much a real person, very much a brilliant man, very much a successful Union soldier, and very much opposed to slavery.   He's also worth a look, even for a southerner, to perhaps help convince you that everyone on our side of the war wasn't evil.

What Civil War? We never had one.  A Civil War is one faction seeking to overthrow the government.  The South never wanted that.  It wanted the USA to leave them alone.

It was a War between the States caused by Union Aggression.

[musiclady]

What Civil War? We never had one.  A Civil War is one faction seeking to overthrow the government.  The South never wanted that.  It wanted the USA to leave them alone.

It was a War between the States caused by Union Aggression.

I said I wasn't interested in discussing that particular War..........whatever you choose to call it.

It's a thread hijack and I don't want to be part of it.

My only point was that Joshua Chamberlain was not fictional.

That's it.

That's all.   

[driftdiver]

Sexual attraction/orientation is inborn.  God's responsible for that.   Sexual behavior is not.  The responsibility for behavior lies solely with the individual.

@Jazzhead
A frequently repeated lie.

Sexual orientation is not inborn.  Its a product of genetics, hormones, as well as environmental factors.  Its is highly malleable for many people largely depending on their age, maturity level, and mental state.   This is why homosexuals target teens as that is when our brains are developing and we are at our weakest.

[Hoodat]

What Civil War? We never had one.  A Civil War is one faction seeking to overthrow the government.  The South never wanted that.  It wanted the USA to leave them alone.

It was a War between the States caused by Union Aggression.

Which is why I refer to it as the War of Secession.  The North attacked the South for one reason and one reason only - to preserve the Union.  It was a violation of the oral agreement promised to Virginia et al 84 years prior.

[Hoodat]

@Jazzhead
A frequently repeated lie.

Jazzhead has as much medical evidence proving that sexual preference is inborn as he has legal evidence proving that California marriage law is unconstitutional.  In other words, none.  But hey, that doesn't stop him from repeating the lie.

[Jazzhead]

Jazzhead has as much medical evidence proving that sexual preference is inborn

How do you know you're not gay, hoodat?   Have you always known you're not gay?   

[Hoodat]

And those of us who continue to argue on behalf of reality are called "troglodytes."

I prefer 'Knuckle-dragging Neanderthal' myself.  But even a Neanderthal has more ability to employ logic, reason, and think critically than your average liberal.

To the left up is down and down is up. 

Mick Jagger and Keith Richard wrote a song about it.

Sympathy for the Devil


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj6y6tohW_0


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj6y6tohW_0

Just as every cop is a criminal, and all the sinners saints . . .

[DiogenesLamp]

Homosexuality isn't "wrong" in the sense that sexual orientation is part of who someone intrinsically is.  Folks are wired to be gay or straight - you know you are, don't you?

I know the exact opposite of that.   Numerous medical studies have shown that about 40% of male homosexuals were molested as children.   (40% who participated in these studies admitted it.  The actual number may be much higher.)   


It is too great a stretch of coincidence to believe that 40% of children who would grow up to be Homosexuals happened to get molested.  It is far more plausible to believe that it is the molestation that steered them into that lifestyle.


In other words,  God didn't make them that way.   

http://www.conservapedia.com/Sexual_abuse_being_a_contributing_factor_for_homosexuality

[Jazzhead]

Gay marriage is but one more step in destroying the family in order to elevate the State.

That's idiocy.   How does your neighbor's marriage destroy your family?

What you should be arguing is that the State has no business granting rights and protections to married couples, or providing the means for one party to a marriage to enforce the other's marital obligations.  If you did that, that would eliminate the equal protection guarantee that extends, quite rightly and Constitutionally, to gay couples.     

But that, of course,  would destroy the family.   

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I said I wasn't interested in discussing that particular War..........whatever you choose to call it.

It's a thread hijack and I don't want to be part of it.

My only point was that Joshua Chamberlain was not fictional.

That's it.

That's all.   

Then please call it properly rather than attempting to go along with diatribe that alters its beginnings.

[Hoodat]

How do you know you're not gay, hoodat?   Have you always known you're not gay?   

It doesn't matter whether I choose to consider myself gay or not.  My sexual preference is not taken into account in regard to marriage laws.  There is no sexual preference qualifier or condition when it comes to California marriage law.  It's called 'Equal Protection' in that the law applies equally regardless of sexual preference.

And you falsely argue for equal protection even though you oppose the very law that guarantees it.

[DiogenesLamp]

Homosexuality as akin to bestiality?   It's cruel slander such as this that turns so many decent folks off to "Christian" conservatism.

Is it cruel slander to compare it to pedophilia?  Because over and over,  those who inquireabout this,  find that there appears to be a very close relationship between child molestation and homosexuality.   


If you do not know about the relationship between child molestation and homosexuality,   you need to do more research so you can speak intelligently on the subject. 


Furthermore,  about 42% of all child molestations are of male children.   For some reason,  2% of the population that prefers males manages to make 42% of all cases of child molestation.   

[DiogenesLamp]

But somehow the Christian right concentrates on 2% of the population while the vast rest of the population are being adulterous and screwing around at a record pace and not a word, or very little is said.

Has heterosexual adultery resulted in the deaths of 700,000 people?   


http://kff.org/hivaids/fact-sheet/the-hivaids-epidemic-in-the-united-states-the-basics/


The bloodshed is on the hands of the Homosexuals.   *THAT* is why we talk about them.   

[INVAR]

That's idiocy.   How does your neighbor's marriage destroy your family?

Same way the homosexual marriage agenda destroyed the livelihoods, businesses and private properties of biblical Christians that refused to violate their consciences to participate in celebrating deviancy.

Eventually - the goal (stated by the homo leadership themselves) is to DESTROY the institution of marriage itself for normal people who will not embrace homosexuality.

Like all Leftist logic that is a twisted miasma of illicit imbecility, yours selects which behaviors are to be accepted and approved and which ones you grant the state the power to destroy for refusing to accept evil behavior as good and normal.

[driftdiver]

That's idiocy.   How does your neighbor's marriage destroy your family?

What you should be arguing is that the State has no business granting rights and protections to married couples, or providing the means for one party to a marriage to enforce the other's marital obligations.  If you did that, that would eliminate the equal protection guarantee that extends, quite rightly and Constitutionally, to gay couples.     

But that, of course,  would destroy the family.

@Jazzhead

Because the family is the foundation of our country.  Through strong families children are taught morals ethics values love all kinds of things.  But most of all they are taught the govt is not their caretaker and is instead an institution subordinate to the people.

[Cripplecreek]

@Jazzhead

Because the family is the foundation of our country.  Through strong families children are taught morals ethics values love all kinds of things.  But most of all they are taught the govt is not their caretaker and is instead an institution subordinate to the people.

One only need to look to the inner cities to see what the destruction of the family has done to most blacks there.

Both Frederick Douglass and Booker T Washington spoke of the destruction of the family being a tool of slavery and subservience.

[musiclady]

Then please call it properly rather than attempting to go along with diatribe that alters its beginnings.

       

[DiogenesLamp]

The animal cannot give consent as two adults can.

Do you mean legal consent or actual consent?   It is clear that animals can give actual consent because there exists in the world numerous examples of beastiality porn in which this is clearly true.   


If you are referring to legal consent,  prior to the 1973,  Homosexuals couldn't give legal consent either.   They were legally adjudged to be "non compos mentis"  and therefore unable to give legal consent.   


My point here is that your point is merely a technicality,  and one which Homosexuals have overcome.  Therefore it is not unreasonable to believe that beastophiles will also be capable of overcoming this silly technicality eventually.   Indeed,  in several other countries,  Beastiality is legal.   

 No homosexual I know has ever said bestiality or child sex is ok.

Which proves exactly what?   It is quite possible they wouldn't tell you the truth about these things because they know how normal people will react.    If you go undercover in the "gay"  community,  you find out pretty quickly that they often make jokes about child molestation,  and there is a lot of "wink wink"  about it in those circles. 


I've read reports and seen videos of homosexuals admitting that it is a common thing in the gay community to talk about "Chickens."   (Young boys)  Just look up "Chicken Hawk"  in the gay context and you'll see.   

Beyond that,  we have so many examples of prominent homosexuals molesting boys,  of which Dennis Hastert is but one relatively recent example.