Posted on 05/28/2015 6:18:24 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Even more fundamentally, where in the Constitution does the State impart to itself the authority to conduct a marriage? This was the province of the clergy.
Well, duh; Mr. Goldberg...Christians 'refuse' to evolve because they don't believe in evolution in the first place.
Except for those in the northeast...
There is nothing whatsoever in the US Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to impose homosexual marriage on the States. Regardless, I would be very surprised to see the SCOTUS rule against the homosexualists. Certainly, several justices (probably a majority) will firmly avow the government’s authority to do whatever it pleases in all matters. It’s not like they haven’t done it before.
BTW, there’s nothing stopping the homosexualists from amending the US Constitution to expressly protect homosexual acts, but why bother? Five justices is all they need to do whatever they want. Civil society, democracy, and the rule of law be damned.
Christians are delusional if they believe that the GOP, as a whole, holds any affection for them.
Christians cannot evolve, because the Bible is clear. It doesn’t give us any wiggle room when it comes to sin. I’m sorry some folks find that message hard to accept, but I don’t see a middle way. One is either Christian, i.e. a believer and follower of Christ, or one is destined for hell.
Of course it could all be a fairly tale, but if so, why even bother playing at Christianity? Unbelievers, aka heathens, I totally understand. Professing Christians who ignore Christ? That makes no sense to me.
“Christians are delusional if they believe that the GOP, as a whole, holds any affection for them.”
As a statement about GOP leadership in general, I believe you’re right. The GOPe, in general, is embarrassed to be associated with us Bible thumpers.
They’ve made that abundantly clear (on a near-daily basis) over the past several years and following politics is less frustrating once reality is accepted.
I accept it. I’ve moved on from the GOP and won’t vote for those who hold me in contempt.
I agree. Romney ran an effective campaign in the primary and looked good until mid-summer when they went limp. No purpose, no new ideas, and other than that one debate, no underlying purpose. In the primary in Florida, he ran very effective positive ads in Florida for a month or more during the primary. If he had just run that same ad nationally in the summer, it would have combated the ‘Romney killed my wife ads’. Instead, crickets.
My theory is that the Supreme Court decision to allow Obamacare utterly killed their campaign plan, and they didn’t have a plan B.
What a terrible thing to write:
“Wishing ill on people for consensual acts that have in no way harm others.”
I wondered who in the world would even think that their acts in no way harm others.
Then I read where you are not a Christian, so that answers that.
In the end, it is all about rebelling against God and destroying as much of his creation as possible.
You cannot categorically say that “Christianity” believes that homosexuality is a sin and homosexual marriage is not accepted when two mainstream Christian sects, the Presbyterians and Episcopals, accept it. All you can say is that your Christian sect and God as your Christian sect understands him.
You cannot say that homosexuality is not natural when studies have pinpointed patterns in two regions of the human genome - one on the X chromosome and one on chromosome 8 as having a tie to male homosexuality. (Also certain hormone levels in mothers while they are pregnant have been found to have a tie with homosexuality.)
http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/10443/20141118/homosexuality-genetic-strongest-evidence.htm
Marriage is not simply a spiritual union. It is a legal and economic one. It carries with it spousal rights to inheritance, tax benefits, hospital visitation and health decisions, property rights, child visitation rights (and child support) etc. This is why a civil union or marriage should be allowed. The new Irish law allows any two adults to enter into such a formal union and does not affect the religious marriages allowed by any religion.
The argument against gay adoption is likely fear based. I think a very large number of children from heterosexual relationships are now raised by one parent or outside of a marriage relationship.
I was being sardonic, of course. Some conservatives talk as if they’re rightwing Christians, but deep down they’re secular. One day George Will talks about the value of marriage as the greatest anti-poverty program, the next days he says he an “amiable atheist.”
I am Christian, and I do believe in natural selection, but I do not believe that it is an accident, nor that it is random.
I am Christian, and I do believe in natural selection, but I do not believe that it is an accident, nor that it is random.
Predisposition does not equal behavior. So tell me, I am genetically autistic (around 100 percent correlation in identical twins, where they are both autistic), so does that justify me not trying to control my behavior despite being autistic? Does genetics justify homosexual men having bathhouse orgies, engaging in super-promiscuous behavior with 100s of partners as is the case for quite a number of homosexual men per the CDC, or should they take measures to actually master and control their actual behavior regardless? Where is the line? Because that answer has never been given to me about what genetics justifies in terms of behavior, NEVER EVER HAS.
Orgies for the worship of Ashtoreth were consensual and bisexual in nature.
Exactly. Fox News isn’t the conservative news outlet that its left-wing critics paint is as. It’s only “conservative” because it’s slightly to the right of all the other big ones which to a leftist means it’s “too conservative.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.