Civil Rights Up for Vote

[thrill]

It's not like marriage is a Judeo-Christian invention. Marriage may be a Christian Sacrament, but it's also a cultural universal. Every culture that has ever existed has had some form of marriage, and they haven't all been defined as being between one man and one woman. I'm a Christian, but I think people need both a better understanding of history and anthropology, and the separation of church and state.

But this only explains why it is reasonable for some people to be against gay marriage, not why it is against the spirit or law of our constitution and bill of rights.

[redbirdjazzz]

It's not like marriage is a Judeo-Christian invention. Marriage may be a Christian Sacrament, but it's also a cultural universal. Every culture that has ever existed has had some form of marriage, and they haven't all been defined as being between one man and one woman. I'm a Christian, but I think people need both a better understanding of history and anthropology, and the separation of church and state.

But this only explains why it is reasonable for some people to be against gay marriage, not why it is against the spirit or law of our constitution and bill of rights.

I was trying to explain why Americans who believe in the Constitution shouldn't be against gay marriage. I apologize if it came across otherwise.

[thrill]

It's not like marriage is a Judeo-Christian invention. Marriage may be a Christian Sacrament, but it's also a cultural universal. Every culture that has ever existed has had some form of marriage, and they haven't all been defined as being between one man and one woman. I'm a Christian, but I think people need both a better understanding of history and anthropology, and the separation of church and state.

But this only explains why it is reasonable for some people to be against gay marriage, not why it is against the spirit or law of our constitution and bill of rights.

I was trying to explain why Americans who believe in the Constitution shouldn't be against gay marriage. I apologize if it came across otherwise.

Actually I see it now. I like it. My bad.

[jim]

Lots of bibilical discussions here .... Interesting but irrelevant:

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.

We'll stay out of your religion, and you stay out of our legislation. Simple and clean. So now that we have that out of the way, what's left?

Bigotry.

That's it. Simple as pie.

[clevername]

Lots of bibilical discussions here .... Interesting but irrelevant:

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.

We'll stay out of your religion, and you stay out of our legislation. Simple and clean. So now that we have that out of the way, what's left?

Bigotry.

That's it. Simple as pie.

that just about boils it down to the core ingredients.

[BW23]

Lots of bibilical discussions here .... Interesting but irrelevant:

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.

We'll stay out of your religion, and you stay out of our legislation. Simple and clean. So now that we have that out of the way, what's left?

Bigotry.

That's it. Simple as pie.

So, really what you're saying is, those that believe in what the Bible says are bigots, right?

[redbirdjazzz]

Lots of bibilical discussions here .... Interesting but irrelevant:

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.

We'll stay out of your religion, and you stay out of our legislation. Simple and clean. So now that we have that out of the way, what's left?

Bigotry.

That's it. Simple as pie.

So, really what you're saying is, those that believe in what the Bible says are bigots, right?

No, he's saying that people who use religious reasons to politically inhibit the rights of others are behaving in a bigoted manner.

[G. Keenan]

Lots of bibilical discussions here .... Interesting but irrelevant:

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.

We'll stay out of your religion, and you stay out of our legislation. Simple and clean. So now that we have that out of the way, what's left?

Bigotry.

That's it. Simple as pie.

So, really what you're saying is, those that believe in what the Bible says are bigots, right?

I'll take this bait.

There are plenty of things the bible tells us to do that we don't do anymore. There are plenty of attitudes expressed in the bible that we all agree are outdated.

People who don't believe that gay couples should have the legal right to marry are bigots, imo, at least as it pertains to homosexuality, and history will prove them so. The government is denying citizens equal protection under the law, plain and simple. People against gay marriage say that a certain group of people should not be entitled to legal marriage because of who they are. That is textbook bigotry.

Perhaps that bigotry is holy. I doubt it.

[jim]

Lots of bibilical discussions here .... Interesting but irrelevant:

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.

We'll stay out of your religion, and you stay out of our legislation. Simple and clean. So now that we have that out of the way, what's left?

Bigotry.

That's it. Simple as pie.

So, really what you're saying is, those that believe in what the Bible says are bigots, right?

Not at all. I know true Christians hate the sin but not the sinner. Marriage to Christians is defined a certain way. It's not bigoted at all for Christians to not recognize a same sex marriage. 1st amendent guarantees that gov't won't interfere in that belief.

But take away the Christian part - what else is left if you are legislating about it. Saying it's not ok to marry because of your religious beliefs is ok in my book, but the 1st amendment won't let you bring in your religious beliefs to legislation. So if you pass laws on in it without any religious foundation, what exactly is it?

I happen to believe that people voting for this weren't all bigoted but really attacking the 1st amendment. Some(maybe most?) don't even realize they are attacking it, and some are playing games of trickery to attack it by luring in unsuspecting voters. Some use the bible to support their bigotry.

Can't have freedom of religion without freedom from religion. Protect the 1st amendment.

[BW23]

Thanks, jim.