U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of same-sex marriage nationwide

[basslicker]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="The Unknown Poster" data-cid="128797" data-time="1435350787"><p><p><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="basslicker" data-cid="128780" data-time="1435350118"><p>It's not a 'vile' sin. It's no more sinful than lying or stealing. And yes, our faith and strength are tested always.

[basslicker]

Back to the point here, what really other then gay marriage was being denied from gay people? They dont ask your sexual orientation in job interviews, theres no gays only bathrooms, gay people can vote, gay people can travel, own property...ect Have they been discriminated against sure, but I often think most of it is just social hate crimes, like in school, and kids picking on the kid with a lisp, or the small guy or skin colour, physical attributes you cant escape from. in my personal experience if someone was being picked on for being gay, it was because they were very flamboyant with it, and made themselves out to be an easy target. I believe people should be themselves, but I also believe in a time and a place mentality for when to really let loose, and when to be more reserved. Im a foul mouthed sarcastic off colour humor type guy, that when im with my buddies at a party, I'll hold back nothing, but if I was in a job interview or at a place you generally know its a type of environment where i need to conduct myself a little more proper, it's night and day.

You're a rare breed man. So many are scared to voice their opinions nowadays for fear of being labeled one thing or another. Especially if they're logical and require people to think about their situation and environment.

[Atomic]

 

 

 

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="The Unknown Poster" data-cid="128745" data-time="1435348579"><p><p><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="basslicker" data-cid="128733" data-time="1435348153"><p>I'd attend the wedding because I would love my child no matter what. Doesn't mean I have to agree with their choices. Christians aren't supposed to hate anyone and I don't. But murderers and the like make it difficult. I pray they see their sins and try to atone. As for gay, I treat it like other sin. Pray they find their path God planned for them.

God planned for them to be Gay.

Or maybe he gave them tendencies in which to overcome.

 

You believe in a God that would decree that being gay is a vile sin and yet create so many people that are gay by their very nature and then demand of them that they live a life subjected to hate, wanting them to be unhappy and live a lie for His enjoyment? 

 

Perhaps the tendency to overcome that God has instilled is yours. 

 

 

Silly argument.  Let's replace gay with pedophile and see why:

 

You believe in a God that would decree that being a pedophile is a vile sin and yet create so many people that are pedophiles by their very nature and then demand of them that they live a life subjected to hate, wanting them to be unhappy and live a lie for His enjoyment?

 

Note:  Don't go for the easy "I'm so offended you just compared being gay to being a pedophile", because that's obviously not what I'm doing here.

[Taynted_Fayth]

lol i must be,  but I also have gay friends and we've had conversations at length about why so many people who are gay can go so long without anyone ever knowing and once they come out with it,  they arent suddenly like Heeeeey! and using their hands to talk, and it came down to the way people act.  They often tell me the people being targeted with discrimination are the overly flamboyant ones and that kind of over the top behavior puts the spotlight on them and sometimes gets negative reaction/attention. They also think poor judgement at times is another huge instigator more times then not, such as getting drunk at a bar and with liquid courage going up to another guy and hitting on him or whatever. Might be common place at a club like Desires (not sure what its called now) where it's a known gay bar and again "hey we're different!" publically advertised bar,  but doing it across the street at whiskey dix or empire..ect would probably be met with hostility especially with liquor involved and potential ridicule the guy would face by the buddies he was there with. 

[basslicker]

@atomic

You're assuming God does it for His enjoyment. He's not. We were given free will and some make bad choices and give into temptation.

And you may say 'well, then why does God allow evil etc.'

He gave us free will to choose, and humans are easily swayed. But it's worth having free will. I wouldn't want a world where we have no choice. He loves us and so gave us choice. Love cannot be forced. If it was, then it's not love.

There are still consequences to our actions, but at least it's our choice.

Man, haven't had a good debate in a while.

[Atomic]

@atomic

You're assuming God does it for His enjoyment. He's not. We were given free will and some make bad choices and give into temptation.

And you may say 'well, then why does God allow evil etc.'

He gave us free will to choose, and humans are easily swayed. But it's worth having free will. I wouldn't want a world where we have no choice. He loves us and so gave us choice. Love cannot be forced. If it was, then it's not love.

There are still consequences to our actions, but at least it's our choice.

Man, haven't had a good debate in a while.

 

You misunderstood my post.  I was saying TUP's argument was no good.  I'm not a particularly religious man but I also hate the "Why does God allow evil if he's so good?" question, like it proves anything.

[comedygeek]

lol i must be,  but I also have gay friends and we've had conversations at length about why so many people who are gay can go so long without anyone ever knowing and once they come out with it,  they arent suddenly like Heeeeey! and using their hands to talk, and it came down to the way people act.  They often tell me the people being targeted with discrimination are the overly flamboyant ones and that kind of over the top behavior puts the spotlight on them and sometimes gets negative reaction/attention. They also think poor judgement at times is another huge instigator more times then not, such as getting drunk at a bar and with liquid courage going up to another guy and hitting on him or whatever. Might be common place at a club like Desires (not sure what its called now) where it's a known gay bar and again "hey we're different!" publically advertised bar,  but doing it across the street at whiskey dix or empire..ect would probably be met with hostility especially with liquor involved and potential ridicule the guy would face by the buddies he was there with. 

 

Why should it be okay to target people because they "act different"? To me, that's just as bad as targeting them because of their sexuality.

 

Are you against men hitting on women in a bar? Women hitting on men? If you are, then you have a bit of an argument. But the "ridicule" and "hostility" you talk about potentially being met by a guy hitting on another guy at Whiskey Dix is a perfect example of WHY, even with marriage equality in Canada for the last 10 years, there's still a long way to go until LGBTQ people in this country are treated the same way as cisgendered straight people.

 

[Taynted_Fayth]

I dont think its right, what i was saying is its a reality that it happens, and typically people who are flamboyantly gay are very outspoken and a bit over the top and draw attention,  and depending the environment your in at the time it makes them an easy target for probably insecure ppl trying to impress their peers or make themselves feel better by making someone feel lesser or a hater or someone you rubbed the wrong way cuz of your antics. The point in the conversation though, is the way you act, or even what you wear are things you can have control over, unlike skin colour or disabilities that losers equally discriminate against. I think its just common sense not to draw unwanted attention upon yourself when your in public places. not everyone want to hear it, not everyone is tolerant and will lash out.  this isnt a new reality. 

 

I have never once tried to pick up a chick at the bar. I wouldnt be interested in a woman who would meet a complete stranger hammered and go home with them. but thats just me. I've watched buddies try to pick up chicks and get slapped or shot down pretty hard.  im willing to bet a not as extreme version of Jenny Jones would happen far more often then not if a guy went up to a straight guy at the bar and started hittin on him with his friends present, sometimes even without.  Some people have short fuses, some people are not opposed to others being gay but dont want any of that comin their way. add in liquor, and a public stage and it can get pretty bad.

 

I know some guys that came out a while ago, and honestly you wouldnt know they were gay unless they told you. I know a few that are i almost want to say stereotypically cartoonish gay, they want to pee in the girls washroom cuz the guys washroom are soo eeewww *hands flapping* <-- that kinda stuff can be put away and i personally think at times it should be if you dont wanna attract some unwanted attention.  I dont go to church and start going so a ****ing priest, a mofo'in rabbi and a donkey are all down in tiajuana... - not a real joke but just saying, it's not like i cant hold back how id be if i was at my buddies knocking back a few for the x amount of time im there. 

[Mark H.]

 

I'm quite willing to live and let live, but I've also been told to park my religious beliefs at the door. I had not said or done anything harmful or hateful. Tolerance is a two way street.

Absolutely.  Within reason.  If someone's religious believes are that being gay is "wrong", "immoral", "abomination", then thats not much of a religion.  One can believe anything they want.  There are people who believe women are lesser than men, or that black people are inferior.  They have the right to that opinion.  But they're still wrong.

 

 

Well, I find things like public nudity immoral.  With all due respect to anyone who believes otherwise, I feel that it's my right to believe that.  

[Taynted_Fayth]

im willing to let tall skinny busty chicks slide with the public nudity, but i subscribe to the naked chicks are art belief and I support art!

[FrostyWinnipeg]

None of this would be up for debate if marriages were strictly done on a religious scale only and not done by courts.

[Fraser]

Frankly I dont think marriage has much to do with religion anymore anyways.

[MOBomberFan]

LOL @ 'being a young healthy white male is the worst thing you can possibly be in canada now' haha how many advantages can one person possibly have?

[The Unknown Poster]

I wondered how long it would take for someone to use the pedophile comprison. I hoped the people here were more enlightened than that.

[The Unknown Poster]

None of this would be up for debate if marriages were strictly done on a religious scale only and not done by courts.

people should be able to marry regardless of religious beliefs

[Mark H.]

 

None of this would be up for debate if marriages were strictly done on a religious scale only and not done by courts.

people should be able to marry regardless of religious beliefs

 

 

Given that marriage has traditionally been a religious institution, perhaps a dividing line would have been the best way to resolve this.  In other words, call it something else for people who are not religious.  After all, why would anyone who is not religious want to be associated with something that was inherently religious for centuries? But alas, that opportunity has come and gone.  Now we're left arguing over something that's mostly a matter of semantics.

[Atomic]

I wondered how long it would take for someone to use the pedophile comprison. I hoped the people here were more enlightened than that.

I hoped you'd be able to see the point but clearly it was lost on you. There is no comparison happening. The point is that you can't use the silly argument that you did to say God doesn't exist or doesn't want people to be gay or whatever ridiculous point you were trying to prove.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

I wondered how long it would take for someone to use the pedophile comprison. I hoped the people here were more enlightened than that.

I hoped you'd be able to see the point but clearly it was lost on you. There is no comparison happening. The point is that you can't use the silly argument that you did to say God doesn't exist or doesn't want people to be gay or whatever ridiculous point you were trying to prove.

 

Sorry Atomic, but common sense applies.  Please show me where I said God doesnt exist.  I didnt.  You cant make the comparison between God making people gay and God making people pedophiles but diminish the silly comparison with "and Im not comparing them".  You are. 

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

None of this would be up for debate if marriages were strictly done on a religious scale only and not done by courts.

people should be able to marry regardless of religious beliefs

 

 

Given that marriage has traditionally been a religious institution, perhaps a dividing line would have been the best way to resolve this.  In other words, call it something else for people who are not religious.  After all, why would anyone who is not religious want to be associated with something that was inherently religious for centuries? But alas, that opportunity has come and gone.  Now we're left arguing over something that's mostly a matter of semantics.

 

But why should people who are not religious or dont believe the same as a certain group (many religions with different beleifs) not be allowed to marry?  Why would anyone care?

[tacklewasher]

I'm in favour of same-sex marriage. Should have never been outlawed by the Romans in the 300's.

 

I'm going to express dissapointment at the SC ruling. My dissapointment is that it still fell on party lines, with Kennedy being essentially the decision maker. So one man has the responsibility and the power to make this decision for all of the US.

 

How ****** up is that?

 

How can, what is suppossed to be a question of law, be so clearly split on party lines and ideology? I know there are dissenting opinions on law, but that is not what this is.

 

I hope the SC understands that these types of rulings undermine their credibility.

[The Unknown Poster]

I'm in favour of same-sex marriage. Should have never been outlawed by the Romans in the 300's.

 

I'm going to express dissapointment at the SC ruling. My dissapointment is that it still fell on party lines, with Kennedy being essentially the decision maker. So one man has the responsibility and the power to make this decision for all of the US.

 

How ****** up is that?

 

How can, what is suppossed to be a question of law, be so clearly split on party lines and ideology? I know there are dissenting opinions on law, but that is not what this is.

 

I hope the SC understands that these types of rulings undermine their credibility.

Exactly the point I made too.  History will judge the dissenters as bipartisan fools.  Hard to believe that educated, insightful people could be against gay marriage in this day and age. 

[max power]

Frankly I dont think marriage has much to do with religion anymore anyways.

 

Well it does for religious people.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

Frankly I dont think marriage has much to do with religion anymore anyways.

 

Well it does for religious people.

 

And for those that arent religious, why should they be held to the standard of the religious?  Is a marriage between two non-religious people any less of a commitment?

 

Someone asked what the big deal was outside of the ceremonial nature of marriage.  There are matters of benefits, death benefits, decision-making etc.  Things of that nature.

[Fraser]

Frankly I dont think marriage has much to do with religion anymore anyways.

Well it does for religious people.

And for those that arent religious, why should they be held to the standard of the religious? Is a marriage between two non-religious people any less of a commitment?

Someone asked what the big deal was outside of the ceremonial nature of marriage. There are matters of benefits, death benefits, decision-making etc. Things of that nature.

Franky I think those matters are the big deal. I also don't know why one religion would pretend to have a monopoly on the concept/term since it's been around forever under many different civilizations.

[max power]

 

 

 

Frankly I dont think marriage has much to do with religion anymore anyways.

Well it does for religious people.

And for those that arent religious, why should they be held to the standard of the religious? Is a marriage between two non-religious people any less of a commitment?

Someone asked what the big deal was outside of the ceremonial nature of marriage. There are matters of benefits, death benefits, decision-making etc. Things of that nature.

Franky I think those matters are the big deal. I also don't know why one religion would pretend to have a monopoly on the concept/term since it's been around forever under many different civilizations.

 

Although never between two men or two women, to be fair.