The public demand is the issuance of and recognition of a marriage license. The moment that the homosexual steps out of his bedroom and gets State officials involved, it ceases to be a private matter.
Kentucky clerk who refused gay couples taken into federal custody; ordered jailed
- Thread starter GFR7
- Start date
The public demand is the issuance of and recognition of a marriage license. The moment that the homosexual steps out of his bedroom and gets State officials involved, it ceases to be a private matter.
I simply would like to point out that I didn't say, or even imply, any of these things. :idunno:
IMJerusha
New member
Yes, well the problem is that moral doctrine isn't what is governing our nation just now. It should be but....
There's an enormous amount of difference between what we want our government to be and what it truly is. We have to work with what we have and work to change what we have to what we want.
I never stated that the Muslim woman was working from a Judeo/Christian perspective and regardless of what our laws are based on, we've strayed so far from that mark it's pathetic.
So?
Don't state "again" as if I was making any comparison. My point is and has been that if the Muslim woman gains traction in a court of law as to her work performance holding with her religious belief, then the Kentucky Christian clerk should receive the same traction.
The founders outlined religious freedom in the Constitution, not just Christian religious freedom.
TracerBullet
New member
except that there are no such legitimate organizations.
Considering reparative therapy is conducted by perverts who verbally, physically and sexually abuse those children any child forced into that quackery is pretty much guaranteed to have a miserable life.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
If Kim Davis had stepped aside, it would still be a private matter. It was she who made this the public spectacle that it became.
It was a public matter when law intruded into that bedroom to begin with then...or, marriage is an inherently private matter that necessarily intersects with public policy.
TracerBullet
New member
just like all those heterosexual couples are forcing their sordid sex lives onto the rest of us when they get a marriage licence.
That literally only was true when there were anti-sodomy laws.
I have a sneaking suspicion that you don't understand what I am saying.
How would you paraphrase the argument/statement that I've made?
(Let's see if Trad will attempt to touch this one with the proverbial 10 ft pole).
Do you feel that way about incestuous, adulterous/polygamous and bestiality matters?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
:chuckle:
Probably, formal cooperation in sin, or, if not, at the very least, immediate material cooperation in sin.
As to the rest of your post, I either have nothing really new to add, or else, it's just too tangential to the main point. The thread's not really about Hell. :idunno:
Do I feel what way about these matters? What in particular do you understand me to be saying?
Which were undone how, again?
But you were approaching the subject as if homosexuals had insisted on pushing their sexuality and what followed upon a public square that had, as I noted, routinely made that sexuality, private or else, it's business.
I have a name for that sneaking suspicion. I've differed and agreed with anna for years and never had the least suspicion there was something anyone around here could say that would mystify her. Or are you suggesting that you're not putting your case clearly?
I can't speak for her, but my hope is that she'd do it with an outrageous French accent. :french:
Then you need to move to the Holy See, because once you start talking about facilitation of moral choice as sin you're by and large up to your neck in it given your material participation in the Republic.
Could depend on your vantage.
In the same manner a local school tax is publicly demanded from a childless individual. Fundamental utilitarian concept. Society at large benefits from maintaining equality across the board...suspending personal interest/belief.
If the State is involved, it's not a private matter. That applies equally to criminality and State endorsement. If the local police are busting down your door because they suspect that you are having sex with another man, your private business has stopped being private. It's now a public matter insofar as police are involved.
Likewise, if you are going to the court house and saying: "Hey, I need to fill out some paperwork so that the State can do so and so," then, once more, it's stopped being private. It's public.
If you really want privacy, that means "everyone else, stay out."
That's a distinct possibility. Note, I'm not asking for a paraphrase in order to be condescending. There's a distinct possibility that either she hasn't understood, or else, that I haven't expressed myself clearly.
Yes.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
There is no benefit to society in perversion.
I don't disagree with this point. I might not use the word "forced," but I don't disagree with the "publically" bit. That's exactly what I assert. It's not a private matter.