SUPREME COURT EXTENDS GAY MARRIAGE NATIONWIDE

[Nathon Detroit]

We have all heard the news plastered in every corner of every aspect of social media, television, and radio. The Supreme Court declared Friday that same-sex couples have a right to marry anywhere in the United States.

Those in favor of such a ruling are running their parade lap while those opposed are recoiling.

But what does it all really mean? What will this mean for religious liberty in this country? Is that officially dead now?

One of the more interesting facts I read today is that there are only 390,000 married same-sex couples in the United States and another 70,000 couples living in states that do not currently permit them to wed. That's an incredibly small number when you think about it. Yet that tiny fraction of the population has just slew religious liberty which was one of the pillars of this nation's heritage.

 

[fool]

.......that tiny fraction of the population has just slew religious liberty which was one of the pillars of this nation's heritage.

How on Earth does this slay religious liberty?
You don't have to get gay married and you can still get straight married.

 

[chrysostom]

But what does it all really mean? .

when you don't vote republican

you get judges like breyer, ginsburg, sotomayor, and kagan
and
they gave you same sex marriage

didn't you see that coming?

 

[fool]

when you don't vote republican

you get judges like breyer, ginsburg, sotomayor, and kagan
and
they gave you same sex marriage

didn't you see that coming?

As I said in the other thread this is a great thing for the GOP, they can lay off the anti gay stuff now.

 

[jamie]

Same sex marriage is moot. Jesus said what God has joined together let not man separate. There is nothing in the Bible about God joining same sex couples.

It means nothing to no one from a biblical standpoint.

Much ado about nothing.

 

[chrysostom]

As I said in the other thread this is a great thing for the GOP, they can lay off the anti gay stuff now.

well they can certainly show the differences between the democratic judges
and
the republican judges
there will be many others issues regarding freedom of religion

 

[Stripe]

As I said in the other thread this is a great thing for the GOP, they can lay off the anti gay stuff now.

Actually, they will use this and the Obamacare result to rally the conservative base and win next year.

 

[Bright Raven]

Oh well, the nation is going to hell in a hand basket.

 

[fool]

Actually, they will use this and the Obamacare result to rally the conservative base and win next year.

Rally!

 

[Stripe]

Rally!

And once again, right and wrong will be set aside while the masses are drawn to an election circus.

 

[Town Heretic]

We have all heard the news plastered in every corner of every aspect of social media, television, and radio. The Supreme Court declared Friday that same-sex couples have a right to marry anywhere in the United States.

A close but not really surprising ruling.

Those in favor of such a ruling are running their parade lap while those opposed are recoiling.

Sounds about as expected too.

But what does it all really mean? What will this mean for religious liberty in this country? Is that officially dead now?

In order: gays can marry. What should it mean? No.

One of the more interesting facts I read today is that there are only 390,000 married same-sex couples in the United States and another 70,000 couples living in states that do not currently permit them to wed. That's an incredibly small number when you think about it.

Not if you're in line for the restroom. Nearly half a million is only a small number on a sign outside of a McDonalds (or a line for one in China).

Yet that tiny fraction of the population has just slew religious liberty which was one of the pillars of this nation's heritage.

Not one hair on the head of religious liberty is out of place as a result of this ruling, though more than a few noses might be. No one altered a single church's stance on the morality of homosexuality with this ruling. No one required anyone so offended by the state's sanction to seek that sanction for their own union or to consider their union lessened because of the ruling if they do.

It's literally only and all in the eye of the beholder.

Oh well, the nation is going to hell in a hand basket.

Well, it will at least be a fashionably put together hand basket. lain:

 

[Town Heretic]

Rally!

You have a horrible accent. lain:

Actually, they will use this and the Obamacare result to rally the conservative base and win next year.

They had the conservative vote the last time. But it would have been better for Republicans if Roberts had sided with the majority. The left will find traction with the center on the issue and gain nothing with those who were already motivated.

 

[Stripe]

Anyone who thinks that the law of the land does not impact liberty is a moron.

 

[The Barbarian]

Same sex marriage is moot. Jesus said what God has joined together let not man separate. There is nothing in the Bible about God joining same sex couples.

Right.

It means nothing to no one from a biblical standpoint.

Nor should it. Marriage is a sacrament, a union of a man and a woman in God's name. The government should stay completely out of it.

Much ado about nothing.

Would have been, if we didn't have laws about it. I don't really care if homosexuals want to call it whatever they do, "marriage." And it wouldn't be an issue if it wasn't government business.

 

[Town Heretic]

Anyone who thinks that the law of the land does not impact liberty is a moron.

That's going to kill when someone actually argues that point, Stripe. You should save that one. It's a keeper.

In this case the ruling expands liberty to one group while denying nothing to any other. lain:

 

[Stripe]

They had the conservative vote the last time. But it would have been better for Republicans if Roberts had sided with the majority. The left will find traction with the center on the issue and gain nothing with those who were already motivated.

I guess I just want to believe there is a hidden reserve of righteousness left in the US. If the Re-publicans play their cards right, I think the majority still oppose homosexuality. And the politicians don't need to push such a view; they can just prepare a path that slopes more gently toward hell than the picture they paint of the Dumocrats.

 

[chrysostom]

But it would have been better for Republicans if Roberts had sided with the majority.

aren't you comfortable with one republican and four democrats?

 

[Stripe]

In this case the ruling expands liberty to one group while denying nothing to any other. lain:

Calling a homo relationship "marriage" is not "extending liberty"; it is propagating a lie.

You need to have a standard other than regulations men have passed.

 

[chrysostom]

In this case the ruling expands liberty to one group while denying nothing to any other. lain:

it completely destroys the meaning of marriage
protect the child

 

[Town Heretic]

I guess I just want to believe there is a hidden reserve of righteousness left in the US.

It isn't hidden. It's in all sorts of places you'd expect to find it, churches and the lives of adherents.

If the Re-publicans play their cards right, I think the majority still oppose homosexuality

It's just not in the wind. The whole issue has been rightly portrayed as a matter of public morals and the prevailing sentiment in America is that it's one of those things that shouldn't be legislated.

And the politicians don't need to push such a view; they can just prepare a path that slopes more gently toward hell than the picture they paint of the Dumocrats.

There are any number of paths to hell and the majority are completely legal.