Thread: Marriage Equality

Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge

The larger issue is that a "special interest group" forced an issue onto the ballot to provoke a particular result. When they were not appeased, they then sought to over turn the "will of the people" by filing a lawsuit. The votes of hundreds of thousands where thrown out on the say so of ONE PERSON.

Moreover - that person stated publicly that he saw this as an oppurtunity to further the agenda of that "special intrest group" before he was assigned the case, which shows that he did not approach the lawsuit with a fair and open mind in violation of of ANY code of ethics and the oaths that he has taken.

California lost the right to vote

University Academics Say Pedophilia Is ‘Natural, And Normal For Males To Be Aroused By Children’ FEATURED, POLITICAL NEWS Zoom Out Zoom In By Lauren Richardson 132164569 10:00 AM June 27, 2015 - See more at: http://truthuncensored.net/universit....L1Iq1VTX.dpuf

ISIS Celebrates Gay Love by Tossing 4 Gays from Roof of Highrise Building

Jim Hoft Jun 26th, 2015 6:15 pm —

Several Islamists tweeted out #LoveWins – the same hashtag that was used today after the Supreme Court ruling.

Of course this wasn’t the first time…
A massive crowd assembled to watch ISIS rebels throw another gay man off a building top earlier this month.
Hundreds of spectators came out to watch the brutal public execution.

Several Islamists tweeted out #LoveWins – the same hashtag that was used today after the Supreme Court ruling.

Of course this wasn’t the first time…
A massive crowd assembled to watch ISIS rebels throw another gay man off a building top earlier this month.
Hundreds of spectators came out to watch the brutal public execution.

The execution was most likely filmed in Nineveh Province where the Islamists have murdered several gay men.

ISIS is reportedly using “flirting squads” to single out gay men for trial and execution in the Caliphate.

The Islamic State has posted several public executions of gay men online.
ISIS released photos and video of Islamists throwing two men off a rooftop in January.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015...#ixzz3eIG3IZ1o

I am NOT posting the images.

Those figures are wrong - he's still the jerk in charge until january 2017

Remember everyone's rights as you want your own rights not infringed. Peace, love and happiness.

Glenn Beck

I have tried to be kind to those who have written such hatred to me today.

I don't understand it. As a libertarian my position on Gay marriage was that the Government should not be involved in matters of conscience at all. Years before O or Hillary.

My plea has been to love one another and not try to control one another's lives.

The atheist florist should not have to make a funeral wreath in the shape of a cross if they don't wish to.

A homosexual printer should not be forced to print signs for the Westboro baptist church, just as a Christian baker or photographer should not be forced to work for a gay couple getting married.

If they don't sell them a birthday cake, I think it is bigotry; if it is a wedding cake it is forcing them to participate in a ceremony they do not agree with. Right of conscience.

The confederate flag should not fly over a state Capitol but it makes sense at a civil war memorial in the south. I personally don't like the confederate flag, but it is not my culture. Maybe only those in the culture get it. Maybe it is a bit like rappers and their use of the n word?

If I can buy a Che shirt or purse, certainly I can purchase a confederate flag shirt.

If you are offended you have every right.

I know I am offended when I see a shirt bearing the image of a man who rounded up poets, artists, blacks and homosexuals and shot them for sport.

But as people used to say years ago: "Hey, it's a free country"

Is it any more?

I supported those churches that married homosexuals in the past. Will you support those churches that don't in the future?

We all have a right of conscience. Now we can see how those who have fought for so long to be who they are support those who wish to be who they are openly.

Let's celebrate diversity right?

If we can do this, today we should celebrate. If we cannot allow others to have different lifestyle and different held beliefs we should weep.

The biggest problem is the Constitution says nothing about marriage at all. We should not allow the federal government to regulate ANYTHING in our personal lives when it deals with conscience.

I have often said the evil libertarian plan is to slowly take over the entire world and then....
Leave every one alone!

Let those who are gay live their life and speak their mind with respect. Let those who are not and have a deeply held religious view live their life and speak their mind with respect. Period.

One planet, one life. Why waste it on war and hate when there is so much to love and such little time?

‪#‎nohomophobia‬
‪#‎nohetrophobia‬
‪#‎stopthehate‬
‪#‎marriageequality‬
‪#‎alllivesmatter‬
‪#‎rightofconscience

13 Reactions to The Rainbow White House Makeover After the Gay Marriage Ruling
By Katie LaPotin - 11 hours ago

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/06/3547...paign=Politics

City threatens to arrest ministers who refuse to perform same-sex weddings
By Todd Starnes · Published October 20, 2014

Two Christian ministers who own an Idaho wedding chapel were told they had to either perform same-sex weddings or face jail time and up to a $1,000 fine, according to a lawsuit filed Friday in federal court.

Alliance Defending Freedom is representing Donald and Evelyn Knapp, ordained ministers who own the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel in Coeur d’Alene. "Right now they are at risk of being prosecuted,” their ADF attorney, Jeremy Tedesco, told me. “The threat of enforcement is more than just credible.”

According to the lawsuit, the wedding chapel is registered with the state as a “religious corporation” limited to performing “one-man-one-woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.”

But the chapel is also registered as a for-profit business – not as a church or place of worship – and city officials said that means the owners must comply with a local nondiscrimination ordinance. That ordinance, passed last year, prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, and it applies to housing, employment and public accommodation.

City Attorney Warren Wilson told The Spokesman-Review in May that the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel likely would be required to follow the ordinance. “I would think that the Hitching Post would probably be considered a place of public accommodation that would be subject to the ordinance,” he said.

He also told television station KXLY that any wedding chapel that turns away a gay couple would in theory be violating the law, “and you’re looking at a potential misdemeanor citation.”

Wilson confirmed to Knapp my worst fear -- that even ordained ministers would be required to perform same-sex weddings. “Wilson also responded that Mr. Knapp was not exempt from the ordinance because the Hitching Post was a business and not a church,” the lawsuit states.

And if he refused to perform the ceremonies, Wilson reportedly told the minister that he could be fined up to $1,000 and sentenced to up to 180 days in jail.

Now all of that was a moot point because, until last week, gay marriage was not legal in Idaho. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an order on May 13 allowing same-sex marriages to commence in Idaho on Oct. 15. Two days later, the folks at the Hitching Post received a telephone call.

A man had called to inquire about a same-sex wedding ceremony. The Hitching Post declined, putting it in violation of the law. City officials did not respond to my requests for an interview, nor did they respond to requests from local news outlets. “The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines,” Tedesco said.

“The city is on seriously flawed legal ground, and our lawsuit intends to ensure that this couple’s freedom to adhere to their own faith as pastors is protected, just as the First Amendment intended.”

Alliance Defending Freedom also filed a temporary restraining order to stop the city from enforcing the ordinance. “The Knapps are in fear that if they exercise their First Amendment rights they will be cited, prosecuted and sent to jail,” Tedesco told me.

It’s hard to believe this could happen in the United States. But as the lawsuit states, the Knapps are in a “constant state of fear that they may have to go to jail, pay substantial fines, or both, resulting in them losing the business that God has called them to operate and which they have faithfully operated for 25 years.”

The lawsuit came the same week that the city of Houston issued subpoenas demanding that five Christian pastors turn over sermons dealing with homosexuality and gender identity.

What in heaven’s name is happening to our country, folks? I was under the assumption that churches and pastors would not be impacted by same-sex marriage. “The other side insisted this would never happen – that pastors would not have to perform same-sex marriages,” Tedesco told me. “The reality is – it’s already happening.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, told me it’s “open season on Americans who refuse to bow to the government’s redefinition of marriage.”

“Americans are witnesses to the reality that redefining marriage is less about the marriage altar and more about fundamentally altering the freedoms of the other 98 percent of Americans,” Perkins said.

Why should evangelical Christian ministers be forced to perform and celebrate any marriage that conflicts with their beliefs? “This is the brave new world of government-sanctioned same-sex unions – where Americans are forced to celebrate these unions regardless of their religious beliefs,” Perkins told me.

As I write in my new book, “God Less America,” we are living in a day when those who support traditional marriage are coming under fierce attack. The incidents in Houston and now in Coeur d’Alene are the just the latest examples of a disturbing trend in the culture war – direct attacks on clergy.

“Government officials are making clear they will use their government power to punish those who oppose the advances of homosexual activists,” Perkins said. "I’m afraid Mr. Perkins is absolutely right. No one should be discriminated against but have you noticed that any time a city passes a “nondiscrimination” ordinance, it’s the Christians who wind up being discriminated against?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/...e-sex-weddings

What would you think if the Court had decided the opposite? That is, if the Court had held that same sex marriage is unconstitutional, so that all state laws approving such unions are void, and all court decisions establishing same sex marriage are overruled. Would you then think it appropriate for “five lawyers,” as Chief Justice Roberts put it, to remove this issue from the democratic process and purport to resolve it by judicial fiat?

I am pretty sure you wouldn’t. I am pretty sure that in the face of such a ruling, you would howl with outrage and insist that the issue of same sex marriage be determined by democratic processes.

I realize that hardly anyone on the Left acknowledges any obligation to be consistent. But logically, the issue of same sex marriage either is governed by the Constitution, or it isn’t. The truth is that the Constitution is silent with regard to marriage, which has always been a matter of state law. To assert that the Constitution mandates gay marriage is as outrageous as to assert that it prohibits gay marriage. It does neither.

Liberals have become accustomed to the idea that Supreme Court decisions can help, but never hurt, their causes. But that isn’t true. At one time, the Court held that there is a fundamental constitutional right to own slaves, which Congress could not limit in the territories. (The justices in the Dred Scott majority were loyal Democrats, doing their party’s bidding much like today’s progressives.) Subsequently, the Court held that wage and hour laws were unconstitutional because they infringed the fundamental right of contract. Both of those cases were decided on precisely the same theory as the Court’s gay marriage decision, i.e., substantive due process.

It is disheartening to see the almost universal acclaim received by a decision that is, in terms of process, a raw and unconstitutional usurpation of power. One would think that there should be many Americans who care about the Constitution, regardless of their views on gay marriage. But that does not appear to be the case.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive...e-decision.php

We’ve heard it over and over again in the main stream media – a majority of Americans now support “same-sex” marriage. It is the rationale those pushing for this radical change to U.S. culture are using to press ahead with their agenda. But, a new report just out shoots down this assumption being hammered home by the left.

The Daily Caller reports: http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/20/ma...author-admits/

[quote]A study purporting to show that people’s views on gay marriage could change simply by meeting gay people has been retracted following revelations that its data was fabricated.

The study was published last December in Science, and prior to publication drew a great deal of attention from the American media. Vox, for instance, described the findings in the study as “kind of miraculous.” http://www.vox.com/2014/4/8/5592214/...akes-them-more

As it turns out, that’s exactly what they were, because they were apparently made up.

According to the study, people from communities hostile to gay marriage could have their opinions shift dramatically after spending just a few minutes speaking with a gay person who canvassed their neighborhood promoting gay marriage. Not only that, but this could have a spillover effect, making not just the people themselves more pro-gay but also other people who lived in the same household.

The study, among other things, lent support to the notion that those opposed to gay marriage simply don’t know or interact with open homosexuals. More broadly, it was seen as an important development in the science of how people can be convinced to change their minds on ideologically-charged issues./quote]

I don’t know why this should surprise us. The left always plays “fast and loose ” with the facts to spew their propaganda. Perception is reality as far as they are concerned.

The Daily Caller provides more details:

The study began to fall apart when students at the University of California at Berkeley sought to conduct additional research building off of it, only to find major irregularities in how its research was apparently conducted. For example, thermometers used to measure participants’ attitudes produced consistent, reliable information, even though they are known for producing relatively unreliable numbers.

Also, the data recovered had an exceptionally consistent distribution, with not a single one of the 12,000 supposed participants providing anomalous or unusual results. In other words, the study’s data was too perfect to be believable.

Donald Green, a professor at Columbia University and a co-author of the paper, made the decision to retract it after having a confrontation with co-author Michael LaCour, a graduate student at UCLA. While LaCour maintained that he hadn’t fabricated the data, he was also unable to produce the original source files supposedly used to produce it. When he failed to write-up a retraction, Green took the initiative and did so himself.

“I am deeply embarrassed by this turn of events and apologize to the editors, reviewers, and readers of Science,” Green told Retraction Watch, a science watchdog website.

How much damage this “fake” study has already inflicted on America is not known, but don’t look to anyone in the main stream media to correct the record. They are completely sold on the idea of “same-sex” marriage and all of the “transgender fluidity” nonsense now being pushed by the same people who pushed for acceptance of homosexual behavior as normative.

It may take the American people some time to see through this most recent fraud, but truth has a funny way of coming out; especially when all of the lies start to fall like a house of cards.

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/u...ge-study-faked