RunRyder RC
 7  Topic Subscribe
WATCH
 5 pages [ <<    <     3      4     ( 5 )    >    >> ] 2812 views POST REPLY
HelicopterOff Topics News & Politics › One Leftist Judge Slaps Down Seven Million Voters in California
08-11-2010 06:55 PM  7 years agoPost 81
SSN Pru

rrElite Veteran

Taxachusetts

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

For me, marriage is not a religious question, it's a social and cultural institution that certain groups want to redefine for the sole purpose of forcing acceptance of their beliefs.
Has the definition been the same since the inception of the idea of marriage?

I doubt it.

No one is forcing ANYONE to accept any beliefs by adding another definition. Many words have multiple definitions. The word 'marriage' is no different.
Look, that makes even less sense.
I'm sure it does, especially for you, and yet you concoct an argument based on a phrase you claim to not understand?

Stupidity can be cured. Ignorance is for life!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-11-2010 07:10 PM  7 years agoPost 82
dilberteinstein

rrNovice

texas - USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I'm sure it does, especially for you, and yet you concoct an argument based on a phrase you claim to not understand?
Ok. You are trying to get completely away from your statements now concerning hypocrites. You have are claiming regilious people are hypocrites because....
"accept for everyone only that which they deem acceptable" automatically labels you as a hypocrit
I'll say it again:
Religious people don't "accept for everyone. " They have their own opinions and desires for laws. Is that wrong? There are tons of groups that lobby for legislation all the time...some religious.

But that does not make them hypocrites.
That does not make them hypocrites.

90% of life is "showing up"

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-11-2010 07:14 PM  7 years agoPost 83
Aaron29

rrProfessor

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

In the Constitution, it says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

So this gets used by a lot of people who want further whatever agenda they may have.

But just how absolute is the First Amendment?

Hmmm...

In the Bible, it says, "Thou shalt not steal." American laws against stealing exist. And yet, this has never been seen as Congress "respecting an establishment of religion." Nor would society care to repeal these existing laws.

On the flip side...there are religions that believe in ritual animal sacrifice. American laws exist which prohibit murdering animals. And yet this has never been viewed as "prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Nor would society care to repeal these existing laws.

What's my point? If gay marriage propenents invoke the 1st Amendment while thumbing their nose and angering the societal majority, they are not going to get anywhere.

They have to appeal to society to further their agenda.

You can call this unfair all you want. It's called reality.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-11-2010 07:22 PM  7 years agoPost 84
Rodan

rrVeteran

Prescott Valley, AZ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Has the definition been the same since the inception of the idea of marriage?

I doubt it.
That's certainly true, but I can't think of anytime in history where it was defined as something other than a relationship between men and women. The numbers of the women, and the acceptable ages of the women may have changed over time, but show me where, historically, marriage was generally accepted in a society between men and men, or women and women?

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
08-12-2010 12:51 AM  7 years agoPost 85
SSN Pru

rrElite Veteran

Taxachusetts

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

And you secular types that refuse to accept that their belief is no less valid than your non-belief are any better?
Nope, I am no better than you religiously brainwashed people are, however, I have one thing you can't even come close to claiming.

I can ADMIT that I am NOT tolerant of religious zealots. You claim to be tolerant of others while being intolerant.

You can call this unfair all you want. It's called reality.
Let's be clear here. I am not calling this fair or unfair. What I am doing is being a devils [size=tiny](pun intended)[size] advocate.

I just love pointing out the blatant hypocrisy in some of the statements here on this thread.
That's certainly true, but I can't think of anytime in history where it was defined as something other than a relationship between men and women.
Who defined it as a relationship between a man and a woman?

Stupidity can be cured. Ignorance is for life!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-12-2010 01:22 AM  7 years agoPost 86
philip 01

rrElite Veteran

ft worth

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

if we have to debate, from a legal standpoint, as to whether a marrige can be instituted so two guys can gargle each others chicken mcnuggets, we've already lost the battle.

meat curtains are one thing, but the skin flute swallowing and boucing mcnuggets off your tonsils needs to go to a mental health discussion as a rehabilitation issue.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-12-2010 01:24 AM  7 years agoPost 87
Aaron29

rrProfessor

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlbV-NPT56s

I dunno, man. Folks gotta have their McNuggets!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-12-2010 02:02 AM  7 years agoPost 88
philip 01

rrElite Veteran

ft worth

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

but not the hairy sweaty kind.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-12-2010 04:14 AM  7 years agoPost 89
Aaron29

rrProfessor

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Honey mustard or barbecue?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-12-2010 04:38 AM  7 years agoPost 90
philip 01

rrElite Veteran

ft worth

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

salt and dingle berrys. it appears.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-12-2010 11:20 PM  7 years agoPost 91
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

You know, after studying that issue in CA and Prop 8 as much as I can with my limited abilities, that decision by that looser judge could just as easily loose in the Supreme Court.

Here is why I think why:

7 million people in CA voted to affirm that marriage should be between a man and a women. They did NOT ban gay marriage by legal language. They only affirmed that marriage should be between a man and a woman. In legalese, that means they did NOT ban gay marriage. Also, that judge did not put out a legal opinion to support his decision. It was a personal opinion.

Thousands of gay people could very easily get disappointed once again and their marriages annulled.

But, only if it goes to a right leaning Supreme Court. Still, it will be a close decision. If the gays loose, there will be riots in the streets. If the Prop 8 supporters loose, life will go on. The issue will end.

Just a personal opinion. I am not a legal expert at all.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-12-2010 11:23 PM  7 years agoPost 92
SSN Pru

rrElite Veteran

Taxachusetts

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

what's the difference between a right leaning activist judge and a left leaning one?

Nothing.

I hope I never see you bitching about a lefty activist judge anymore. You've lost that privilege.

Stupidity can be cured. Ignorance is for life!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-12-2010 11:31 PM  7 years agoPost 93
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I hope I never see you bitching about a lefty activist judge anymore. You've lost that privilege.
This is simply a discussion about heavy issues. If I want to rant and rave about a lefty activist judge, I will. You are welcome to counter that with a righty activist judge. Or whatever you want.

Don't get your panties in a wad over it.
Get yourself together.
what's the difference between a right leaning activist judge and a left leaning one?
Well, one leans to the left and the other leans to the right. Ideologically, of course.

Answer your question?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-13-2010 02:46 AM  7 years agoPost 94
baby uh1

rrVeteran

St. James, Mo.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

A left leaning judge rules from his feelings and a right leaning judge rules by the Constitution.
That's all!

Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
08-13-2010 10:58 PM  7 years agoPost 95
debogus

rrApprentice

Beauklahoma,peoples republic of mexifornia,USSA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

And the Judge is gay .

Ah so this is how you neuter the will of the people ?
Why aren't they protesting every other state that doesn't allow same sex marriage?

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
08-13-2010 11:03 PM  7 years agoPost 96
hockeysew

rrApprentice

Co-USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

A left leaning judge rules from his feelings and a right leaning judge rules by the Constitution.
BINGO!!

I do feel that this Judge should not have been allowed to preside on this case. With him being hisself a rump ranger there is no way he could be "impartial".
That of it's own should be enough to have his findings tossed, just like his salad

Liberals are like a "Slinky", useless but entertaining when pushed down stairs....

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 5 pages [ <<    <     3      4     ( 5 )    >    >> ] 2812 views POST REPLY
HelicopterOff Topics News & Politics › One Leftist Judge Slaps Down Seven Million Voters in California
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 7  Topic Subscribe

Wednesday, May 23 - 10:17 am - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online