Verdict on Proposition 8

[construct]

By "we" having to appease and compromise, I mean apparently our legal system and society. We lock some people up pretty quick for being "dangerous" or "threatening", yet we actually seem to give the floor to crazy people in our politically correct world. "Well, don't want to offend those religious people! Don't want to sully their word "marriage!" Well, OK, if it's their word, let's separate that word from legally recognized unions. Problem solved, right?

NOPE.

MARRIAGE HAS TO BE A LEGALLY RECOGNIZED TERM BECAUSE GOD RUNS OUR COUNTRY

Woops! There goes logic.

Yes! And that's where glee comes in! There is a time and place for being politically incorrect. This is one of 'em. (Of course, you don't do this when you're lobbying. I'm not being flippant. I'm talking about when you're holding court at the coffee house.) I grin so big my eyes squint and tear off ridiculing their scandals. I purse my lips, look down my nose, pound the table, and denounce those liars and threaten them with hell.

Now, when you go in to lobby, you just simply don't give an inch to any argument based on religious principles. You just talk about the sense of fundamental fairness that is the bedrock of American society. You disabuse them of their false notions, explain the hardships of the status quo, and appeal to fairness.

I'm just telling you my own tactics for remaining sane while doing a little good. Perhaps there are others for other people.

 

[rareboy]

This belongs here:

Can we have this made into billboards all across the US?

 

[palemale]

The American people and the voters of California have sent a clear message saying that they do not want gay marriage.

The gay community may not like it, but this is a Christian nation. Most people in this country do believe in God and in strong family values. And I don't think that is going to change anytime soon. I think that frustrates a lot of gay people, because they don't feel like they are part of the majority.

I think Ted Olson said it best to Chris Wallace when he asked about putting other rights to a vote. People want to deny rights to gay and lesbians now, but in the past, the states denied other people rights based on their minority status. Catholics were the first.

John Jay, of New York, who afterwards became Chief Justice of the United States, succeeded in fastening upon the Constitution of his own state a provision which denied the privilege of citizenship to every foreign-born Catholic unless he would first abjure and renounce all allegiance to the pope in matters ecclesiastical.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08677a.htm

That's what a Christian nation does. I think it's time we accept that this is a secular nation and we must resist our version of the Taliban and all of its bigotry.

 

[palemale]

We actually are a Christian nation. More than 3/4's of Americans actually. I'm sure you'd prefer we were a Godless society, but that's not the case.

Which form of Christianity are we? Catholics are the largest religious denomination. Should Catholic doctrine rule the country?

I, of course, would prefer that our religious citizens would free themselves from superstition. That process, alas, takes a long time.

 

[laikaNYC]

Which form of Christianity are we? Catholics are the largest religious denomination. Should Catholic doctrine rule the country?

It's a matter of statistics. No one said anything about it indoctrinating social policy.

 

[palemale]

Don't put words in my mouth. Did I say it should not exist? I sure as hell did not. What I said is that if we are allowed then what's stopping everyone else from making the same case that we've made to justify something like polygamy and beastiality.

Judge Walker's decision said that the state did not have a legitimate interest in preventing same sex couples from marrying. The same cannot be said for bestiality and polygamy. Mr. Ed aside, animals cannot give consent. Animal cruelty laws would apply. The state has a different interest in polygamy (I'm not so sure it's so compelling). However, it would not be difficult to distinguish polygamy from same sex marriage.

 

[rareboy]

But your statement Laika is just wrong.

And you just can't seem to get past it.

The US is not a christian nation.

Let it go.

Because if you keep hanging onto the idea of some kind of superiority by numbers, what are you going to do with the rest of the world?

 

[palemale]

It's a matter of statistics. No one said anything about it indoctrinating social policy.

You quoted Justice Jay earlier approvingly for the proposition that we are a Christian nation. Just curious, after reading post 242, how much you want to be influenced by his thinking on this subject.

 

[MercuryJones]

Judge Walker's decision said that the state did not have a legitimate interest in preventing same sex couples from marrying. The same cannot be said for bestiality and polygamy.

And there you have the difference between the judiciary and people who think the judiciary is just shouting sport like their use of message boards.

Anyone who reads even a solid summary of the opinion couldn't sincerely ask such a question because the opinion is plainly narrowly limited to the case before the court, based on findings of fact and law. Not ridiculous hypotheticals.

This is, again, what made the case such a relatively easy win: the gay haters, like laika, have been making a case built on hyperbole and non-legal absurdities, and when forced to contend with legal and factual matters just evaporated.

 

[laikaNYC]

You quoted Justice Jay earlier approvingly for the proposition that we are a Christian nation. Just curious, after reading post 242, how much you want to be influenced by his thinking on this subject.

The John Jay quote was only shown to provide the fact that not all the Founding Fathers shared the same views on religion in government.

By the way, Mercury, I am not a gay hater. I would expect you to say something ignorant like that though. I pity your children having to be in that house with you.

 

[BostonPirate]

The John Jay quote was only shown to provide the fact that not all the Founding Fathers shared the same views on religion in government.

By the way, Mercury, I am not a gay hater. I would expect you to say something ignorant like that though. I pity your children having to be in that house with you.

whoa buddy.

Leave a man's children out of things.

 

[MercuryJones]

Leave a man's children out of things.

It's funny though, because even my youngest child, who is not yet in high school, knows horses can't form legal consent, but laika and coolkid don't.

 

[BostonPirate]

america does not have enforced religion. It can't be a christian nation anymore than it can be a sharia law nation, laika.

I think we are stuck here on a basic concept versus a basic description and we are arguing just for the sake of hearing our own voices...or words.... you get what I mean...lol

The USA CAN be described as a christian nation in that it is descriptively that majority, but that's not really what you are implying. Laika, you are saying that america being a christian nation somehow equates with whythis bill should or shouldn't have passed, and that just isn't legally allowed.

I can say Laika is a blonde, or whatever your haircolor is, but that description in no way amounts to what you legally are allowed or not allowed to do.

Christian people would also not attack other peoples children, no matter what they did.

I think this thread needs a healthy dose of christian behavior. Not the religious kind, but the moral kind.

the kind that tells us to respect each other and to do unto others as you would have others done unto you.

why are the people so voceiferouslydefending america as a christian nation not acting christian?

it would be a good place to start in finding common ground.

 

[White Eagle]

Thank you opinterph. I just heard Ted Olsen's interview today. My Courage Campaign newsletter just came in. It was indeed a great interview. I'm surprised Fox let it be broadcast.

 

[MercuryJones]

The USA CAN be described as a christian nation in that it is descriptively that majority, but that's not really what you are implying. Laika, you are saying that america being a christian nation somehow equates with whythis bill should or shouldn't have passed, and that just isn't legally allowed.

And the thing I keep asking - to no avail - is whether the US is or isn't a "Christian nation" by whatever definition, what does it mean to anything, since Christians don't agree uniformly anyway, and we still have a legislative and judicial system?

The civil war was fought between two sides that were predominantly Christian, so was the US revolutionary war, so was every war between the French and English, and every long simmering issue in Ireland.

Saying "we're a Christian nation" is a fool's attempt to shut down conversation. But Christian nation or not, the electorate is not uniform in its opinion on this (or other) matters, and we still have a Constitution that guarantees equal protection and due process that is not contingent on a religious position.

 

[White Eagle]

Got it duped. needed to cancel it.

 

[BostonPirate]

And the thing I keep asking - to no avail - is whether the US is or isn't a "Christian nation" by whatever definition, what does it mean to anything, since Christians don't agree uniformly anyway, and we still have a legislative and judicial system?

The civil war was fought between two sides that were predominantly Christian, so was the US revolutionary war, so was every war between the French and English, and every long simmering issue in Ireland.

Saying "we're a Christian nation" is a fool's attempt to shut down conversation. But Christian nation or not, the electorate is not uniform in its opinion on this (or other) matters, and we still have a Constitution that guarantees equal protection and due process that is not contingent on a religious position.

indeed I would agree.

and let me be the first to say that denying that america is a christian nation in no way denies the individual right to believe that faith. religious freedom is one of our greatest assets.

It however is never sound legal arguement

 

[laikaNYC]

america does not have enforced religion. It can't be a christian nation anymore than it can be a sharia law nation, laika.

I think we are stuck here on a basic concept versus a basic description and we are arguing just for the sake of hearing our own voices...or words.... you get what I mean...lol

The USA CAN be described as a christian nation in that it is descriptively that majority, but that's not really what you are implying. Laika, you are saying that america being a christian nation somehow equates with whythis bill should or shouldn't have passed, and that just isn't legally allowed.

I can say Laika is a blonde, or whatever your haircolor is, but that description in no way amounts to what you legally are allowed or not allowed to do.

Christian people would also not attack other peoples children, no matter what they did.

I think this thread needs a healthy dose of christian behavior. Not the religious kind, but the moral kind.

the kind that tells us to respect each other and to do unto others as you would have others done unto you.

why are the people so voceiferouslydefending america as a christian nation not acting christian?

it would be a good place to start in finding common ground.

His children weren't attacked. His ignorance was however.

 

[Zeno Lorea]

An interesting article on the verdict from The Economist. Forgive me for not giving me own two cents. I'm not sure I have made up my mind on the verdict yet.

http://www.economist.com/node/16743792

 

[BostonPirate]

His children weren't attacked. His ignorance was however.

that's not the way it looked.

calling someone ignorant is not very christian either.

however I do appreciate the clarification, of sorts.