Draggingtree Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Houston Chronicle: Texas files notice of appeal in same-sex marriage case By Guillermo Contreras | February 27, 2014 | Updated: February 27, 2014 3:28pm SAN ANTONIO — The state of Texas has officially given notice that it is appealing a San Antonio judge's ruling that completely struck down its ban on same sex marriage. “Defendants ... Rick Perry, Greg Abbott, and David Lakey ... hereby appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit from the Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, signed and entered in this action on February 26, 2014 ,” said the state's notice, filed in federal court in San Antonio on Thursday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Why does Texans hate Gays and want to see them shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draggingtree Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 You Seek to Dragoon Me Into Violating My Conscience. A Man is More Than His Acts. By: Thomas Crown (Diary) | February 28th, 2014 at 08:00 AM We are once again having one of those great debates that in modern politics skips right past any sort of compromise and has the views of elite lawyers cast into law by our courts. I am not speaking of gay marriage; the Roberts Court signaled where that’s going. I instead mean whether Christian merchants can be coerced by act of law into providing services for gay “weddings.” The inherent problem here, as countless others have noted, is that there are two camps whose views of the world are not merely in conflict, they are actually not even on the same plane. Christians — here I mean small-o orthodox Christians, Chalcedonian Christians, even some mainline Protestants — believe that sodomy is a sin and that a marriage is by definition between one man and one woman, and that anything else one calls a marriage is not merely not a marriage but itself a perversion of something good and a kind of sin called a scandal. To an orthodox Christian, to aid in the commission of a sin is itself a sin. The Catholic Church, which has spent 2,000 years indulging a love of classification, has a term for this: cooperation with evil. (Before you tune out at the word evil, understand that it doesn’t mean mass-murderer, it means sin, or committing an act that separates us from God.) Thus, to participate in any way in the setting-up of a gay “marriage” is analogous to helping set up an abortion clinic. http://www.redstate.com/diary/Thomas/2014/02/28/dragoon-violating-conscience/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draggingtree Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 An Upside Down WorldBy: Erick Erickson (Diary) | February 28th, 2014 at 04:30 AM In December of 1865, the several American states ratified the thirteenth amendment constitutionally ending involuntary servitude in the United States. In the twenty-first century, Americans are coming full circle. In a number of states, a black man can again be forced by the government to work involuntarily for a white man. Not since the nation eliminated Jim Crow laws during the civil rights era have we seen such a bizarre conundrum. But if the black man is a Christian and the white man is gay, a court can forcibly order the black man to serve the white man or drive the black man from business. A number of states have been working to pass laws to prevent this weird conundrum, but in an irony that knows no bounds, gay-rights activists are comparing these religious freedom laws to Jim Crow. The issue boils down to one question — should a Christian who believes a wedding can only be between a man and a woman be forced to provide goods and services to a gay wedding? http://www.redstate.com/2014/02/28/an-upside-down-world/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrWoodchuck Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Just my opinion here: 1.) Most of those Christian beliefs came about from Jewish law. Jewish dietary law, like some of the laws in the Old Testament, made sense in the real world. Natural sense. Dietary laws prevented food-born illness & disease.The idea behind the sodomy law was.....procreation [multiplying + being fruitful] & family unit....to ensure the continued viability of a species and a sect. 2.) Just because these laws are thousands of years old, does not make them any less valid in the natural....or in the spiritual or cultural scheme of today. They still provide a code of belief...and strength for the family & societal unit. 3.) The United States of America.....founded as a Constitutional Republic....supposedly guarantees freedom of religion. It never meant freedom from being able to practice our chosen religion....although that is what is happening here. No state religion....that was the premise. It meant free practice of your own cultural/religious belief, without state interference. Obviously, this is in the framework of not using your religion to injure or impinge on the rights of any other of the Republic's citizens. 4.) We have a government that now interferes with an individual citizens right to exercise of their religion, by appointing other religions....especially secularism [yes, as practiced by Progressive socialists-it is a religion,] atheism, and Islam, which are receiving "enabling & superior rights," over Christianity. They are now....."more equal".......to use Orwell's, Animal Farm analogy. 5.) This establishment of the new "state religions" of secularism, atheism & Islam, does not have to happen in our American Republic. It is however, necessary to remove religious, cultural & familial freedoms....to change the world into a "better place" where the government can choose.....who gets to be more equal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draggingtree Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Erickson, Sullivan, And What “Bigots” Deserve Ignoring dissent is no way for a free people to act By Hunter Baker February 28, 2014 Andrew Sullivan and Erick Erickson recently agreed on something having to do with gay marriage and community life. Well, sort of, anyway. The nature of Sullivan’s agreement is productive of further discussion. Erickson pointed out, quite sensibly, that Christians who are photographers or bakers are not seeking to reject any and all business from gay customers. Rather, he noted, that Christian photographers and bakers object specifically to participating in a gay wedding. A wedding, for many people and certainly for Christians, is an explicitly religious activity. It is really not unreasonable for people with a particular religious view of marriage (such as Christians well within the mainstream of Christian belief) to not want to participate in something they believe to be wrong. http://thefederalist.com/2014/02/28/erickson-sullivan-and-what-bigots-deserve/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draggingtree Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Just my opinion here: 1.) Most of those Christian beliefs came about from Jewish law. Jewish dietary law, like some of the laws in the Old Testament, made sense in the real world. Natural sense. Dietary laws prevented food-born illness & disease.The idea behind the sodomy law was.....procreation [multiplying + being fruitful] & family unit....to ensure the continued viability of a species and a sect. 2.) Just because these laws are thousands of years old, does not make them any less valid in the natural....or in the spiritual or cultural scheme of today. They still provide a code of belief...and strength for the family & societal unit. 3.) The United States of America.....founded as a Constitutional Republic....supposedly guarantees freedom of religion. It never meant freedom from being able to practice our chosen religion....although that is what is happening here. No state religion....that was the premise. It meant free practice of your own cultural/religious belief, without state interference. Obviously, this is in the framework of not using your religion to injure or impinge on the rights of any other of the Republic's citizens. 4.) We have a government that now interferes with an individual citizens right to exercise of their religion, by appointing other religions....especially secularism [yes, as practiced by Progressive socialists-it is a religion,] atheism, and Islam, which are receiving "enabling & superior rights," over Christianity. They are now....."more equal".......to use Orwell's, Animal Farm analogy. 5.) This establishment of the new "state religions" of secularism, atheism & Islam, does not have to happen in our American Republic. It is however, necessary to remove religious, cultural & familial freedoms....to change the world into a "better place" where the government can choose.....who gets to be more equal. very well put, thank you 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Just my opinion here:very well put, thank you I've done some research on this. I can't find a culture/society/civilization that has sanctioned same sex marriage. Even the Spartans for whom male homosexual relationships were...encouraged, maintained that marriage was between a Man and a Woman. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrWoodchuck Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 @Draggingtree, @SrWoodchuck Why a Man and a Woman?Paul A. Rahe 3/3/14 * In my post yesterday, I deliberately restricted my purview to civil marriage. My reason for doing so was that, last year or the year before, I attended a conference on marriage at Brigham Young University; and, both from the reading assigned and the discussion, I got a good sense of what Judaism, the various Christian sects, and Mormonism have in common in their teaching about religion, and I was made aware of some of the differences. (For the record, the best book I read dealing with the Catholics and the Protestants is From Sacrament to Contract: Marriage, Religion, and Law in the Western Tradition, which was written by my friend John Witte). What these monotheistic religious traditions have in common, let me add, they have in common also with the pagan Greeks and Romans and with the pagan peoples of ancient Mesopotamia (whose thinking is reflected in the ordinances pertaining to marriage and divorce found in the Code of Hammurabi, which reflects a tradition going back as much as a millennium of Sumerian and Akkadian case law). That something in common is the emphasis on the procreation and rearing of children. None of these societies made any provision for same-sex marriage — which is extremely telling, given the fact that pederasty was a common practice throughout ancient Greece and achieved in some cities a measure of legal recognition (mainly because, like marriage, it served a public purpose — in this case, by reinforcing solidarity between men situated alongside one another in the battle line). Why a man and a woman? Well, to the ancients — even to those who were themselves homoerotically inclined — the reason seemed obvious. Same-sex couples cannot procreate. (Snip) * No-Fault Divorce and Prenuptial AgreementsPaul A. Rahe 3/2/14 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrWoodchuck Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Just my opinion here:very well put, thank you I've done some research on this. I can't find a culture/society/civilization that has sanctioned same sex marriage. Even the Spartans for whom male homosexual relationships were...encouraged, maintained that marriage was between a Man and a Woman. Several Roman Emperors "married" other males....although, as you indicated....a conubium [?] only applied between [1] male Roman citizen & [1] female Roman citizen. Even the islanders of Lesbos, a huge LGBT geaway destination, tried to sue the LGBT org. to stop them from using the name "lesbian," and lost. I, myself....am a lesbian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Just my opinion here:very well put, thank you I've done some research on this. I can't find a culture/society/civilization that has sanctioned same sex marriage. Even the Spartans for whom male homosexual relationships were...encouraged, maintained that marriage was between a Man and a Woman. Several Roman Emperors "married" other males....although, as you indicated....a conubium [?] only applied between [1] male Roman citizen & [1] female Roman citizen. Even the islanders of Lesbos, a huge LGBT geaway destination, tried to sue the LGBT org. to stop them from using the name "lesbian," and lost. I myself....am a lesbian. A couple of Roman Emperors (who could do pretty much whatever they wanted...for a short time) marrying a man is not the same as accepting same sex marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrWoodchuck Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Via My Muse Shanked Me: From The Sen: http://lastcar.blogspot.com/ What if Westboro baptist church came into a gay owned bakery and wanted a cake that said their slogan "God hates fags" on it? Should the homosexual owner be forced to make the cake? Word. "Let's make another law" isn't always the answer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 And This Is Why Muslim Bakeries Are Never Forced to Bake Cakes for Gay Weddings David Burge @iowahawkblog Idaho bakery declines to cater same-sex wedding: OMG JIM CROW Iran hangs gay men from construction cranes: whatever 12:05 PM - 3 Mar 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draggingtree Posted July 22, 2015 Author Share Posted July 22, 2015 7/21/2015 Gay Baker To Gays: Stop Being Bullies Just So You Can Have Your Cake And It Eat It Too Filed under: General — Dana @ 12:29 pm [guest post by Dana] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAWTQJdPiPU Why not patronize the business that actually wants your business? Because it’s not about business. Jesse, the gay baker, makes the case: Hi guys, my name is Jesse and I bake wedding cakes for a living, and I cannot tell you how disgusted I am with my fellow gay and lesbian community — that they would stoop so low as to force someone to bake a cake for them who simply doesn’t agree with them,” Bartholomew said. “And before you can go and blame me and say that they have to — no, they don’t have to. They don’t have to bake a cake for you.” http://patterico.com/2015/07/21/gay-baker-to-gays-stop-being-bullies-just-so-you-can-have-your-cake-and-it-eat-it-too/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valin Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 7/21/2015 Gay Baker To Gays: Stop Being Bullies Just So You Can Have Your Cake And It Eat It Too Filed under: General — Dana @ 12:29 pm [guest post by Dana] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAWTQJdPiPU Ultimately this is not about who can marry who (if it was civil unions would have been the answer), this is not even about equality. No this is about (to quote fearless leader) Fundamentally changing America..."Hey Hey, Ho Ho, Western Civ Has Got To Go." Jesse Jackson. They don't know what they want to replace it with, but Hey why let a little thing like that stop you from feeling good about yourself. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draggingtree Posted July 22, 2015 Author Share Posted July 22, 2015 How Christians Can Bake Cakes And Sign Licenses For Gay Weddings JULY 22, 2015 By The Federalist Editors It doesn’t seem right to accept that one cannot be a baker, florist, or photographer unless you compromise convictions that were well-accepted and widely shared until about five minutes ago .http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/22/how-christians-can-bake-cakes-and-sign-licenses-for-gay-weddings/ Hmmmmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now