Louisiana won't Recognize Same-Sex Marriages

[adrynalyne]

Kinda tired of seeing rainbow crap all over the net... can't wait for it to die down and people stop pushing their beliefs onto others.

Images push their beliefs onto you?

 

Wow, you are one impressionable fellow.

 

I'd recommend you steer clear of movies involving mass murder.

I'm impressed at the level of back patting going on in this thread, as well as the sheer intolerance of certain groups of people. Just goes to show even a good cause can have its fair share of bigotry when everyone here resorts to calling people who disagree with them names and inferring they are somehow superior to them.

 

Complete disrespect for differing opinions, but hey I suppose that's the internet for you.

 

Imagine if the supreme court ruled in the opposite direction and banned same sex marriage. I'm sure statements like "This day was our 9/11" would be uttered by the LGBT community just as easily and not so heavily criticized. It's funny the double standards people have.

If your opinion involves mixing church and state, it doesn't deserve to be respected.

 

This is my opinion., I bet you don't respect it, and that makes your statement rather hypocritical.

[Dot Matrix]

Justice Moore made the unprecedented claim that he was not bound by decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court that conflict with his view of the U.S. Constitution.  Indeed, he stated that it would violate his

[tompkin]

That's not how things work.    

I am on another (non-technical) site where there are people from around the world. I'm sure it is often easy to misinterpret things on our news. (Even our own people do that continually). 

Justice Moore would never be allowed to do that.

If he said that, it's just for show. Probably playing up to his own political backers. 

 

The President could send C-130's full of Abrams tanks down there to prevent anything like that. 

[TMYW]

let me google that for you

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/judge-grants-gay-divorce-florida-article-1.2049363

 

its not rocket science is it?

It's rocket surgery!

 

I love how these anti-same-sex marriage guys keep pulling out all of these contrived scenarios from their nether regions as if we painted ourselves into a corner by legalizing it.

[TMYW]

There are more important things in the world to fight about anyway, such as ISIS, AIDS and cancer, ebola,and more violence. I'd say gay marriage is the very last thing to waste our government's time with.

That's why the SCOTUS ruling is welcomed. States can stop wasting their time trying to implement laws banning same-sex marriage.

[Stoffel]

I still haven't heard a valid reason to be against same sex marriage from anybody.

Wonder why everybody is up in arms about this.

Letting other people get married has no effect on you personally what so ever.

So what is it then?

[TMYW]

I'm impressed at the level of back patting going on in this thread, as well as the sheer intolerance of certain groups of people. Just goes to show even a good cause can have its fair share of bigotry when everyone here resorts to calling people who disagree with them names and inferring they are somehow superior to them.

 

Complete disrespect for differing opinions, but hey I suppose that's the internet for you.

 

Imagine if the supreme court ruled in the opposite direction and banned same sex marriage. I'm sure statements like "This day was our 9/11" would be uttered by the LGBT community just as easily and not so heavily criticized. It's funny the double standards people have.

 

LOL! Another "Christian persecution" whine post. It's not intolerance for "certain groups of people". It's intolerance of intolerance. Have all the Christianity you want. Just stop being intolerant of others.

 

And don't confuse respecting one's right to have an opinion with respecting what that opinion is. You're obliged to do the former, but you are NOT obliged to do the latter. What's the point of free speech if you have to just respect whatever anybody says? Free speech is all about criticizing what you believe are BAD IDEAS. I find that ideas requiring religion dogma to back them up are almost universally bad ideas, and I'll freely use my right to free speech to share that opinion.

[TMYW]

I still haven't heard a valid reason to be against same sex marriage from anybody.

Wonder why everybody is up in arms about this.

Letting other people get married has no effect on you personally what so ever.

So what is it then?

When you're left with characterizing proponents of the legalization of same-sex marriage as being "intolerant", you're completely out of reasons that even remotely resemble "valid".

[Emn1ty]

If your opinion involves mixing church and state, it doesn't deserve to be respected.

 

This is my opinion., I bet you don't respect it, and that makes your statement rather hypocritical.

 

First of all, this is a great example of what's going on here. Both of the people quoting me have assumed my position about all this and immediately placed me opposed to their views. How can you possible jump to that conclusion when all I've remarked on is the fact that everyone in here is effectively circle-jerking about this issue and putting others down because apparently they're just "stupid rednecks" that don't deserve an opinion.

 

Does this at all seem like a civilized way to handle the issue? To slander and bully people who don't conform to your own world views because you can?

 

My opinion is that the states should grant marriage at all, but civil unions. Marriage is that of the church and is nothing but symbolic while a union granted by the state has nothing to do with marriage. It's just a legal contract to share assets and responsibilities under the law. If that was the way it was from the start this wouldn't even be an issue.

 

LOL! Another "Christian persecution" whine post. It's not intolerance for "certain groups of people". It's intolerance of intolerance. Have all the Christianity you want. Just stop being intolerant of others.

 

And don't confuse respecting one's right to have an opinion with respecting what that opinion is. You're obliged to do the former, but you are NOT obliged to do the latter. What's the point of free speech if you have to just respect whatever anybody says? Free speech is all about criticizing what you believe are BAD IDEAS. I find that ideas requiring religion dogma to back them up are almost universally bad ideas, and I'll freely use my right to free speech to share that opinion.

 

I don't really call statements like these being "intolerant of intolerance". The seem quite obvious what their intentions were. You may not be obliged to respect an opinion, but it's not an excuse to behave like five year olds.

 

Damn rednecks. 

 

Attorney General James D.

[Stoffel]

 

My opinion is that the states should grant marriage at all, but civil unions. Marriage is that of the church and is nothing but symbolic while a union granted by the state has nothing to do with marriage. It's just a legal contract to share assets and responsibilities under the law. If that was the way it was from the start this wouldn't even be an issue.

 

 

But this is exactly what is going on, except for the naming.

I don't think gay people were fighting for the right to be married at a church. They just want to have the same legal rights as hetero couples.

[TMYW]

I don't really call statements like these being "intolerant of intolerance". The seem quite obvious what their intentions were. You may not be obliged to respect an opinion, but it's not an excuse to behave like five year olds.

 

They're examples of ridiculing people for their ignorance and intolerance. If you see calls for having separate drinking fountains, lunch counters, and schools for "rednecks", let me know.

 

 

Yes, cause it's as simple as boiling down the entire South as a bunch of idiot rednecks. Totally reasonable.

And this is an example of a straw man. Try being a little less hyperbolic with your claims, and maybe you'll have even an inch of ground to stand on.

[Mouettus]

'murica!

[Gone]

That's why the SCOTUS ruling is welcomed. States can stop wasting their time trying to implement laws banning same-sex marriage.

For the record I do NOT support gay marriage, but it doesn't affect me much anyway though I know it will affect freedom of religion in the future when churches are forced to marry homosexuals against their doctrine (pretty much every religion out there). 

 

Don't screw with society and use your freedom without oppressing others views and you are good. Don't make a big deal because somebody thinks what you do is immoral (note: I am not referring to you TMYW, but to the homosexuals). I don't expect the gays to force their views on me, nor do I expect the churches to force their views on me either.

 

Jehovah Witnesses are a different story though.....

[ATLien_0]

First and foremost, I am not a Christian, and for me growing up in the south its always been amusing to see the conservative christians push their beliefs on others and even into government. When I bring up the fact that these very same people always are the ones that argue we have to stick to the constitution, I bring up we have separation of church and state for a reason in the constitution. They then refute. Now I saw this in a facebook comment earlier this weekend from one of the local papers

 

I get sick and tired of folks using the Bible to say "The Bible says" and beat up people! I love the Bible, I do believe it is the inspired word of God. BUT The Bible tells me how to treat my slaves, how to treat my multiple wives and how to sacrifice my lambs and doves. It forbids eating catfish, shrimp and crab. It forbids me wearing a polyester suit and a cottom shirt. It says growing a garden of more than one crop is a sin, like having parsley and sage in a herbal garden. It forbids women speaking in church and being ministers. It says I can not get divorced. Why don't people quote those parts?

 

[PaulATMOS]

Gay marriage is highly offensive to the Islamic religion. In fact, the act of sodomy in an Islamic country results in harsh jail time. Let's face it, marriage was never designed nor worded for the joining of two same sex couples. They can have a civil union but the word marriage cannot be used.

[wakjak]

Gay marriage is highly offensive to the Islamic religion. In fact, the act of sodomy in an Islamic country results in harsh jail time. Let's face it, marriage was never designed nor worded for the joining of two same sex couples. They can have a civil union but the word marriage cannot be used.

heterosexuals engage in sodomy every day. To pretend that it's only a homosexual act would be disingenuous and you know it.

For the record I do NOT support gay marriage, but it doesn't affect me much anyway though I know it will affect freedom of religion in the future when churches are forced to marry homosexuals against their doctrine (pretty much every religion out there). 

 

 

Priests aren't going to be forced to marry homosexuals, just like they're not forced to marry heterosexual couples. They choose to do so everyday.

[T3X4S]

Here, Denton County was turning down people, they claimed it was because of software needing to be updated, that their systems would not allow it-  FWIW

[mudslag]

Gay marriage is highly offensive to the Islamic religion. In fact, the act of sodomy in an Islamic country results in harsh jail time. Let's face it, marriage was never designed nor worded for the joining of two same sex couples. They can have a civil union but the word marriage cannot be used.

 

 

Why should anyone care if anyone else is offended? Being offended is personal and in all fairness nothing happens when you're offended. It's not like you wake up the next day with ebola because you got offended. Given that this isn't a Islamic country, it's meaningless, so they can deal with it. 

[T3X4S]

First and foremost, I am not a Christian, and for me growing up in the south its always been amusing to see the conservative christians push their beliefs on others and even into government. When I bring up the fact that these very same people always are the ones that argue we have to stick to the constitution, I bring up we have separation of church and state for a reason in the constitution. They then refute. Now I saw this in a facebook comment earlier this weekend from one of the local papers

He forgot the most laughable - its OK to rape a woman, as long as you marry her, and giver her dad 50 pieces of silver.

Or, if an angry mob is at your house and they want someone who is a guest in your house - you can offer your daughter for them to do as they wish....

Yeah, it says that - and they claim its the "divine word of god" - funny how he hates the things they hated back then, and loved the things they loved back then - so lucky for them the way that worked out

[+Red King Subscriber²]

Gay marriage is highly offensive to the Islamic religion. In fact, the act of sodomy in an Islamic country results in harsh jail time. Let's face it, marriage was never designed nor worded for the joining of two same sex couples. They can have a civil union but the word marriage cannot be used.

USA is not an Islamic theocracy.

[Dot Matrix]

Jindal: Louisiana Will 'Comply' With Same-Sex Marriage Ruling:

 

Presidential candidate Gov. Bobby Jindal, R-La., said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that while he disagrees with the Supreme Court's ruling legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states, his state will abide by the Court's decision.

"We don't have a choice," Jindal said Sunday. "Our agencies will comply with the court order."

 

Jindal said the Court ignored the Tenth Amendment when it issued its ruling Friday that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. He said the fight will now focus on maintaining religious freedom.

"I think it is wrong for the federal government to force Christian individuals, businesses, pastors, churches to participate in wedding ceremonies that violate our sincerely held religious beliefs. We have to stand up and fight for religious liberty. That's where this fight is going," he told Chuck Todd. "The left wants to silence us. Hillary Clinton wants to silence us. We're not going away."

 

- http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/jindal-louisiana-will-comply-same-sex-marriage-ruling-n383381?cid=sm_tw&hootPostID=507ece0bea5d429d1674c7a2a3ebe383

 

 

Why are these people making everything about them and their religion? How selfish. Friday's ruling has no effect on you if you do not wish to marry into the same sex. No one is forcing these pastors to do anything. If you don't want to officiate a wedding, fine, the engaged couple can go elsewhere. I hear having ordained friends is quite popular today.   

[trag3dy]

I am on another (non-technical) site where there are people from around the world. I'm sure it is often easy to misinterpret things on our news. (Even our own people do that continually). 

Justice Moore would never be allowed to do that.

If he said that, it's just for show. Probably playing up to his own political backers. 

 

The President could send C-130's full of Abrams tanks down there to prevent anything like that. 

 

Uhm, no. That would be illegal.

[COKid]

Let's face it, marriage was never designed nor worded for the joining of two same sex couples. They can have a civil union but the word marriage cannot be used.

Actually the word marriage CAN be used. The SCOTUS just said so. That's how we roll here in the USA, so you are the one who needs to face it. 

 

And so you know, I couldn't care less about the Islamic or any other religion. Religion is simply a tool used to control the weak-minded among us.  

[Forjo]

But this is exactly what is going on, except for the naming.

I don't think gay people were fighting for the right to be married at a church. They just want to have the same legal rights as hetero couples.

I disagree. I think the name is at the core of this whole issue.

 

True, I don't think most care about churches. But if the right to be civilly joined was the only thing they asked for, I doubt many would have been opposed. I believe two (or more) people should be free to enter into whatever legal agreement they want. The real question is whether such unions should be afforded special privileges under the law.

 

In the case of marriage, there are certain legal privileges -- particularly involving taxes, power of attorney powers, and other benefits. I believe gay couples should have complete access to all of these so long as their unions are as legally binding as those of non-gay couples.

 

But I don't think it should be called marriage. That word already has a definition. And I believe the activists want that definition changed not only to grant themselves access to the aforementioned privileges (which they do deserve), but also to weaken the influence and the mindshare of religion and other so-called "traditional values". I see a systematic and sometime concerted effort in this country and others to undermine and deconstruct traditional values and religion -- in particular, Christian religion.  Islam, for the moment, seems to be off-limits. But Christianity is under assault on multiple fronts.

 

If you don't believe, then don't -- it is your right. But we who do believe are also exercising a protected right -- at least until that right is taken away (which I believe is the goal of many). By the language of many of the posters in this thread (and the replies that are sure to follow this post), I'm sure many of you would support the removal of that right. But I caution you not to pledge your support to quickly. A government that can take away such a right can take away almost anything. Today you might be on the benefitting side of such a government. Tomorrow you might not be so lucky.

 

-Forjo

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Marriage isn't a religious construct, it's a legal one. It's also a federally protected right under US law, so you can't restrict it to people just because a religion disagrees (Especially because the US isn't a "religious country")

Uhm, no. That would be illegal.

Yeah, it'd be the national guard, not the army.