All Things LGBTQ+ (4 Viewers)

[Farb]

Didn't really see a place for this so I thought I would start a thread about all things LGBTQ since this is a pretty hot topic in our culture right now

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/17/sup...y-that-refuses-to-work-with-lgbt-couples.html

• The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a unanimous defeat to LGBT couples in a high-profile case over whether Philadelphia could refuse to contract with a Roman Catholic adoption agency that says its religious beliefs prevent it from working with same-sex foster parents.
• Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in an opinion for a majority of the court that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment by refusing to contract with Catholic Social Services once it learned that the organization would not certify same-sex couples for adoption.

I will admit, I was hopeful for this decision by the SCOTUS but I was surprised by the unanimous decision.

While I don't think there is anything wrong, per se, with same sex couples adopting and raising children (I actually think it is a good thing as it not an abortion) but I also did not want to see the state force a religious institution to bend to a societal norm.

 

[MT15]

Are you implying God is punishing me for lying?

No I am not implying anything. I am saying you are a HUGE hypocrite. Someone who wants government out of your life, but wants big government to punish the people you don’t like.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Yes that is me!! Thanks.
So, I voted to take abortion away from the federal government and into more localized government.

I don't think this proves what you think it proves!! LOL

Are you saying that government ceases to be big when it's at the state level, even though the same number of people are being impacted? How do you define big government?

 

[cuddlemonkey]

That was it. That was my point.

And what does that have to do with someone not wanting freedom to be ruled by the religious beliefs and edicts of others? If a law protects a right that goes against your religion, you still have the ability to not exercise that right. Your ability to freely practice your religion has not been prohibited in any way.

 

[MT15]

And what does that have to do with someone not wanting freedom to be ruled by the religious beliefs and edicts of others? If a law protects a right that goes against your religion, you still have the ability to not exercise that right. Your ability to freely practice your religion has not been prohibited in any way.

The point is that he wants other people to have their rights restricted, but not him. He’s part of the theocracy so they will never restrict his rights. It’s all so banal.

 

[Optimus Prime]

 

[Farb]

Are you saying that government ceases to be big when it's at the state level, even though the same number of people are being impacted? How do you define big government?

I would be fine with abortion being county to county, I think anything smaller than that will be impossible to regulate though. Unfortunately, every law that is passed, there has to be an executive branch that regulates it. The smaller civil governments don't have that man power but you are correct. The smaller/more local the better.

 

[Farb]

And what does that have to do with someone not wanting freedom to be ruled by the religious beliefs and edicts of others? If a law protects a right that goes against your religion, you still have the ability to not exercise that right. Your ability to freely practice your religion has not been prohibited in any way.

So you are fine with child marriages, honor killings and polygamy? (I am sure you are ok with polygamy sadly)

 

[Optimus Prime]

 

[coldseat]

I can match his hate with equal hate. I think all Christian preachers like him and their congregations should be lined up and shot in the back of the head by our government because they're evil child molesters and abusers that drag this country in to ruin with their extremism.

That was fun!

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I would be fine with abortion being county to county, I think anything smaller than that will be impossible to regulate though. Unfortunately, every law that is passed, there has to be an executive branch that regulates it. The smaller civil governments don't have that man power but you are correct. The smaller/more local the better.

Again, though, you didn't address the actual question. How do you define "big government"?

 

[cuddlemonkey]

So you are fine with child marriages, honor killings and polygamy? (I am sure you are ok with polygamy sadly)

There are secular reasons to prevent these things. The fact that these things are not allowed in our society shows that the wall of separation between church and state is designed to be an actual wall and it works.

 

[Farb]

I think mister man there has a few skeletons in his/her closet.

 

[Farb]

Again, though, you didn't address the actual question. How do you define "big government"?

Any government that overreaches their power.

How about you? What do you consider big government?

 

[Farb]

There are secular reasons to prevent these things. The fact that these things are not allowed in our society shows that the wall of separation between church and state is designed to be an actual wall and it works.

Why are those things not allowed? Hint: religion. Religion formed the foundation for the wests legal system.

I am all for separation of faith and law regardless of the actual underpinning of western society is in fact religion. However, the alt-left has just swapped a spiritual religion for a religion of self where the right for sexual gratification is the most important thing. Us religious nut jobs/hicks call that Satanism. So when the left screams about separation of church of state, they don't mean their new religion, just the old religions that are against a Marxist society. Why is it that the 1st thing a socialist government does is destroy the church?

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Any government that overreaches their power.

How about you? What do you consider big government?

I look at it more as a government that excessively meddles in the private affairs of the people.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Why are those things not allowed? Hint: religion. Religion formed the foundation for the wests legal system.

I am all for separation of faith and law regardless of the actual underpinning of western society is in fact religion. However, the alt-left has just swapped a spiritual religion for a religion of self where the right for sexual gratification is the most important thing. Us religious nut jobs/hicks call that Satanism. So when the left screams about separation of church of state, they don't mean their new religion, just the old religions that are against a Marxist society. Why is it that the 1st thing a socialist government does is destroy the church?

Does this stuff make sense to you when you type it, because all I see is a jumbled word salad that demonstrates zero understanding of anything it attempts to address.

 

[MT15]

Why are those things not allowed? Hint: religion. Religion formed the foundation for the wests legal system.

I am all for separation of faith and law regardless of the actual underpinning of western society is in fact religion. However, the alt-left has just swapped a spiritual religion for a religion of self where the right for sexual gratification is the most important thing. Us religious nut jobs/hicks call that Satanism. So when the left screams about separation of church of state, they don't mean their new religion, just the old religions that are against a Marxist society. Why is it that the 1st thing a socialist government does is destroy the church?

These are almost all lies.

Do you honestly think the “west” (lol) has some sort of monopoly on ethical legal systems? This is extremely rich coming from someone who wants to take the US into a theocracy similar to what the Taliban likes to do.

Throwing in the old “satanism” canard is the worst sort of smear. You are evidently scraping the bottom of the barrel these days. It’s sad, but just par for the course these days for your side.

 

[Farb]

I look at it more as a government that excessively meddles in the private affairs of the people.

Workable definition, but for me, the key is the over reach.