Gay Marriage and the Supreme Court

[CardiacCoug]

This pretty much sums up my thoughts...


http://www.redstate.com/2013/06/27/y...-made-to-care/



I hope he and those who share his fears are wrong.

Don't worry he's totally wrong, especially when he says "gay marriage and religion are not compatible."

[Guest]

Don't worry he's totally wrong, especially when he says "gay marriage and religion are not compatible."

Religion wants gay people but religion is in denial about it. Think about this. Religion wants you to go with your feelings. Religion, just like being gay, as soon as you start using your head to think about the logic involved, it no longer makes sense. No one ever says to reason either out in your mind because you can't. The facts involved with both are not explainable. Sure people attempt an explanation, but, just like everyone else before them, they fail.

Church is all about being touchy-feely and dealing with emotions. Religion appeals to the emotional type, women and gays. I'm willing to guess that there are way more women emotionally deep in the church than there are men. Sure men go and they may even claim to like it, but they are almost never as emotional about it as women.

[Shaka]

Is there a more ridiculous euphemism than "Supporter of Traditional Marriage" out there?

The fact that anti-gay marriage people aren't even willing to label themselves correctly is evidence that somewhere deep down they know what they are doing is shameful and wrong.

I have no problem with gay marriage but I think the above statement is bombastic crappola.

[CardiacCoug]

I have no problem with gay marriage but I think the above statement is bombastic crappola.

Why do you think the preferred wording is that they support traditional marriage? Enlighten me.

[Shaka]

Why do you think the preferred wording is that they support traditional marriage? Enlighten me.

You of course are getting hung up on semantics. Who cares how they define themselves? Besides historically marriage has been a civil or religious (in the past these have oftentimes been intertwined) construct to aid the biologically compatible in the raising up of offspring. This has been the same whether marriage is common law, arranged, or how we celebrate it now. Definitely there has been an evolution that has led to what is now considered traditional.

[CardiacCoug]

You of course are getting hung up on semantics. Who cares how they define themselves? Besides historically marriage has been a civil or religious (in the past these have oftentimes been intertwined) construct to aid the biologically compatible in the raising up of offspring. This has been the same whether marriage is common law, arranged, or how we celebrate it now. Definitely there has been an evolution that has led to what is now considered traditional.

Is somebody trying to get rid of those types of marriages? It's nonsense they way people are saying they support those kinds of marriages -- that's not the issue and those marriages will obviously continue.

Call it bombastic crappola if you want, but I really do believe that people who are against gay marriage don't want to say "I'm against gay marriage" because they know somewhere deep down that that position is mean-spirited and wrong. So they distance themselves from the issue by carrying on about the stuff you posted about traditional marriage, which to me seems entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand.

[Shaka]

Is somebody trying to get rid of those types of marriages? It's nonsense they way people are saying they support those kinds of marriages -- that's not the issue and those marriages will obviously continue.

Call it bombastic crappola if you want, but I really do believe that people who are against gay marriage don't want to say "I'm against gay marriage" because they know somewhere deep down that that position is mean-spirited and wrong. So they distance themselves from the issue by carrying on about the stuff you posted about traditional marriage, which to me seems entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand.

I hardly think folks like LA Ute are mean spirited simply because they happen to disagree with either one of us. Personally I think the approach that anyone who happens to disagree with gay marriage must be a moron is ridiculous. While I do not have a problem with it it doesn't mean that I can't see why others might.

[CardiacCoug]

I hardly think folks like LA Ute are mean spirited simply because they happen to disagree with either one of us. Personally I think the approach that anyone who happens to disagree with gay marriage must be a moron is ridiculous. While I do not have a problem with it it doesn't mean that I can't see why others might.

I don't think LA Ute or anybody else here who supports gay marriage is a moron and I don't think they are mean-spirited. I think they are distancing themselves from a blunt and accurate description of their supposed position because they are good people who are NOT mean-spirited. They're good people who don't want to say bad things so they stay positive by emphasizing the irrelevant topic of heterosexual marriages.

And I think it's clear from LA Ute's responses and for that matter the LDS Church actions in recent years that they don't think it's a moral imperative for religious straight people to fight endlessly to ensure that all gay people remain permanently (legally) unmarried. These are the actions and attitudes of good and smart people.

[Shaka]

If good and smart people.

Describing LA Ute? This might be a stretch.

I kid I kid!

[All-American]

John McGinnis of Northwestern Law school is part of a panel on Cspan discussing the recently concluded term. He is no fan of DOMA, and supports same sex marriage, but he called the Kennedy opinion in Windsor "the most singular failure in the history of the Supreme Court." Gasps ensued.

[venkman]

Don't worry he's totally wrong, especially when he says "gay marriage and religion are not compatible."

I guess we'll see.

Religion is a pretty broad spectrum. Certain religions or strains of religions will have no problem with it. Many don't already. I guess he's talking more orthodox or conservative strains.

[SoonerCoug]

Gay Mormons will eventually be allowed to marry in the temple.

[Indy Coug]

Gay Mormons will eventually be allowed to marry in the temple.

Within how many years?

[SoonerCoug]

Within how many years?

50.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

50.

I said 30 about a month ago in a similar conversation with my FiL.