ADVERTISEMENT

Gay marriage support (morals)

I do not stand up for evil. I stand up for free will and the separation of church and state... which is its physical manifestation within the confines of our constitution.

I don't believe either one of us believes that sanctity can be dictated. Knowing that, why would we provide the enemy with ammunition? It's a fools errand imho.
Agreed. No clue why government (the state) got involved in something that began in Genesis (the church)
 
Lets hope that Clarence Thomas gets his way and that Obergefell is overturned. At that moment gay marriage will be illegal in TN. People can hoop and holler about forcing religion or separation of church and state. To me that is moot nonsense because 80% of the voters in TN voted to make that the constitutional law here. Something about 9th and 10th amendments come to mind.

Rights come from the Creator who has declared homosexuality an abomination. There is no right to abominations.

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." - John Jay 1st Chief Justice of SCOTUS.

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." President John Adams.

We do NOT have a wall of separation we have a one-way mirror.

Gubmint may not interfere with the church but the church most assuredly has the right to influence the gubmint through the ballot box and rallying members from the pulpit to vote their conscience. This is the intent of the 1st amendment and the true implication of Jefferson's statement. He was after all replying to Baptist ministers and allaying their fears.

He was not replying to Libertarians who confuse Liberty with "anything goes" licentiousness.

"..Freely, and fully have and enjoy his and their own judgments, and conscience in matters of religious concernments . . .; they behaving themselves peaceably and quietly and not using this liberty to licentiousness and profaneness; nor to the civil injury, or outward disturbance of others." Rhode Island Charter 1663

but even after the Declaration we find the founders/framers using the same language to add to the intent and limitations of Liberty.

"The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever hereafter be allowed, within this state, to all mankind: provided that the liberty of conscience, hereby granted, shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of this state." - NY State Constitution 1777


-Sandra Day O'Connor a moderate wrote the article

licentious: lacking legal or moral restraints especially : disregarding sexual restraints

Merriam- Webster
Mic drop.

Well said
 
Lets hope that Clarence Thomas gets his way and that Obergefell is overturned. At that moment gay marriage will be illegal in TN. People can hoop and holler about forcing religion or separation of church and state. To me that is moot nonsense because 80% of the voters in TN voted to make that the constitutional law here. Something about 9th and 10th amendments come to mind.

Rights come from the Creator who has declared homosexuality an abomination. There is no right to abominations.

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." - John Jay 1st Chief Justice of SCOTUS.

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." President John Adams.

We do NOT have a wall of separation we have a one-way mirror.

Gubmint may not interfere with the church but the church most assuredly has the right to influence the gubmint through the ballot box and rallying members from the pulpit to vote their conscience. This is the intent of the 1st amendment and the true implication of Jefferson's statement. He was after all replying to Baptist ministers and allaying their fears.

He was not replying to Libertarians who confuse Liberty with "anything goes" licentiousness.

"..Freely, and fully have and enjoy his and their own judgments, and conscience in matters of religious concernments . . .; they behaving themselves peaceably and quietly and not using this liberty to licentiousness and profaneness; nor to the civil injury, or outward disturbance of others." Rhode Island Charter 1663

but even after the Declaration we find the founders/framers using the same language to add to the intent and limitations of Liberty.

"The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever hereafter be allowed, within this state, to all mankind: provided that the liberty of conscience, hereby granted, shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of this state." - NY State Constitution 1777


-Sandra Day O'Connor a moderate wrote the article

licentious: lacking legal or moral restraints especially : disregarding sexual restraints

Merriam- Webster

I am a Christian. I believe that homosexuality is a sin. I am an American, and I don't believe that our governance should favor one religion over another.

Not to pick on Catholicism, but let’s use that as an example. Would you be ok if our laws were based strictly on their laws and edicts? Would you be ok with the requirement for confession under the terms laid out by the Catholic Church?

God is more than capable of making judgment without our help. It is not our job to prevent sin. That is God's purview. You're charged with loving others and following His laws...and nothing more.

Our religious freedoms in this country, imho, allow us to follow God by choice. Infringing upon that right is a mistake...and since faith cannot be forced upon another, it's a fruitless effort anyway.
 
I am a Christian. I believe that homosexuality is a sin. I am an American, and I don't believe that our governance should favor one religion over another.

Not to pick on Catholicism, but let’s use that as an example. Would you be ok if our laws were based strictly on their laws and edicts? Would you be ok with the requirement for confession under the terms laid out by the Catholic Church?

God is more than capable of making judgment without our help. It is not our job to prevent sin. That is God's purview. You're charged with loving others and following His laws...and nothing more.

Our religious freedoms in this country, imho, allow us to follow God by choice. Infringing upon that right is a mistake...and since faith cannot be forced upon another, it's a fruitless effort anyway.
I refer you to my previous post. I do not advocate what you state above. Maybe read the article if you have not. There is nuance there that many miss.

Lastly, I can not force anyone to believe anything and am not trying to. I am stating that TN codified marriage as being between one man and one woman. I voted for that. Should SCOTUS fix their error then that will once again be the law in TN.
 
I think he either did not read what I posted, or he is a plant democrat that has reading comprehension issues! I AGREE with him for the most part! LOL
 

Nerd point...

That line, "I'm your huckleberry" was likely supposed to be, "I'm your huckle bearer." Huckles were what they used to call the handles on the sides of caskets. A huckle bearer was a man who carried your casket.

Huckleberry sounds way cooler so a good choice...but as a nerd I thought this was interesting when I read about it.

 
  • Like
Reactions: jfegaly
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT