• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

South Carolina Supreme Court Halts Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

Yes, just as state laws should adhere to federal laws. That doesn't mean that the federal government runs the states, nor does adherence to divine law mean that the Church runs the government.

who gets to decided whats divine lol
whos god? which god? and whos interpretation?
 
That the government has it's own legislators and other officials.

I meant the effective difference, in terms of what we who have to live under those laws experience. As far as we are concerned, what is the effective difference if regardless of who is making those laws, they must conform with divine law?
 
What do you want to use it for?

I want to substitute my divine law for yours, law the US government must adhere to and enforce upon the population.
 
Yes, just as state laws should adhere to federal laws. That doesn't mean that the federal government runs the states, nor does adherence to divine law mean that the Church runs the government.

this simply factually means you dont think a country should be a free country and people should have rights lol
 
I meant the effective difference, in terms of what we who have to live under those laws experience. As far as we are concerned, what is the effective difference if regardless of who is making those laws, they must conform with divine law?

I don't suppose there would be much of one. Nevertheless the term "theocracy" is not correct.

I want to substitute my divine law for yours, law the US government must adhere to and enforce upon the population.

Human beings do not get their own divine laws.
 
I don't suppose there would be much of one. Nevertheless the term "theocracy" is not correct.

If the product, legislation by divine law, is the rule and the result, then that's a theocracy. The minutiae of the process is irrelevant.
 
1.) I don't suppose there would be much of one. Nevertheless the term "theocracy" is not correct.



2.)Human beings do not get their own divine laws.

1.) actually it is
: government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided
also who would run the government?

2.) where did he mention human beings?
 
If the product, legislation by divine law, is the rule and the result, then that's a theocracy. The minutiae of the process is irrelevant.

Legislation in accordance with divine law.
 
Legislation in accordance with divine law.

Right, that's a theocracy. Replacing the priesthood with a legislative body to disguise the process is mere deception.
 
Right, that's a theocracy. Replacing the priesthood with a legislative body to disguise the process is mere deception.

No it's not.
 
If the product, legislation by divine law, is the rule and the result, then that's a theocracy. The minutiae of the process is irrelevant.

Defining sex as a marriage between a male and a female, the joining of opposite sexes, is a matter of common sense more than "divine law".
 
Human beings do not get their own divine laws.

Sure, they do, Human beings wrote the stories in the bible and other religious texts. You cannot prove YOUR religious text is divine and someone else's is not.
 
Sure, they do, Human beings wrote the stories in the bible and other religious texts. You cannot prove YOUR religious text is divine and someone else's is not.

Yes I can.
 
Nope. You and others like you are free to teach your children whatever nonsense and religious folklore you wish, but the rest of society is going to ensure that so long as you are unwilling or unable to teach them real knowledge as well, that they will learn it somewhere else. If some religious people don't approve, they are free to find other means of education for their children. But since you live in this society, you do have to help pay for the education, the real education of this society. You are free to leave anytime if you don't like that arrangement.

Same to you!
 
Defining sex as a marriage between a male and a female, the joining of opposite sexes, is a matter of common sense more than "divine law".

Ah yes, the common sense argument. Those against interracial marriage used the "common sense" argument when saying that blacks should marry blacks and whites should marry whites.
 
Defining sex as a marriage between a male and a female, the joining of opposite sexes, is a matter of common sense more than "divine law".

"Common sense" is just another term for "opinion I think should be shared by everybody else."
 
"Common sense" is just another term for "opinion I think should be shared by everybody else."

Some things are too obvious for people not to get. This is one of those things.
 
What were they teaching your child that is so against your religion. Can you be specific? I mean 8 hours of brainwashing a day is a lot of information .

It wasn't all offending of religion . Lots of revisionist history, bad science, PC crap, etc.
 
Some things are too obvious for people not to get. This is one of those things.

"Obvious" is just another word for "I'm not able to rationally explain why my belief is true."
 
Defining sex as a marriage between a male and a female, the joining of opposite sexes, is a matter of common sense more than "divine law".
facts?

ZERO

please list these facts that make it common sense LOL i cat wait to read them
 
Back
Top Bottom