Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 92

Thread: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

  1. #11
    The Expert
    JP Cusick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Hollywood, MD. USA, 20636
    Last Seen
    04-22-15 @ 03:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,240

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    It's not a violation, nobody took over anything.
    It is troubling that you do not know the difference between violate and taking over, and that is a huge sign that you lack personal boundaries.

    It would be like owning property / or land, and some one drives over top of your land everyday without your permission so that it cuts tracks as a rough road into your land so the land is violated but not taken over, and the police (the State) empowers those who drive over your land (your Church) even after you said not to do that.

    As such the Churches said "no" to the same-sex marriages (their land) but the State law forced that the Churches could not stop that violation.

    So the Churches are not taken over as the Churches are only violated.

    The separation of Church from State has been violated because the State has taken control over the religious Institution of marriage.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    You've always been able to have a private religious ceremony for whatever you like. Your church can marry two dogs if it wants to, but the government isn't going to recognize it.
    Clearly you show a lack of respect for the churches and or for religion, because the Churches would never marry two dogs.

    While only the government can recognize the union of two dogs, and the government is the only one who can empower the marriage of two dogs.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++
    SIGNATURE: JP Cusick
    Mr. Know-it-all, sir.

  2. #12
    The Dude
    Kobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Western NY
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    43,219

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Marriage is not a solely religious institution and never has been.
    Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.

  3. #13
    The Expert
    JP Cusick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Hollywood, MD. USA, 20636
    Last Seen
    04-22-15 @ 03:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,240

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Kobie View Post
    Marriage is not a solely religious institution and never has been.
    Maybe not solely religious but it was always religious - until now when the State violated the religious Institution.

    The various governments did step into marriage from the beginning of governments, but marriages NEVER happened without religion included.

    The separation of Church from State is now officially violated.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++
    SIGNATURE: JP Cusick
    Mr. Know-it-all, sir.

  4. #14
    The Dude
    Kobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Western NY
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    43,219

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    Maybe not solely religious but it was always religious - until now when the State violated the religious Institution.

    The various governments did step into marriage from the beginning of governments, but marriages NEVER happened without religion included.

    The separation of Church from State is now officially violated.
    Which governments?

    (You're fractally wrong, btw)
    Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.

  5. #15
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 07:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    The problem is that marriage was originally an institution of religion, and instead of the separation of church from State the States took over control of marriage away from religion thereby violating the institution, and after that then the State laws and Federal laws have no basis in morality and thereby the secular laws do not have any authority to say "no" to the same sex marriage.

    It is a violation of the church by the State.

    Of course we never see that position argued in the Courts.

    All the State has is civil unions so calling a civil union as a marriage is just a play on words.

    Of course now the Churches have mostly bowed to the demands and orders of the States and thereby the institution of marriage is violated.

    The irony of it is that marriages for religious people and for natural partners was already being destroyed by the laws so letting the homosexuals have that dead institution of marriage is ironic since they are the only ones left in the USA who sees marriage as desirable or as valuable or as having any meaning.

    A lot (if not most or all) of the States have local representatives who are trying to show their self to be politically against the same sex marriage in order to get that vote so they create those unsound laws which can never stand up in Court so THEN those representatives can pretend to be against it when really it is just a charade.

    1. Churches are not being forced to perform religious ceremonies for same-sex religious marriages.

    2. Churches (and other religious organizations) have been VOLUNTARILY performing same-sex religious marriages for a long time.



    >>>>

  6. #16
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    01-19-18 @ 08:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    45,455

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    The problem is that marriage was originally an institution of religion, and instead of the separation of church from State the States took over control of marriage away from religion thereby violating the institution, and after that then the State laws and Federal laws have no basis in morality and thereby the secular laws do not have any authority to say "no" to the same sex marriage.

    It is a violation of the church by the State.

    Of course we never see that position argued in the Courts.

    All the State has is civil unions so calling a civil union as a marriage is just a play on words.

    Of course now the Churches have mostly bowed to the demands and orders of the States and thereby the institution of marriage is violated.

    The irony of it is that marriages for religious people and for natural partners was already being destroyed by the laws so letting the homosexuals have that dead institution of marriage is ironic since they are the only ones left in the USA who sees marriage as desirable or as valuable or as having any meaning.

    A lot (if not most or all) of the States have local representatives who are trying to show their self to be politically against the same sex marriage in order to get that vote so they create those unsound laws which can never stand up in Court so THEN those representatives can pretend to be against it when really it is just a charade.
    sorry but this is completely false since churches are still free to marry who ever they want the made up story in your posts loses to that fact.
    Quote Originally Posted by RamFel View Post
    Genetically human & human being is exactly the same thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    homosexuality is objectively wrong, but because science tells me it is, not politics.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    I'm not at risk for AIDS. Gays are.
    Quote Originally Posted by ajn678 View Post
    there is no such thing as an abortion on a dead fetus.

  7. #17
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    01-19-18 @ 08:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    45,455

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post
    Maybe not solely religious but it was always religious - until now when the State violated the religious Institution.

    The various governments did step into marriage from the beginning of governments, but marriages NEVER happened without religion included.

    The separation of Church from State is now officially violated.
    and yet you cant offer one fact that supports your false claim . . . not one
    Quote Originally Posted by RamFel View Post
    Genetically human & human being is exactly the same thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    homosexuality is objectively wrong, but because science tells me it is, not politics.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    I'm not at risk for AIDS. Gays are.
    Quote Originally Posted by ajn678 View Post
    there is no such thing as an abortion on a dead fetus.

  8. #18
    Advisor NonConformer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    01-12-18 @ 05:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    419

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    The national battle over gay marriage rages on. Hardly a day goes by without yet another legal skirmish somewhere; the most recent one is in Nebraska, I think.

    Allow me to break apart this thing we call "marriage". There are really at least two separate aspects:

    First there is the love, sex, and romance aspect. To be blunt, the government has no business here. Nothing in the history books, nor the Declaration of Independence, nor the Constitution, nor the Bible remotely suggest that love, sex, and romance should have governmental oversight.

    The second aspect is the legal contract. This contract, signed by both parties, covers matters such as inheritance, survivor benefits, medical decisions, and such. Now it can be argued that government does have role in the enforcement of legal contracts. And I have no problem at all if two, or more, people of ANY relationship choose to enter unto a binding legal contract covering matters like inheritance and such.

    The problem arises when said legal contract includes the word "marriage", because by word association, we're now getting into matters of love, sex, and romance, which are clearly out of governmental jurisdiction.

    Therefore the solution to this whole same-sex marriage dilemma is obvious: just re-name the darned contract. Call it something that does not include the word "marriage." The name "civil union" has been proposed; sounds Ok by me. And anybody who wants one can have one!

    Meanwhile, keep "marriage" about love, sex, and romance, and if two (or more) people want to participate in it, well that's between them, and their God, assuming they believe in God and so choose to involve him too. But keep government out of it.

  9. #19
    The Expert
    JP Cusick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Hollywood, MD. USA, 20636
    Last Seen
    04-22-15 @ 03:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,240

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Kobie View Post
    Which governments?

    (You're fractally wrong, btw)
    Factually wrong before I give the answer - kind of demonstrates your intentions.

    A huge turning point was Henry the 8th of England as the Church would not give him a religious divorce so he broke with that Church in order to divorce and to marry under the authority of the new State religion, and that marked a huge beginning to the violation of the Institution of marriage by the State gov.

    But here lets stick to the USA government and the 50 States.

    People in the "New World America" did not have much of any government and often the only government was the election of a local Sheriff, but the people still got married, and often times the only preachers was whoever could read the Bible as a person who could read the Bible was rare up to the turn of the 20th century and beyond in much of the old USA. So American marriages were just religious marriages and when a local government (or a State gov) was finally created then the State recorded the marriages and in time the State created a tax on marriages and that tax was called a "Marriage License".

    The State tax of a "Marriage License" is what undermined and violated the religious authority of the Church and of religion, and that State License is the only thing that now empowers the same sex marriages.


    ==============================================


    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    1. Churches are not being forced to perform religious ceremonies for same-sex religious marriages.

    2. Churches (and other religious organizations) have been VOLUNTARILY performing same-sex religious marriages for a long time.
    It is just a matter of time till the laws force all of the Churches, and I believe the force has already begun.

    The idea is to make the Church marriages to look VOLUNTARY when the Church is not allowed to refuse.

    The pressure has already begun.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++
    SIGNATURE: JP Cusick
    Mr. Know-it-all, sir.

  10. #20
    The Dude
    Kobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Western NY
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    43,219

    Re: U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by JP Cusick View Post

    It is just a matter of time till the laws force all of the Churches, and I believe the force has already begun.

    The idea is to make the Church marriages to look VOLUNTARY when the Church is not allowed to refuse.

    The pressure has already begun.
    Societal pressure is not the same as government intervention, nor is it a violation of the separation of church and state.
    Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •