- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:31 pm to FCP
quote:
The government should basically just do civil unions for everyone.
I think this is the correct answer. We all know that churches are not going to perform same sex marriages, but these couples should be able to have the financial protection of a civil marriage if they so desire.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:32 pm to wal marks
If a state wishes to legalize it, fine.
If a state wishes to ban it, fine.
If a state wishes to ban it, fine.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:33 pm to WalkingTurtles
Dude, I have no problem with same sex marriage in terms of a civil union. Even if it's called marriage.
Of course. That's not protected speech.
Again, you are confusing what you think is "appropriate" with what is protected. We don't have to be nice to each other. We should...but that's not what free speech is about.
I get where you are coming from and your heart is in the right place...but incorrectly throwing out defined legal terms when arguing emotionally gives people fodder.
quote:
Would running into a crowd theatre scream "fire" or "I have a bomb" be a qualifier?
Of course. That's not protected speech.
quote:
If two men want to get married, I think free speech goes out the windon when you are condemning or damning them. A polite I don't agree with your lifestyle choices for religious reasons may be more appropriate
Again, you are confusing what you think is "appropriate" with what is protected. We don't have to be nice to each other. We should...but that's not what free speech is about.
I get where you are coming from and your heart is in the right place...but incorrectly throwing out defined legal terms when arguing emotionally gives people fodder.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:34 pm to WalkingTurtles
quote:
In my interpretation I felt like there was.
I just ran this by my dil, a prosecuting attorney. She says no.
quote:
Most important point is why would you want to say it?
Christians are supposed to speak out about it. They are simply warning these people of what will happen. If you saw someone about to be run over by a car would you warn them? Remember this, in the Christian's eyes it is all done in love.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:37 pm to WalkingTurtles
quote:
Yes these people are trying to save lost souls. Forget it man, its not your place or anyone else to save someone from their sexuality choices.
Oh, but it is. And it is done in love for fellow man.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:39 pm to Redbone
quote:
Oh, but it is. And it is done in love for fellow man.
Ha. Oooookaayyy... I see what's goin' on in here!!!
PROCEED...
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:40 pm to Tigerlaff
Nah they have the right to be punished with the rest of us. 
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:45 pm to WalkingTurtles
quote:
Would running into a crowd theatre scream "fire" or "I have a bomb" be a qualifier?
Don't get stupid. No slander there.
quote:
Do you also want to protest gay marriage with Westboro?
Lets keep this to normal people. Westboro is a cult .. but still has free speech rights.
quote:
If two men want to get married, I think free speech goes out the windon when you are condemning or damning them.
How in the living hell can you say this? Are you so out of touch with reality. Did you think this through? Can we all just decide when we want to change the constitution and amendments??
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:48 pm to Artie Rome
quote:
A ham sandwich lacks legal capacity. And how would you get personal jurisdiction over said ham sandwich?
This was used to make a point but that sandwich is owned by someone and lawsuits can be filed "on behalf of .... Jurisdiction already exists. Check out civil court cases. Outcomes may shock you.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:49 pm to wal marks
I'm against forcing people to cater to or conduct ceremonies for any marriage they disagree with.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:50 pm to WalkingTurtles
quote:
For scientific reasons I do. Breeding such as that can be damaging to the children.
Since you're being so scientific about it, where are the studies that back this up?
Because...
"Twenty–three empirical studies published between 1978 and 2000 on nonclinical children raised by lesbian mothers or gay fathers were reviewed (one Belgian/Dutch, one Danish, three British, and 18 North American). Seven types of outcomes were found to be typical: emotional functioning, sexual preference, stigmatization, gender role behavior, behavioral adjustment, gender identity, and cognitive functioning. Children raised by lesbian mothers or gay fathers did not systematically differ from other children on any of the outcomes. The studies indicate that children raised by lesbian women do not experience adverse outcomes compared with other children. The same holds for children raised by gay men, but more studies should be done."
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:51 pm to Tigerlaff
quote:
Tigerlaff
HEEEY LEGHUMPER. It's been a while. Glad to see you still alive and kicking .... and allowing me to proceed.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:52 pm to BlackleafBaller
I say let them get married, who gives a frick. It's not like marriage is some sacred thing for heterosexuals. The divorce rate is pretty bad, so it's not like it really means anything.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:53 pm to Redbone
Not against it. Perfectly fine with me.
Marriage predates history and has included same sex couples long before the creation of Christianity. It always makes me laugh when the morons talk about changing definitions or getting your own sacrament when they had nothing to do with it's creation and the definition included same sex long before them.
Marriage predates history and has included same sex couples long before the creation of Christianity. It always makes me laugh when the morons talk about changing definitions or getting your own sacrament when they had nothing to do with it's creation and the definition included same sex long before them.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:53 pm to wal marks
I don't think it's right but if it makes them happy I say go ahead and let them get married
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:54 pm to dawgsjw
I don't think gay people will destroy the "sanctity of marriage." Heterosexuals have done an excellent job of that already.
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:55 pm to Dam Guide
quote:
Marriage predates history
Wait, wut??
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:55 pm to wal marks
quote:
Yep I am!! Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve
Posted on 9/8/14 at 10:58 pm to Redbone
Marriage existed before the advent of writing. Basic human history.
Page 8 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News