- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: Respect for Marriage Act passed by Senate. Goes to House for final vote.
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:50 am to MasterDigger
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:50 am to MasterDigger
quote:How is this NOT in violation if the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment if government and secular organizations are free to apply discrimination but not the public?
It WILL make you bake a cake with messaging which you disagree with.
0
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:50 am to SOSFAN
quote:
are also their biological children.
Individually they may be their biological children... But there had to be another "donor" who is a biological father, no matter how butch one or the other may be...
It still takes a man and woman...
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:51 am to loogaroo
quote:
Can the Catholic Church be sued for refusing to marry a gay couple?
Senate Bill Language:
quote:If (a big 'if') this language survives the House, it seems fairly solid with regard to churches.
SEC. 6. NO IMPACT ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND CONSCIENCE.
(a) In General.—Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to diminish or abrogate a religious liberty or conscience protection otherwise available to an individual or organization under the Constitution of the United States or Federal law.
(b) Goods Or Services.—Consistent with the First Amendment to the Constitution, nonprofit religious organizations, including churches, mosques, synagogues, temples, nondenominational ministries, interdenominational and ecumenical organizations, mission organizations, faith-based social agencies, religious educational institutions, and nonprofit entities whose principal purpose is the study, practice, or advancement of religion, and any employee of such an organization, shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage. Any refusal under this subsection to provide such services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges shall not create any civil claim or cause of action.
LINK
This post was edited on 11/30/22 at 8:55 am
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:52 am to JiminyCricket
quote:
Technically those twins are partially their biological children and partially a donors. Two eggs don't make a
Moving the goal post. They are still raising their biological children in a gay marriage.
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:53 am to AggieHank86
quote:Reading is fundamental.
That is obvious in the operative language itself, which I quoted.
Your quoted segment of the law pertains to Officials acting under color of State law. This is to prevent the state officials from denying another state's acceptance of a marriage.
It does not protect individual religious liberty and conscience as you are saying it does.
quote:
§ 1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect thereof (a) In General.—No person acting under color of State law may deny—
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:53 am to JiminyCricket
quote:Try to tell a hetero step-parent who has raised a child from birth … that (s)he has no “family bond” with the child.quote:Technically those twins are partially their biological children and partially a donors. Two eggs don't make a baby.
gay couples will never experience what it's like to have a biological family and the immense bond for life that comes from that.
Where do we send the flowers for your funeral?
This post was edited on 11/30/22 at 8:56 am
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:54 am to SOSFAN
quote:
Moving the goal post.
No, it is not. That is the same thing as saying a step-dad is the biological father of a child he had no part in creating... He may be a great dad to the kid but he will never be the kid's biological father...
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:55 am to SOSFAN
Not moving the goalposts at all. It'd be no different than a step parent saying they are raising their biological kid when they didn't actually supply any biology to the equation. The kid is one of theirs biologically but it's not possible for two lesbians to scissor out a baby. Gotta have someone with testicles at some point in this story.
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:55 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Try to tell a hetero step-parent who has raised a child from birth … that (s)he has no “family bond” with the child.
Some do and some don't have that bond.
God you fking suck at this.
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:55 am to MRF
quote:
and thought a yes would hurt more than help in Louisiana.
If he isn’t running again then who gives a shite?
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:55 am to AggieHank86
quote:
This is a legal issue, not a religious one.
It's not. Redefining language can be done legally, but can also be undone, since as the left keeps demonstrating, language is a social construct and words are meaningless.
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:55 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Try to tell a hetero step-parent who has raised a child from birth … that (s)he has no “family bond” with the child.
Where do we send the flowers for your funeral?
I never said there was no bond. I said the kid wasn't biologically theirs which is scientifically true.
ETA: I noticed you added a quote from someone else's post to try to prove your point that I said something I didn't say. For a guy who constantly tries to present himself as some sort of intellectual, you swung and missed on this one.
This post was edited on 11/30/22 at 8:59 am
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:58 am to MasterDigger
Your attempt at statutory interpretation is laughably wrong.
This post was edited on 11/30/22 at 8:59 am
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:59 am to Goonie02
TD is so juvenile, and its fantastic. 
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:59 am to MRF
quote:
1996: 85-14 DOMA
2022: 61-36 RFMA
What an incredible cultural decline in 26 years. And it’s only accelerating.
Why I will forever loathe GWBush. He ran on the marriage amendment and he failed to get it done. Then we learn that he felt bad for Cheney's lesbo daughter. Now we are seeing the slide down the slippery slope.
Posted on 11/30/22 at 8:59 am to chalmetteowl
quote:
If he isn’t running again then who gives a shite?
He has some specific aspiration I’m sure.
Posted on 11/30/22 at 9:01 am to JiminyCricket
This post has been marked unreadable!
Posted on 11/30/22 at 9:02 am to KAGTASTIC
quote:
Now we are seeing the slide down the slippery slope.
It started before all of this but it has certainly accelerated things where many people started to notice...
Posted on 11/30/22 at 9:04 am to The Maj
quote:
Hank the kid diddler swings and misses on most things...
Agreed. The worst part is he'll try to come in with some word salad that he thinks make his points seem more intellectually sound than they truly are.
This post was edited on 11/30/22 at 9:05 am
Page 5 of 15
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News