runner, you and md keep me in stitches ...First to tuck, not everybody believes in the bible........To the condom, I am assuming your comment and question has to do with your belief homosexuality somehow , on its own caused the demise of all the great empires?...wow ......Let us see....Did it cause the demise of the Ottoman Empire..nope.......Persian Empire..nope....The Han Dynasty?...nope......The British Empire....nope.........The Holy Roman Empire...nope.......The Russian Empire...nope..........The Great Mongol Empire......nope not there either..........I believe you might find much of their problems arose over harsh rule, greed and an inequality in just about everything between classes of people.................Happy Holidays to all................. :12224
abuck76 wrote: runner, you and md keep me in stitches ...First to tuck, not everybody believes in the bible........To the condom, I am assuming your comment and question has to do with your belief homosexuality somehow , on its own caused the demise of all the great empires?...wow ......Let us see....Did it cause the demise of the Ottoman Empire..nope.......Persian Empire..nope....The Han Dynasty?...nope......The British Empire....nope.........The Holy Roman Empire...nope.......The Russian Empire...nope..........The Great Mongol Empire......nope not there either..........I believe you might find much of their problems arose over harsh rule, greed and an inequality in just about everything between classes of people.................Happy Holidays to all................. :12224
harsh rule, greed and an inequality in just about everything between classes of people...
...sounds as if there was a severe breakdown in the morality of the leadership in these empires.
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
How do you believe this fits into our current situation, abuck? Do you believe that those in power see our choices as not pertaining to a breakdown in morality? Is the power to change our society producing a lack of resolve for maintaining the morality of our nation? We have lost our way in this country to make morally correct decisions. We have made mistakes in our past to include slavery, civil rights, etc. This one IMO ranks up there as well.
If the people choose to have same sex marriages, then of course, I must legally go along with their wishes in a democratic society; however, it does not mean that same sex marriages are morally just.
If the US government eventually makes it mandatory that all 50 states accept same sex marriages, then there will be a revolution in this country unlike any ever seen before.
(I do believe that Kentucky will be one of the last states to accept it.)
20 years from now, it will be legal in all 50 states. There will be no "revolutions" as all those who would fight in such a revolution will have died off by then.
Even young conservative Republicans already show support for marriage equality. This will no longer be an issue 20 years from now.
The Federal Gov't made it law in all states to ban poll taxes, civil rights abuses, and outlaw slavery. I'm not against states deciding on their own how to handle this question. But they should not discriminate against those homosexuals couples who desire to marry. If they do, it becomes legitimately a Federal issue as they are citizens. There were once state laws against interracial marriage. How do you feel about that now?
dazed&confused wrote:The Federal Gov't made it law in all states to ban poll taxes, civil rights abuses, and outlaw slavery. I'm not against states deciding on their own how to handle this question. But they should not discriminate against those homosexuals couples who desire to marry. If they do, it becomes legitimately a Federal issue as they are citizens. There were once state laws against interracial marriage. How do you feel about that now?
You make the incorrect assumption that I had any issue against interracial marriage in the first place.
I dated a Filipino girl off and on for 9 years so you are talking to the wrong guy about that. I also dated a girl from Ethiopia in college.
I am waiting for the day when it becomes a Federal issue. I am glad that you brought this up.
I hope that somebody makes this a Federal issue now because this wedding took place on US Government property at West Point.
NYBuckeye96 wrote:20 years from now, it will be legal in all 50 states. There will be no "revolutions" as all those who would fight in such a revolution will have died off by then.
Even young conservative Republicans already show support for marriage equality. This will no longer be an issue 20 years from now.
If the Mayan Apocalypse doesn't destroy the USA, then 20 years from now our values will be destroyed according to your timeline.
Kentucky will not budge on this issue. I guarantee that!!!!!
dazed&confused wrote:The Federal Gov't made it law in all states to ban poll taxes, civil rights abuses, and outlaw slavery. I'm not against states deciding on their own how to handle this question. But they should not discriminate against those homosexuals couples who desire to marry. If they do, it becomes legitimately a Federal issue as they are citizens. There were once state laws against interracial marriage. How do you feel about that now?
You make the incorrect assumption that I had any issue against interracial marriage in the first place.
I dated a Filipino girl off and on for 9 years so you are talking to the wrong guy about that. I also dated a girl from Ethiopia in college.
I am waiting for the day when it becomes a Federal issue. I am glad that you brought this up.
I hope that somebody makes this a Federal issue now because this wedding took place on US Government property at West Point.
I never made it personal with you. But I have an opinion and my belief is that there is no difference between interracial marriage and same-sex marriage. We just differ in that and probably will so can we agree to disagree without threatening blood in our streets?
NYBuckeye96 wrote:20 years from now, it will be legal in all 50 states. There will be no "revolutions" as all those who would fight in such a revolution will have died off by then.
Even young conservative Republicans already show support for marriage equality. This will no longer be an issue 20 years from now.
If the Mayan Apocalypse doesn't destroy the USA, then 20 years from now our values will be destroyed according to your timeline.
Kentucky will not budge on this issue. I guarantee that!!!!!
And the south did "budge" on the issue of civil rights in the '60s? Nope. They were forced by the federal government to change and then those that hated that died off and things gradually improved for the better over time.
A lot of the civil rights victories have been won in courts...............but a lot have also been won by having older generations die off. That's a fact.
NYBuckeye96 wrote:20 years from now, it will be legal in all 50 states. There will be no "revolutions" as all those who would fight in such a revolution will have died off by then.
Even young conservative Republicans already show support for marriage equality. This will no longer be an issue 20 years from now.
If the Mayan Apocalypse doesn't destroy the USA, then 20 years from now our values will be destroyed according to your timeline.
Kentucky will not budge on this issue. I guarantee that!!!!!
And the south did "budge" on the issue of civil rights in the '60s? Nope. They were forced by the federal government to change and then those that hated that died off and things gradually improved for the better over time.
A lot of the civil rights victories have been won in courts...............but a lot have also been won by having older generations die off. That's a fact.
Agree in spirit 96. But a lot of that hatred never did die off. It is still there today.
no difference between interacial marriage and same same marriage ? thats a bizarre outlook. one is perfectly fine , they are male - female and God made them for one another . the other ? no .
Both the same.........Two people who love each other.....And tuck, they are married.....License, I dos and done.......I do not believe they care what you think..........Legally they are married, and that is all that counts.......... :12224
The law is contrary to God's law. It is God who joins two people together. A man and a woman. Tell me this? Why are they unable or unwilling to accept a civil union that will carry all the benefits of marriage without it being called a married? I think I know why, what are your thoughts?
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Friday to take its first serious look at the issue of gay marriage, granting review of California's ban on same-sex marriage and of a federal law that defines marriage as only the legal union of a man and a woman.
At the very least, the court will look at this question: When states choose to permit the marriages of same-sex couples, can the federal government refuse to recognize their validity? But by also taking up the California case, the court could get to the more fundamental question of whether the states must permit marriages by gay people in the first place.
The California case involves a challenge to Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment approved by 52 percent of voters in 2008. It banned same-sex marriages in the state and went into effect after 18,000 couples were legally married earlier that year.
A federal judge declared the ban unconstitutional, and a federal appeals court upheld that ruling, though on narrower grounds that apply only to California. Now that the Supreme Court is wading into the battle, the justices could decide the more basic issue of whether any state can ban same-sex marriage under the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection of the law. Or they could limit their ruling to apply only to the ban in California.
Nine states and the District of Columbia have moved to permit same-sex marriage or soon will -- Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, and Washington.
The Supreme Court also agreed Friday to hear a challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, passed by overwhelming margins in both houses of Congress in 1996 and signed by President Clinton. A provision of the law specifies that, for federal purposes, "the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife."
Congress acted out of concern that a 1993 state court decision in Hawaii, which held that the state could not deny marriage licenses to same sex couples, might force other states to recognize gay marriage. As it turned out, Hawaii did not adopt same-sex marriage.
Because of DOMA, gay couples who wed in the nine states where same-sex marriage is permitted are considered legally married only under state law. The federal government is barred from recognizing their marriages. As a result, they are denied over 1,000 federal benefits that are available to traditional couples.
After first supporting DOMA in court, the Obama administration concluded last year that it violated the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law.
"We cannot defend the federal government poking its nose into what states are doing and putting the thumb on the scale against same-sex couples," President Obama said in explaining the change.
I think Obamacare already showed us that Chief Justice Roberts is out to create a legacy for himself. He knew it was inevitable that health care would be provided to all, and he wanted to be on the side that won that right to make his mark on history.
I think the man is smart enough to know that gay marriage is just as inevitable. Any ban now would not only be overturned within the next 2 decades, but would be the downfall of any positive legacy he could leave on the Court.
I'm not saying the Court will come out and say gay marriage is legal everywhere, but I would be shocked if they take away any rights already won because there is a clear generational shift on this issue and we all know how this will end. We just don't know how long it will take to get there. Twenty years at the most.
Kentucky Trojan wrote:Again, it is inevitable that those of us who are watching our country be destroyed from within will not allow this "decay" to occur much longer!!!
The only thing that is "decaying" is the bodies of the old socially conservative coots who will die off in the next 20 years.
Young evangelical adults stand apart from elders on same-sex marriage
Published: Thursday, September 01, 2011, 11:40 AM
It’s not news that young people are more liberal than their elders on matters touching on sexuality and public policy -- issues like same-sex marriage, adoption and so forth. But a non-partisan poll released this week charts how that split carves deeply into even the white evangelical community, the most socially conservative major group on the American religious landscape.
The poll by the Public Religion Research Institute found that 44 percent – nearly half – of young evangelicals between the ages of 18 to 29 favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry.
Nearly half that generation is outside the evangelical tent on that issue.
By contrast, the white evangelical community as a whole, even counting those relatively liberal young adults, is solidly opposed to same sex marriage, by slightly more than 80 percent.
That’s a generational split in conservative communities that include Southern Baptists and hundreds of independent evangelical churches that identify themselves as simply Christian.
The researchers don’t offer much in the way of explanatory insights, which are left to others.
But clearly, the power of culture, perhaps the experience of gay and lesbian friends and other factors are in collision with younger evangelicals’ understanding of Scripture.
More broadly, the poll found “at least a 20 point generation gap between Millennials (age 18-29) and seniors (65 and over) on every public policy measure in the survey concerning rights for gay and lesbian people."
That was true for religious young adults and those who do not consider themselves religious.
It even includes young Republicans. Nearly half, 49 percent, favor allowing gay and lesbian people to marry, the research found.
The poll demonstrates again why it’s unwise to assume that a person’s religious affiliation, if any, predicts his or her stance on sexuality issues.
Young evangelicals offer one caution. So does this: The research found that a slight majority of all Catholics, 52 percent, favor same-sex marriage, despite the energetic teaching of their church to the contrary.
Finally, and perhaps least surprisingly the Public Religion Research poll confirmed findings from other polls that since 2006 the American public has come to a tipping point on the issue of same sex marriage – either equally divided or slightly in favor.
The PRRI poll measured the split at 47 percent for and 47 percent against.
"This is the first year that support for allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry is not a minority position," said Dr. Robert P. Jones, CEO of Public Religion Research Institute.
"Overall trends, and the strongly supportive attitudes of the Millennial generation suggest that we will look back on 2011 as the year marking a sea change in American attitudes on gay and lesbian issues."
......Let us see....Did it cause the demise of the Ottoman Empire..nope.......Persian Empire..nope....The Han Dynasty?...nope......The British Empire....nope.........The Holy Roman Empire...nope.......The Russian Empire...nope..........The Great Mongol Empire......nope not there either..........I believe you might find much of their problems arose over harsh rule, greed and an inequality in just about everything between classes of people.................Happy Holidays to all................. :12224
