God and Gay Marriage

Quote: Evenbob

Only most of the state of Utah.

Wikiepedia says it's about 1.4% of Utah. (no claims that I know that's right)

Anyway, most guys (I know) rather live like Hugh Hefner, and that's about as close to the idea of polygamy they want. Not sure if that's what everyone has in mind.

Quote: Evenbob

Only most of the state of Utah. It
will not take much time till Gays
realize that multiple partners will
be beneficial. The court has to pass
it or cancel what they did today. Which
will never happen.

That's absurd.
You sound like the Penn state students I argued with on another board.
I supported the statue coming down.
Their absurd argument, if the statue comes down, then the library that bears his name must come down.
So therefore the statue cant come down.

Well the statue came down and the library remained.
Polygamy becoming legal has as much chance in this country as Ebola becoming an epidemic :-)

Now the conservatives will fight for polygamy simply to say I told you so
This is rich. Conservatives supporting polygamy lol
Got the popcorn out

Quote: terapined

That's absurd.

Hush. Don't pop the rage bubble.

Quote:

I supported the statue coming down.
Their absurd argument, if the statue comes down, then the library that bears his name must come down.

because they can't change the name of the library, right? ;)

Quote:

Now the conservatives will fight for polygamy simply to say I told you so
This is rich. Conservatives supporting polygamy lol
Got the popcorn out

I don't think they've gotten much traction when demanding marriage equality proponents also advocate for polygamy, so, yes, I do believe they should undertake the task themselves. I wish them luck making a mess of things. Polygamy has never been the norm in the West, even in Ancient times. Such cultures where it was the norm, it has never been the norm outside of the power, moneyed elite. No one else can afford it.

Quote: rxwine

Wikiepedia says it's about 1.4% of Utah.

Only 1.4% of Utah is Mormon?

Quote: Nareed

Polygamy has never been the norm in the West, even in Ancient times..

Doesn't matter. Some will want it and
they will get it now. They have to, how
can it be denied, on what grounds.
The lawyers proposing it will just use
the courts argument against itself.
What do you have against it? Why
shouldn't multiple people be allowed
to marry.

I like the idea of having more than one
wife. They can fight with each other and
not me. If one is mad, one of the others
will take my side.

Quote: Evenbob

the courts argument against itself.
What do you have against it? Why
shouldn't multiple people be allowed
to marry.

.

Ok, lets flip your argument around.
Lets say polygamy gets to the supreme court. Its never gonna get there but lets just imagine.
The liberal judges will of course vote against polygamy. According to conservatives, they don't follow the constitution, they just vote for what they support or don't support politically.
They certainly don't support polygamy.
That leaves the conservative judges.
Are you telling me Alito, Scalia and Thomas will be forced to vote for polygamy simply due to precedence in this just decided case.
Oh the irony :-)

Quote: terapined

The liberal judges will of course vote against polygamy.

None of them will vote against it. The
very arguments the judges used to
pass same sex marriage will be thrown
in their faces by the advocates lawyers.

You have very little understanding of
what happened today, don't you.

'Polyamory is a fact. People are living in group relationships today. The question is not whether they will continue on in those relationships. The question is whether we will grant to them the same basic recognition we grant to other adults: that love makes marriage, and that the right to marry is exactly that, a right.'

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/gay-marriage-decision-polygamy-119469.html#ixzz3eEHTwIts

as far as a marital relationship goes it takes luck and hard work and I doubt that any god focuses on one particular couple's bedroom any more than he focuses on one particular couple's "forty acres and a mule".

at a wedding we throw rice, I throw rice pudding. I've not seen god throw either.

do not intend to offend anybody........ I drowned my keyboard while taking some pills washed away some capitals .

Quote: rxwine

Since I think the Bible was written entirely by people of Earth using facts and mythology combined, I think the majority just imposed values of the majority.

Wait...there are facts in the bible? Who knew? Like, what Kings were in power? Like Jerusalem is in the Middle East? That about covers it, fact-wise.

Chose a bad time to be moving if I want to contribute to the forum. I also hate to draw fire away from Evenbob's usually incorrect statements. However I feel I should say something. Besides giving people a chance to hate on religion I'm not really sure why this thread exists and certainly I don't know why it is in the religion section. God doesn't hate on gays or anyone for that matter. The Church's stance on same-sex marriage is something that every society in human history till about 12 years ago agreed on. Sometimes there was disagreement on the number f people involved but everyone, everywhere believed marriage was between a man and a woman.

In regards to the Church I don't see how not calling a loving, committed, homosexual union a "marriage" is equivalent to saying God hates gays. In reading the dissents it is not as if the judges didn't see the emotional and justice issue that gays and lesbians were in, some were moved by them (as anyone should be), however everyone of those who did not agree say it is the ultimate in hubris for a court of nine unelected and unrepresentative lawyers make a decision for the whole nation on such an issue. Especially a decision that went against the entire history and precedent of every human society. Are there not other ways to make equality than calling two obviously different things the same? Is there no other way than by a judicial super-legislative action by the judicial branch of our government to create equality under the law? Justice Scalia said, "A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy."