(06-26-2015 09:37 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 09:19 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 09:14 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 09:04 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  The precedent set in Dale v Boy Scouts is still valid, and won't be challenged. But you don't have a right to government grants to perform state social work while discriminating in employment of provision of services.

The issue of tax breaks for mansions and lear jets for megapreachers is a salient one, but one that stands without reference to same sex marriage.

How is discrimination employment tied to a clergy person doing this or that marriage ceremony?

Equal rights has always been a red herring, gays want acceptance not rights.

You're absolutely right.

There are some real legitimate "discriminatory" issues with gay marriage, such as employee spousal benefits. Yet when you heard them talk about their lawsuits, it was ALWAYS about acceptance.

I could play amateur psychologist, but will resist the urge.

Tolerance is not enough.
Acceptance is not enough.
Apathy is not enough

Affirmation is required.

Sorry, I'm stuck on apathy.

This won't happen. I know I for one think this assumption that this is the "next step in the gay agenda" nonsense is ridiculous. I wonder if they said the same things ("forcing churches to marry ...") about interracial couples. This has never been about forcing churches to marry everyone against their convictions. If anything, it is about making sure the ones who do want to marry same sex couples are able to do so. Even here in Bible Belt City, TN, USA we have a smattering of churches who said they wanted to perform same sex marriages and have them be legal. Finally they can.

I fully expect a couple of radical queers to try. It is my fervent hope that they get shouted down by their peers.

At least you rhyme

Like many of the other issues we face, it's just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

With our open borders, national debt exploding exponentially, and radical Islam, we are doomed.

(06-26-2015 09:57 PM)Ole Blue Wrote:  This won't happen. I know I for one think this assumption that this is the "next step in the gay agenda" nonsense is ridiculous. I wonder if they said the same things ("forcing churches to marry ...") about interracial couples. This has never been about forcing churches to marry everyone against their convictions. If anything, it is about making sure the ones who do want to marry same sex couples are able to do so. Even here in Bible Belt City, TN, USA we have a smattering of churches who said they wanted to perform same sex marriages and have them be legal. Finally they can.

...and you'd be wrong. Again.

(06-26-2015 10:10 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Like many of the other issues we face, it's just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

With our open borders, national debt exploding exponentially, and radical Islam, we are doomed.

It is a damn shame that such a small segment of our population causes such a fcking uproar when we have REAL problems afoot. I am glad this schit is over. All I will say about this is ....Queers, be very careful what you wish for. Marriage is not all that fcking great.

(06-26-2015 10:27 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 10:10 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Like many of the other issues we face, it's just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

With our open borders, national debt exploding exponentially, and radical Islam, we are doomed.

It is a damn shame that such a small segment of our population causes such a fcking uproar when we have REAL problems afoot. I am glad this schit is over. All I will say about this is ....Queers, be very careful what you wish for. Marriage is not all that fcking great.

It's not over, not by a longshot. The gays will simply find another battle to fight, like forcing churches to perform gay marriages. You can take that to the bank, bet the house, etc.

(06-26-2015 10:35 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 10:27 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 10:10 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Like many of the other issues we face, it's just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

With our open borders, national debt exploding exponentially, and radical Islam, we are doomed.

It is a damn shame that such a small segment of our population causes such a fcking uproar when we have REAL problems afoot. I am glad this schit is over. All I will say about this is ....Queers, be very careful what you wish for. Marriage is not all that fcking great.

It's not over, not by a longshot. The gays will simply find another battle to fight, like forcing churches to perform gay marriages. You can take that to the bank, bet the house, etc.

I agree some radicals will try it at some point. We will see if the "normal" queers will support that or not. I have a feeling the vast majority believe they got what they wanted today.

I think churches will never have to perform or host a gay wedding if they don't want to. They will be vilified in the media and social media for not doing it, but not forced to do it by law.

(06-26-2015 09:57 PM)Ole Blue Wrote:  This won't happen. I know I for one think this assumption that this is the "next step in the gay agenda" nonsense is ridiculous. I wonder if they said the same things ("forcing churches to marry ...") about interracial couples. This has never been about forcing churches to marry everyone against their convictions. If anything, it is about making sure the ones who do want to marry same sex couples are able to do so. Even here in Bible Belt City, TN, USA we have a smattering of churches who said they wanted to perform same sex marriages and have them be legal. Finally they can.

Really?

http://www.umc.org/news-and-media/gay-co...of-wedding

Quote:A United Methodist pastor is facing a complaint under church law because he declined to officiate at a same-sex wedding.

A gay couple at Green Street Church, a United Methodist congregation in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, has filed the formal complaint against their pastor, the Rev. Kelly P. Carpenter.

The couple, Kenneth Barner and Scott Chappell, charge Carpenter under the Book of Discipline with “failure to perform the work of ministry.” Their complaint also accuses Carpenter of “gender discrimination” in not officiating at their ceremony. Gender discrimination is also a chargeable offense under church law.

The United Methodist Book of Discipline, the denomination’s book of church law and teachings, also states that all people are of sacred worth but the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching,” It is a chargeable offense under church law for clergy to preside at same-sex unions.

http://www.chelmsfordweeklynews.co.uk/ne...h_wedding/

Quote: BRITAIN’S first gay surrogate parents have launched a legal challenge to the Church of England’s ban on same-sex marriage.

Barrie Drewitt-Barlow, 44, who runs the Maldon-based British Surrogacy Centre with partner Tony, hoped to get married in his local church, St John the Baptist, in Danbury.

Practising Christian Mr Drewitt-Barlow said the new law did not offer what he had been campaigning for and he had now begun a legal challenge.

The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill was given Royal Assent last month after winning cross-party support.

However, under the terms of the Act, religious organisations have to opt in to offer weddings.

The Church of England and the Church of Wales are not offering weddings.

Mr Drewitt-Barlow, who has been in a civil partnership since 2006, said: “We’ve launched a challenge to the Government’s decision to allow some religious groups to opt out of marrying same-sex couples.

“We feel we have the right as parishioners in our village to utilise the church we attend to get married.”

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/judge-...eremony-on

Quote:A New Jersey judge ruled against a Christian retreat house that refused to allow a same-sex civil union ceremony to be conducted on its premises, ruling the Constitution allows “some intrusion into religious freedom to balance other important societal goals.”

On Thursday, administrative judge Solomon A. Metzger ruled that religious liberty did not exempt the seaside retreat, which is associated with the United Methodist Church, from renting its facilities out for purposes that violate its moral beliefs.

(06-26-2015 10:57 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 09:57 PM)Ole Blue Wrote:  This won't happen. I know I for one think this assumption that this is the "next step in the gay agenda" nonsense is ridiculous. I wonder if they said the same things ("forcing churches to marry ...") about interracial couples. This has never been about forcing churches to marry everyone against their convictions. If anything, it is about making sure the ones who do want to marry same sex couples are able to do so. Even here in Bible Belt City, TN, USA we have a smattering of churches who said they wanted to perform same sex marriages and have them be legal. Finally they can.

Really?

http://www.umc.org/news-and-media/gay-co...of-wedding

Quote:A United Methodist pastor is facing a complaint under church law because he declined to officiate at a same-sex wedding.

A gay couple at Green Street Church, a United Methodist congregation in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, has filed the formal complaint against their pastor, the Rev. Kelly P. Carpenter.

The couple, Kenneth Barner and Scott Chappell, charge Carpenter under the Book of Discipline with “failure to perform the work of ministry.” Their complaint also accuses Carpenter of “gender discrimination” in not officiating at their ceremony. Gender discrimination is also a chargeable offense under church law.

The United Methodist Book of Discipline, the denomination’s book of church law and teachings, also states that all people are of sacred worth but the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching,” It is a chargeable offense under church law for clergy to preside at same-sex unions.

http://www.chelmsfordweeklynews.co.uk/ne...h_wedding/

Quote: BRITAIN’S first gay surrogate parents have launched a legal challenge to the Church of England’s ban on same-sex marriage.

Barrie Drewitt-Barlow, 44, who runs the Maldon-based British Surrogacy Centre with partner Tony, hoped to get married in his local church, St John the Baptist, in Danbury.

Practising Christian Mr Drewitt-Barlow said the new law did not offer what he had been campaigning for and he had now begun a legal challenge.

The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill was given Royal Assent last month after winning cross-party support.

However, under the terms of the Act, religious organisations have to opt in to offer weddings.

The Church of England and the Church of Wales are not offering weddings.

Mr Drewitt-Barlow, who has been in a civil partnership since 2006, said: “We’ve launched a challenge to the Government’s decision to allow some religious groups to opt out of marrying same-sex couples.

“We feel we have the right as parishioners in our village to utilise the church we attend to get married.”

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/judge-...eremony-on

Quote:A New Jersey judge ruled against a Christian retreat house that refused to allow a same-sex civil union ceremony to be conducted on its premises, ruling the Constitution allows “some intrusion into religious freedom to balance other important societal goals.”

On Thursday, administrative judge Solomon A. Metzger ruled that religious liberty did not exempt the seaside retreat, which is associated with the United Methodist Church, from renting its facilities out for purposes that violate its moral beliefs.

They're more than welcome to go up against the church institutions themselves. That's what those pieces you pulled show. Formal complaints in the church body have nothing to do with government interfering in church operations, except the NJ case, which I disagree with. You shouldn't be able to force an economic choice (rental, in that case) by a tax-exempt like a church.

(06-26-2015 10:35 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 10:27 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 10:10 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Like many of the other issues we face, it's just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

With our open borders, national debt exploding exponentially, and radical Islam, we are doomed.

It is a damn shame that such a small segment of our population causes such a fcking uproar when we have REAL problems afoot. I am glad this schit is over. All I will say about this is ....Queers, be very careful what you wish for. Marriage is not all that fcking great.

It's not over, not by a longshot. The gays will simply find another battle to fight, like forcing churches to perform gay marriages. You can take that to the bank, bet the house, etc.

Hide yo wife, hide yo kids, teh gays are coming for them.

Tennessee lawmakers started on the Pastor Protection Act yesterday that will give churches the legal right to say no to gay weddings and preachers will suffer no consequences of denying to perform one.

(06-27-2015 08:53 AM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  Tennessee lawmakers started on the Pastor Protection Act yesterday that will give churches the legal right to say no to gay weddings and preachers will suffer no consequences of denying to perform one.

Why? I believe the court affirmed that stance in it ruling Federally. I guess they are doing a CYA?

(06-27-2015 08:53 AM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  Tennessee lawmakers started on the Pastor Protection Act yesterday that will give churches the legal right to say no to gay weddings and preachers will suffer no consequences of denying to perform one.

Completely unneeded, but if it makes the "God, Gays, and Guns" brigade in Nashville happy, whatever...

Really don't understand all the denial. It will happen. They will get shot down. They will continue filing. Shot down some more. Some judge will finally listen. Still lose. A small victory will eventually come. More and more suits. Then an activist SC will overstep it's bounds. Again.

I fully expect that to be the next step. I'm just hoping that the First Amendment trumps the fourteenth.

Quoting someone else:

By using the 14th to protect Gay Marriage they have literally put the 1st and 14th on a collision course. we will see more and more prosecution of christian businesses.

(06-27-2015 09:11 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(06-27-2015 08:53 AM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  Tennessee lawmakers started on the Pastor Protection Act yesterday that will give churches the legal right to say no to gay weddings and preachers will suffer no consequences of denying to perform one.

Why? I believe the court affirmed that stance in it ruling Federally. I guess they are doing a CYA?

They have to cover their a$$ and cant leave it up to the courts. A lot of it is political grandstanding as well. Tennesseans are overwhelmingly against gay marriage and even voted a ban into the state constitution. This law caters to the conservative supermajority that TN enjoys.