The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
#7381
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,052
Total Cats: 6,615
Religion, any religion, is a set of beliefs and moral codes that apply to ones self. If someone else wishes to violate those codes, then so long as they don't infringe on me in the process, I have no problem with that.
I'll give you a personal example: For three years, I worked in NYC. In NYC, there are many, MANY practicing Orthodox Jews. To give you some idea, in the building where I lived on the upper-east side (which is heavily Jewish), the doorman would always hop up and push the elevator button for everyone coming home Friday evening. And B&H Photo-Video, the world's largest distributor of broadcast and production equipment, closes every Friday at a time which precedes local sunset by about an hour, and doesn't re-open until Sunday (and the employees mostly wear Yarmulkes and have the beard and the hair-curl thing that I don't know the name of). Ditto the shops in the Diamond District. And the Kosher delis, oh man... I could go on.
But no Jew in NYC has ever lobbied the MTA to shut down subway service in observance of Shabbos (or suggested that Kosher turnstiles be installed which do not require the swiping of an electronic card), or criticized their gentile neighbors for watching TV on Saturday, or protested outside a Korean BBQ restaurant, or basically tried in any way to either force me to conform to Mosaic law or to criticize me for failing to do so.
I certainly won't deny that there are people who claim to be Christians who do attempt to foist their interpretation of the proscriptions of their religion onto others, and that this influences their politics. A minority, but a vocal one. These people do not represent any specific political party, and could afford to act a tad more Jewish.
#7382
See thats my point. Practice your religion all you want. Dont force others to follow it as well by making laws specifically worded to benefit your religious beliefs.
The fact that it took so long to make same sex marriage is a perfect example of that. Why did it take so long? Why was it illegal in the first place?
Religion.
The fact that it took so long to make same sex marriage is a perfect example of that. Why did it take so long? Why was it illegal in the first place?
Religion.
#7383
See thats my point. Practice your religion all you want. Dont force others to follow it as well by making laws specifically worded to benefit your religious beliefs.
The fact that it took so long to make same sex marriage is a perfect example of that. Why did it take so long? Why was it illegal in the first place?
Religion.
The fact that it took so long to make same sex marriage is a perfect example of that. Why did it take so long? Why was it illegal in the first place?
Religion.
#7384
The historical position of the Christian Church is that marriage is a covenant between two people and God, and has nothing to do with government. The advent of marriage licenses in the United States has much more to do with its ugly racial history than with anything religious.
#7385
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,052
Total Cats: 6,615
Until the mid-1800s, marriage in most US states was a non-regulated matter, and common-law marriages were recognized as valid.
The licensing of marriage was a byproduct of anti-miscegenation laws, which prohibited interracial marriage, again passed at the state level.
And while those laws have been repealed over time, the licensing systems which they put into place remains. It had nothing at all to do with Christians, and everything to do with racists.
In the 21st century, ultra-conservative Christians have merely latched onto them as a convenient tool for furthering their own agenda, as much like an SJW can't tolerate seeing someone else having fun, certain of these religious types can't tolerate seeing someone else do something which they consider immoral.
#7386
The historical position of the Christian Church is that marriage is a covenant between two people and God, and has nothing to do with government. The advent of marriage licenses in the United States has much more to do with its ugly racial history than with anything religious.
The only non-religious argument I have seen opposing gay marriage claimed that the state institution of marriage grants certain rights to a couple in an effort to create a more stable and secure family unit. A stable and secure family unit being the base for raising grounded and productive offspring which is essential to society. So essentially, the argument was that gays cannot naturally procreate and should, therefore, not be extended the benefits of marriage when they cannot fulfill their end of the bargain. Of course, I find this argument to be such a stretch because gays can adopt and even use surrogates if they so desire.
#7387
Incredibly beside the point, but you do realize that Christianity purports to be the continuation/fulfillment of Old Testament Judaism, right? So whether or not you find it compelling or persuasive, the internal logic is consistent: God instituted marriage as covenant between Himself and Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.
#7388
Couple religious laws written against non religious citizens.
Arkansas No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any Court.Maryland That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God; nor shall the Legislature prescribe any other oath of office than the oath prescribed by this Constitution."
Mississippi "No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state."
North Carolina "The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God."
South Carolina "No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution."
Tennessee "No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state."
Texas "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."
Arkansas No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any Court.Maryland That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God; nor shall the Legislature prescribe any other oath of office than the oath prescribed by this Constitution."
Mississippi "No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state."
North Carolina "The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God."
South Carolina "No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution."
Tennessee "No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state."
Texas "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."
#7389
Some that protect it.
Pennsylvania "No person who acknowledges the being of a God and a future state of rewards and punishments shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth."
Senate Bill 11 West Virginia Freedom of Conscience Protection Act This law basically states that you can do stuff because it's your religion.... aka muslims bombing buildings because the qiran says to kill the unbelievers etc. The Christians that wrote this didnt think that far though. This attempt of this law got blocked.
H.B. 1523, an extensive law written to protect people who believe any of the following: that marriage is between a man and a woman; that sex should only happen in the context of marriage; and that the words “male” and “female” refer to “an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at time of birth.”
Of course.. the first amendment.. which for some reason doesnt protect people that dont believe in a god.
Pennsylvania "No person who acknowledges the being of a God and a future state of rewards and punishments shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth."
Senate Bill 11 West Virginia Freedom of Conscience Protection Act This law basically states that you can do stuff because it's your religion.... aka muslims bombing buildings because the qiran says to kill the unbelievers etc. The Christians that wrote this didnt think that far though. This attempt of this law got blocked.
H.B. 1523, an extensive law written to protect people who believe any of the following: that marriage is between a man and a woman; that sex should only happen in the context of marriage; and that the words “male” and “female” refer to “an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at time of birth.”
Of course.. the first amendment.. which for some reason doesnt protect people that dont believe in a god.
Last edited by triple88a; 11-12-2016 at 12:39 AM.
#7390
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,052
Total Cats: 6,615
If there's a way to transgress upon individual liberty, the Bible Belt states will find it, and the Supreme Court will strike it down.
#7391
Sure it does. Every single citation you note above was nullified under Torcaso v. Watkins in 1961, six years before state laws barring whites from marrying blacks were nullified in Loving v. Virginia.
If there's a way to transgress upon individual liberty, the Bible Belt states will find it, and the Supreme Court will strike it down.
If there's a way to transgress upon individual liberty, the Bible Belt states will find it, and the Supreme Court will strike it down.
#7392
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,052
Total Cats: 6,615
They aren't. That's what "nullified" means.
There are lots of laws still on the books of various states which are not enforceable, due to their having been ruled unconstitutional. They remain in place until officially repealed by the state legislature, such as the Texas law which prohibits homosexuality, the Connecticut law which bars married couples from using contraceptives, the Louisiana law which requires creationism to be taught in schools, etc.
There are lots of laws still on the books of various states which are not enforceable, due to their having been ruled unconstitutional. They remain in place until officially repealed by the state legislature, such as the Texas law which prohibits homosexuality, the Connecticut law which bars married couples from using contraceptives, the Louisiana law which requires creationism to be taught in schools, etc.
#7394
Moderator
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 20,664
Total Cats: 3,013
And, for the sake of understanding, cultures across the globe from the Celts to the Mung people, to the Polynesians had marriages without being exposed to Christianity.
And Moses had a black wife at one point. She was ostracized by some of the Jews and they were punished for how they treated her.
And Moses had a black wife at one point. She was ostracized by some of the Jews and they were punished for how they treated her.