First they came for gays....

And what does that have to do with same sex marriage?

 

I find this question to be strange because it is already explained in my brief post that you just responded to.

They see it as a covenant between a man, woman, and god. You can disagree all that you like with their religion, but you cannot dictate their religion.

Same sex marriage does not include a man and a woman. It includes a man and a man, or a woman and a woman. It seems silly that I have to articulate this obvious point of fact.

 

Point out where it says that god doesn't like it.

 

Point out where he says that it is OK.

I dont run the church. I dont even belong. I am capable however of understanding that this is their long held religious belief. There is a thing in this country called religious freedom.

 

Right where it doesn't say that he hates it.

 

Is the word of god supposedly being quoted where he hates same sex marriage required for it to be a long-held religious belief in your mind?

I am not a religious guy. I am not going to get into trying to quote scriptures that I know little about. I am however capable of recognizing that a lot of Christian denominations sincerely oppose same sex marriage. It is not as if this is a new thing they just made up to counter the relatively new concept of same sex marriage.

 

Its required for it to be a religious belief, you do agree that people can have non religious beliefs yes?

 

Here you go...Not my bag, but you go right ahead and read until your heart is content. It is certainly not my place to interpret THEIR beliefs.

47 Bible verses about Same Sex Marriage (knowing-jesus.com)

 

They are right now coming for Trans Americans. I have not seen such an all-out uncompromising shameless attack on all fronts, since those first few months after 9-11 and how Americans treated muslim and Arab Americans. This one is so much uglier , cynical and orchestrated because there is no 2000 dead Americans, in a direct and planned attack on 'soft' targets full of civilians. There is no organic natural cause behind this animus or fear that some are exploiting. This was created out of absolutely nothing. This one is pure political scapegoating.

 

What always amuses me is that the original poem starts with "First they came for the socialists." Yet most people who quote it (this does not apply to the OP) think it starts with "First they came or the Jews" . . . and they tend to be anti-socialists. Some even claim that the Nazi party was socialist even though the Nazis abandoned socialism after Hitler took over. And, yes, the Nazis did go after socialists, communists, and Marxists first.

 

what right do gays have that the government punished them for exercising.

 

wrong-the issue is specific services that advocate something-if you sell a car or a cake to a Jew, then you sell it to a black or a Muslim or a gay. this case is about something specifically advocating a position that some find offensive

 

lefties often cannot understand what a right is. the right to free speech means that the government does not punish you for exercising the right. If your boss fires you for say advocating NAMBLA or the Proud Boys-that is not a violation of your rights. If your girlfriend won't sleep with you because you wear a George Floyd T shirt or one celebrating murderer Che Guevara-that is not a violation of your rights. If someone won't make you cake celebrating animal liberation or gun rights, they are not punishing you. They are not changing your condition as it exists before they met you

 

They came for my progressive policy and I looted a Walmart.

 

So the Supreme Court is going to take away the stolen loot you receive from the treasury. You poor thing.

 

Please read the Constitution. Who controls what money comes out of the treasury?

 

You are not talking to me.

Hey, Golem. I notice three of the things you listed the supreme court as "coming for" are rights. The other three are stolen from taxpayers and the treasury, and one is an infringement on religious liberty.

But how come you listed gays first?

 

Believe it or not, it's even sillier than that.

The baker was more than willing to sell them a cake. He just refused to decorate it the way they wanted based on his First Amendment freedom of speech rights.

America- land of the grievously butt hurt.

 

What "cake" are you talking about? It's a webpage!

But your confusion illustrates my point and make it obvious that you understand that this is not only about gay people. Any bigot who refuses to bake a cake or give any service for a mixed-religion/mixed-race couple can count on this fascist Supreme Court to protect their bigotry. Welcome to the 1950s... and we're shooting for the 20s.

No need to say more... you got the point!

 

It'll be the first one to be on the "chopping block" since no rights have been on the current Supreme Court's chopping block, to begin with.

 

The right to be treated the same as anybody else.

 

Sounds like it.

 

That right doesn't exist.

 

You don't know what you're talking about. It means way more than that. It's a right you have REGARDLESS of whether the government punishes you or not.

 

Oh, wait the 1st Amendment doesn't JUST apply to the government?