"Jesus would rather kill, not marry, gay people" - Franklin Graham

[Divinity]

Was it called marriage? How obscure is the reference? 

Listen, even if you do find an obscure example, the main point I am making is that Christians believe that God ordained marriage as we have viewed it for all of history. You have to have your head up your ass to think that 5 people on the supreme court can redefine such a word/concept--against the majority view of the population--and there would not be any objections.

What the fuck gives you motherfuckers the right to define a word?  Who gives a fuck if the majority of you maggots don't want it to be called 'Marriage" you fuckers also opposed interracial marriage on your fucking bigotry.  I don't see why anyone shold kowtow to you pathetic mental midgets in order to spare your widdle feelings.  Grow the fuck up, and stop acting like YOU get to decide how the world works cupcake.  Because this isn't fairy tale land.  The world doesn't revolve around you.  No matter how much you wish it would.

[Brian37]

Was it called marriage? How obscure is the reference? 

Listen, even if you do find an obscure example, the main point I am making is that Christians believe that God ordained marriage as we have viewed it for all of history. You have to have your head up your ass to think that 5 people on the supreme court can redefine such a word/concept--against the majority view of the population--and there would not be any objections.

What the fuck gives you motherfuckers the right to define a word?  Who gives a fuck if the majority of you maggots don't want it to be called 'Marriage" you fuckers also opposed interracial marriage on your fucking bigotry.  I don't see why anyone shold kowtow to you pathetic mental midgets in order to spare your widdle feelings.  Grow the fuck up, and stop acting like YOU get to decide how the world works cupcake.  Because this isn't fairy tale land.  The world doesn't revolve around you.  No matter how much you wish it would.

Steve has never met your daughter, but out of 7 billion humans, Steve magically knows what God wants. And the moron doesn't want to face the fact that there are even Christians who would side with us and not him.

And as I said in prior posts, this mindset are half assed bigots. ISIS throws gays off rooftops while quoting the Koran. But rest assured, I'd stand behind you and your daughter and fight anyone trying to screw with her or you.

He is basing his morality on the social norms of antiquity. Thankfully for the west, there were many theists and atheists who cared to ditch bigoted interpretations in favor for equality.

You should be angry and have every right to be. Someone fucked with my kid, if I had one, I'd defend them too.

[Astreja]

Emphasis mine.  I cannot see such views as anything but hatred.

The belief is:

1. Marriage was ordained between a man and a woman from the beginning--with no ambiguity.
2. Sexual immorality is sex outside of marriage.
3. Sexual immorality is a sin.
4. Homosexual activity is outside of marriage (from 1)
5. Homosexual activity is a sin (from 2 and 3).

Getting 'hatred' from that takes a special kind of anger.

Well, you're trying to use your beliefs on me, and disrespecting my desire to live a life free of religion.  At very least you should have the courtesy to not call my sexual expression "sinful."  Think it all you want, but if you have the audacity to repeatedly say it publicly where I can hear it, I am going to repeatedly call you out as a homophobic bigot.

---

Even back in whatever culture you might find a mention, the concept that it was different would still be clear. You cannot argue that traditional marriage was not one of the primary pillars of every culture. There is no argument that could be made that the few cultures that allowed open same-sex relationships viewed them on par with traditional marriage within the fabric of their society.

There is nothing wrong with changing traditions or throwing them away completely, Steve.

[Angrboda]

It's a matter of historical fact that not every religion forbade same sex marriage.

Was it called marriage? How obscure is the reference? 

Listen, even if you do find an obscure example, the main point I am making is that Christians believe that God ordained marriage as we have viewed it for all of history. You have to have your head up your ass to think that 5 people on the supreme court can redefine such a word/concept--against the majority view of the population--and there would not be any objections.

What majority view?  You're talking out of your ass, Steve.  Obergefell v. Hodges was in mid-2015.

National support [for same-sex marriage] rose above 50% for the first time in 2011 and has not gone below that mark since then. National support rose to 60% for the first time in 2015 and has not gone below that mark since then. Support continues to rise while opposition continues to fall each year, driven in large part by a significant generational gap.

Wikipedia || Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States

Poll: Support for same-sex marriage is now the majority position in 44 states

Few aspects of public opinion have seen change as rapid as Americans' views on same-sex marriage.

And a new poll from PRRI shows that an idea that was nearly taboo as late as the 1980s has become the majority position across all major ethnic and racial groups and among all but a handful of states.

The study finds that 61 percent of Americans overall support same-sex marriage, while only 30 percent are opposed.

That support includes majorities of white (63 percent), black (52 percent) and Latino (61 percent) Americans, as well as majorities of all major religious groups with the exception of white evangelical Protestants (34 percent support/ 58 percent oppose) and Mormons (40 percent support/ 53 percent oppose).

It's also the majority position in 44 states. The exceptions: Alabama (41 percent), Mississippi (42 percent), Tennessee (46 percent), West Virginia (48 percent), Louisiana (48 percent), and North Carolina (49 percent). And Alabama is the only state where a majority says they oppose same-sex marriage.

NBC News, May 2018

[SteveII]

The belief is:

1. Marriage was ordained between a man and a woman from the beginning--with no ambiguity.
2. Sexual immorality is sex outside of marriage.
3. Sexual immorality is a sin.
4. Homosexual activity is outside of marriage (from 1)
5. Homosexual activity is a sin (from 2 and 3).

Getting 'hatred' from that takes a special kind of anger.

Well, you're trying to use your beliefs on me, and disrespecting my desire to live a life free of religion.  At very least you should have the courtesy to not call my sexual expression "sinful."  Think it all you want, but if you have the audacity to repeatedly say it publicly where I can hear it, I am going to repeatedly call you out as a homophobic bigot.

NO. I am not trying to "use my beliefs on you". Do whatever you want. Fine, you don't want to be told you are a sinner according to another belief system. I understand that. But the fact is that that belief system exists and you must co-exist with it. Labeling everyone who tries to follow the Bible as best they can as 'hateful' just does not follow. You infer hatred using faulty logic:

1. There are people who believe in God and that the Bible is his revelation (belief is based on many different types of reasons)
2. The Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin
3. I don't believe the Bible or in the concept of sin.
4. Anyone who does is hateful. 

It's a non sequitur. Of course there are bigoted people that use the cover of religion for their hatred. But the hatred does not follow from the belief. In fact one of the primary points of the entire NT is to Love your neighbor as yourself. 

I feel badly that your experiences have led you to this conclusion. My whole point in getting involved in this thread was to dial back the generalizations, mischaracterizations, and straw men. We still disagree, but the angry rhetoric and demonization has to stop because it is counter-productive. 

---

Even back in whatever culture you might find a mention, the concept that it was different would still be clear. You cannot argue that traditional marriage was not one of the primary pillars of every culture. There is no argument that could be made that the few cultures that allowed open same-sex relationships viewed them on par with traditional marriage within the fabric of their society.

There is nothing wrong with changing traditions or throwing them away completely, Steve.

Perhaps. But who should change a definition older than history itself? 5 people?

[Brian37]

Well, you're trying to use your beliefs on me, and disrespecting my desire to live a life free of religion.  At very least you should have the courtesy to not call my sexual expression "sinful."  Think it all you want, but if you have the audacity to repeatedly say it publicly where I can hear it, I am going to repeatedly call you out as a homophobic bigot.

NO. I am not trying to "use my beliefs on you". Do whatever you want. Fine, you don't want to be told you are a sinner according to another belief system. I understand that. But the fact is that that belief system exists and you must co-exist with it. Labeling everyone who tries to follow the Bible as best they can as 'hateful' just does not follow. You infer hatred using faulty logic:

1. There are people who believe in God and that the Bible is his revelation (belief is based on many different types of reasons)
2. The Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin
3. I don't believe the Bible or in the concept of sin.
4. Anyone who does is hateful. 

It's a non sequitur. Of course there are bigoted people that use the cover of religion for their hatred. But the hatred does not follow from the belief. In fact one of the primary points of the entire NT is to Love your neighbor as yourself. 

I feel badly that your experiences have led you to this conclusion. My whole point in getting involved in this thread was to dial back the generalizations, mischaracterizations, and straw men. We still disagree, but the angry rhetoric and demonization has to stop because it is counter-productive. 

---

There is nothing wrong with changing traditions or throwing them away completely, Steve.

Perhaps. But who should change a definition older than history itself? 5 people?

Your reading comprehension SUCKS.

5 people have ruled on tons of cases that gave a variety of minorities rights, not just LGBT.

Sex is older than any written religion, not just yours. 

You will NOT get away with using your holy book to vilify people you do not know.

You are going to get a "FUCK YOU" every time you try. 

If you think LGBT is a "sin", again, you are a HALF ASSED BIGOT! ISIS murders them and bases it on the Koran. I hope you stay half assed and never resort to that cruelty. But be warned, you physically harm anyone LGBT, you will get prosecuted and you will go to prison. 

No, I will NOT apologize to standing up to bigots and bullies.

[SteveII]

Was it called marriage? How obscure is the reference? 

Listen, even if you do find an obscure example, the main point I am making is that Christians believe that God ordained marriage as we have viewed it for all of history. You have to have your head up your ass to think that 5 people on the supreme court can redefine such a word/concept--against the majority view of the population--and there would not be any objections.

What majority view?  You're talking out of your ass, Steve.  Obergefell v. Hodges was in mid-2015.

National support [for same-sex marriage] rose above 50% for the first time in 2011 and has not gone below that mark since then. National support rose to 60% for the first time in 2015 and has not gone below that mark since then. Support continues to rise while opposition continues to fall each year, driven in large part by a significant generational gap.

Wikipedia || Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States

Poll: Support for same-sex marriage is now the majority position in 44 states

Few aspects of public opinion have seen change as rapid as Americans' views on same-sex marriage.

And a new poll from PRRI shows that an idea that was nearly taboo as late as the 1980s has become the majority position across all major ethnic and racial groups and among all but a handful of states.

The study finds that 61 percent of Americans overall support same-sex marriage, while only 30 percent are opposed.

That support includes majorities of white (63 percent), black (52 percent) and Latino (61 percent) Americans, as well as majorities of all major religious groups with the exception of white evangelical Protestants (34 percent support/ 58 percent oppose) and Mormons (40 percent support/ 53 percent oppose).

It's also the majority position in 44 states. The exceptions: Alabama (41 percent), Mississippi (42 percent), Tennessee (46 percent), West Virginia (48 percent), Louisiana (48 percent), and North Carolina (49 percent). And Alabama is the only state where a majority says they oppose same-sex marriage.

NBC News, May 2018

What was Obergefell v. Hodges about? A ruling that overturned state-level bans/ballot initiatives/laws on gay marriage. It also struck down portions of DOMA (passed by a veto-proof majority of democratically-elected congressmen/senators). Do we run our country by opinion polls coupled with judicial activists or do we run it according to a democratic process? It's not clear anymore.

[Brian37]

What majority view?  You're talking out of your ass, Steve.  Obergefell v. Hodges was in mid-2015.

What was Obergefell v. Hodges about? A ruling that overturned state-level bans/ballot initiatives/laws on gay marriage. It also struck down portions of DOMA (passed by a veto-proof majority of democratically-elected congressmen/senators). Do we run our country by opinion polls coupled with judicial activists or do we run it according to a democratic process? It's not clear anymore.

I DO NOT GIVE A FUCK, our same SCOTUS once defended the owning of slaves in certain cases.

Our values have changed since then. Just like we allow women to vote and we don't lynch blacks or segregate them.

We are not a direct democracy DUMBASS! If you think Iran or China don't have voting, YOU ARE A FUCKING MORON!

OUR, and I do mean OUR Constitutional Republic does not favor majorities over minorities or minorities over majorities. Our system is designed as a CONSENT and review, with safety nets so that no one group can gain a monopoly over others. The CONCEPT is what we call CHECKS AND BALANCES.

How the fuck you STUPIDLY  think gay sex or gay marriage existing or being legal, is an attack on your rights is FUCKING ABSURD.

If someone were trying to rob you at gunpoint, that is a crime, but other people having money IS NOT. Your right to date the opposite sex or marry the opposite sex IS NOT IN DANGER YOU DUMBASS!

Other people wanting equality isn't a call to oppress you. YOU ARE NOT THE VICTIM! GROW THE FUCK UP!

[Astreja]

NO. I am not trying to "use my beliefs on you". Do whatever you want. Fine, you don't want to be told you are a sinner according to another belief system. I understand that. But the fact is that that belief system exists and you must co-exist with it.

Being told publicly that I'm a sinner is not "coexisting."  It is verbal abuse, and I will not roll over and play dead when treated in such a manner.

Labeling everyone who tries to follow the Bible as best they can as 'hateful' just does not follow. You infer hatred using faulty logic:

1. There are people who believe in God and that the Bible is his revelation (belief is based on many different types of reasons)
2. The Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin
3. I don't believe the Bible or in the concept of sin.
4. Anyone who does goes around telling me that I'm a sinner because of my sexual orientation is hateful.

FTFY.  Stop mis-characterizing my position.

I feel badly that your experiences have led you to this conclusion.

You do realize, don't you, that your conduct in this thread is now part of those experiences?  This cannot be undone.

But who should change a definition older than history itself? 5 people?

Why not?  If one person chooses to use a different definition, I'm fine with that.

What was Obergefell v. Hodges about? A ruling that overturned state-level bans/ballot initiatives/laws on gay marriage. It also struck down portions of DOMA (passed by a veto-proof majority of democratically-elected congressmen/senators). Do we run our country by opinion polls coupled with judicial activists or do we run it according to a democratic process? It's not clear anymore.

I hope you realize that civil rights should never be at the mercy of "democratic process" or majority rule.  What's that line -- something about two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner?

[KevinM1]

So, sodomy laws were never a thing then.  Cool, cool.

Also, you do realize that Christians don't have the monopoly on marriage, correct?  That when people are arguing for gay marriage, it's not to force churches to conduct ceremonies or otherwise acknowledge these unions (although, I'm sure there are some extremists who want that), but rather that they want the same kind of marriage that the state itself recognizes with traditional couples?  Put simply, that it's not a religious recognition, but rather a governmental one?

I mean, I don't see Christians protesting people of other religions getting married or, even worse, atheists getting married.  I don't see any Christians fuming that people who choose not to procreate get married.  It's only when non-standard gender relationships are involved that it's suddenly an issue of the institution being eroded and redefined.  Curious, that.

All valid points and are part of a civil discussion. Here's the question, who has the right to redefine an institution that predates history itself? 5 people?

In the United States, marriage is a legal construct, not a religious one. So, yes SCOTUS has the authority to determine whether or not gay marriage can be legal, and recognized by both state governments and the Federal government.

That this legal construct is termed marriage is immaterial to the issue at hand, namely that LGBTQ couples are seeking the same legal standing as traditional couples, with all the rights, privileges, and responsibilities associated with it. That's what LGBTQ people and their allies are fighting for. It has nothing to do with whether or not a church recognizes such unions.