Incestual relationships are a lot trickier. I'm against a child marrying his/her parent due to the simple fact of manipulation from a young age to adulthood could do some serious psychological trauma to a child to think that they do love their parent in that way. Cousin and cousin, brother and sister, etc? Eh...birth defects are at a higher rate among these relationships, so that is an issue. Maybe if they agreed to get fixed? Incest is a trickier subject due to heavy psychological influences.
The Supreme Court ruling will not redefine marriage for me. Marriage has always been and always will be between a man and a woman, strike that, between a physically born man and physically born woman. Our deranged society does not have the right to redefine words to coexist with the daily perversion of traditional values that many hold dear, regardless of whose feelings are hurt.
So anyone that voted or would vote against gun rights, is discriminating against people that utilize the 2nd amendment. As is anyone that voted or would vote against flag desecration because it's discriminating against freedom of speech supporters. or anyone that would vote against... ___________________ (fill in the blank). It doesn't have to be a demographic.
And in a democracy, voting is how things are determined, decided, etc. So anytime ANYTHING is voted on, someone is being discriminated against, one side or the other? So the point to calling out someone for "discriminating" against gays for voting against gay marriage, is... what? The people that voted for gay marriage discriminated against those of us that don't support gay marriage.
This begs the question; If a man and woman get married in Missouri and then move to Iowa where they later decide to divorce.........are they still brother and sister?
In a way...sure I guess right the "you are denying my freedom to deny their freedom" argument Discrimination is when one group has the right and/or ability to do something, but another group does not have that right. The group that does not have that right is being discriminated against. This is so simple. I really don't understand how some of y'all don't get it.
And now we all have the ability to marry someone of the same sex. Yay for more freedoms! Does America not champion itself off its freedoms? Why are so many angry about more freedoms? Why would that ever be a bad thing?
What's simple is every couple committed to each other should get the same benefits from the government. What's not simple is calling it marriage (defined an given by God as a union between man and woman). I also agree with Dustin that they should not try to attack us like so many do for not consenting or changing our ways because they are different . I will never agree with gay "marriage". Gay civil unions is different but not what's being discussed here. No matter what we do people are always going to judge others. We all do it. We see someone and in 7 seconds we have judged them by what we see. If people want to be gay that's fine with me. If they want to be gay and also attack me for the way I think, no we have a problem because it wasn't me that made them gay. People need to accept responsibility for their actions in this country instead of crying louder than the other side. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yay! Freedom to shoot people without consequence, yay for more freedoms! There's a reason that would be a bad thing...
What about the freedom of 13 states to vote and ban same sex marriage? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nobody is redefining your God's definition of marriage. The vast majority of gay people just want to live their life. A rational gay person is not going to attack you for simply disagreeing with their lifestyle. They may try to attack your if you actively try to deny them the ability to do something simply because they are gay though.
The exact same thing happened in 1969 with interracial marriages. Would you be in favor of say, the state of Alabama, outlawing interracial marriages and claim states rights?
We also need to realize that we are at the beginning of a presidential race, many are pushing their agendas to get a voting base going. Politicians and them judges are so wishy washy, they change their views like underwear. I personally wouldn't vote for or support gay marriage, nor would I vote for anyone who has had it on their agenda. It doesn't matter now though, it's the law. I will continue to support my beliefs and raise my family in a Christian way, I can love my neighbor, but I don't have to support what they do!
A blurb from Scalia's dissent: Scalia: We just destroyed democracy. A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy. The strikingly unrepresentative character of the body voting on today’s social upheaval would be irrelevant if they were functioning as judges, answering the legal question whether the American people had ever ratified a constitutional provision that was understood to proscribe the traditional definition of marriage. But of course the Justices in today’s majority are not voting on that basis; they say they are not. And to allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation. Thoughts?
SCOTUS just redefined God's definition of marriage. So me utilize my right to an opinion and a vote is actively denying them? What am I supposed to do give up my right so they can have theirs? Has nothing to do with their beliefs it is based on my belief that marriage is between a man and a woman Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
