"V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches" (jbv12)
06/27/2015 at 01:08 • Filed to: None
11
27|
"V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches" (jbv12)
06/27/2015 at 01:08 • Filed to: None | 11
| 27 |
Other conservatives act like its the end of days because others can now marry each other. If You’re gonna live by the constitution, live by all of it . Nowhere in the constitution does it define mairrage as a bond between a man and a woman only . Also remember that the U.S. of A has no official religion.
As pointed out by a few commenters, “separation of church and state” is not actually in the constitution. My error, I have amended the article to fix that.
Original post:
Other conservatives act like its the end of days because others can now marry each other. If You’re gonna live by the constitution, live by all of it “separation of church and state” . Also remember that the U.S. of A has no official religion.
boredalways
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 01:14 |
|
bet it made for one hellava Critical Mass today, huh? :)
sellphones2493
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 01:16 |
|
Specify your conservatives. Us fiscal conservatives are cool with this - social conservatives...not so much#libertarianism
this is not matt farah's foxbodymiata
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 01:17 |
|
“U.S. of A has no official religion”
GASP. This is an astounding revelation. How will we survive without the unofficially federally sanctioned heavenly overlord who has blessed our currency and our pledges of allegiance since... almost 100 years after the country was founded??
BReLp7dzHM3ytYsE
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 01:18 |
|
For the record, separation of church and state is not explicitly stated in the Constitution. It appeared in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to a group of Baptists. http://www.allabouthistory.org/separation-of-…
|
V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
> sellphones2493
06/27/2015 at 01:20 |
|
True, I meant social.
ttyymmnn
> this is not matt farah's foxbodymiata
06/27/2015 at 01:26 |
|
God wasn’t part of the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954, when “under God” was added to set us apart from the Godless Communists.
http://www.ushistory.org/documents/pled…
|
this is not matt farah's foxbodymiata
> ttyymmnn
06/27/2015 at 01:32 |
|
Yup. In God we Trust showed up on coins in 1864, and then on paper currency in ‘57 when it was declared the national motto, for the same reason as under god was added to the non-lemon Pledge.
415s30 W123TSXWaggoIIIIIIo ( •_•))°)
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 01:32 |
|
I know, like they have to personally go to other people homes and watch them do it?? Nothing will change for them because they aren’t going to be around it anyway. Its also pride week here in SF and I bet it’s going to be a bit nuts this weekend! Late buses, my wife will be thrilled. Last year she waited two hours and I had to go get her because no bus showed up. I wish there really was a no religion mentioned rule, in some countries it’s really forbidden to do it, Scandinavia is awesome that way.
TheHondaBro
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 01:34 |
|
Amoore100
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 01:52 |
|
Posts like these where no commenting wars break out underneath are why I love Oppo.
|
V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
> ttyymmnn
06/27/2015 at 01:57 |
|
Damn commie baterds. To chicken to fight us dag nabbit USA USA USA
BigBlock440
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 02:19 |
|
If You’re gonna live by the constitution, live by all of it “separation of church and state”
Hmm... I don’t recall seeing that bit in the constitution.
AthomSfere
> ttyymmnn
06/27/2015 at 02:34 |
|
I never pledged allegiance because of that damn phrase.
|
V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
> BigBlock440
06/27/2015 at 02:39 |
|
Yeah, I sort of lumped that in there. I know it’s not actually in the constitution. I'll ammend that.
NotUnlessRoundIsFunny
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 03:49 |
|
I don’t get why some feel so threatened by same-sex marriage. Why is a consenting adult couple’s decision anyone else’s business again?
Nymphicus Hollandicus
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 06:28 |
|
Here’s something interesting I stumbled upon several days ago, http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/ten… . It’s all a good laugh since it smells of bullshit.
DISCLAIMER: If you are strongly against gay marriage you are free to say how I’m in cahoots with Satan to contaminate the earth. Also please get a grasp on life, you sound like an ignorant bigot.
Among other things, we know that fathers excel in reducing antisocial behavior and delinquency in boys and sexual activity in girls.
My neighbor’s father was not with him for most of his childhood, yet he’s quite a sociable guy. My friend lost her father during high school and she isn’t crawling with STDs and sleeping with every body. Her younger brother is also doing quite well. Where’s the facts?
7. Same-sex “marriage” would further isolate marriage from its procreative purpose.
Wait... marriage is only for starting families? I would get married to my future wife because I love her for who she is and how she makes me happy. This quote tells I am welcome to abuse my wife just because we have 7 children because having ton’s of children is the “Christian” way. Also look at the contrasting statements in the above two quotes. So if sexual activity in girls is bad than they shouldn’t be having children. Is the above statement even a real question? Marriage has a deeper meaning than just pumping out children ya know.
shop-teacher
> AthomSfere
06/27/2015 at 07:35 |
|
I just skip that part.
|
shop-teacher
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 07:59 |
|
Now we get to hear all the crazies say things like, “I guess now we can all just marry our dogs or our refrigerators!”
Riiiiiiight
Sam
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 08:17 |
|
Don’t forget that there was a similar uproar from the Democrats (modern Republicans) when interracial marriage was legalised.
R Saldana [|Oo|======|oO|] - BTC/ETH/LTC Prophet
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 09:16 |
|
Seeing other Christians and public figures from the right being so butthurt over this is alarming to me. They champion their anger as disbelief “because it is a sin”. News flash y’all, we are all sinners and no sin is more powerful than Jesus Christ. So, that being a fact, which it is, states that we should not be hung up on this stuff. This does not mean you have to shut up about your faith, but all of you in established elements of christianity have no idea how express a belief without stepping on the little guy.
The tin foil hat folks are going even crazier than expected, I pray that no blood is shed over this. I wish the verdict had been more along the lines of it being unconstitutional to create financial subsidies and kickbacks for certaingroups/couples of people. Meaning the federal government or any other government should have no say and regulation of marriage.
As I say this I do remember all the extreme fringe weirdo polygamists and child-lovers. I do not know how to fix that problem.
KusabiSensei - Captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs
> ttyymmnn
06/27/2015 at 09:20 |
|
And the Pledge was written by a socialist. I find the Pledge to be incompatible with liberty as defined by Locke.
|
KusabiSensei - Captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 09:37 |
|
It is also possible to agree with the outcome, and disagree with the logic that was used to get there. I’m LGBT, agree with the decision, but find the legal precedent (that is we spaghetti twist the 14th Amendment to mean whatever we say it to mean, under a pretense of a ‘Right to Dignity’) to be dumb at best, and outright dangerous at worst.
What’s to happen if the Court makeup were different, and say Kennedy was closer to Scalia than where he normally is (ideologically speaking)? And what if the case presented allows some social conservative position to be protected under the 14th Amendment penumbra of the right to “dignity” that Kennedy cited (and that he seems really fond of, having used it in plenty of his opinions before)?
I’d recommend reading this piece in the Atlantic: The Dangers of a Constitutional ‘Right to Dignity’
davedave1111
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 10:08 |
|
I fully support the right of anyone to marry who they wish, and to define ‘marry’ however they want. It’s absurd to discriminate on the basis of sexuality the way the US has done historically. But, if you want to live by the US constitution, then Scalia was right. He’s a bell-end, but a bell-end with a point. The judiciary is not supposed to have the power to make laws, only to strike them down; it’s an essential protection, and not one worth abandoning for a single win.
Rainbow
> sellphones2493
06/27/2015 at 10:16 |
|
Social conservatives are - luckily - a dying breed. I believe that the Republican Party will be replaced by the Libertarians within the next 50 years. Either they will literally fade out of the spotlight and be actually replaced, or their ideology will become identical to what the Libertarians’ is now. Both things have happened in the past, and the Republicans are really acting ridiculous lately. It seems their time has come to give up.
(I’m a registered Democrat, so I’ll admit I might be missing something. Although, I DID vote for a Libertarian in the last election. It was either him or a “traditional Christian family values” guy who doesn’t understand Christian values, though, so that was an easy choice. But anyway, yeah. Politics on Oppo where everyone seems to agree, hot damn!)
|
AthomSfere
> shop-teacher
06/27/2015 at 10:46 |
|
I want to marry a Toyota FT1, I mean those exhausts!
X37.9XXS
> V12 Jake- Hittin' Switches
06/27/2015 at 10:57 |
|
CBN goes rabid
http://www.cbn.com/tv/43255046020…
|
shop-teacher
> AthomSfere
06/27/2015 at 11:10 |
|
If you can get her consent, then congrats :)