I think the implication is that god is gay - because if he was straight he wouldn't care about gays enough to kick up a fuss about them
Basmas
From what I have read it is going again to the 9th in December again. If you re-phrase the issue to 'people have the right to marry consenting adults they are in sexual love with' then gays don't have the same rights and the difference in ways of approaching is the nub of the issue isn't it?
Then it will be turned over on appeal and you can calm down. But I bet that if the prop was that white/black/jewish people can't marry it would be against the national constitution.
Where does the 10th prevent the consitution being the supreme law of the land? You quite clearly said that the national consitution isn't the supreme law of the land which appears not to the match the document that lays out the rules of the USA The 10th does nothing bar say what it can make law on - where does the 10th say that the constitution is not the supreme law of the land on whatever it makes laws on? And the ruling was based on the obligation placed on each and every sta
The national constitution is the highest law of the law - as per article six of the constitution [quote] This Constitution , and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land ; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contra
On the fire department - I bet lots of people paid up after that fire! I though the highest law in the land was the federal constitution not the state?
There is a difference between wanted the rich to pay 3% more and trying to reduce your own burden. If the taxes go up then all the rich pay more and the government has enough money to do more stuff - so the person gains as he gains though the increase in government spending. If he himself pays more then he loses the money but the government doesn't have enough money to do anything else either - so he loses. One person giving more money to the government does nothing - all
There has been a long term massive study done in Denmark. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1124634/ The medical records of over half a million children were studied over seven year (the nature of Denmark's health system made this possible) - about 100 000 children had not been given the MMR vaccine. The autism rates were statically the same between the groups (the exact numbers were lower in the vaccinated group). The principle reason that there are more
[quote who="Nitro Cruiser" reply="1" id="2778022"] Yeah he's an easy target since no one puts a fatwa on the people criticizing him. Those same "well spoken" people and comedians really show their "courage" when it comes to Islam, don't they?[/quote] Yes they do. Richard Dawkins and Steven Fry have spoken out against Islam. Jack Dee, Jimmy Carr et all have all made anti-islam jokes. Also not really sure of the point of that comment was but hey ho.
For those don't know the Pope is currently conducting the first state visit to the UK and so far I don't think it is going very well for him. From the start of it the visit has promted a wave of anti-catholic comment and the things that the Pope and his aides have said have really not helped. If his aim was to try to 're-convert' the UK I think it might have done exactly the opposite. It brought back into the public eye the peado-priests, the views on women, birth contro
I'm going to have to come back to this one. I'm off on holiday hiking tomorrow and will be unable to get online at all for at least 10 days
[quote] Why are you so interested in the OT when we are not under the OT laws anymore? Is it because you wish to project that God is really an evil God? What is your motivation here? What are you trying to accomplish? [/quote] I'm trying to understand how the same god that is the god of love can be the same god as the one that kills first borns. I want to understand how the the god of love can order that all people that work on the sabbath
Where did I say that there are documented cases of homosexuals being killed? What I keep on saying is that the god commanded them to be put to death. The LORD said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites......... If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death' Your argument about the moses killings doesn't really wash. First born babies in houses that didn't put blood on the wall
God did command they were put to death. As for killings - why did god kill the first born of all families in moses times? Babes in arms will have been included - innocents that were killed by god from the crimes of their dictator. Delibratery killed children doesn't sound like love to me.
[quote who="KFC Kickin For Christ" reply="9" id="2741332"] Today, as Christians we are not enslaved by the law anymore. Christ took that burden away by fulfilling the law completely. But that doesn't make the law totally null and void. [/quote] This has confused me. Does that mean that all the laws and guidance in the OT are not valid? [quote] don't understand the comparing what happened during the days
For example If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB) Because the LORD considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death.' (Exodus 31:12-15 NLT) OT and Christianty - I thought the NT was built on
I'm confused by several comments in this. 1) You may be free to question the holy text but are you free to do opposite to it? If you have to obey it, even after questioning it there is very little functional difference 2) Practice as opposed to theory There are numerous verses in the bible talking about killing people, whole towns etc for things that are against gods law (including merely being in a town were somebody is trying to convert a believer of your go
They are TRYING. THAT WAS ALL I SAID. By voting on a law to impose their reglios views on the laws of sociery they are trying to impose their views. What part of that means I said they ARE imposing? Laws impose things on people. That is the whole point of them trying to get laws is trying to impose things, either a requirement or a prohibition.
Oh look, After all it does happen the other ways. Despite the rhetoric heard here Muslims - or in this case suspected a Muslim - can be lead away by the police despite not breaking any law.
[quote who="Dr Guy" comment="71"] Basmasreply 35Really? How would you describe the comments on this very board about the gay marriage and the fact that it shouldn't happen because your god says it is naughty? Um - Freedom of Speech? or is that no longer possible unless you are speaking correctly? It just boggles my mind that some think they have to impose a restriction on the freedom of speech because they do not agree with the subject!
[quote who="Nitro Cruiser" comment="53"] Gotta love you guys.[/quote] Got to love you thinking that a comment I made just after quoting somebody complety different was aimed at you. Shall we both play that game? [quote who="dan_|" comment="57"] Tell us your 'vision' for your 'fears' [/quote] (Nitro this comment in in reference to the above quote and is not to do with the first quote). If anybobdy cares to answer this please
[quote] I'm persuaded (absent evidence to the contrary) that a sufficiently vocal and committed minority of western Muslims, particularly those sympathetic to the Cordoba crowd , have no desire or intent to live long-term in, or subject to the rule of, any secular state, US or otherwise. And that they will wrest control of the narrative concerning the role of sharia in the west. [/quote] evidence? Given that the Cordoba crowd appears to p
[quote who="Dr Guy" comment="27"] Basmasreply 24Of course re-zoning would force the four churches and one synagogue that are within two blocks of ground zero to move as well! Here is why I do not advocate (and really hate) the arbitrary nature of zoning. No it would not. 3 reasons why not. They can be designated historical structures (thus getting them an exemption), they can be grandfathered in, or the zoning can be very specific (that part I hate) to the
Of course re-zoning would force the four churches and one synagogue that are within two blocks of ground zero to move as well! I've listened to the video and the only quote says from the guy in questions says nothing about the US, in fact the commentator talks about Sharia law, in the same way as in Britain which kind of throws his views into question. He also says there are no prominent peaceful Muslims at all There is nothing about [b]imposing[/b] shaira law - and don't forg
sorry I meant 'The sharia project, from what.....'