Pretty sure everyone knows that the OT enjoins the death penalty for male homosexuals and that in the NT, St Paul condemns both male and female homosexuality. However, in our legal system, man-made law is enforced when it conflicts with man’s interpretations of natural law or God’s law.
Anthony “Rainbow Warrior” Kennedy’s SSM ruling is detestable, but it’s law, and conservatives had better stand up for strict and consistent enforcement of the law, because the widespread current acceptance of civil disobedience (=breaking laws “because conscience,” “because religion,” etc) is destroying respect for the law generally, and is encouraging movements like Black Lives Matter, blocking traffic, rioting, and even violence against law enforcement. When you condone civil disobedience, you undermine law and public safety, period. It is bizarre and tragic to see numerous conservatives accept the avowed “democratic socialist” Martin Luther King, Jr’s premise that it’s acceptable to break laws you don’t like “because Christian.” If in the ‘60s we’d consistently and relentlessly arrested, jailed, and fined sit-inners, lie-inners, and rioters, we could’ve avoided the explosion of crime in that decade, but instead we legitimized lawbreaking, abandoned vital social controls, and reaped the whirlwind. From Nixon in ‘68 to Bush in ‘88, Republicans ran on law and order and won. In 1992, even Bill Clinton found it necessary to pledge law and order to win. That only makes it stranger these days to see more and more Republicans backing civil disobedience.
Oh, Lookie who came back a day later!
You still have an unanswered question from Darksheare concerning your post #259. I believe he asked you something about how you figured that homosexuality was a “race, creed or religion.”
He also made a few points in his post #289 to which you have yet to respond.
Your continued silence only serves to underscore the fact that you can’t defend the indefensible. I guess it’s perfectly understandable in that light.
“At least since SCOTUS ruled that the Civil Rights Act supersedes religious scruples against serving all races and creeds. “ -your idiotic post 259
Show how homosexuality is a race or creed.
You CAN do that, right?
Please cite the US Code, the US Constitution, the general laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, or the Kentucky Constitution to back up your claim that SSM "is law".
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3331594/posts?page=259#259
Hello, you still have yet to show how homosexuality is a race, creed, or religion.
You also need to cite what law is being violated, and where the Supreme Court gets legislative powers.
And after you finish with Dark’s questions there’s still that whole “secular nation” thing.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3331594/posts?page=293#293
But take your time.
Just answer one at a time.
We can get to the anti-Israel thing later.
“Pretty sure everyone knows that the OT enjoins the death penalty for male homosexuals”
The Tanakh does no such thing. Try reading all the books.
You are an utter fool to think that any man made law will prevail over God’s law.
Sooner or later this lunatic idiocy will be overturned. You will see and someday you will understand how ignorant you truly are.
Does the authority to make law simply come because a man is wearing black robes? You will one day learn.