The Defense of Marriage Act is ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court
#51
(06-26-2013, 04:49 PM)MorganHiver Wrote: I'm confused. There is a transgendered person here? If yes then I am sincerely interested in hearing how this person is able to uphold the Catholic faith. Maybe there should be a separate thread for this? or maybe it is so simple that it can be summed up in a few words.

Anyway...since we have a lawyer here do you think I can get a short explanation on how it is possible that the majority of California voted against gay marriage, yet the small population of supporters was able to get it overturned? Does this not violate the rights of the state majority that voted against same sex marriage?

Thanks!

No, it doesn't.  If the state recognizes, rightly or wrongly, marriage as a legal right, then that is not something the majority can merely vote away.  Rights, thankfully, are not dependant upon majority approval.  Imagine if the majority voted away your right to profess the Catholic faith?
Reply
#52
I hold to Catholic teaching. God made us male and female to come together in the Holy Sacrament of Matrimony, and therein to fulfill His plans for us to be fruitful and multiply. Two people of the same sex pretending to be husband and wife is not a marriage. Immoral laws are to be opposed.
Reply
#53
(06-26-2013, 07:36 PM)Miles Christi Wrote: in fact, if one truly were to hate them, one would lead them in there state and let them be damned, but it is the Catholic's duty to love them and make them depart from their ways, and be saved.

I'm just going by your words, you said you hate all of them.
Reply
#54
(06-26-2013, 07:39 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(06-26-2013, 03:52 PM)MorganHiver Wrote: The thing that I love most about this is the fact that California residents voted against gay marriage and a very small minority went to higher *powers* to violate the rights of the California majority. Wonderful.

The rights of the california majority were not violated.  One can disagree with this all one wants, but the majority has no right to impose their worldview on the minority.  This is a republic, not a democracy.

ITA, and the thought of majority rule is almost as scary as the plutocracy we already have. Saw this isht coming as a teen; and the poor states who imagine they could ever override federal rule... I almost feel sorry for them. (That was settled in 1864; there ARE no "states rights".)

BUT, we follow our country's laws, though — period. We're not a Catholic nation, so we live as the apostles did and try to set a better example. The Muslims will kill everyone off anyway (#Sweden) so it really doesn't matter who has what rights. (STILL loving Putin though.)

ANYWAY! Came to share this lovely nugget from the most politically-powerful US witch in America (don't judge! You'll see, she's a witch!)

Nancy Pelosi Wrote:[in regards to Michele Bachmann's statement that "no man, not even a Supreme Court, can undo what a holy God has instituted."]

"Who cares?"

Isn't she a PEACH!

Btw, it's refreshing to see some truth on these boards: these LGBT fanatics and their supporters have nothing to do with humanity; they're demonics animated by Satan, so in hating these "people", you're really just hating what animates them, Satan, who is okay to hate. :thumb:
Reply
#55
I am not very political. I have never voted in my life. I don't want to be bothered with it, as I'll just end up getting even more stressed out. I care more about things on a local level. I always thought that voting was a "majority rules" setup. "ALL IN FAVOUR OF PLAYING POOL?" 10 against 2? "OK, POOL IT IS!". This is also why voting doesn't make sense to me in terms of the presidential election. If one candidate loses in terms of vote counts, they person can still win anyway. Blargh, whatever! haha. I'm definitely not a dumb person, just not very interested in learning our political structures.
Reply
#56
(06-26-2013, 07:46 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(06-26-2013, 04:49 PM)MorganHiver Wrote: I'm confused. There is a transgendered person here? If yes then I am sincerely interested in hearing how this person is able to uphold the Catholic faith. Maybe there should be a separate thread for this? or maybe it is so simple that it can be summed up in a few words.

Anyway...since we have a lawyer here do you think I can get a short explanation on how it is possible that the majority of California voted against gay marriage, yet the small population of supporters was able to get it overturned? Does this not violate the rights of the state majority that voted against same sex marriage?

Thanks!

No, it doesn't.  If the state recognizes, rightly or wrongly, marriage as a legal right, then that is not something the majority can merely vote away.  Rights, thankfully, are not dependant upon majority approval.  Imagine if the majority voted away your right to profess the Catholic faith?

neither are rights based on legal statute by a government
Reply
#57
(06-26-2013, 07:53 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(06-26-2013, 07:36 PM)Miles Christi Wrote: in fact, if one truly were to hate them, one would lead them in there state and let them be damned, but it is the Catholic's duty to love them and make them depart from their ways, and be saved.

I'm just going by your words, you said you hate all of them.
'

no, someone else said that they hated all of them. I failed at quoting someone else
Reply
#58
(06-26-2013, 08:11 PM)Miles Christi Wrote:
(06-26-2013, 07:46 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(06-26-2013, 04:49 PM)MorganHiver Wrote: I'm confused. There is a transgendered person here? If yes then I am sincerely interested in hearing how this person is able to uphold the Catholic faith. Maybe there should be a separate thread for this? or maybe it is so simple that it can be summed up in a few words.

Anyway...since we have a lawyer here do you think I can get a short explanation on how it is possible that the majority of California voted against gay marriage, yet the small population of supporters was able to get it overturned? Does this not violate the rights of the state majority that voted against same sex marriage?

Thanks!

No, it doesn't.  If the state recognizes, rightly or wrongly, marriage as a legal right, then that is not something the majority can merely vote away.  Rights, thankfully, are not dependant upon majority approval.  Imagine if the majority voted away your right to profess the Catholic faith?

neither are rights based on legal statute by a government

Insofar as they are acknowledged and respected by a government, they are.  A right is useless if you're not free to use it.
Reply
#59
(06-26-2013, 08:12 PM)Miles Christi Wrote:
(06-26-2013, 07:53 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(06-26-2013, 07:36 PM)Miles Christi Wrote: in fact, if one truly were to hate them, one would lead them in there state and let them be damned, but it is the Catholic's duty to love them and make them depart from their ways, and be saved.

I'm just going by your words, you said you hate all of them.
'

no, someone else said that they hated all of them. I failed at quoting someone else

Ok, sorry for the confusion.
Reply
#60
It's impossible for any G'ment to give "rights" and if they take away your rights that's tyranny. The G'ment gives it can also takeaway.

tim
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)