Courts on homosexuality

[tod evans]

It seems as if there are a lot of people here who look to the courts to determine morality for them.

Drawing a distinct line between legal and moral is a concept foreign to many.

A great many things government does are immoral in my eyes but they're damn sure legal.

If society as a whole wants a more moral government then she's left with only two options;

1) Try to convince other people to be more moral.

2) Try to force other people to be more moral.

At this point talkin' voting and writing don't appear to be having much effect......







A long time ago a young member of the Bar told me;

"What's right-n-wrong have absolutely no bearing on what's legal or illegal."

[puppetmaster]

Yeah that's the problem. What the hell does society want.....what the hell do our masters want....we know what God wants.

[tod evans]

Yeah that's the problem. What the hell does society want.....what the hell do our masters want....we know what God wants.

One portion of society has just got authorization to bring the full force of "The Law" down on the portion that thought they held that power unilaterally...

Society isn't a cohesive whole and now the cludgeon of "The Law" has been taken from the hands of one group of morality dictators and given to another....

[Zippyjuan]

It seems as if there are a lot of people here who look to the courts to determine morality for them.

Drawing a distinct line between legal and moral is a concept foreign to many.

A great many things government does are immoral in my eyes but they're damn sure legal.

If society as a whole wants a more moral government then she's left with only two options;

1) Try to convince other people to be more moral.

2) Try to force other people to be more moral.

At this point talkin' voting and writing don't appear to be having much effect......


A long time ago a young member of the Bar told me;

"What's right-n-wrong have absolutely no bearing on what's legal or illegal."

Maybe we need the government to pass more laws limiting what people can and can't do. No alcohol. No cigarettes. If you don' wear your headscarf in public we can stone you to death. No sex outside marriage. Certain people can't live in certain places. Let's legislate morality!

Or should we promote personal liberties? If you want freedom to do what you want you must tolerate those who behave differently and want to do what they want to as well. Freedom ins't freedom if it isn't for all.

[tod evans]

Maybe we need the government to pass more laws limiting what people can and can't do. No alcohol. No cigarettes. If you don' wear your headscarf in public we can stone you to death. No sex outside marriage. Certain people can't live in certain places. Let's legislate morality!

Or should we promote personal liberties?

Funny you should jump directly to governmental force......

Read slower......

I set out actions society could take against government not vice-versa.......

[Zippyjuan]

Funny- I was being sarcastic. But there are some who are in favor of liberties but against gay marriage when that should be a personal choice not something determined by law.


Ron Paul: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/ro...-marriage-but/

“Who’s married and who isn’t married. I have my standards but I shouldn’t have to impose my standards on others. Other people have their standards and they have no right to impose their marriage standards on me.”

“But,” he continued, “if we want to have something to say about marriage it should be at the state level, and not at the federal government.”

In his newest book, Liberty Defined, Paul’s chapter on “Marriage” states, “In a free society…all voluntary and consensual agreements would be recognized.” He adds, “There should essentially be no limits to the voluntary definition of marriage.”

“Everyone can have his or her own definition of what marriage means, and if an agreement or contract is reached by the participants, it would qualify as a civil contract if desired…Why not tolerate everyone’s definition as long as neither side uses force to impose its views on the other? Problem solved!”

[tod evans]

Why not tolerate everyone’s definition as long as neither side uses force to impose its views on the other?

As a society we haven't made that leap yet...

Maybe it'll be moral issues that forces the public's hand, it hasn't been wars or the economy........

The point I'm trying to make is that no central government can be representative of all the people, hell at this point no state government can..

Maybe the ***** will be the issue that causes the citizenry to take back her power..........

We'll see....

[Christian Liberty]

Funny- I was being sarcastic. But there are some who are in favor of liberties but against gay marriage when that should be a personal choice not something determined by law.


Ron Paul: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/ro...-marriage-but/

Ick... No Ron seriously no... I like you on most things but this is wrong...

[tod evans]

Ick... No Ron seriously no... I like you on most things but this is wrong...

So you want to define other peoples personal relationships?

I certainly don't, but don't expect me to accept them either.

[Origanalist]

One portion of society has just got authorization to bring the full force of "The Law" down on the portion that thought they held that power unilaterally...

Society isn't a cohesive whole and now the cludgeon of "The Law" has been taken from the hands of one group of morality dictators and given to another....

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to tod evans again.

It seems I have some spreading to do.

[TheCount]

Ick... No Ron seriously no... I like you on most things but this is wrong...

[Danke]

It seems as if there are a lot of people here who look to the courts to determine morality for them.

Drawing a distinct line between legal and moral is a concept foreign to many.

A great many things government does are immoral in my eyes but they're damn sure legal.

If society as a whole wants a more moral government then she's left with only two options;

1) Try to convince other people to be more moral.

2) Try to force other people to be more moral.

At this point talkin' voting and writing don't appear to be having much effect......







A long time ago a young member of the Bar told me;

"What's right-n-wrong have absolutely no bearing on what's legal or illegal."

Another good candidate for the treatment. http://disinfo.com/2015/06/psychosur...information%29

[Origanalist]

Another good candidate for the treatment. http://disinfo.com/2015/06/psychosur...information%29

A brain surgeon begins an anterior cingulotomy by drilling a small hole into a patient’s skull. The surgeon then inserts a tiny blade, cutting a path through brain tissue, then inserts a probe past sensitive nerves and bundles of blood vessels until it reaches a specific cluster of neural connections, a kind of switchboard linking emotional triggers to cognitive tasks. With the probe in place, the surgeon fires up a laser, burning away tissue until the beam has hollowed out about half a teaspoon of grey matter.

This is the shape of modern psychosurgery: Ablating parts of the brain to treat mental illnesses.

[Ender]

Ick... No Ron seriously no... I like you on most things but this is wrong...

This is NOT wrong- this is exactly as it should be.

Freedom is for all- not just those who behave exactly as YOU think they should.

[Origanalist]

This is NOT wrong- this is exactly as it should be.

Freedom is for all- not just those who behave exactly as YOU think they should.

Well that's no good, how am I supposed to maintain my feelings of superiority?

[Danke]

It seems I have some spreading to do.

Clinton manspreading on public transportation?!

[Origanalist]

Clinton manspreading on public transportation?!

He's no snob, that Bubba.

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

It doesn't seem any of the states are going to do anything about it. Louisiana is the only state that hasn't married two dudes yet. Jindal says he will do it when the Fifth Circuit issues its compliance order. If anyone will disobey it might be that chief judge. He's old and ornery. But I doubt he will.

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

It's comical when you step back and think about it. SCOTUS is no different than the panel of mullahs in Iran... doling out their secular sharia from DC while their fanatic true believers eat it up. This has been going on for decades or a century. Friday was just more of the same.

It seems as if there are a lot of people here who look to the courts to determine morality for them.

Drawing a distinct line between legal and moral is a concept foreign to many.

[Origanalist]

It's comical when you step back and think about it. SCOTUS is no different than the panel of mullahs in Iran... doling out their secular sharia from DC while their fanatic true believers eat it up. This has been going on for decades or a century. Friday was just more of the same.

Yep, peace be upon the prophet Abraham Lincoln.