Sky daddy ain't doing nothing. Da gays been around forever, it's not automatically going to make more of them....unless your concerned you might wake up that way tomorrow. If sky daddy is gonna get mad, why do you care...your not gay and getting married. He's been letting Canada marry gays for a decade now....or is he only an American God and that's when he gets mad?
Same-Sex Marriage Is a Right, Supreme Court Rules, 5-4
- Thread starter -LEK-
- Start date
- Status
Sky daddy ain't doing nothing. Da gays been around forever, it's not automatically going to make more of them....unless your concerned you might wake up that way tomorrow. If sky daddy is gonna get mad, why do you care...your not gay and getting married. He's been letting Canada marry gays for a decade now....or is he only an American God and that's when he gets mad?
Are you mad you have to employee married heteros? Everyone needs to stay single until retirement....for your benefit of course
I hope your business isn't sports metaphors.
Totally understandable if your business is hyperbole (and you would definitely employ homosexuals).
Last edited:
The social conservative butthurt is so strong right now.
Being on the wrong side of history over and over and over and over and over again has to be a bad feeling.
Being on the wrong side of history over and over and over and over and over again has to be a bad feeling.
Kevin Zipperle can, at last, legally marry his partner Debbie now.
How are you impacted any more than if those same employees sought "traditional" marriage?
Wait just a minute. I thought these people were having their "right to marriage" denied. How on earth would they be getting non gay-married?
This isn't about religious intolerance and the yearning to monopolize the legal institution of marriage, it's about disability insurance.
You're finally catching on. Good job. Yes, there are implications outside of "Billy and Steve love each other and they want to get married and have a wedding and they want to live happily ever after."
I'll bite. As a business owner (I am one), you are obligated to treat all of your employees equally in order to comply with the current laws. That can mean A) giving all of your full-time employees a flat lump sum amount toward healthcare each month or B) paying a common percentage of one's healthcare cost. hence, if you don't want to pay for someone's spouse that happens to be same-sex (or opposite sex or whatever), then you pay all of your employees a flat dollar amount for their healthcare each month and be done with it.
I am all for fairness and equality, so if the federal government does not want to issue spousal benefits (or if it's too expensive) for things like income tax credits, healthcare, etc, then so be it. I just want opposite sex legal partners treated the same way as same sex partners.
OK, then let's get rid of federal income tax benefits for married couples of all kinds. Did you complain about getting federal income tax breaks for being married prior to this decision?
Hell, let's not stop there, let's get rid of the federal income tax altogether, 3 birds with one stone.
My Bible says Marriage is between a MAN and a WOMEN. I keep looking and looking and I still see Marriage is between a MAN and a WOMEN. So to believe any other way you must not believe in the Bible. Seems pretty simple to me. You either BELIEVE or you DON"T believe.
Did the SCOTUS legislate those benefits through a nebulous interpretation of the Constitution? I'm not sure that's an apt comparison.
So it's an easy business decision to pay for someone's spouse.
Not sure how opposite sex legal partners are not treated the same here?
I don't want the government involved, but they are. If they continue to be, the laws shouldn't be discriminatory based on the sexual preference of the marriage.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:28
Anyhooo ... you can think that homosexuality is a sin, but so are lots of things. I hope you didn't take a second look at a woman anytime recently. If you don't like the thought of a dude and another dude going at it, that's cool, but if you're a Christian then you are supposed to show love (not necessarily that kind) To your neighbor, and I think one way of doing that is to see everyone as equals no matter what you think.
But this is not a religious issue. It's an equal rights under the law issue. No one is going to win this one based on passages from the bible.
Satan-1, God-0
Yay Satan!!!! A rare win by lord of darkness.
Yay Satan!!!! A rare win by lord of darkness.
Think about what you're saying about a relationship between 2 humans - no matter the sexual preference.
Your lawful right!!!!
Lol, nope. Straight or gay, y'all some sheep *** sheep for buying that logic.
Your lawful right!!!!
Lol, nope. Straight or gay, y'all some sheep *** sheep for buying that logic.
But does your Bible specify whether Marriage is between a MAN and two WOMEN, or between a MAN and three WOMEN? Or is it four? Or just any number greater than one?
No where did I say I do not show LOVE to my GAY Neighbor. Nowhere did I say that we all do not sin or do things we shouldn't. All I am saying in the Bible it says Marriage is between a man and women. That is GOD's word not MAN's. To me it is pretty simple. Man can change what he want's but GOD isn't going to change a thing.
And that's just fine as far as your religion is concerned. I think what most people are saying is that every legal citizen of this country should have the same rights and and be governed by the same set of laws, regardless of religion. Religion should really have nothing to do with it.
Most of our laws are based on Christian beliefs. Man can change the laws any way it wants,but you can't change God's words is all that I am saying.
I couldn't care less what this worthless government of mine does anymore. My church doesn't recognize it and neither do I. Meanwhile, passing of FastTrack this week is going to hurt workers in this country. But hey, as long as 3% of the population can get married, hooray!
ugh, man has changed God's word for centuries. like every time it was translated from one language to the next. and the ole catholic thing of only including what books in the bible they saw fit. anyway, not going to win this one. now carry on.
Which is the point of, do you get disgruntled at heterosexual marriage and wish you could only hire single individuals? Oh, no?
Well what if we don't believe? You only read your bible bc it's the one you were born with, if you were born in ancient Greece you'd be swearing up and down about Zeuss. Besides, if your bible says it..then don't marry another man...boom problem solved for you. Why do you care if anyone else does? We're you given judging privileges? Or why haven't you gotten up in arms about divorce, infedelity, and adultry...what's your good word say about that? Are you hunting down all those ppl and having head explosions?
I think the law should be equal to all, but when my church is forced to marry a gay couple because of disriminization then watch out because the constitution officially means nothing anymore. Freedom is freedom and ga people should be allowed to marry in America just like we should be allowed to worship as we please, but something tells me in the America I currently live in the right to marry is not going to be enough, the right of our church to our beliefs are soon going to be considered offensive and we will be forced by law to preside over these weddings. This is when the rubber will hit the road and it will be very interesting to see how it shakes out.
So we wouldn't have been able to figure out that we didn't want to be murdered, stolen from, raped, assaulted etc. etc. without the guidance of Christianity?
That is where you are wrong Christians have gotten up in arms in the past and still do about divorce,adultery,homosexuality, and other morality issues in the past based on God's word. This stance isn't anything new. The only person who can judge and will judge is GOD.
So if these people woke up tomorrow and decided they were straight, then you'd be ok with providing them medical coverage?
- Status