-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
High stakes as Supreme Court considers same-sex marriage case
- Thread starter leibowde84
- Start date
Wirey
Fartist
You think you've got it rough? I'm sexually attracted to box jellyfish!
Whose family law? Abraham's? He had a wife and concubine. David? Yikes, he committed adultery and murder for lust. Solomon? How many concubines? So please, spare us.
Marisa
Well-Known Member
There was a time when women couldn't get custody of their children if they divorced their husbands. That paradigm shifted so violently that there was a time when men couldn't get custody of their kids if mom was a drunk or addict. I know it's inconvenient to know things that invalidate our ick reflex, but do try to evolve.
Akivah
Well-Known Member
Not all changes are for the better.
Akivah
Well-Known Member
The family law of humanity.
Marisa
Well-Known Member
Said every slave owner and misogynist ever.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
But some are. This one, for example.
In other words: "No law that actually exists."
Some folks might enjoy it more, plugged in?
Marisa
Well-Known Member
That's not a legal standard. No one is saying you don't get to go around thinking gays are icky for as long as you like, but you don't get to treat them as second class citizens.
Marisa
Well-Known Member
Hey, you won't find me judging them!
I for one am offended that the Supreme Court is even considering legalizing same-sex marriage. My pet Loch Ness Monster told me that every time homosexuals fall in love with each other, a baby Monster dies. I can't believe we have stooped to this level, allowing ourselves to kill baby Loch Ness Monsters. I'm genuinely offended and about to cry now.
That's written where? Name of the book? Page? What library?
Akivah
Well-Known Member
They shouldn't be allowed to marry. Anymore than a man can marry a toaster. He can love his toaster, but it isn't a marriage.
Akivah
Well-Known Member
Look around the world and history.
jonathan180iq
Well-Known Member
And you can hate human beings, but that doesn't make you right.
And you'll find very successful and prosperous societies that had no problem allowing homosexuality.
Commited relationships deserve both social and legal recognition. It is really simple as that.
I hope you realize how insulting your comparison of genuine love to "loving a toaster" is. Just because your ancient religious beliefs are against homosexuality doesn't mean that homosexuals shouldn't have the right to marry those they love. Maybe we should consider outlawing archaic myths instead of loving relationships between consenting adults.