• 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!

Homosexuality and the U.S. Constitution

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
:sorry1: to burst your bubble... but this conspicuously biased source of alleged "historical" information has been quite frequently posted by atheists all over the internet... this particular forum is but one of many, so this comes as :no: surprise whatsoever

although it's always kinda sad :( to read how it depicts Thomas Jefferson to be a such 2 faced phony :facepalm: which is WHY the FFR foundation promotes that persona so heavily... to undermine Religion by ANY means they deem necessary
I agree that he could have easily found a less biased source, but the information is solid.

ETA: How, exactly does accurate history portray Jefferson as a "2 faced phony?"
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
:sorry1: to disappoint you... perhaps you've never actually taken an extensive tour of our nation's capital?... in addition to other colonial founding cities...

where there's overwhelming abundance of evidence, that directly contradicts what you're asserting here...
:yes: indeed... it's literally all over the place; in the architecture, monuments & famous paintings, commissioned by the fledgling U.S. government

The architecture is neo-classical... patterned on Greece and Rome, not Jerusalem. There is no Ten Commandments on the Supreme Court building, contrary to popular wishful thinking. There is a carving of Moses on the frieze, along with Hammurabi, Solon, and other lawgivers.

Please point to the exact location in the US Constitution or DoI that makes a reference to God, not Creator, but God. Btw, the DoI is not a law, but an essay to King George III.

It is not I who should be disappointed.
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
gee? :bonk: wonder WHAT he meant by "endowed by Our Creator"?

amoebas? :areyoucra or monkeys? :monkey: or maybe aliens? :yoda: LOL! :biglaugh:

Name the Creator, because the Founding Fathers don't. They don't even use the word 'God'. Thomas Jefferson had all references to miracles redacted from his copy of the New Testament. Basically that leaves us with what Jesus was... a great teacher, nothing more.
 

PRV357

Member
Actually, that would be valued more highly by anyone and everyone who values historical accuracy over idological revisionism. Of course, the quote marks make it pretty clear where you stand on that particular issue.

:sorry1: BUT the visual evidence (already listed) that WE ALL SAW with our own eyes made it pretty clear... as it's STILL openly displayed & readily available for anyone & everyone to see for themselves... & certainly NOT just in those extensive DC tours either

b.t.w... it's NOT as if I've ever denied the presence of other Religions... that were either already here or brought over by immigration & grown from there... in addition to all those who are unbelievers... since our Freedom OF Religion rights, allow ALL citizens to embrace or even reject whatever beliefs as they choose, okay?

:sorry1: if I honestly DO find it difficult to respect some of these FFR groups, because of their bigoted intolerance of any reference to Christian heritage... as they seem so hell bent upon either trivializing, outright denying, or erasing ANY evidence of it
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
:sorry1: BUT the visual evidence (already listed) that WE ALL SAW with our own eyes made it pretty clear... as it's STILL openly displayed & readily available for anyone & everyone to see for themselves... & certainly NOT just in those extensive DC tours either

You must have seen a different Washington DC than I saw. I ran the Marine Corps Marathon, so I got to see a pretty good glimpse of the town. I didn't see anything religious.
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
Sorry to disappoint you... perhaps you've never actually taken an extensive tour of our nation's capital?... in addition to other colonial founding cities...

where there's overwhelming abundance of evidence, that directly contradicts what you're asserting here... indeed... it's literally all over the place; in the architecture, monuments & famous paintings, commissioned by the fledgling U.S. government
All the religiously themed architechture you see in Washington was commissioned during the Great Awakening. A time of religious revival following the Age of Enlightenment period of Americas Founding.



gee? wonder WHAT he meant by "endowed by Our Creator"?

amoebas?
or monkeys? or maybe aliens? LOL!

During the Enlightenment, most learned men followed a deistic philosophy.

OOPS! OF COURSE those "documents" would be deemed as more important
than ANY architecture OR paintings OR monuments commissioned by the government...
especially by those who'd rather exchange the "OF" to have Freedom "FROM" Religion
Since the documents reflected the thinking of our most influential founders, yes, I would say they are more important in showing the influences of those founders than later architectural and artistic paintings.

so does his over-edited "Bible" list what choice he made? as to identifying the "Creator"?
The Jefferson Bible was written by Thomas Jefferson to reflect his admiration for the life and teachings of Jesus minus the miracles and "salvation" that he thought distracted from the lessons that could be learned.
I have a copy myself.

:sorry1: to burst your bubble... but this conspicuously biased source of alleged "historical" information has been quite frequently posted by atheists all over the internet... this particular forum is but one of many, so this comes as :no: surprise whatsoever

although it's always kinda sad :( to read how it depicts Thomas Jefferson to be a such 2 faced phony :facepalm: which is WHY the FFR foundation promotes that persona so heavily... to undermine Religion by ANY means they deem necessary
As the son of an American History Professor, and an avid amateur historian myself, I can attest to the basic historicity you find so biased.

:sorry1: BUT the visual evidence (already listed) that WE ALL SAW with our own eyes made it pretty clear... as it's STILL openly displayed & readily available for anyone & everyone to see for themselves... & certainly NOT just in those extensive DC tours either

b.t.w... it's NOT as if I've ever denied the presence of other Religions... that were either already here or brought over by immigration & grown from there... in addition to all those who are unbelievers... since our Freedom OF Religion rights, allow ALL citizens to embrace or even reject whatever beliefs as they choose, okay?

:sorry1: if I honestly DO find it difficult to respect some of these FFR groups, because of their bigoted intolerance of any reference to Christian heritage... as they seem so hell bent upon either trivializing, outright denying, or erasing ANY evidence of it

If you're done ranting, perhaps you could provide some actual evidence of your accusations.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
:sorry1: BUT the visual evidence (already listed) that WE ALL SAW with our own eyes made it pretty clear... as it's STILL openly displayed & readily available for anyone & everyone to see for themselves... & certainly NOT just in those extensive DC tours either

b.t.w... it's NOT as if I've ever denied the presence of other Religions... that were either already here or brought over by immigration & grown from there... in addition to all those who are unbelievers... since our Freedom OF Religion rights, allow ALL citizens to embrace or even reject whatever beliefs as they choose, okay?

:sorry1: if I honestly DO find it difficult to respect some of these FFR groups, because of their bigoted intolerance of any reference to Christian heritage... as they seem so hell bent upon either trivializing, outright denying, or erasing ANY evidence of it
Here's the thing: yes, many of the American Founding Fathers were devout Christians, but they also knew full well the dangers of not having a separation of church and state from the then-recent history of Britain.

For centuries before the Revolution, religious involvement in government was bad news for most Christians: when the Catholics had political power, Protestants were persecuted. When the Protestants had political power, the Catholics were persecuted. And no matter who was in power, were persecuted. And no matter who was in power, fringe Christian groups like the Puritans and the Quakers were persecuted.

The Founding Fathers realized what you apparently don't: that the best way to protect their churches and their faith was to keep religion out of government.
 

PRV357

Member
Here's the thing: yes, many of the American Founding Fathers were devout Christians, but they also knew full well the dangers of not having a separation of church and state from the then-recent history of Britain.:yes:

For centuries before the Revolution, religious involvement in government was bad news for most Christians: :yes:when the Catholics had political power, Protestants were persecuted. When the Protestants had political power, the Catholics were persecuted. And no matter who was in power, were persecuted. And no matter who was in power, fringe Christian groups like the Puritans and the Quakers were persecuted.

The Founding Fathers realized what you apparently don't: that the best way to protect their churches and their faith was to keep religion out of government.

& to keep the government out of Religion... where NEITHER dictates to the other...
to AVOID the history of Old Europe, repeating itself here; in our new nation
...
but there was no logical reason :confused: for even posting this in rebuttal, since I obviously wasn't disagreeing with it anyway...

so :yes: many of the American Founding Fathers were devout Christians...
but :no: they did not force other citizens to convert to their Religion, against their will...
& neither do modern Believers, who also cherish our Freedom OF Religion...

something that many of the Freedom FROM Religion groups apparently don't realize
 

PRV357

Member
You must have seen a different Washington DC than I saw. I ran the Marine Corps Marathon, so I got to see a pretty good glimpse of the town. I didn't see anything religious.

:no:big surprise either... it would actually be more surprising for this group to agree with anything I posted... yet I still search for some common ground anyway
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
& to keep the government out of Religion... where NEITHER dictates to the other...
to AVOID the history of Old Europe, repeating itself here; in our new nation
...
but there was no logical reason :confused: for even posting this in rebuttal, since I obviously wasn't disagreeing with it anyway...

It seems to me you were. You're arguing in favour of imposing your religious views on homosexuality on others through secular law, aren't you?

But if I got it wrong and you're actually in favour of same-sex marriage, my apologies for misunderstanding your position.
 

PRV357

Member
It seems to me you were. You're arguing in favour of imposing your religious views on homosexuality on others through secular law, aren't you?

But if I got it wrong and you're actually in favour of same-sex marriage, my apologies for misunderstanding your position.

it seems to me :shrug: you're arguing in favor of imposing liberal/alternative views on homosexuality, on others through secular law, aren't you?
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
it seems to me :shrug: you're arguing in favor of imposing liberal/alternative views on homosexuality, on others through secular law, aren't you?

No, I'm not. Letting people do what they want is the exact opposite of imposing views on others. When you can marry who you want, I can marry who I want, and gay and lesbian people can marry who they want, nobody is being imposed on at all.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
No, I'm not. Letting people do what they want is the exact opposite of imposing views on others. When you can marry who you want, I can marry who I want, and gay and lesbian people can marry who they want, nobody is being imposed on at all.

Some people think their rights are offended if everyone is not like them.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
I think it's the equal protection clause, myself. No state can make a law which abridges or denies a citizen equal protection of the law. Because state laws allow heterosexuals to marry, homosexuals are not granted equal protection for that right to marry under state law, as granted by the 14th Amendment. The 14th was partially used as the argument for overturning state sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas. I think all state bans on gay marriage will ultimately be struck down based on the 14th Amendment. Jmo.

And I think there's absolutely no question that the Full Faith and Credit clause applies to same-sex marriages, which means that states are constitutionally required to recognize same-sex marriages from other states, and the provisions of DOMA that say they don't have to are unconstitutional.

BTW, wasn't DOMA struck down as unconstitutional about two weeks ago? That seems to be the clearest indication of where the constitution lies on this issue.
 

McBell

Unbound
It seems to me you were. You're arguing in favour of imposing your religious views on homosexuality on others through secular law, aren't you?

it seems to me :shrug: you're arguing in favor of imposing liberal/alternative views on homosexuality, on others through secular law, aren't you?
So I take it that the question you completely avoided answering is to embarrassing for you to actually answer?
 

PRV357

Member
Best.Reason.Ever. for embracing diversity!

REAL diversity... differences in opinion, beliefs & lifestyles...
EVERYBODY'S right to be different & NOBODY has to be the SAME...

YOU'RE certainly entitled to vote liberal/alternative & nobody expects YOU to do otherwise; against your own will & conscience...
while I'M entitled to vote traditional/conservative & nobody should expect ME to do otherwise; against my own will & conscience...

because it's NOT embracing diversity for ANYONE to demand that others HAVE TO agree with their opinions, beliefs, or lifestyles
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
REAL diversity... differences in opinion, beliefs & lifestyles...
EVERYBODY'S right to be different & NOBODY has to be the SAME...

YOU'RE certainly entitled to vote liberal/alternative & nobody expects YOU to do otherwise; against your own will & conscience...
while I'M entitled to vote traditional/conservative & nobody should expect ME to do otherwise; against my own will & conscience...

because it's NOT embracing diversity for ANYONE to demand that others HAVE TO agree with their opinions, beliefs, or lifestyles
I'm also entitled to point out the abject hypocrisy of voting against minority civil rights while trumpeting diversity.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
REAL diversity... differences in opinion, beliefs & lifestyles...
EVERYBODY'S right to be different & NOBODY has to be the SAME...

YOU'RE certainly entitled to vote liberal/alternative & nobody expects YOU to do otherwise; against your own will & conscience...
while I'M entitled to vote traditional/conservative & nobody should expect ME to do otherwise; against my own will & conscience...

because it's NOT embracing diversity for ANYONE to demand that others HAVE TO agree with their opinions, beliefs, or lifestyles
Then why are you doing precisely that?
 
Top