Why gay marriage? - Page 16 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #151 of 161 (permalink) Old 08-09-2006, 10:52 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
rstone's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by QBNCGAR
The ACLU comes off as being just wildly psychotic about perceived transgressions of the "church and state" clause.
Americans enjoy a degree of religious freedom unknown in most of the rest of the world, and they take full advantage it: the United States is home to more than 1,500 different religious bodies and 360,000 churches, synagogues and mosques.

The right of each and every American to practice his or her own religion, or no religion at all, is among the most fundamental of the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. The Constitution's framers understood very well that religious liberty can flourish only if the government leaves religion alone.

The free exercise clause of the First Amendment guarantees the right to practice one's religion free of government interference. The establishment clause requires the separation of church and state. Combined, they ensure religious liberty.

The ACLU works to ensure that religious liberty is protected by keeping the government out of the religion business.

The American Civil Liberties Union has a long history of working to ensure that religious liberty is protected. From the famous 1920 Scopes trial—in which the ACLU challenged a Tennessee law prohibiting the teaching of evolution in schools—to the current Ten Commandments case, the ACLU has remained committed to keeping the government out of the religion business and protecting every American's right to believe as he or she wishes.

Recent ACLU involvement in religious liberty cases include:

December 22, 2004: ACLU of New Jersey successfully defends right of religious expression by jurors.

December 14, 2004: ACLU joins Pennsylvania parents in filing first-ever challenge to “Intelligent Design” instruction in public schools.

November 20, 2004: ACLU of Nevada supports free speech rights of evangelists to preach on the sidewalks of the strip in Las Vegas.

November 12, 2004: ACLU of Georgia files a lawsuit on behalf of parents challenging evolution disclaimers in science textbooks.

November 9, 2004: ACLU of Nevada defends a Mormon student who was suspended after wearing a T-shirt with a religious message to school.

August 11, 2004: ACLU of Nebraska defends church facing eviction by the city of Lincoln.

July 10, 2004: Indiana Civil Liberties Union defends the rights of a Baptist minister to preach his message on public streets.

June 9, 2004: ACLU of Nebraska files a lawsuit on behalf of a Muslim woman barred from a public pool because she refused to wear a swimsuit.

June 3, 2004: Under pressure from the ACLU of Virginia, officials agree not to prohibit baptisms on public property in Falmouth Waterside Park in Stafford County.

May 11, 2004: After ACLU of Michigan intervened on behalf of a Christian Valedictorian, a public high school agrees to stop censoring religious yearbook entries.

March 25, 2004: ACLU of Washington defends an Evangelical minister's right to preach on sidewalks.

February 21, 2003: ACLU of Massachusetts defends students punished for distributing candy canes with religious messages.

October 28, 2002: ACLU of Pennsylvania files discrimination lawsuit over denial of zoning permit for African American Baptist church.

July 11, 2002: ACLU supports right of Iowa students to distribute Christian literature at school.

April 17, 2002: In a victory for the Rev. Jerry Falwell and the ACLU of Virginia, a federal judge strikes down a provision of the Virginia Constitution that bans religious organizations from incorporating.

January 18, 2002: ACLU defends Christian church's right to run “anti-Santa” ads in Boston subways.

Just because you do not always agree with the ACLU and the cases they take does not mean they are not defenders of the constituton. I know I dont like all the cases they have defended, but we need organizations like the ACLU to ensure the government does not abuse its powers and that they follow the constitution as it was intended by our founding fathers. The ACLU does not just protect the majority. Sometimes the minority needs protection from the tyranny of the majority.

There is one thing we can be sure of -- Jefferson would have supported the ACLU and its fight to preserve the Bill of Rights.

"Protecting the Constitution vs Presidental powers is not about terrorism, but of doing what is right vs. what is easy. I choose doing right... where do you stand?"
rstone is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 161 (permalink) Old 08-09-2006, 11:29 PM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
67_250SE's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jillian80
I wish the religious nutjobs would stop calling it gay 'marriage'. 'Marriage' happens in the church. What gays want--civil unions--has nothing to do with the church.
I thought that gays and lesbians could get married...just not to people of their same gender...

Frankly, I don't know why gays wish to get married...look at the divorce rate...why even go there?
67_250SE is offline  
post #153 of 161 (permalink) Old 08-09-2006, 11:31 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
rstone's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by QBNCGAR
"Establishment of [a] religion" amounts to state-sponsored denominations, i.e. "English is America's language, and Catholicism is America's religion". That isn't happening anywhere in America. The logical conclusion of the argument that "the symbol of a holy cross is an affront to my beliefs as an agnostic, and shouldn't be on government-owned property" can be easily turned against the agnostic, as the logical conclusion is legislation that prohibits any public display of any religious symbol - plainly contrary to the "free exercise thereof" clause, not to mention running contrary to 90% of the population and the fact that agnostics don't have a religion to exercise.
Just because one does not practice a religion, does not mean they CANNOT practice a religion. With that said, they are still protected under the consititution to practice a religion if they so choose.

Your freedom of religion does not extend to areas where there is clear violation of church and state. Your religion does not give you the right to violate this just because you have some right to practice your religion. The fact of the matter is public schools, courts, buildings, etc are run by the federal, state, city government and therefore are required to comply with the wall of seperation.

The Free Exercise Clause has never meant that a majority may use the machinary of the state to subject everyone to its beliefs, and thats precisely what we have in this sitution. The courts have said again and again we need neutrality and yet we have the quintessential question, does there exist a god?

I am not suggesting we take away your right to be religious, what I am suggesting is we take away the governments right to endorse it. You can still continue to be religious as you see fit, but lets stop pretending here that this is not about endorsement of religion by the government.

Lets break this down into simple terms..

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".

Congress will NOT make ANY law that shows or refers to a condition or fact that institutes (as a law) permanently by enactment or agreement of a religion.

The constitution applies to everyone, regardless of if they believe in the consitution, religion, or anything else for that fact. By your logic, non guns owners have no say in gun laws, hetrosexuals have no say in laws regarding homosexuals, and white people have no say in laws regarding black people. The fact of the matter is that consitution doesnt mention non-gun owners having the right to bear arms either, but even a person with limited intelligence understands this does not exclude them from gun ownership or the practice thereof.

The fact of the matter is that the seperation of church and state is recognized by the United States Supreme Court and decades of legal precendent. I do not think the founding fathers intended for congress to turn the constitution into a religious document or to use religion to further some religious goal. Our founding fathers had been running from that and I'm sure they would not of condoned a religious government today.

The founding fathers inserted the establishment clause for a reason, and that was because they did NOT want our government to establish laws with religious indoctorinations in them. They did not want the U.S. to become another England, where a government would force there own religious beliefs on the people.

What Thomas Jefferson called "a wall of separation between Church and State" in his letter to the Danbury Baptists is a fundamental principle of American government. This principle of separation of church and state is defined in the Establishment Clause, found in the First Amendment to the Constitution. The clause states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free expression thereof." The purpose of this passage is to guarantee each citizen's right to practice or not practice religion as they choose without fear of government interference. As president, Thomas Jefferson said, "I consider the government of the US, as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, or exercises." James Madison, known as the "father of the Constitution," expressed criticism for government prayer proclamations when he wrote that they "imply...the erroneous idea of a national religion." These comments are representative of how the founders intended the Establishment Clause to be interpreted. They believed that the line between government and religious beliefs should be kept completely separate. Centuries later, in the 1992 Supreme Court case Lee v. Weisman, the Establishment Clause and the opinions expressed by Jefferson and Madison were upheld when prayer at high school graduation was ruled unconsitutional because it forced participation in a religious exercise. Thus, the constitution, the founders, and the Supreme Court all assert that government should never impose a religion or specific religious practices on any citizens.

"Protecting the Constitution vs Presidental powers is not about terrorism, but of doing what is right vs. what is easy. I choose doing right... where do you stand?"

Last edited by rstone; 08-09-2006 at 11:45 PM.
rstone is offline  
post #154 of 161 (permalink) Old 08-09-2006, 11:41 PM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
67_250SE's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeelTheLove
... Erecting crosses on public property requires Congress to appropriate funds for their construction and maintenance, while providing free rent to the adherents of that religion as they use public property to advertise their mythology, while excluding that right to other viewpoints. It is clearly unconstitutional. ... It's bad enough I have to get fucked on my property taxes so your churches can have a free ride. But hey, let's give that one some time, the ACLU is busy right now.
the ACLU has consistently opposed religious displays EVEN when: 1. the people proposing the display have offered to pay for the display and 2. the display would not involve the use of ANY public funds.

I too hate to pay taxes to pay for f***ing programs that I do not approve but have now become part of the new politics of entitlements.

So we all get f***ed over.

The ACLU = a bunch of neo-nazis and the Hezbollah mullahs all rolled into one.

Personally I don't care if gays and lesbians want to get married...(let them "suffer" like the rest of married couples). As long as: 1. there are no inter-species marriages and 2. no marriages with children/minors then I have no problems with anyone marrying whoever they chose to marry.
It is not my business and it is no one's business.

Last edited by 67_250SE; 08-09-2006 at 11:47 PM.
67_250SE is offline  
post #155 of 161 (permalink) Old 08-10-2006, 12:50 AM
CH4S Artist
 
Teutone's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1985 500SEC, 1991 190E 2.6.
Location: Los Angeles / Hannover Germany
Posts: 33,572
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Quoted: 958 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear
You just summed up why I can't sleep well at night. I think I know the answer but Scotland is just so bone chilling cold in the winter. Maybe Costa del Sol.
Six month of rain, and six month of bad weather, that's how an Aberdeen pal described his City. For a time Laphroig would sell every bottle with the deed for a sq. ft. of land. We used to joke to have enough for a funeral plot on the Isle of Islay. Spain sounds good. I have known it since Franco's times. My oldest friend lives on Mallorca. Part of the Costa del Sol was originally developed by the Agha Khan. Marbella is too Saudi-cized. The Saudi King has a big compound there with his nightclub right across the street. Tons of Russian 'ladies of leisure' with their German chief of procurement. Cheerio.
Teutone is offline  
post #156 of 161 (permalink) Old 08-10-2006, 12:17 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Jayhawk's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2005
Vehicle: S500/W220/2000
Location: Lawrence, KS (USA)
Posts: 21,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by administrator
Jayhawk is definately hammered and should probably get back on topic
You were correct... I went to bed!

Don't believe everything you think
Jayhawk is offline  
post #157 of 161 (permalink) Old 08-10-2006, 02:03 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
old300D's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2003
Vehicle: '83 240D
Location: Denver
Posts: 3,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayhawk
You were correct... I went to bed!
When will you wake up?

OBK #35

old300D is offline  
post #158 of 161 (permalink) Old 08-10-2006, 05:32 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Jayhawk's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2005
Vehicle: S500/W220/2000
Location: Lawrence, KS (USA)
Posts: 21,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by old300D
When will you wake up?
I will let you know...

Don't believe everything you think
Jayhawk is offline  
post #159 of 161 (permalink) Old 08-10-2006, 06:17 PM
Premium Member
 
offroadwarrior's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2006
Vehicle: Nice, Fast, Luxurious.
Location: NY
Posts: 817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Premium Member
Homosexuality is a vice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67_250SE
I thought that gays and lesbians could get married...just not to people of their same gender...

Frankly, I don't know why gays wish to get married...look at the divorce rate...why even go there?
Same-gender sexual relation is antisocial behavior which is reflective of degenerate human beings.

Mi$ter Right.
offroadwarrior is offline  
post #160 of 161 (permalink) Old 08-10-2006, 06:39 PM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by offroadwarrior
Same-gender sexual relation is antisocial behavior which is reflective of degenerate human beings.
So is posting in OT -- get used to it.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    ALL marriage should be banned. Jillian80 Off-Topic 22 07-23-2006 11:53 AM
    Marriage and Wills tiggerfink Off-Topic 4 02-28-2006 07:08 PM
    Before and after marriage Nutz 4 Benz Off-Topic 7 02-23-2006 02:45 PM
    "Gay Marriage" issue dies with a thud FeelTheLove Off-Topic 111 02-15-2006 08:10 PM
    California legalizes Gay Marriage FeelTheLove Off-Topic 40 03-18-2005 12:12 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome