That is what the lawyers want you to believe.

Gay marriage had nothing to do with a constitutional change. Or any such interpenetration of it. That is just not true.

The battle over state rights was at issue thus constitutional. Not the act of marriage itself.

Here's a poem for you, Tobias.

The Hollow Men by T S Eliot - Famous poems, famous poets. - All Poetry

Everything I said to you, I stand by 100%. The Constitution was supposed to protect the rights of the church as much as any other party. These judges have usurped the constitution in their rulings. You're basically telling me it's ok for the supreme court top do whatever they want, just because they can. That's a very dangerous thing.

Secondly, I am not contradicting myself in speaking of separation of church and state. My point is very simple. Marriage is (meaning should be) for the church. But I'm not legally forbidding homosexual from entering into some other kind of civil union. It takes no advantages away from them, while allowing the church to practice marriage under it's own laws. Now I'm aware that this will not always include Christian churches, but in cases where people DO try to get married in, say, a protestant church and the pastor says no, the church will be in danger of losing it's tax exempt status, and that isn't to mention the public display it will likely be made into. Just look at how people yourself respond to me taking a stance. And as far as I know you aren't gay. anytime someone on tv is asked for an honest answer about homosexuality and says something as simple as " I don't agree with it", he gets bashed and told to apologize.

What do I mean by essence of marriage? Simple. One man, one woman, united before God. If a man marries a woman, and proceeds to beat her, he is breaking the sanctity of marriage just as much as a homosexual in an obviously much different manner. Sin is Sin. The thing about a same sex marriage is that it's a sin before it even gets started. Now the law doesn't define it that way anymore, yes, I know.

Calling me a bible thumper is the oldest trick in the book. You don't like that I'm not a cowardly PC tool like almost everyone else. I'm not here for a high five.

You don't like that I said there is only one truth? Prove me wrong then. When I said that I made sure to leave the door open for your beliefs, but you're too eager to attack my words and paint me as a hypocrite instead of reading what I say and giving an actual response. I said you can interpret the truth however you want... That means even if you think I'm wrong and you're right (which is the case for both us) there is still only one truth. We can't both be right. In theory, we could both be wrong. But there is a truth, as to how we got here and who is really in charge, or if you are an atheist, that we all just got here from some massive cosmic fart. There aren't multiple answers.

Do I have physical evidence on hand to show you? No, not personally, and neither does an atheist have physical evidence that we weren't created. Why do I believe in God? I'll give you the answer that is easiest to understand. Prophesy. The bible WAS written a long time ago, meaning it couldn't have knowledge of anything going on recently without divine knowledge.

There have been many,many prophecies that have been fulfilled, to perfection. Many of those prophecies were fulfilled within the time frame of the bible, as it was written over a very long period of time. So if you want something more current, look no further than end time prophecy. The signs are everywhere and America is filling out just about the entire list. It would take a lot longer to go through it all, so here is a link with a lot information including where to look in the bible and see it for yourself. Prophecy Being Fulfilled in Current Events

This isn't new to any of us who have followed it, but it is clearly accelerating.

... Now, who's for some waffles...

Sorry, but no. It had nothing to do with states rights. That may have been the argument people against it put forth, but this whole gay marriage thing is definitely about individual rights and equal treatment of individuals under the U.S. Constitution.

As far as I know, states can govern themselves, and create their own laws, but have no right to defy the U.S. Constitution. A state cannot turn around and say, for example "we are repealing the 13th amendment".

See that is my whole point. This in truth had nothing to do with marriage. That was the what the lawyers sold it as. legal con job in my book. That is why marriage itself was dealt with as an issue all by itself in Ireland. Now comes the rest of the issues. which in my opinion should have been done separate from the marriage issue.

The shot gun effect of gay rights laws passed over the years was yet another con job done by lawyers. All these laws scattered all over the place and needed to be rounded up and packaged into one complete court case to deal with equality once and for all. But once again that is not supported by the Lawyers.

The supreme court left it to states for so long because they had a good idea this is what would happen.

With the coffin nailed gay rights can be addressed and established once and for all. But the way we are proceeding now it will years upon years till a true law on gay rights ever gets on the books. We all get hurt and the lawyers get rich.

What other issues? And yes, it had to do with marriage, and individuals of the same sex not being allowed to enter into the civil contract known as marriage. And no, Ireland did not do it right.


Shotgun effect? What shotgun effect? And these are not "gay rights laws". They are the correct interpretation of "all men are created equal" and "the inalienable right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" for everyone.

That is not the case. At all.

And again, there is no such thing as gay rights. Unless you get the right to do something specifically because you are gay, and others can't because they are not gay, no such thing as gay rights.