Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Among all the other stuff making the news on the Pope's most recent statement is this:

“In discussing the dignity and mission of the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, ‘as for proposals to place unions between homo­sexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for mar­riage and family,’”

JohnStOnge wrote:Among all the other stuff making the news on the Pope's most recent statement is this:

“In discussing the dignity and mission of the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, ‘as for proposals to place unions between homo­sexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for mar­riage and family,’”

There is no god so there is no plan for marriage and family from that god. So what he said doesn't mean anything.

There is no god.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:There is no god.

Impossible to say really...
But the odds of their being an idiotic bigoted God
with iron age reasoning and no grasp of science is pretty slim actually

WOW

the pope is still catholic?

who knew


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And, THIS is religious liberty.

If Catholics don't want to recognize gay marriages... that's their prerogative.

No one's saying they should be forced to recognize gay marriage.

Skjellyfetti wrote:And, THIS is religious liberty.

If Catholics don't want to recognize gay marriages... that's their prerogative.

No one's saying they should be forced to recognize gay marriage.

I agree.

Once marriage went from being strictly religious ceremony, to becoming the equivalent of a corporate merger, all bets were off.

I still hold the belief that getting government OUT of marriage completely would go a long way further towards the goals of the anti-gay marriage crowd than constantly attempting to legislate morality from their false pedestal of "freedom of/from religion"

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

DSUrocks07 wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:And, THIS is religious liberty.

If Catholics don't want to recognize gay marriages... that's their prerogative.

No one's saying they should be forced to recognize gay marriage.

I agree.

Once marriage went from being strictly religious ceremony, to becoming the equivalent of a corporate merger, all bets were off.

I still hold the belief that getting government OUT of marriage completely would go a long way further towards the goals of the anti-gay marriage crowd than constantly attempting to legislate morality from their false pedestal of "freedom of/from religion"

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Skjellyfetti wrote:And, THIS is religious liberty.

If Catholics don't want to recognize gay marriages... that's their prerogative.

No one's saying they should be forced to recognize gay marriage.

You sure about that, Sparky?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreill ... 82f58559ee

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... titutions/

http://www.frc.org/clergyprotected

Nice links, dumbass.

I didn't make it very far in this one

Can Pastors and Churches Be Forced to Perform Same-Sex Marriages?
By Travis Weber

The short answer: almost certainly not

http://www.frc.org/clergyprotected

No one's saying they should be forced to recognize gay marriage.

Not true. There are now many contexts in which Catholics will be forced to recognize homosexual relationships as "marriage." Sure, they can think in their own minds, "this isn't really marriage." But as a practical matter Catholics are going to run into situations where they must treat homosexual relationships as equivalent to heterosexual marriage.

That's the point I was making during the years leading up to the Supreme Court decision that forced recognition of homosexual relationships as "marriage" upon society. It's never been about things like getting to visit your loved one in the hospital, get on your partener's health insurance, etc. It's about thought control. It's about browbeating the society into acting like a homosexual romantic relationship is equivalent to a heterosexual romantic relationship when it's not.

And mark my words: The time will come when Catholic Priests as well as other Christian ministers are going to be told that if they want to perform marriage ceremonies they have to perform them for homosexuals. It will happen because these people are not going to tolerate not believing according to the egalitarian dogma.

Skjellyfetti wrote:Nice links, dumbass.

I didn't make it very far in this one

Can Pastors and Churches Be Forced to Perform Same-Sex Marriages?
By Travis Weber

The short answer: almost certainly not

http://www.frc.org/clergyprotected

Legal precedent means nothing. The Supreme Court can and does make up new rules any time it really wants to. Sure, it can stick to precedent if it wants. But it is bound by nothing. Total latitude to do anything it wants in the absence of any accountability. That's why homosexual marriage is legal now to begin with. The idea that there is a Constitutional "right" to homosexual marriage is ridiculous. But it's effectively there because a majority on the Supreme Court wanted it to be.

Skjellyfetti wrote:Nice links, dumbass.

I didn't make it very far in this one

Can Pastors and Churches Be Forced to Perform Same-Sex Marriages?
By Travis Weber

The short answer: almost certainly not

http://www.frc.org/clergyprotected

Clearly, you did not read the rest of that article or the others.

Vidav wrote:
There is no god so there is no plan for marriage and family from that god. So what he said doesn't mean anything.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:There is no god.

How do you know?

BDKJMU wrote:

Vidav wrote:
There is no god so there is no plan for marriage and family from that god. So what he said doesn't mean anything.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:There is no god.

How do you know?

God told me.




Wait, he didn't tell me...because he doesn't exist.

Cluck U wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:



How do you know?

God told me.




Wait, he didn't tell me...because he doesn't exist.

True,
God is far less cooperative than during the biblical era...
Heck god was down right meddling and intrusive there for a while

all that biblical nonsense aside - its still difficult to dismiss the prime mover theory

Chizzang wrote:
all that biblical nonsense aside - its still difficult to dismiss the prime mover theory

An hourglass figure and slutty lips?

DSUrocks07 wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:And, THIS is religious liberty.

If Catholics don't want to recognize gay marriages... that's their prerogative.

No one's saying they should be forced to recognize gay marriage.

I agree.

Once marriage went from being strictly religious ceremony, to becoming the equivalent of a corporate merger, all bets were off.

I still hold the belief that getting government OUT of marriage completely would go a long way further towards the goals of the anti-gay marriage crowd than constantly attempting to legislate morality from their false pedestal of "freedom of/from religion"

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Nailed it.

Cluck U wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:



How do you know?

God told me.




Wait, he didn't tell me...because he doesn't exist.

To definitely say there is no higher power is as silly as definitively saying that there is a higher power. One way or the other, you can't say with proof that there isn't a higher power somewhere out there any more than a fundie (any religion) can say with proof that there is. All anyone has from atheist to fundie and everywhere in between is their beliefs.

BDKJMU wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
God told me.




Wait, he didn't tell me...because he doesn't exist.

To definitely say there is no higher power is as silly as definitively saying that there is a higher power. One way or the other, you can't say with proof that there is or that there isn't a higher power somewhere out there.

Nailed it.


Suck it atheists. Boo-yay!!!

BDKJMU wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
God told me.




Wait, he didn't tell me...because he doesn't exist.

To definitely say there is no unicorns is as silly as definitively saying that there is a unicorn. One way or the other, you can't say with proof that there is or that there isn't a unicorn somewhere out there.

Vidav wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
To definitely say there is no unicorns is as silly as definitively saying that there is a unicorn. One way or the other, you can't say with proof that there is or that there isn't a unicorn somewhere out there.

Apples to oranges. No one is claiming unicorns exist as higher powers...

BDKJMU wrote:

Vidav wrote:

Apples to oranges. No one is claiming unicorns exist as higher powers...

So if someone claims something exists but can offer no proof we are just to accept that they might be right, no matter how silly the claim is?

Vidav wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
Apples to oranges. No one is claiming unicorns exist as higher powers...

So if someone claims something exists but can offer no proof we are just to accept that they might be right, no matter how silly the claim is?

Big difference between "someone" and tens of billions of people for thousands of years..

And FWIW I'm pretty much agnostic- haven't been in a church outside of a wedding or funeral, in about a doz years..

JohnStOnge wrote:Among all the other stuff making the news on the Pope's most recent statement is this:

“In discussing the dignity and mission of the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, ‘as for proposals to place unions between homo­sexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for mar­riage and family,’”

What could you possibly say against treating people with respect?