Published: Tuesday, July 2 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
I know of a lot of heterosexuals who care very little for the responsibility of
marriage. That doesn't mean we deny them the option to get married
"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but
laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind.
As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made,
new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of
circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We
might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy
as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous
ancestors." – T. Jefferson - carved into he wall of the Jefferson
Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the
holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus
Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus
Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the
great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its
protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo
and Infidel of every denomination.-T. Jefferson, Autobiography, in
reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom
I most definitely do _not_ want a government that feels obligated to uphold the
myriad irrational and cruel "laws" of the Christian Bible.I
am in fact deeply grateful that so few Americans actually attempt to comply with
what the Christian Bible demands of them.What is good about the
Bible is not unique to the Bible, but what is unique to the Bible is not good.
In my opinion, it is really, really, arrogant to assume that every U.S. citizen
should adhere to your Holy Bible. This is a large diverse nation and people
would do themselves a favor to realize that. Self-righteous,
egocentric attitudes are flaunted way too often in this state....hence, My
Equal treatment. It's already a part of the Constitution. The fact that
you don't believe in equal treatment indicates that you don't believe
in the Constitution.Oh, and btw, we are NOT a "Christian"
nation. We are a nation of many religions, the Christian version being only one
You want judges to abide by the Constitution AND the Bible? You do realize it is
it possible to do both. Both used to allow slavery. Our Constitution has
changed. the parts of the Bible that allow slavery are still there. Also if
judges were to rule according to the Bible, women could not get a divorce
unless they had a sexually unfaithful husband. in other words women could be
stuck with extremely violent husbands.Is this what you want? Might I
suggest that we have judges that rule according to the Golden Rule, common
sense, the Constitution and the law, in that order.
In pitting states against the federal government the Supreme Court majority has
made a mess of the gay-rights issue. Their unfortunate ruling stating the
states have the right to define marriage but gay couples have the right to equal
protection will only bring greater divisiveness to the nation.
Still not a theocracy but thanks.
Edward, your reasoning is fundamentally flawed. If the Supreme Court upholds the
Constitution, it cannot privilege the teachings of the Bible over those of any
other religion. That would be, well, unconstitutional. Ever heard of the
Have you read some of the stuff in that there bible? Not just the happy bits,
but the old testament stuff. Slavery, slaughter your enemy stuff. There's a
lot in there that we need to keep our nation away from.
There are institutions that are much more important than the "feeling"
that some people have that because they can't have what they want, even
though that "thing" has never been part of "marriage", that they
have to tell us that the whole world is wrong and that they alone are right.Marriage is not a "law" passed by government. It is not an
edict passed down from the bench. It is an eternal principle given to us by our
creator, a principle that is immutable no matter how many people refuse to live
it and no matter how many abuse it.We are responsible to our
Creator, not to our peers, not to black-robed justices who think that they just
walked down from Olympus. We are responsible to either accept eternal law or to
reject that law. There are blessing from being obedient and there are serious
consequences for rebellion against eternal laws.Responsibility and
"blessings" cannot be separated. If we want the "blessings"
from a just and merciful creator, we accept his eternal laws without complaint
and without modification.
I dot to tell ya about my little bog. His hole objective in life is to be loved.
He is so happy to see me home when I walk in the door, I just love him. He knows
that for him to get loved he can't chew up stuff that is mine and he knows
what is his stuff he doesn't use the house for his bathroom. I'm taken
a lesion from this little dog And my objective is the same. Simply to be loved.
I assume that's the way, in a world that has lost the way. The Way, is that
important that religions use it for there God.
@mike richards "Marriage is not a "law" passed by
government?" so prop 9 and doma were what exactly? I am sorry but this
argument fails right out of the gate.
prop 8 sorry.
Actually, Sal, a careful reading of Kennedy's ruling is that the states can
expand marriage and the federal government must then honor it. He left open the
possibility of ruling on the merits of restricting marriage if that restriction
deprives a group of their constitutional rights. Reading his DOMA decision that
was based on 5th Amendment protections of Equal Liberty, had the proponents of
Prop 8 been granted standing, it is likely Prop 8 would have been ruled
unconstitutional on the same grounds.
“The justices and leaders of our country place their hand on the Holy
Bible when sworn into office, but do not hold up the Christian values
therein.”Edward – be careful what you wish for. If you
think the Constitution and the Bible are fully compatible, you might be in for a
shock when justices who would put the Bible before the Constitution would
exonerate a husband for stoning his non-virgin bride, or parents who kill their
children for talking back.And if you’re looking for Americans
who did put the Bible before our founding documents, look no further than the
pious slave owners of the antebellum South. As a southern preacher famously said
prior to the civil war, “what is sanctioned in the Old Testament and
affirmed in the New cannot be a sin.” @Owen – great
quote! As Kennedy once said when hosting a White Dinner for Nobel
Laureates, “I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent,
of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered at the White House - with the
possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.”
"Responsibility and 'blessings' cannot be separated. If we want
the 'blessings' from a just and merciful creator, we accept his
eternal laws without complaint and without modification."What
about the thousands of gay and lesbian men and women who have prayed for
countless of hours to help ease the pain and change their ways? They seek the
blessings that you feel they don't deserve. The answers do not come in the
way they expect. To most, the answer they finally get is "Do what you must
do. Choose love." How can choosing love be wrong? One aspect of the gospel
that I am sure you firmly believe is the atonement. Well, guess what, the
atonement works for our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters just as much as it
works for you. Let Jesus be their judge. I'm sure he'll do a much
Gotta laugh at leftist government worshipers, who try to think that our morals
came from the vapors of thin air, or a rock, or tree, or the light of a
moonbeam. Of course I would try and conjure or fabricate the same theory if I
selfishly wanted to live a careless lifestyle, thinking there were no
consequences, because a tolerant God lets this kind of idiocy go on...for a
time. For decades, gays have had the same rights as everyone else,
when it comes to marriage. Yes gays and even non-gays have chosen to not use
traditional marriage rights, thats their choice! Now we have created special
rights for gays, and redefined marriage, imposing new rules and restrictions on
society. Imposing new beliefs on society, even if its contrary to your own
personal convictions. We have extracted from the courts rulings that cloud and
complicate other marriage arguments and issues. All this to appease a growing
segment of society that "feels" like things aren't fair! This
ruling doesn't exactly demonstrate hard defined right or wrong, it just
creates a feel good appeasement. One vote the other way, and we would be having
an entirely different conversation!
Replace the word Bible with Quran and tell me if you'd feel the same way...
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments