1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Federal court: Virginia marriage is for all

AmyDB Wrote: Jul 29, 2014 9:00 PM
Trog wrote.. . . . Now, you ask how I am injured personally if two people of the same sex unite in what they fancy is a "marriage." I answered you already. Although I am not personally injured if that is ALL that they do (though I fear that they may sue me at the drop of a hat if I want to have nothing to do with them), any further dilution of marriage on top of what has already been inflicted on it is a thoroughly bad idea. __________________ Trog the damage has already been done to "marriage". Wasn't your doing or mine. It started when "Christians" willingly involved government in what was supposed to be a sacrament of religion.
Depends on the day. I think they play rock-paper-scissors to see who gets to be king/queen of stupid for the day.
In response to:

Federal court: Virginia marriage is for all

AmyDB Wrote: Jul 29, 2014 6:53 PM
BTW Trog I don't ever remember bringing Nero into our past conversations. I did mention Brehon law, the Nordic law & customs of the Althing, the Code of Hammurabi, as well as various Native American tribal customs. No Nero though.
In response to:

Federal court: Virginia marriage is for all

AmyDB Wrote: Jul 29, 2014 6:48 PM
Troglodite said. . . . It is not clear why Christians, especially if living in a Christian country, should desire or prefer a government that is explicitly indifferent to their beliefs. Let's admit it, Amy: putting aside all cant about religious neutrality, you desire a legal regime that suits you and your moral judgments. Why should Christians be at fault for doing likewise? _____________________________ I desire a federal government that obeys the Constitution Trog. The Constitution is religiously neutral. You & I have gone round on this subject before & my stand is the same. If the government is going to license or regulate a given matter then the laws must be neutral (blind) when it comes to matters that are under the umbrella of "morality" yet directly harm no one else. Leaving the abjuration against homosexuality out of this how does it damage you, or anyone, when two adult people, regardless of gender, unite in a long term, monogamous union?
In response to:

Federal court: Virginia marriage is for all

AmyDB Wrote: Jul 29, 2014 1:25 PM
Tin it's not the Christians' fault. They are correct in standing against anything other than mixed gender couple marriages since that is what their doctrine & dogma endorses. For some reason they can't seem to see that a religion neutral government is much better for everyone than a government that endorses a specific religion. . . . No matter what that religion is.
In response to:

Conservatism Is The New Punk Rock

AmyDB Wrote: Jul 27, 2014 12:09 PM
Oh to be sure that's why many of us love people like Col. West, Dr. Ben Carson, et al. It's also why I'm respected here. . . . Cause I'm white, straight, & Christian. Is there any chance either of you could recognize truth in any form?
Hannity was trying to get the guest to admit that Hamas was a terrorist org Wee Willy. Don't agree with his technique but it's a valid question.
Just one small quibble. It's religious cleansing not ethnic cleansing. That said it's still horrendous, barbaric, & savage. This is the logical outcome of not stopping the Islamofanatics. They are simply following the dictates of their religion since they now have control of the land & the government. The caliphate rolls on.
Even then Lil'Lying LowLow got her facts wrong MacQ.
He's got time LowLow. . . 2.5 years to go.
1 - 10 Next