SCOTUS protects marriage equality

Freedom was available to blacks, unless they were slaves.

I never said marriage doesn't exist, Void.
Right, freedom was available to blacks in the US, so why didn't the enslaved blacks just decide to be free?

I mean, if a gay man can decide to marry a woman, which would give him equality, why couldn't blacks just decide to exercise their equality and be free?
 
Why wasn't freedom available to blacks during slavery?
Are you not aware that the past is not the present? Do you not have a relevant question about the present?

I mean, freedom did exist in the US, right?
Let's give it a try. "I mean, freedom does exist in the US, right?" Correct response: Yes, it does.

Freedom existed in the US just like marriage exists now.
Translation: "(a condition in the past) is just like (a different condition in the present)"

Sorry, but no.
 
Are you not aware that the past is not the present? Do you not have a relevant question about the present?


Let's give it a try. "I mean, freedom does exist in the US, right?" Correct response: Yes, it does.


Translation: "(a condition in the past) is just like (a different condition in the present)"

Sorry, but no.
Am I aware that the past is not the present?

Tell me again what the basis is for your definition of marriage being only a man and woman? 🤣🤣
 
Am I aware that the past is not the present?
Well, now that I taught you the difference. You're most welcome.

Tell me again what the basis is for your definition of marriage being only a man and woman?
I don't have such a definition. I am adefinitive.

My position is that Christians have a definition with strong rationale that correlates to human history and to Darwin's theory of evolution (although they are typically not aware of this and certainly don't want to emphasize it). The Christian definition of, and view on, marriage is beneficial to society, whereas the WOKE, society-destroying, humanity-HATING position of leftists is destructive to society. As a result, I side with the Christians every time.

You have never explained why the label "civil union" is somehow unacceptable. Start explaining.
 
Well, now that I taught you the difference. You're most welcome.
Right, so telling a gay person that equality is available to them, as long as they be something they aren't, is like telling a black slave that freedom is available to them, as long as they be something they aren't: white and not a slave.
I don't have such a definition. I am adefinitive.

My position is that Christians have a definition with strong rationale that correlates to human history and to Darwin's theory of evolution (although they are typically not aware of this and certainly don't want to emphasize it). The Christian definition of, and view on, marriage is beneficial to society, whereas the WOKE, society-destroying, humanity-HATING position of leftists is destructive to society. As a result, I side with the Christians every time.
And therein lies the problem. You are willing to deny equality based on the opinions of iron age men who sacrificed animals to change the weather and couldn't explain where the sun went at night. Their "strong rationale" behind marriage was related to social and economic security and ensuring an heir for family property and money. The hatred of gays is separate and based on what they believed was the opinion of the Sky Wizard.

Same-sex marriage has been in existence for a decade and do you know what has changed for society? Absolutely nothing. I mean literally not a fucking thing. Same-sex marriage has changed nothing and the claim by evangelicals that it was going to ruin society was all a lie in an attempt to force their beliefs on the country and deny true equality for consenting adults.
You have never explained why the label "civil union" is somehow unacceptable. Start explaining.
Separate but equal isn't equality.... something we learned 50 years ago.
 
Are you not aware that the past is not the present? Do you not have a relevant question about the present?
Had you lived in the past, you'd argue that the Blacks wanted supremacy over others.
Let's give it a try. "I mean, freedom does exist in the US, right?" Correct response: Yes, it does.
Deflection, troll.
Translation: "(a condition in the past) is just like (a different condition in the present)"

Sorry, but no.
Sorry troll, but yes.
 
Well, now that I taught you the difference. You're most welcome.
No you didn't. You're just a troll that stated the obvious.
I don't have such a definition. I am adefinitive.

My position is that Christians have a definition with strong rationale that correlates to human history and to Darwin's theory of evolution (although they are typically not aware of this and certainly don't want to emphasize it). The Christian definition of, and view on, marriage is beneficial to society, whereas the WOKE, society-destroying, humanity-HATING position of leftists is destructive to society. As a result, I side with the Christians every time.
There is no destruction. SSM has no impact on society, troll.
You have never explained why the label "civil union" is somehow unacceptable. Start explaining.
Who said it's unacceptable, troll?
 
It’s hyperbole, for sure. Stupid to boot.
I'm an ordained minister and just married my dog and cat. No worries, one is male and the other is female. :thup:

The problem is that the feds don't recognize the marriage so I can't get a tax break for them. Same for gay people if the Feds didn't recognize gay marriage.
 
Back
Top