Not a good day for the home team, be prayerful

[myway]

Hello everyone. I was just cruising the headlines and was saddend to see a couple that should concern a lot of folks. New Hampshire's Governor has signed a gay marriage bill making it legal for same sex marriages in that State.

I am not sure what the consenquences will be, if any, as far as Churches, or Pastors who will not perform marital rights based upon religious objection. Remember a while back where there had been lawsuits filed against a couple of Churches for refusing to marry same sex couples.

On another front, a case in Philadelphia, the Supreme Court has ruled that the Holy Bible cannot be read in a classroom for show and tell. The principal refused to let a child read it at the time, and a lawsuit was heard. However to no avail. There may possibly be an appeal.

Not a good day for the home team, but these are just battles, not the whole war.

[FunkyTown]

Okay. The first, I'm not really bothered by, but the second? A CHILD brought the bible to school for show and tell and was told 'No'? That was a child exercising his right to free speech. It wasn't condoned by the school.

[Jamie123]

A CHILD brought the bible to school for show and tell and was told 'No'? That was a child exercising his right to free speech. It wasn't condoned by the school.

I'm a bit shocked myself, but its not easy to define where the limits of free speech should be. If the child had brought in a book on Satanism, would the school have been right to object? I'm sad though that the Bible should have been banned.

[FunkyTown]

I'm a bit shocked myself, but its not easy to define where the limits of free speech should be. If the child had brought in a book on Satanism, would the school have been right to object? I'm sad though that the Bible should have been banned.

o.O If a gradeschool kid brings in a book written by Anton LaVey or Aleister Crowley or any one of a hundred authors, I would be amazed. I would also be very uncomfortable, but I wouldn't stop them from sharing what they've read. Freedom of speech can not stop people from saying things we don't want to hear or it ceases to be freedom of speech.

[Seanette]

o.O If a gradeschool kid brings in a book written by Anton LaVey or Aleister Crowley or any one of a hundred authors, I would be amazed. I would also be very uncomfortable, but I wouldn't stop them from sharing what they've read. Freedom of speech can not stop people from saying things we don't want to hear or it ceases to be freedom of speech.

I really have to agree here. When you start restricting someone's freedom of speech because you don't like what they're saying, where does it end?

[Churchmouse]

Hello everyone. I was just cruising the headlines and was saddend to see a couple that should concern a lot of folks. New Hampshire's Governor has signed a gay marriage bill making it legal for same sex marriages in that State.

I am not sure what the consenquences will be, if any, as far as Churches, or Pastors who will not perform marital rights based upon religious objection. Remember a while back where there had been lawsuits filed against a couple of Churches for refusing to marry same sex couples.

On another front, a case in Philadelphia, the Supreme Court has ruled that the Holy Bible cannot be read in a classroom for show and tell. The principal refused to let a child read it at the time, and a lawsuit was heard. However to no avail. There may possibly be an appeal.

Not a good day for the home team, but these are just battles, not the whole war.

Whenever the people are allowed to vote on the gay marriage issue it loses. The state legislatures pass these laws without going through the public voting process. The way these representatives vote is part of the public record. If your rep votes contrary to your wishes you should vote them out. People keep re-electing the same people.

Our General Authorities continue to tell us things are not going to get better. American values are going to continue to deteriorate.

We can only keep ourselves spotless and attempt to help others do the same. Unfortunately, many don't want to be. Immorality in rampant and many see nothing wrong with these lifestyles. I realize I'm an old codger, but in my youth people living together outside of marriage was uncommon and kept quiet by those that did. Pregnant high school girls did not attend classes with the other students. The girls at the high school I just retired from bring in ultrasounds to show to teachers and fellow students. Being pregnant and unmarried in high school has become a status symbol.

[hordak]

o.O If a gradeschool kid brings in a book written by Anton LaVey or Aleister Crowley or any one of a hundred authors, I would be amazed. I would also be very uncomfortable, but I wouldn't stop them from sharing what they've read. Freedom of speech can not stop people from saying things we don't want to hear or it ceases to be freedom of speech.

The US would be a better place if people understood the Silver rule (golden was taken;))

Free speech is meant to protect speech you don't like, not the speech you do.

As to the original post while I am not a supporter of ssm i wouldn't worry about the churches being forced to wed gay couples anymore then Catholic priest being forced to wed Muslims.

Infact the church (LDS) can deny to wed it's own members if one drinks coffee, which has been legal and social accepted for century's.

[john doe]

My understanding was that the New Hampshire law explicitly has language that religions cannot be forced to recognize the marriages. I heard that the governor would not sign it unless it did have that provision.

Edited June 4, 2009 by john doe
corrected spelling

[Jamie123]

I really have to agree here. When you start restricting someone's freedom of speech because you don't like what they're saying, where does it end?

Of course you're right, but it would be interesting to see how many school principals would enforce "freedom of speech" in such circumstances - especially if there's a schoolboard full of evangelical Christians to answer to.

As for the "where does it end?" we're beginning to see something of that here in Britain: Since January this year it's been illegal to possess (even for your own personal use) "extreme pornography" including "...an act which involves or appears to involve [stuff too horrible to write] that a reasonable person looking at the image would think...was real."

Why? The only answers I've ever heard from its supporters are variants of "because it's disgusting" (I agree), "because there's no room for it in our society" (whatever that means) and because "it causes people to commit crime" (does it?).

Like it or not, freedom of speech is being limited on the basis of what people do or don't like. Whether it make society bettor worse, only time will tell.

[DigitalShadow]

Okay. The first, I'm not really bothered by, but the second? A CHILD brought the bible to school for show and tell and was told 'No'? That was a child exercising his right to free speech. It wasn't condoned by the school.

Show and tell is not exactly free speech. If the kid were reading a Bible out loud at recess and told no, then I believe it would be an issue of free speech, but show and tell is an assignment that they can give any arbitrary parameters they want. If the principle says to do something else for show and tell, why bring a lawsuit over that?

Assuming this is true and that's all there is to the story, I think it is stupid on both sides. If the kid wants to read the Bible for show and tell, sure, why not? If the principle or teacher says 'no' then just do something else.

[ADoyle90815]

My understanding was that the New Hampshire law explicitly has language that religions cannot be forced to recognize the marriages. I heard that the governor would not sign it unless it did have that provision.

That's also my understanding as well, that the governor insisted that religions cannot be forced to perform or recognize same-sex marriages. If that wasn't added, the law would have been vetoed.

[Seanette]

Show and tell is not exactly free speech. If the kid were reading a Bible out loud at recess and told no, then I believe it would be an issue of free speech, but show and tell is an assignment that they can give any arbitrary parameters they want. If the principle says to do something else for show and tell, why bring a lawsuit over that?

Assuming this is true and that's all there is to the story, I think it is stupid on both sides. If the kid wants to read the Bible for show and tell, sure, why not? If the principle or teacher says 'no' then just do something else.

I remember one time in kindergarten I brought one of our dogs in for show and tell. He was very well-behaved and popular with my classmates.

[Moksha]

Watch for those fourth grade girls carrying a book on advanced calculus and an Uzi. Uzi's are illegal for the girl to conceal except in Utah - so chalk one up for the home team!!!