Third Hour Forum Rules - Please be familiar with these rules before posting
Log in changes to forums

What will tomorrow bring?

Soulsearcher

By Soulsearcher
in Current Events

 Share

Recommended Posts

Wingnut

Wingnut

Posted
Posted

Is there a reason you're bringing up a thread, the OP of which has no basis for even starting? That thread went on for nine pages, at least half of which discussed the appropriateness of Hemi's making such a prophecy or posting it online, and what authority he had to do so. I'm surprised the thread is even still open.

Matthew0059

Matthew0059

Posted
Posted

Is there a reason you're bringing up a thread, the OP of which has no basis for even starting? That thread went on for nine pages, at least half of which discussed the appropriateness of Hemi's making such a prophecy or posting it online, and what authority he had to do so. I'm surprised the thread is even still open.

My reasoning is as follows:

-We're discussing events taking place in California

-Those who live in California will likely be interested

-I think there's something to Hemi's warning

Ergo, I linked the thread.

But I really don't want this thread to devolve into another argument about stewardship and visionaries... Maybe I should go delete my post.

Dravin

Dravin

Posted
Posted

Tomorrow will bring pizza, with a chance of tuna casserole.

Choose you this day what ye will serve; but as for me and my house, we will serve tacos. :D

Soulsearcher

Soulsearcher

Posted
  • Author
Posted · Hidden
Hidden

Being we already have 2 threads going on this i think we need to limit the number of threads on this topic and focus on the already open and active threads

Look under current events " what will tomorrow bring" and there is a prop 8 topic under general discussion covering this as well.

bytor2112

bytor2112

Posted
Posted

Once and for all, may it be made legal for any adult couple who love and cherish one another to be married, without their marriage invalidated.

Why only couples? If being an adult and loving and cherishing are the only qualifiers.

bytor2112

bytor2112

Posted
Posted

I am always dumbfounded by Latter Day Saints that cheer over the mockery of what should be considered a Sacred union between a man and a woman. How is it that they have such careless disregard for their brothers and sisters that are ensnared by this homosexual desire that they actually support yet another step down the path of immoral wickedness that will likely just further bind them to this chosen path of rebellion.

Just_A_Guy

Just_A_Guy

Posted
Posted (edited)

Volokh's coverage of the decision has been stellar.

I don't think this opinion is going to stand. Here's why:

Under equal protection jurisprudence, government will apply one of two standards to discriminatory behavior (well, three, actually, but "intermediate scrutiny" is kind of a briar patch and I don't feel like going there). The "strict scrutiny" test is the one we're all familiar with, that applies to protected classes (i.e. race, gender): the discrimination must be necessary to achieve a compelling government interest. The other test, used where no protected class is involved, is a "rational basis" test--the discriminating party merely needs to be "rationally" related to a "legitimate" government interest. It doesn't need to be a "good" reason, it doesn't need to be a reason the court agrees with; it just needs to be one that could reasonably be construed as "rational".

What most SSM advocates have been wanting, is for gays to be included as a "protected class" and thus have strict scrutiny applied to heteros-only marriage laws. What Judge Walker actually did was to circumvent the whole issue by going and saying that there is no rational reason a state might only allow traditional marriage. In short, Walker ruled that 52% of California voters and over 60% of the states are just plain bat-shizzle crazy for opposing SSM.

I think even moderate SSM supporters (like Dale Carpenter, over at Volokh) are going to see this as over-reaching. If they don't, private entities (read: churches and religious individuals) that continue teaching the "sinfulness" of gay sex should be scared spitless. Because the federal judiciary has just ruled that they're all crazy.

Once you've managed to label religious adherents as nuts, you can do quite a bit to them in the name of social engineering. (Exhibit A.)

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Moksha

Moksha

Posted
Posted

Why only couples? If being an adult and loving and cherishing are the only qualifiers.

Your not going to refer to that old story about a man and his Maytag are you? It was already decided in the case of the People v. Westinghouse.

Boris_natasha

Boris_natasha

Posted
Posted

I am always dumbfounded by Latter Day Saints that cheer over the mockery of what should be considered a Sacred union between a man and a woman. How is it that they have such careless disregard for their brothers and sisters that are ensnared by this homosexual desire that they actually support yet another step down the path of immoral wickedness that will likely just further bind them to this chosen path of rebellion.

I know the position of the LDS church on the issue. Also, if someone is struggling with attractions that they feel are hindering their progress toward eternal life in Celestial glory, then I pray that they will arrive in the Celestial Kingdom.
bytor2112

bytor2112

Posted
Posted

I know the position of the LDS church on the issue. Also, if someone is struggling with attractions that they feel are hindering their progress toward eternal life in Celestial glory, then I pray that they will arrive in the Celestial Kingdom.

Then you might try NOT supporting something that can only harm them and the LDS Church's view is the Lord's view.

bytor2112

bytor2112

Posted
Posted

Shame on you for bearing false witness, treating marriage so lightly, and promoting chaos. No thank you, for your lies.

?????? Bearing false witness......um...what exactly? Lie? um....No. Me treating marriage lightly...again no....I fully support marriage as between a man and a woman.

Perhaps the words from a Prophet might help you with your confusion:

We want to help these people, to strengthen them, to assist them with their problems and to help them with their difficulties. But we cannot stand idle if they indulge in immoral activity, if they try to uphold and defend and live in a so-called same-sex marriage situation. To permit such would be to make light of the very serious and sacred foundation of God-sanctioned marriage and its very purpose, the rearing of families.- President Gordon B Hinckley

Boris_natasha

Boris_natasha

Posted
Posted

I do believe that the council of the prophets is divinely inspired. But I also believe that I can, and do, pray that God will give word that will shed light on this issue. Because I disagree that this is an issue of permitting immorality.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing