Ted Cruz Claims Pastors Will Be Perse...

Ted Cruz Claims Pastors Will Be Persecuted For Telling Biblical "Truth"

There are 79 comments on the lezgetreal.com story from Jul 23, 2013, titled Ted Cruz Claims Pastors Will Be Persecuted For Telling Biblical "Truth". In it, lezgetreal.com reports that:

Ignoring the First Amendment and dozens of Supreme Court Rulings, Sen. Ted Cruz claims pastors will be persecuted for saying same-sex marriage is wrong

Join the discussion below, or Read more at lezgetreal.com.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#43 Jul 26, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
From post #15 "I stated earlier science can be used to show the pros(good) and cons(bad) of an issue like marriage."
But science can never and will never state marriage is good and great and we should all partake of it.
But science can never and will never state marriage is bad and injurious mentally/physically and we should all avoid it.
Understand?
Yes. Thanks for the clarification.

BTW I was just told after a week that Brian G is Not divorced. Why he waited a week to correct my mistake and then go on a tirade about being honest is beyond me.

Of course he is still pedaling the lie that the florist in WA was sued by a gay couple. The couple didn't sue. They filed the complaint with the proper authorities and now the woman faces religious discrimination charges and criminal penalties beciase of her own actions.

But of course the anti-gays want to blame everyone lese and lie about the actual facts!

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#45 Jul 26, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Really. So we don't have any carvings, no mottos, no saying of anything religious on any government type building in America? So the first laws for the common wealth among the thirteen colonies weren't influenced by Biblical dogma? So we don't have a motto "In God we trust" on our money? So we don't have a segment of homosexuals and their supporters stating God is fine and well with homosexuality and that's why they feel same sex marriage should be equated with opposite sex marriage? So there is no such thing as 'religious wars'?
You''re pretend ignorance isn't surprising.
Just because people believed in superstitions and utter nonsense does not make them real.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#46 Jul 27, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Yes. Thanks for the clarification.
BTW I was just told after a week that Brian G is Not divorced. Why he waited a week to correct my mistake and then go on a tirade about being honest is beyond me.
Of course he is still pedaling the lie that the florist in WA was sued by a gay couple. The couple didn't sue. They filed the complaint with the proper authorities and now the woman faces religious discrimination charges and criminal penalties beciase of her own actions.
But of course the anti-gays want to blame everyone lese and lie about the actual facts!
Don't know about Brian G's comments as I came in after them. But I read of that florist case before and they are being sued according to recent info...
http://www.edgeonthenet.com/news/local/news/1...
Under state law, it’s illegal for businesses to refuse to sell goods, merchandise and services to any person because of their sexual orientation.

Stutzman says she has no problem with homosexual customers but won’t support gay weddings because of her religious beliefs.

In addition to the state, the ACLU sued Stutzman on behalf of the Kennewick, Wash., couple.

In other action Friday, Mendoza consolidated the attorney general’s lawsuit and the private lawsuit into a single case for purposes of discovery.

A religious freedom group, Alliance Defending Freedom, countersued the state on behalf of Stutzman.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#47 Jul 27, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because people believed in superstitions and utter nonsense does not make them real.
This all began when you made this half lame statement... "Religion, existentialism, and any of that garbage is not reality."

The belief in anything invisible that can't be proved to exist by the five human senses, to most those beliefs aren't reality, that's true. But all the extensions from a belief in the invisible, those are facts of reality. The religious temples, edifices, drawings, carvings, mottos, writings, etc those are all facts of life that have actual existence. One of the oldest religious temples extending from beliefs in the invisible was discovered in Turkey and is near to 10,000 years old. The 'venus' figurines found in parts of Europe that are tens of thousands of years old are thought to have theistic origins from superstitious beliefs in the invisible and what they didn't understand about life.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#48 Jul 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Idiocy...science can no more prove same sex marriage is a good thing any more than science can prove opposite sex marriage is a good thing. So there is no scientific evidence to prove same sex marriage is good and well or bad and evil. Science can't prove the validity of marriages humans engage in be it same sex, opposite sex or polyandry. Fricking get real.
Law, not science has determined what is harmful and what isn't harmful. Science establishes cause and effect. Law uses the opinions/theories/facts established by science to establish what is harmful and what isn't harmful in courts of law.
An opinion is an opinion no matter how it's used or for what reason it's used for good, bad or neither.
For someone to not believe in same sex marriage is not necessarily hate speech. See, if being against something/disagreeing with something is hate speech as you define it, you're a hater yourself as you promote hate speech to accuse others of using hate speech.
I have to agree with you on this for the most part, though I disagree that science isn't what determines what is harmful.

Smoking has been proven harmful and I smoke. Yes we have laws preventing people of a certain age to possess tobacco just as we do with alcohol. The laws know how harmful these are yet they are legal. And as with SSM the laws regarding these didn't attack anyone's religious freedom or compromise anyone's morals.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#49 Jul 27, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Science is a tool used to help us understand the universe, and it has provided us with answers to such questions, deny them all you want, it won't make those answers disappear.
Belief, in this instance, is inconsequential, it's a useless exercise in pointlessness fueled by delusion.
interesting and well said.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#50 Jul 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree. but science cannot and will not never prove marriage good or bad for anyone. What marriage is should remain an opinion and nothing more unless one engages in mental/physical violence against another for their personal opinion concerning marriage. Then they should face criminal charges.
Wrong. The affects of marriage have been studied by science and science has shown how beneficial marriage CAN BE to the individual, the family, and society.

You can deny it. But that denial doesn't make it false.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#51 Jul 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaking of denial and pointlessness and delusion, I can use scientific data to factually prove that marriage between any two or more people is more damaging to them and the children in those marriages than it's ever been healthy for most all those subjected to it's confines.
So your delusion that science can prove marriage a great and good thing to vindicate same sex marriage is a real, true delusion on your part.
Your last post said the opposite. Now you want to use scientific studies to prove that marriage has no effect.

May I suggest you begin with this?

Study: The Health Benefits of Marriage Don't Apply to Cohabitating Gay Couples
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/201...

"....Do same-sex couples who live together, but are unable to marry, get the same advantages? From a socioeconomic standpoint, researchers at Michigian State University assumed that this wouldn't be the case. They looked at the self-reported health, on a scale from "poor" to "excellent," of a nationally representative sample of over 3,000 cohabitating same-sex couples, equal parts male and female, as compared to the health of people in heterosexual marriages, as well as single, divorced, and windowed individuals. Per their results, published in the Journal of Health and Social Behavior, men living with a same-sex partner were 61 percent more likely to report having "poor" or "fair" health than men in heterosexual relationships; the odds were 46 percent higher for gay women than their straight, married peers.

Contrary to their expectations, socioeconomic status -- as measure by education level, poverty, and insurance coverage -- didn't account for these differences. At the same time, it was the only reason why same-sex couples were healthier than single, divorced, or widowed people. Once socioeconomic status had been accounted for, all reported more or less equal health status which, again, was lower than that reported by people in heterosexual marriages.

This means there must be something else making same-sex couples feel less healthy than heterosexual married people. The authors of the study suggest that stress borne from continuing discrimination against homosexuality may be part of the problem. Among all black women, those in same-sex cohabitating relationships had the worst reported health, while gay white women were healthier than straight white women who were either divorced or living with a male partner. This effect wasn't seen for men, and points to the possibility of what the authors call a "triple jeopardy": social stress caused by their sexuality, added on to that experienced by racial minorities and women in general, all could be contributing to their poor health...."

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#52 Jul 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand my response was to what koder stated of same sex marriage being validated through opinions as good and well by scientific evidence. They stated... "An opinion that is opposed by scientific evidence or which is harmful to other humans is wrong, period." There is no scientific evidence to show having an opinion against same sex marriage is harmful and or wrong. No scientific evidence exists and never will exist to prove any such thing of such an 'opinion'.
And I disagree that science can prove if it's beneficial to an 'organism' meaning humans. With the available data we have on the ills of marriage for just the last century, science could be used to well establish that marriage isn't a beneficial act between humans. Science can use historical data concerning the cause and effects of marriages to show marriage is more hazardous than it's ever been beneficial.
I've been following it and still can't figure out what point you are trying to make, though I DID notice you tend to address only SSM in your posts.

In any case when you first started calling so many people idiots I began to wonder how you managed to find your way down the birth canal.

IMO you've become very shrill ind intractable.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#53 Jul 27, 2013
Swinging from Vines wrote:
Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) needs to learn acceptable adult behavior
.
His republicanism is atrocious
Washington's Farewell Address 1796 talks about the dangers of political parties and the system that allows them to gain control.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washi...

"....Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment. The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you.

It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts....

In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection....

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion...."

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#55 Jul 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
From post #15 "I stated earlier science can be used to show the pros(good) and cons(bad) of an issue like marriage."
But science can never and will never state marriage is good and great and we should all partake of it.
But science can never and will never state marriage is bad and injurious mentally/physically and we should all avoid it.
Understand?
Yes and so do the rest of us. Now can we move on from your issues? Or do we have to endure 4 more pages of you calling everyone who questions your theories or disagrees with them an idiot?

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#56 Jul 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree. They don't understand their own theology/doctrines of marriage and why they feel hetero is in and same sex is out. They know nothing past what the Bible states and that's all.
I STRONGLY disagree that, "They know nothing past what the Bible states and that's all."

What they KNOW is what they were taught. Teaching and learning are two different species. They have decided to accept what is taught instead of doing the research themselves.

May I suggest you read:
The Fundamentalist Agenda By Davidson Loehr
http://www.uuworld.org/2004/01/feature2.html

"....From 1988 to 1993, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences sponsored an interdisciplinary study known as The Fundamentalism Project, the largest such study ever done. More than 100 scholars from all over the world took part, reporting on every imaginable kind of fundamentalism. And what they discovered was that the agenda of all fundamentalist movements in the world is virtually identical, regardless of religion or culture.

They identified five characteristics shared by virtually all fundamentalisms....One scholar suggested that it's helpful to understand fundamentalism as religious fascism, and fascism as political fundamentalism. The phrase “overcoming the modern” is a fascist slogan dating back to at least 1941...."

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#57 Jul 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
That's true if it isn't dealing with science. And there was no contradiction. Science never takes sides as you wish it to. Science is used to show data. How that data is used by a person is the difference. You wish to believe science is on the side of same sex marriage and it isn't. That like me claiming science is on the side of opposite sex marriage and it isn't. Marriage is a human invention, not a part of the natural evolution of life. To say it loosely, nature created an ability in opposites in the species called humans so they would reproduce. Science didn't produce marriage. Science cares nothing of marriage. Science will never side for marriage.
If you wish to use data from research/scientific research to show the pros of same sex marriage have at it. But science will never state same sex marriage or opposite sex marriage or polyandry marriages are the best things going.
Still insisting your version of the truth is smarter than hundreds of studies done by PhD's.

Someone PLEASE change his CD! If I hear one more verse of this version of UMM-BOP I'll scream.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#58 Jul 27, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
This all began when you made this half lame statement... "Religion, existentialism, and any of that garbage is not reality."
The belief in anything invisible that can't be proved to exist by the five human senses, to most those beliefs aren't reality, that's true. But all the extensions from a belief in the invisible, those are facts of reality. The religious temples, edifices, drawings, carvings, mottos, writings, etc those are all facts of life that have actual existence. One of the oldest religious temples extending from beliefs in the invisible was discovered in Turkey and is near to 10,000 years old. The 'venus' figurines found in parts of Europe that are tens of thousands of years old are thought to have theistic origins from superstitious beliefs in the invisible and what they didn't understand about life.
Just because religion is prevalent doesn't mean gays should miss out on things because of it.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#60 Jul 28, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>I have to agree with you on this for the most part, though I disagree that science isn't what determines what is harmful.
Smoking has been proven harmful and I smoke. Yes we have laws preventing people of a certain age to possess tobacco just as we do with alcohol. The laws know how harmful these are yet they are legal. And as with SSM the laws regarding these didn't attack anyone's religious freedom or compromise anyone's morals.
This is what I was trying (apparently not very well on my part) to explain to the other poster. Science doesn't determine harmful/non-harmful, good/bad, etc information. Science gives statistics and information and that's all. Humans using those statistics/information then denote/establish what is harmful/non-harmful, good/bad.
Same sex marriage is a custom partook of by two members of the same sex. You can find all sorts of information about same sex marriages established by scientists in their own different fields. But only humans, not science establishes whether same sex marriage is good or bad by opinion.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#61 Jul 28, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>I've been following it and still can't figure out what point you are trying to make, though I DID notice you tend to address only SSM in your posts.
In any case when you first started calling so many people idiots I began to wonder how you managed to find your way down the birth canal.
IMO you've become very shrill ind intractable.
Koder made a statement that I responded to. It was about SSM. That is why my posts have been about SSM. If you had been following the posts you would have noted that fact.
Koder stated science proves SSM is good and well. I disagreed. Science has never stated any such thing. Humans with information, scientific and non-scientific information have produced opinions that SSM is good and well. Koder continued to disagree and continued to ignorantly insist science on it's own did in fact prove SSM was good and well. Understand?
There seems to be a few here who in some form of idiocy believe science of it's own doing makes judgement calls of human actions and morals as to whether they're good or bad. Science doesn't work that way and never has, understand?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#62 Jul 28, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong. The affects of marriage have been studied by science and science has shown how beneficial marriage CAN BE to the individual, the family, and society.
You can deny it. But that denial doesn't make it false.
I denied nothing...lol. I have tried to show science isn't a living breathing thing of intelligence that questions informations and makes judgements/decisions of the good/bad of whatever it is questioning.
Humans have taken information and made an opinion from that gathered/constructed information concerning marriage that marriage has it's benefits.
I can also show you opinions derived from scientific studies done on marriage that it's one of the worst things for a human to engage in. Studies show more people divorce than those that remain married. Studies show very few marriages remain in the "always faithful" category and most suffer infidelity which causes anger, hate and even violence and the destruction of the marriage. Studies show more couples cause physical violence upon each other and or children then those few who don't. Studies insinuate more wives/partners have probably suffered rape by their marriage partner than what takes place in society.
Using your and koder's logic, I can show where science proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the human institution called marriage is bad and is one of the worst things a human can subject themselves to. Now what?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#63 Jul 28, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Yes and so do the rest of us. Now can we move on from your issues? Or do we have to endure 4 more pages of you calling everyone who questions your theories or disagrees with them an idiot?
:)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#64 Jul 28, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>I STRONGLY disagree that, "They know nothing past what the Bible states and that's all."
What they KNOW is what they were taught. Teaching and learning are two different species. They have decided to accept what is taught instead of doing the research themselves.
May I suggest you read:
The Fundamentalist Agenda By Davidson Loehr
http://www.uuworld.org/2004/01/feature2.html
"....From 1988 to 1993, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences sponsored an interdisciplinary study known as The Fundamentalism Project, the largest such study ever done. More than 100 scholars from all over the world took part, reporting on every imaginable kind of fundamentalism. And what they discovered was that the agenda of all fundamentalist movements in the world is virtually identical, regardless of religion or culture.
They identified five characteristics shared by virtually all fundamentalisms....One scholar suggested that it's helpful to understand fundamentalism as religious fascism, and fascism as political fundamentalism. The phrase “overcoming the modern” is a fascist slogan dating back to at least 1941...."
We'll agree to disagree than. Christians (for example) know not why they reject homosexuality/SSM. They know what their writings say but they don't know why those writings were written and or for what purpose. Christians today reject homosexuality/SSM because they can and they do it because they believe their religion tells them to have that rejection. But they don't know why and that was my point when I said "They know nothing past what the Bible states and that's all."

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#65 Jul 28, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Still insisting your version of the truth is smarter than hundreds of studies done by PhD's.
Someone PLEASE change his CD! If I hear one more verse of this version of UMM-BOP I'll scream.
You have defined science a living, intelligent thing whereby as a human it can formulate opinions of good-bad, right-wrong, etc. That's your bad not mine.
Humans, not science (let me state this again for you) humans, not science formulate opinions of what is good-bad, right-wrong, etc. Amazing you disbelieve that fact.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 15 min Sniper Bang 61,725
News Lyft driver in Indianapolis orders gay couple o... 17 min Strawberry Shortcake 46
The Spectrum Cafe (Dec '07) 25 min Jades grand daughter 28,125
WOO HOO!!! Let's ROCK!!! 47 min BIG BOSS MAN 3
News Virginia hardware store fires employee accused ... 48 min whiney beech 16
News Gay veteran with a penchant for heels wins land... 1 hr judy 87
News Pope Francis reportedly tells gay man: 'God mad... 1 hr The Lightbearer 9