Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash...

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

There are 17552 comments on the NBC Chicago story from Jan 7, 2013, titled Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes. In it, NBC Chicago reports that:

Leaders of several Chicago-area African American churches on Monday urged state lawmakers to vote against pending legislation that would allow same-sex marriage in Illinois.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at NBC Chicago.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11739 Oct 21, 2013
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't get the feeling that you understand what those words even mean.
What tenets or doctrines do you think that "atheism" has which would lead to influence over legislation? I've never heard any stories about magic beings that were convincing. Do you think this will lead me to push for legislation banning ANY such belief for ANYONE? There isn't anything about lacking a belief in gods which can serve as the "basis" for anything else.
Let's rewind this.

EdmondWA wrote:
I'm sure that efforts to define or measure religious extremism are pointless. Find Scalia's recent interview where he outlines his fear of the Boogeyman. AN ACTUAL BOOGEYMAN. Define and measure THAT. Then explain to me how the legal decisions of such people represent rationality.

Pietro Armando responded:
Exactly, its subject to the claimant's personal views, beliefs, bias, etc.

Legal decisions of those who profess no religious beliefs, or even a bias against such, can be irrational as well. An absence of religious belief does not necessarily make one "rational" .

Also one does not become a Supreme Court Justice by being "irrational".
And... secular "nonsense"? Really?? Ugh, PLEASE don't tell me that you're one of those misinformed goobers who actually thinks that secularism is your ENEMY. Nothing could be MORE dedicated toward protecting freedom and equality for ALL citizens.
My point again, is that absence of religious belief doesn't necessarily mean "MORE dedicated to protecting freedom and equality for ALL citizens".
To deny secularism, and to try to push it out of government function, is to embrace theology and religious dominionism. And not just ANY religion, but the specific sectarian denominations of whoever may be pushing their religious agenda. Religious people seem to think it would be SO GREAT if religion were deeply integrated in how our government functions, but it never occurs to them that it might not be their flavor of religion which ascends to power, and that they might become the target of whatever rival denomination is given authority over them.
Secular people think it would be so great to outlaw religion, belief in a supernatural entity or divinity, or purge society of all religious references, symbols, or influence. That somehow rainbows would fill the skies, if this were accomplished.
Government MUST run religion-free in order to be fair to all the people it serves. That's what secularism IS. Religious neutrality.
Sounds great in theory, but in reality, it's not that black and white, for example, Christmas is a federal holiday complete with a national Christmas tree lit by the President.
"Abomination" is not a legal term, it has no legal definition, and it has no place in our legal system. If I hear anyone use that word, in the context of establishing civil law, I will IMMEDIATELY suspect them of trying to use supernatural concepts to influence laws which I must live by.
[QUOTE]

I agree "abomination" is not a religious term.

[QUOTE]
If someone wants to live their life calling some of their fellow citizens "abominations" (who aren't harming them or anyone else), they're welcome to it.
Or "hater", "bigot", or "homophobe", as well.
But I'll be damned before I let my GOVERNMENT do it, echoing THEIR religious sentiments, and pushing their religious doctrine. A secular government cannot brook such nonsense, and NO citizens should stand for it. Even religious citizens, if they value their religious freedom.
"But, I'll be damned before I let my GOVERNMENT do it, echoing THIER anti religious sentiment, and pushing their anti religious doctrine, and left wing to boot" ! A secular government cannot brook such nonsense, and I agree NO citizen, religious, or otherwise should stand for it. Calling their fellow citizens "haters", "bigots", etc, in order to stifle free speech, is unacceptable.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11740 Oct 21, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are trans-phobic.
Fear of transportation? No wait, maybe it's something on the USS Enterprise, NCC 1701. " Fire trans-phobic
Torpedoes"! Photon torpedoes, trans-phobic, whatever.
I'll bet your kids wouldn't even care. What are ten year old kids going to do anyway? If she says she is a boy, then she can get hormones and surgery at some point right? What you are saying is you are what you have between your legs. That means you are either a pr*ck or a cu*t. Now really!!!!!
Uhhhhhh.....huh. So a 12 year old boy, says he's a girl, wants to use the girls locker room. At the same time as the girls use it? Ohhhhhhhhh......that'll go over well. And if the girls don't want an anatomically male "girl" undressing with them, they just have to grin and bear it, or is it bare it?

“From a distance...”

Since: Apr 08

Planet Earth

#11741 Oct 21, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>yes it does.
Running a business isn't an act of worship. Should business owners also be allowed to refuse service to blacks too? After all, many Christians asserted their religious beliefs as justification for slavery and segregation. Why should such Christians be forced to provide goods and services to blacks against their sincerely held religious beliefs? And please don't assert the "no true Scotsman" fallacy that such people aren't "true" Christians.
barry wrote:
and no one has actually shown what part of the law the washington florist has broken.
Actually, the specific statute was cited multiple times; it's not our fault you're simply too stupid to understand the law as written.
barry wrote:
perhaps that is why there has been no movement in the case.
As of October 7, a Benton County Superior Court judge is currently considering a motion by the florist's attorneys to consolidate the separate lawsuits filed by the state Attorney General and the same sex couple against the florist.

Link: http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Gay-weddin...

That you apparently haven't bothered to seek relevant news about the case doesn't mean there's "been no movement". And if there was truly no law on which to base filing lawsuits against the florist as you erroneously assert, don't you think her attorney's wold have made a motion to dismiss on that basis rather than asking to have the two lawsuits consolidated? Not everyone is as ignorant as you are.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#11742 Oct 22, 2013
If gay marriage had been around 2,000 years ago Jesus could have married his boy lover Lazarus.

"So the sisters sent word to Jesus,“Lord, the one you love is sick."" (John 11:3).

“A long time ago”

Since: Nov 09

in a galaxy far, far away....

#11743 Oct 22, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Legal decisions of those who profess no religious beliefs, or even a bias against such, can be irrational as well. An absence of religious belief does not necessarily make one "rational".
No, but it HELPS, if one has already worked past the mythology & patriarchal xenophobia. Given the choice between trusting two people, I know how I’ll feel about the one who has professed his fear of sneaky, invisible, malicious beings.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Also one does not become a Supreme Court Justice by being "irrational".
I’d say that remains to be proven.
Pietro Armando wrote:
My point again, is that absence of religious belief doesn't necessarily mean "MORE dedicated to protecting freedom and equality for ALL citizens".
Why not?

Religion is the common factor behind virtually every movement that’s been anti-science, anti-gay, anti-women’s rights, anti-sex education, anti-contraceptive, anti-environmentalism, anti-government, anti-globalism, anti-immigration… am I missing any? Anti-secularism?

Religion leads grown-ups to reject critical thought and analysis, in favor of magic, miracles and divine authority. It seems perfectly likely to me that an absence of religion will lead MUCH FASTER to greater freedom and equality for all citizens.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Secular people think it would be so great to outlaw religion, belief in a supernatural entity or divinity, or purge society of all religious references, symbols, or influence. That somehow rainbows would fill the skies, if this were accomplished.
Is that what secular people think? Funny, no one told me.

While secular people are often disgusted at what religion makes people capable of, we’d prefer to see humanity reject it WILLINGLY, rather than attempt to outlaw what should be a guaranteed right. And no, it won’t fill the skies with rainbows, but it might do something about all the blood that is shed in endless games of “my god can beat up your god”. Not to mention all the laws that are passed preventing people from doing harmless things that God doesn’t like.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Sounds great in theory, but in reality, it's not that black and white, for example, Christmas is a federal holiday complete with a national Christmas tree lit by the President.
Secularists are well aware that religion has played a major role in history, and is deeply integrated in our culture. It makes some sense to leave Christmas as a federal holiday, since the majority of the nation is Christian, and they would simply not show up for work that day if it weren’t. It’s worth keeping in mind, however, that Christmas was hijacked from the pagans. It’s also worth noting that many modern celebratory styles of Christmas are completely secular, and have nothing to do with Christianity. You won’t find Santa, Frosty or Rudolph in the Bible.
Pietro Armando wrote:
I agree "abomination" is not a religious term.
What do you agree with? I said it’s not a LEGAL term. It absolutely IS a religious term.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Or "hater", "bigot", or "homophobe", as well.
Except that “abomination” can’t be demonstrated. Those can.
Pietro Armando wrote:
"But, I'll be damned before I let my GOVERNMENT do it, echoing THIER anti religious sentiment, and pushing their anti religious doctrine, and left wing to boot" ! A secular government cannot brook such nonsense, and I agree NO citizen, religious, or otherwise should stand for it. Calling their fellow citizens "haters", "bigots", etc, in order to stifle free speech, is unacceptable.
If secularists REALLY WERE trying to push an “anti-religious doctrine”, I would agree with you. Instead, we’re only trying to keep gov’t religion-neutral, a fair position. Haters and bigots still have free speech. But they cannot be allowed to pass laws, while pointing to their Bible as justification for them.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11744 Oct 22, 2013
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
No, but it HELPS, if one has already worked past the mythology & patriarchal xenophobia.
Oooooooooo....."patriarch al xenophobia"....nice....bu t what about "matriarchal xenophobia"?
Given the choice between trusting two people, I know how I’ll feel about the one who has professed his fear of sneaky, invisible, malicious beings.
How will you feel....do tell.
I’d say that remains to be proven.
Good point....how else does one explain the five justices decision on DOMA.
Why not?
]
Religion is the common factor behind virtually every movement that’s been anti-science, anti-gay, anti-women’s rights, anti-sex education, anti-contraceptive, anti-environmentalism, anti-government, anti-globalism, anti-immigration… am I missing any? Anti-secularism?
You forgot anti-aircraft.....sigh.....

Anti science?

Vatican observatory. Father George Coyne, Ph.D

http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/transcript/...

Anti women's rights?

http://www.uscatholic.org/church/2009/01/cath...

An authentically Catholic feminism is not only about vocation or glass ceilings. It is about simply keeping the floor under women, respecting their dignity and rights as people.

Third World feminists challenge Western and predominantly white feminists to struggle not only with issues of gender but also those of race, culture, and class. This is essentially what Catholic feminism does. Catholic teachings on solidarity demand that we listen to the marginalized and oppressed. In this sense Catholic social teaching and feminism go hand-in-hand on many issues.

Catholics, for instance, take a feminist stance on workers’ rights. Issues like fair pay, family leave, and flexible scheduling allow women more equitable treatment at work, but they also promote the good of the family. This isn’t just about the do-it-all mom in upper management; it’s about families struggling to maintain a middle-class lifestyle with two salaries and single moms earning the minimum wage.

Anti sex education?

How do you define "sex education" ?

"Anti environmentalism"?

Oh please explain that one.

"Ain't immigration"? Legal or illegal?
Religion leads grown-ups to reject critical thought and analysis, in favor of magic, miracles and divine authority. It seems perfectly likely to me that an absence of religion will lead MUCH FASTER to greater freedom and equality for all citizens.
Ohhhhhhhh.....the old "if we could just do away with religion, everyone would be much smarter" claim.

"Greater freedom and equality"? So that means asking the government to regulate everyone's intimate personal relationship, and treat everyone as androgynous beings?
Is that what secular people think? Funny, no one told me.
You didn't get the memo?
While secular people are often disgusted at what religion makes people capable of, we’d prefer to see humanity reject it WILLINGLY,....
Golly gee Mr Cleaver, do the secular people ever see the good that religion motives people to do, or are,they all filled with religiphobia?
Secularists are well aware that religion has played a major role in history, and is deeply integrated in our culture.
Well.....good for them....why just warms my heart. Are also aware of the contributions that Christianity in general, and Catholicism in particular, for example, have made to Western Civilization?
It makes some sense to leave Christmas as a federal holiday, since the majority of the nation is Christian, and they would simply not show up for work that day if it weren’t.?....It’s also worth noting that many modern celebratory styles of Christmas are completely secular, and have nothing to do with Christianity. You won’t find Santa, Frosty or Rudolph in the Bible.
No, but you will find Christ in Christ mass.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11745 Oct 22, 2013
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you agree with? I said it’s not a LEGAL term. It absolutely IS a religious term.
It's also can be applied to snowmen.
If secularists REALLY WERE trying to push an “anti-religious doctrine”, I would agree with you. Instead, we’re only trying to keep gov’t religion-neutral, a fair position.
I agree to to a certain extent, but religion, Christianity in particular is too ingrained in American society
Haters and bigots still have free speech.
Haters and bigots? Lions, tigers, and bears, oh my!
But they cannot be allowed to pass laws, while pointing to their Bible as justification for them.
How about those who don't point to the bible, but disagree with the "hater" chapters? Why should they be shouted down, and labeled bigots simply because they disagree?

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#11746 Oct 23, 2013
barry wrote:
yes it does.
and no one has actually shown what part of the law the washington florist has broken. perhaps that is why there has been no movement in the case.
Washington law prohibits anyone from discriminating based upon sexual orientation.

And providing a service to someone whose beliefs differ from a business owner in no way violates the business owner's free exercise of religion. Feel free to make an argument to the contrary, but if you do, please be very specific about how you think their free exercise was violated.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#11747 Oct 23, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>
interestingly you think that a florist is an employee of whomever is getting married. employees should not be forced to do something that is against their religious convictions.
If making floral arrangements is against the religious convictions of Baronelle Stutzman, then she shouldn't have become a florist for hire.

Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#11748 Oct 23, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>barry wrote:
<quoted text>apparently xbreath and jonah do.
barry wrote:
<quoted text>well, according to recent california law, men can be lesbians.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-02/cali ...
"California would have the first state law permitting elementary and high school students to use bathrooms and join sports teams based on their gender identity, rather than their biological sex, under a bill going before Governor Jerry Brown."
"Federal law also guarantees transgendered students access to programs and facilities that fit their gender identity, Ilona Turner, legal director for the Transgender Law Center, said in an e-mailed response to questions."
and xbreath replied;
"You can't be THAT stupid."
that was the complete context of your response. nothing was left out and nothing was added.
you said that i was stupid for recognizing that california became the first state to recognize that men could be lesbians. they wrote the law not me.
Look, numbnuts.... California did NOT pass a law that says men can be lesbians.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#11749 Oct 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<
Well.....good for them....why just warms my heart. Are also aware of the contributions that Christianity in general, and Catholicism in particular, for example, have made to Western Civilization?
You mean like the Dark Ages, the Crusades and the Inquisition?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#11750 Oct 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Fear of transportation? No wait, maybe it's something on the USS Enterprise, NCC 1701. " Fire trans-phobic
Torpedoes"! Photon torpedoes, trans-phobic, whatever.
<quoted text>
Uhhhhhh.....huh. So a 12 year old boy, says he's a girl, wants to use the girls locker room. At the same time as the girls use it? Ohhhhhhhhh......that'll go over well. And if the girls don't want an anatomically male "girl" undressing with them, they just have to grin and bear it, or is it bare it?
Pietro says he's an intellectual and wants to join Mensa, and the Mensa members know he doesn't belong, so they make him take a test to PROVE his intellect. He fails and is forced to lick windows on the short bus.

You are impervious to reason. You are incapable of being corrected. And you are TOTALLY bereft of empathy. Gay marriage is here to stay. All State anti-gay marriage amendments will fall as unconstitutional now that DOMA is gone. The big question is: are you able to adapt to reality?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11751 Oct 23, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like the Dark Ages, the Crusades and the Inquisition?
No, like architecture, science, universities, and charitable work. But thanks for trying though.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11752 Oct 23, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Pietro says he's an intellectual and wants to join Mensa, and the Mensa members know he doesn't belong, so they make him take a test to PROVE his intellect. He fails and is forced to lick windows on the short bus.
Wow.....lame actually ....c'mon XBox, you can insult me more creatively than that.....can't you?
You are impervious to reason. You are incapable of being corrected.
You're not going to sing the Grinch song.....are you?
And you are TOTALLY bereft of empathy.
That's not true. I have a great deal of empathy for your Mom and Dad. Look at how little XBox turned out.
. Gay marriage is here to stay. All State anti-gay marriage amendments will fall as unconstitutional now that DOMA is gone. The big question is: are you able to adapt to reality?
So will you adapt to reality when "marriage equality" is expanded to include polygamists?

“A long time ago”

Since: Nov 09

in a galaxy far, far away....

#11753 Oct 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
but what about "matriarchal xenophobia"?
Are you making a joke because you can’t deny how patriarchal and xenophobic most religions are?
Pietro Armando wrote:
How will you feel....do tell.
Like he’s going to make legal decisions based on trying to outwit these invisible troublemakers.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Good point....how else does one explain the five justices decision on DOMA.
Those are the ones who put their respect for human rights ahead of their fear of ghosts (if they HAVE such a fear).
Pietro Armando wrote:
Anti science?
Vatican observatory. Father George Coyne, Ph.D
http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/transcript/...
So, your defense that religion is not anti-science is to find ONE denomination that supports ONE scientific field? The same field in which they issued a 500-year-late apology to the person who pioneered it? In reply, shall I go find 10,000 religious websites which attack evolution, climate change, stem-cell research, and the big bang theory?
Pietro Armando wrote:
Again, not so hot on choosing a good defense. This woman admitted,“Being Catholic and feminist isn’t easy”. This was hardly a glowing endorsement of Catholicism’s feminism. She was actually calling on Catholicism to be MORE feminist. What about women serving in leadership positions in church? Most religions teach that women are to be subservient to men, and that women who defy this are “ungodly”.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Anti sex education?
How do you define "sex education" ?
Making information available about contraceptives and abortion, acknowledging the failure of abstinence-only education, and not teaching people to be shameful of sex and their bodies. These religions are ALL about shame.
Pietro Armando wrote:
"Anti environmentalism"?
Oh please explain that one.
Climate change denial. Disregard of pollution laws, because "God will take care of us".
Pietro Armando wrote:
"Ain't immigration"? Legal or illegal?
Either. This goes hand-in-hand with anti-globalism, and with the xenophobic tribalism taught by religion. Religion thrives on teaching fear of the “outsider”.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Ohhhhhhhh.....the old "if we could just do away with religion, everyone would be much smarter" claim.
"Greater freedom and equality"? So that means asking the government to regulate everyone's intimate personal relationship, and treat everyone as androgynous beings?
Oh brother. If you’re treated as “androgynous”, how will that differ from how you’re treated now? Is it better to ask the gov’t to regulate everyone’s intimate relationship, so that straight people are treated like citizens, and gay people are treated like lepers?
Pietro Armando wrote:
Golly gee Mr Cleaver, do the secular people ever see the good that religion motives people to do, or are,they all filled with religiphobia?
We see that any good can be done WITHOUT superstitious claims of righteous authority. Food kitchens don’t need fairies and leprechauns to get the job done.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Well.....good for them....why just warms my heart. Are also aware of the contributions that Christianity in general, and Catholicism in particular, for example, have made to Western Civilization?
Does that matter? Again, contributions can be made to society WITHOUT magical justifications. Is there any point where it becomes important to determine whether religious claims are TRUE? Or is that just a low priority?
Pietro Armando wrote:
No, but you will find Christ in Christ mass.
Sure, after Christians stole the holiday from pagans and PUT his name there.

“A long time ago”

Since: Nov 09

in a galaxy far, far away....

#11754 Oct 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
It's also can be applied to snowmen.
Always with the jokes, when a logical defense is nowhere to be found. I guess we agree that “abomination” remains a religious term, with no legal (or even clear common) definition. I will assume that you agree that the word is subjective, and serves only as a slur against fellow citizens, with no applicable basis.
Pietro Armando wrote:
I agree to to a certain extent, but religion, Christianity in particular is too ingrained in American society
I agree it’s ingrained in CULTURE, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be untwined from government. And it doesn’t mean that anyone must sit idly by while some people try to intertwine them even MORE.
Pietro Armando wrote:
How about those who don't point to the bible, but disagree with the "hater" chapters? Why should they be shouted down, and labeled bigots simply because they disagree?
"Hater"...chapters?

They should be labeled bigots, not because they “simply disagree”, but because they act bigoted toward their fellow citizens. I’m going to keep that word handy for anyone who feels that “gay” means a person must waive their constitutional rights. These people may SOUND as if they’re only trying to innocently “defend traditional marriage”(which only suggests that gay people are enemies on the attack), but they are the SAME people who, just a couple years ago, were calling for the continuation of DADT, because gay people would destroy unit cohesion and military readiness. Their same mindset has been behind EVERY opposition of gay rights since at least the 50’s. Find me an anti-gay organization, or simply one which opposes same-sex marriage, which ISN’T motivated by religious sentiments, and headed by highly religious individuals (usually decorated theologians and clergy). Find me a secular organization which opposes gay rights.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#11755 Oct 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
So will you adapt to reality when "marriage equality" is expanded to include polygamists?
When will that be.... half past never?

Will you adapt to the nuthouse when your stupid ass is institutionalized?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#11756 Oct 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
No, like architecture, science, universities, and charitable work. But thanks for trying though.
All of those things existed WAY BEFORE catholics, but thanks for proving your ignorance.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#11757 Oct 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Catholic teachings on solidarity demand that we listen to the marginalized and oppressed.
... unless they are gay.

“LOL Really?”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#11758 Oct 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow.....lame actually ....c'mon XBox, you can insult me more creatively than that.....can't you?
<quoted text>
You're not going to sing the Grinch song.....are you?
<quoted text>
That's not true. I have a great deal of empathy for your Mom and Dad. Look at how little XBox turned out.
<quoted text>
So will you adapt to reality when "marriage equality" is expanded to include polygamists?
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
So will you adapt to reality when "marriage equality" is expanded to include polygamists?
Still building strawmen?

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 Hawaii appeals court upholds ruling against bed... 37 min cpeter1313 9
News Same-sex couple allegedly told they don't 'mirr... 47 min cpeter1313 29
Gay text and call (Aug '12) 51 min John 33
Weekend Barn Dance 2 hr Big Jim 1
The Spectrum Cafe (Dec '07) 2 hr Harold 27,397
News Gay bar opens near Macon Road, drawing visitors... (Jun '17) 4 hr Brainiac Five 676
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 4 hr sargon 18,932
More from around the web