10-31-2008, 05:46 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 2,368
|
Netherlands, Canada. The church will not close temples over this. At worst they would stop performing marriages and just do sealings like they do in Europe.
|
10-31-2008, 05:48 PM | #12 | |
AKA SeattleNewt
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,055
|
Quote:
Since the repeal of prohibition, the church has been forced to perform temple marriage for those who consume alcohol. Because premarital sex is legal, the church has been forced to remove all requirements of chastity from temple marriage requirements. Though the church prohibited AA's from entering the temple, the government forced miscegenation in the temple because it was legal. The most galling is that due to First Amendment requirements, the church has been forced to grant temple weddings to those who speak ill of their sustained leaders. I have no doubt that the church will likewise be forced to perform same-sex marriages in the temple if it is legalized. |
|
10-31-2008, 06:13 PM | #13 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Quote:
The No on Prop 8 group's strategy has become clear....lay low until the final week and then bombard. I have seen a bunch of No commercials and radio spots now. Interesting highlights... 1. The State Superintendant of Schools has done a commercial stating that the arguments about teaching gay marriage in school are untrue. There is no requirement to teach any marriage in California school. The Yes camp countered yesterday with a commercial claiming that the Superintendent lied. As is the case with the Yes commercials, they very quickly flashed two links on the screen as support for their claims. I went and checked out both links. Here are the two "proofs" offered by Yes to show that the Superintendent lied. Both are links to sex health education. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/he/se/sexeducation.asp ....which states: Quote:
no wonder the Yes group flashed the links so quickly. There are likely hoping nobody goes and reads them. Incidentally, the Yes commercial claims that in actuality, 96% of CA schools are required to teach about marriage. The claim is made and the links above are flashed onto the screen. Neither of those links make any mention of any schools being required to teach about any marriage, let alone 96%. 2. The No on Prop 8 site has a direct link to California's Opt Out clause, including the actual form parents can fill out, which allows parents to pull their child from any school activity that violates their "religious or moral beliefs." The Yes on Prop 8 group has been disingenuous and provided no reference or discussion of the existing Opt Out clause. Instead, the Yes group focuses on a couple in Mass. that received a "King and King" book. Very sloppy lawyering, frankly. here is the link for those that want to read about the actual Opt Out clause: http://www.savecalifornia.com/getact...efe1743269dc58 The one thing I still don't get about all this "think of the children" stuff.....currently, with civil unions, a teacher could inform students that some people have two mommies or two daddies. If Prop 8 passes, they can still talk about two mommies and two daddies because civil unions are not going anywhere, gays can still adopt etc. Nothing changes. More fearmongering.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
||
10-31-2008, 06:13 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Sssh! Stop making salient points here. Tex won't believe you, anyway.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
10-31-2008, 06:17 PM | #15 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
"Men [and women] rejoice at being led like cattle again, with the terrible gift of freedom that brought them so much suffering removed from them . . . . We will convince them that they will only be free when they have surrendered their freedom and submitted to us . . . . Freedom, free thought, and science will lead them into such straits and will bring them face to face with such marvels and insoluble mysteries, that some of them, the fierce and rebellious, will destroy themselves, others, rebellious but weak, will destroy one another, while the rest, weak and unhappy, will crawl fawning to our feet and whine to us: 'Yes, you were right, you alone possess His mystery, and we come back to you, save us from ourselves!'"
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
|
10-31-2008, 06:24 PM | #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Quote:
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
|
10-31-2008, 06:25 PM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,596
|
Quote:
But I don't put it past gay organizations to try, or sympathetic judges to rule in their favor. Or perhaps a legislature will test the courts by actually legislating it, though that is much more unlikely because they are answerable to the people. The fact that gay marriage statutes were overturned in two states by 4-3 margins, and the Dale case was won 5-4 suggests to me there are razor margins in the judiciary on this issue.
__________________
"Have we been commanded not to call a prophet an insular racist? Link?" "And yes, [2010] is a very good year to be a Democrat. Perhaps the best year in decades ..." - Cali Coug "Oh dear, granny, what a long tail our puss has got." - Brigham Young |
|
10-31-2008, 06:25 PM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,016
|
Quote:
Ya, who'd a thunk such things were possible |
|
10-31-2008, 06:30 PM | #19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Quote:
Will some groups try to file a lawsuit? I agree, some may try. Again, how will it even get past summary judgment? What is the legal basis? There is none. Back to your cocoon of fear, my friend. Probably more comfy in there, anyway.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
|
10-31-2008, 06:34 PM | #20 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Lame
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
Bookmarks |
|
|