Civil Unions disallowed in ACT
Pages
| Author | Topic: Civil Unions disallowed in ACT |
|---|---|
|
Warrior
Member # 7171
|
written Thursday, June 29 2006 11:31
Profile
quote:Churches' opinions do not bear any legal weight. [ Thursday, June 29, 2006 11:31: Message edited by: Maimonides ] Posts: 66 | Registered: Sunday, May 28 2006 07:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Thursday, June 29 2006 11:59
Profile
Homepage
People, stop paying attention to Cairo Jim. He doesn't know what he's talking about. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 5410
|
written Thursday, June 29 2006 12:17
Profile
quote:Yes, in a narrow/strict sense this is true but in a political sense they carry much persuasive power. As a group with interest they can receive standing in court cases, make presentations on bills, motivate demonstrations etc. So, in the broader sense in determining the fate of a bill the cncerns of this political force should be taken into account/addressed in some manner. quote::D -------------------- "Dikiyoba ... is demon ... drives people mad and ... do all sorts of strange things." "You Spiderwebbians are mad, mad, mad as March hares." Posts: 687 | Registered: Wednesday, January 19 2005 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Thursday, June 29 2006 14:30
Profile
Homepage
Cairo Jim said nothing about legality. He gave a reason why churches tend to frown on homosexuality, and in churches churches' opinions hold a great deal of weight. It's not a good reason, but it's a reason. —Alorael, who can pick much better passages for opposing homosexuality. Nitpicking is possible, of course, but not quite as easy as with a commandment that doesn't mention homosexuality. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Thursday, June 29 2006 22:31
Profile
Homepage
quote:Churches' opinions in general aren't very weighty, but I have to ask: Why that particular passage? Alo's right in saying there are others much more specific, and I can't see how adultery is related. -------------------- Encyclopaedia Ermariana • Forum Archives • Forum Statistics • RSS [Topic / Forum] My Blog • Polaris • I eat novels for breakfast. Polaris is dead, long live Polaris. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Thursday, June 29 2006 23:49
Profile
Homepage
quote:Easy. Same-sex intercourse is adultery (or, strictly speaking, fornication) because people of the same sex can't get married, and they can't get married because... well, that's where you have to turn to the other passages, isn't it? :P -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 1092
|
written Saturday, July 1 2006 22:08
Profile
Homepage
That's pretty much on the same track, Thuryl. Fornication would be under adultery. By the way Ash, I do know what I'm talking about. [ Saturday, July 01, 2006 22:13: Message edited by: Cairo Jim ] -------------------- When you think you can't get any lower in life and hit rock bottom, God hands you a shovel. Why should I say somthin intelligent when idiots like you make me look intelligent in the first place. Posts: 615 | Registered: Friday, May 3 2002 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Saturday, July 1 2006 23:48
Profile
Homepage
Fornication is a general offense in which two individuals not married to each other engage in intercourse. Adultery is a subcategory of fornication, specifically sex in which at least one of the participants is married to a third party. There is no inherent difference between homosexual fornication or adultery and heterosexual fornication or adultery unless you presuppose the impossibility of same sex marriage. So I've really reiterated what Thuryl said and made clear that adultery is under fornication, not vice versa. If fornication or adultery are the problems, you'd think same sex marriage would be encouraged! It's not as though all these sinful gays are refusing to go to the altar. —Alorael, who wonders how long it will be before some conservative legislator tries to make pre- or extra-marital sex illegal. No, make that unconstitutional. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Post Navel Trauma ^_^
Member # 67
|
written Sunday, July 2 2006 00:29
Profile
Homepage
Since the attempt to make burning a piece of cloth unconstitutional only lost by one vote, I can see a no-fornication one doing scarily well too. [ Sunday, July 02, 2006 00:29: Message edited by: Khoth ] -------------------- Barcoorah: I even did it to a big dorset ram. desperance.net - Don't follow this link Posts: 1798 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 6652
|
written Sunday, July 2 2006 02:08
Profile
Much of the same reasoning behind a ban on gay marriage could be used to create a ban on fornication ("Traditional sex is under attack!") and it wouldn't have the same united opposition of the gay community. [ Sunday, July 02, 2006 02:11: Message edited by: Little Billy Sue ] -------------------- But I don't want to ride the elevator. Posts: 420 | Registered: Sunday, January 8 2006 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 6652
|
written Sunday, July 2 2006 02:10
Profile
Agh, meant to edit and quoted instead. [ Sunday, July 02, 2006 02:10: Message edited by: Little Billy Sue ] -------------------- But I don't want to ride the elevator. Posts: 420 | Registered: Sunday, January 8 2006 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 03:47
Profile
It would probably have the opposition of just about everyone. Considering the Texas Supreme Court struck down a Texas Law prohibiting sodomy, I can't see any laws regulating fornication coming onto the books any time soon. Per Grizwold v. Connecticut, the right to privacy has more or less been found to be a constitutional right, and that includes what goes on in the bedroom. Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 06:48
Profile
Homepage
The fact that it's been found blatantly unconstitutional doesn't mean that no one would support it. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Councilor
Member # 6600
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 07:10
Profile
Homepage
If people are going to argue for and make laws and regulations with that belief in mind (and not take human nature into account), they might as well stop being somewhat sneaky about it and declare their intent openly. Enough with the "Oh no, we can't teach kids about birth control in school. It would encourage the wrong behavior!" sort of stuff. Dikiyoba. Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 08:55
Profile
Fortunately for us unrepentent fornicators, the hypocrisy of those against fornication takes a lot of the bite out of their bark. I don't exactly see them signing up in droves for new Shaker communities. Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 12:39
Profile
Homepage
Don't be silly. Sex is okay as long as you're married, it's intended for procreation only, and you have no fun at all. Actually, that might explain a few things about life on Capitol Hill —Alorael, who thinks the world might be a better place if politics were bred out of the gene pool. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 12:46
Profile
If you take the sex out of Capitol Hill, who knows what mischief they might otherwise get into? Attractive, young summer interns are vital to the continued wellbeing of the nation. Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 16:36
Profile
Homepage
Says the lawyer in DC! —Alorael, who can see the career ahead of AM now. Shady backroom deals, nubile interns, and pork barrel politics. And gay marriage! Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 20:01
Profile
Homepage
Congratulations, Alo: you've just succeeded in giving a whole new meaning to the phrase "pork barrel". -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 20:38
Profile
The Bible (OT) does have a specific commandment forbidding homosexually as an abomination. As to sex on Capitol Hill, as Newt Gingrich once told his mistress he want only oral sex so he could truthfully say he never slept with her. He said this during the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal. Besides without congressional sex scandals they would have to go home to their wives. And their wives are busy with Hillary's husband. Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 21:03
Profile
Homepage
Be fair to Mr. Clinton. He had no affairs with anyone wielding significant political power. Marriage, yes. Affairs, no. The Bible has all kinds of rules and regulations. We gleefully ignore most of them. Especially the OT ones. —Alorael, who enjoys his bacon on Yom Kippur and his pork barrels (in any sense you'd like, Thuryl) any time. Well, not really, but it makes a good story. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 23:42
Profile
Homepage
quote:No. You don't. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 1092
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 23:47
Profile
Homepage
Yes, I do. [ Monday, July 03, 2006 23:47: Message edited by: Cairo Jim ] -------------------- When you think you can't get any lower in life and hit rock bottom, God hands you a shovel. Why should I say somthin intelligent when idiots like you make me look intelligent in the first place. Posts: 615 | Registered: Friday, May 3 2002 07:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Monday, July 3 2006 23:50
Profile
Homepage
It has already been pointed out to you that adultery and homosexuality are not the same. Don't make me do it again. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 7171
|
written Tuesday, July 4 2006 00:02
Profile
quote:You are not Maimonides. Posts: 66 | Registered: Sunday, May 28 2006 07:00 |