Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

**diachenko** · 02-16-2012, 01:50 AM

(02-10-2012 01:28 AM)diachenko Wrote:
(02-07-2012 10:32 PM)greg Wrote: So they're at it again! The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals have ruled today to nullify the good people of California's 2008 vote against homosexual marriage. Judicial tyranny at its very worst.

Let's turn this around with a hypothetical, Greg.

"The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals have ruled today to nullify the good people of California's 2008 vote in favor of homosexual marriage."

Would you still be calling it "judicial tyranny?" My guess is, no. You would likely be praising the court for bravely correcting the misguided views of the voters.

(Don't cause trouble. Don't cause trouble. Don't post. Don't stir this post aga--Oh screw it, here goes.)
Hmmm. Still no response to this? Can it be that Greg knows I'm right on this one? Oh wait, that's never stopped him before. . . Tongue

greg · 02-16-2012, 01:32 PM

(02-16-2012 01:50 AM)diachenko Wrote:
(02-10-2012 01:28 AM)diachenko Wrote: Let's turn this around with a hypothetical, Greg.

"The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals have ruled today to nullify the good people of California's 2008 vote in favor of homosexual marriage."

Would you still be calling it "judicial tyranny?" My guess is, no. You would likely be praising the court for bravely correcting the misguided views of the voters.

(Don't cause trouble. Don't cause trouble. Don't post. Don't stir this post aga--Oh screw it, here goes.)
Hmmm. Still no response to this? Can it be that Greg knows I'm right on this one? Oh wait, that's never stopped him before. . .

My answer is going to sound sorta mean to you, so that is part of the reason I didn't really want to respond, plus, I guess abit of apathy on my part, as it is appears that no one, or very few people ever change their minds about these sorts of issues. Despite what many at SFL think, I do wish that we could "all get along" like Rodney King said. Big Grin

I hope and believe that you, perhaps more than alot of the homosexuals and their sympathizers here, understand my position. I hate no one, I'm as big a sinner as you and anyone else here, and I have said this before as well, I'm not trying to get laws passed to protect my wicked sins, it is because of my wicked sins that our Precious Savior hung on that cruel cross.

I already know you don't like these comparisons, but to me, they are legitimate, so here goes:

"The 9th circuit Court of Appeals have ruled to nullify the good people of California 2008 vote in favor of.........

polygamy
beastility
mercy killing
parents to kill their children up to the age of 12 months
decriminalize sex between adults and children if the child is in a loving relationship

Homosexuality, and all the above are immoral behaviours.

Someone once said "you can't legislate morality" I submit that is the only thing that can be legislated.

It's a pretty good argument though, if I were a homosexual, polygamist, animal lover, or a pedophile I'm sure I would say the same.

dramaturge · 02-16-2012, 02:02 PM

You didn't really answer the question. Which was, had the situation been opposite (prop to legalize gay marriage, court overruled it), would you still be claiming judicial tyranny had violated the will of the people.

**myotch** · 02-16-2012, 02:06 PM

Guilt by loose, arbitrary association?

The law is rather lenient when it comes to sins that don't cross the boundaries of the rights of another. It's not OK to steal or murder. We live in a commercial society, so coveting is beneficial to all. Adultery is not prosecuted on the criminal level much anymore. And, as far as I can tell, no one is saying that gays can't be gay and have gay sex by constitutional law.

This is only a debate about marriage and the law. Immorality can be quite legal, within someone's rights.

greg · 02-16-2012, 02:57 PM

(02-16-2012 02:02 PM)dramaturge Wrote: You didn't really answer the question. Which was, had the situation been opposite (prop to legalize gay marriage, court overruled it), would you still be claiming judicial tyranny had violated the will of the people.

It's all good as long as it goes my way, the right way Big Grin

Ok I'll try again. My mindset is this. Never should immoral behaviour be legislated. Never! Will of the people, judges, or unicorns! No matter what the judges would have said, legislating homosexual marriage is wrong. If the judges overruled the will of the people that wanted and had voted for homosexual marriage, we could just call that "good" judicial tyranny!

I'm stuck in a country that kills 4,000 boys and girls a day. My government makes me support the biggest abortion provider (PP) Do you think this is right? I don't care what judges or courts or the will of the people is regarding this, it is murder. The same thing with homosexual behaviour/marriage, regardless of anyone's opinion, it is wrong.

Did I answer sufficiently?

**JordanMaria** · 02-16-2012, 04:11 PM

(02-16-2012 02:57 PM)greg Wrote: I'm stuck in a country that kills 4,000 boys and girls a day

Last time I checked, no one is forced to stay here.

Tchaiko · 02-16-2012, 06:09 PM

(02-16-2012 02:57 PM)greg Wrote: It's all good as long as it goes my way, the right way

And here we have it. I can hear the sentence echoing throughout the room like at the end of Monsters Inc. "I'll kidnap a thousand children before I let this company die!" Except in this situation, it's not kidnapping children, it's trampling the entire judicial and legislative structure of the country. And you're not trying to keep a company alive, you're trying to impose your morality on everyone else. And don't say you're not and everyone still has a choice. . . A choice between "agreeing with me or being wrong" isn't a real choice.

I cannot see how any conscientious American could knowingly say something like you just did. That was the mentality that led to every regime of tyranny in the history of mankind: the belief that since one is right, he can use any means he can to impose his "right" upon others.

And yet again we have someone who, although he would probably never use the word, is pushing for a theocracy. Where all of the laws are firmly based in Christianity and what the Bible says (or at least the Head Honcho's interpretation of the Bible) is the law of the land. Sounds great. More power to you. One thing, though, could you start your theocracy somewhere else? I'm kinda living in a little place I like to call the "Land of the Free." And I would prefer it stay free for all, regardless of belief. I understand that you don't agree, but then again I don't expect you to.

I do need to thank you, though, for your reply. I wouldn't have been nearly forward enough to insinuate that you actually didn't care about freedom for anyone except yourself and those exactly like you, so I'm extremely grateful that you did it for me.

Cheers.

lucrezaborgia · 02-16-2012, 08:25 PM

**RobMille** · 02-16-2012, 08:31 PM

Maybe Iran would work out better for you? Abortion is illegal there, as are gays (which they also claim don't exist in Iran). How much better could it get than that?

greg · 02-16-2012, 08:33 PM

(02-16-2012 06:09 PM)Tchaiko Wrote:
(02-16-2012 02:57 PM)greg Wrote: It's all good as long as it goes my way, the right way

And here we have it. I can hear the sentence echoing throughout the room like at the end of Monsters Inc. "I'll kidnap a thousand children before I let this company die!" Except in this situation, it's not kidnapping children, it's trampling the entire judicial and legislative structure of the country. And you're not trying to keep a company alive, you're trying to impose your morality on everyone else. And don't say you're not and everyone still has a choice. . . A choice between "agreeing with me or being wrong" isn't a real choice.

I cannot see how any conscientious American could knowingly say something like you just did. That was the mentality that led to every regime of tyranny in the history of mankind: the belief that since one is right, he can use any means he can to impose his "right" upon others.

And yet again we have someone who, although he would probably never use the word, is pushing for a theocracy. Where all of the laws are firmly based in Christianity and what the Bible says (or at least the Head Honcho's interpretation of the Bible) is the law of the land. Sounds great. More power to you. One thing, though, could you start your theocracy somewhere else? I'm kinda living in a little place I like to call the "Land of the Free." And I would prefer it stay free for all, regardless of belief. I understand that you don't agree, but then again I don't expect you to.

I do need to thank you, though, for your reply. I wouldn't have been nearly forward enough to insinuate that you actually didn't care about freedom for anyone except yourself and those exactly like you, so I'm extremely grateful that you did it for me.

Cheers.

We should probably all stand and sing the National Anthem after that!! Tongue

"The belief that since one is right, he can use any means he can to "impose" his right on others"

Millions upon millions of murdered boys and girls certainly wish it would have been me imposing my will on them, instead of some wretched, wicked, liberal judges!