|
VitalSigns posted:The comments on that article are hilarious Rule #1 of the Internet is to never read the comments.
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 00:38
|
|
"Never!! The Lord God will judge us all for your iniquity, sinner!
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:08 |
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:There are a couple of Southern states that give married couples the ability to sign 'contracts' or whatever that make it impossible for a no-fault divorce. There's a name for this but I forget what it's called. Haha why would you sign something like that? It's like the anti-prenup "I just know this marriage is going to work out, so let me make sure I'm extra-super-hosed-over if I turn out to be wrong!" Oh hey, could I get a put-option on my life insurance instead of the usual version? When I die, I want the company to actually charge my family a million dollars so it'll give me a strong incentive not to die.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Haha why would you sign something like that? It's like the anti-prenup "I just know this marriage is going to work out, so let me make sure I'm extra-super-hosed-over if I turn out to be wrong!" The term for it is covenant marriage. Only allowed in four states (AR, AZ, KS, and LA) it's another stupid religious idea that's been allowed to seep it's way into society. Making it harder to get out of a relationship does wonders to make sure that people are forced to be chained to their abuser/rapist, as whatever lovely god the idiots who came up with this idea intended.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:03
|
|
|
farraday posted:According to gravity everything is attracted to everything else, so both heterosexuals and homosexuals are clearly deviants. A basic rule of occultism is that like attracts like, ergo, gays are magic!
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:The term for it is covenant marriage. Only allowed in four states (AR, AZ, KS, and LA) it's another stupid religious idea that's been allowed to seep it's way into society. Making it harder to get out of a relationship does wonders to make sure that people are forced to be chained to their abuser/rapist, as whatever lovely god the idiots who came up with this idea intended. You... you do understand that this is what all marriages were like before the 50s, and in some states up til 1985 right? It's not a new idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:The comments on that article are hilarious This is what's so stupid. If a god was judging people after they died, why bother harassing them while they're alive?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
effectual posted:This is what's so stupid. If a god was judging people after they died, why bother harassing them while they're alive? I always enjoy asking people who go on about gays how many divorced people they have in their church. "Wow your church is pretty tolerant what with all those hard-hearted sinners who get divorced in the eyes of the lord. That's a liberal, sort of modern church."
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
My biggest issue with the "can't we worry about more important things" is that we could. If it's so unimportant just let gays have rights and be done with it, and you'll never have to talk about it again. Oh but no, we can't do that. We have to fight against this unimportant distraction from the issues as hard as we can every step of the way, no quarter asked none given. For some reason. But jeez, why are liberals so obsessed with this meaningless gay stuff?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
It just instinctively makes me laugh every time somebody says a human rights matter isn't an "important matter". Because you know if that same person was suddenly thrust in a situation where his marriage wasn't legally recognized, his voting rights weren't recognized, he was banned from giving blood, he was judged by the color of his skin, he made much less money than everybody else in his workplace despite being more qualified, people told him what he could and couldn't do with his body, etc. etc., that same person would think it was an important matter. It just always astounds me how people can think something doesn't matter until or unless it affects them. Even in 2014.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:You... you do understand that this is what all marriages were like before the 50s, and in some states up til 1985 right? It's not a new idea. I do, and never contended it wasn't. It is a religious idea that's being snuck back into law after all the blood and tears expended to remove it and gain some level of freedom.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 10:35
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:I do, and never contended it wasn't. It is a religious idea that's being snuck back into law after all the blood and tears expended to remove it and gain some level of freedom. It's not snuck in, as near as I can tell all the covenant marriage states added it in at the same time or within a few years of legalizing no-fault divorce for most marriages.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:It's not snuck in, as near as I can tell all the covenant marriage states added it in at the same time or within a few years of legalizing no-fault divorce for most marriages. The first state to allow convenant marriages was LA in 1997 according to wiki. That would be well after no-fault was put through. It's a huge issue to me, since it's obvious on its face that it's about keeping marriages together instead of keeping both people fully realized. Who wants to pad your marriage stats if it means people are stuck with someone who makes them miserable at best, and criminally attacks them at worst?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
effectual posted:This is what's so stupid. If a god was judging people after they died, why bother harassing them while they're alive? He has to protect us from sucking all these dicks. If He didn't intervene, there'd be nothing to stop them! From sucking dicks! All of them!
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Who wants to pad your marriage stats if it means people are stuck with someone who makes them miserable at best, and criminally attacks them at worst? Yankee spotted
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yankee spotted Close. Rural border stater, but college educated in DC.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 15:53
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:The first state to allow convenant marriages was LA in 1997 according to wiki. That would be well after no-fault was put through. It's a huge issue to me, since it's obvious on its face that it's about keeping marriages together instead of keeping both people fully realized. Who wants to pad your marriage stats if it means people are stuck with someone who makes them miserable at best, and criminally attacks them at worst? For anyone who was curious: Louisiana apparently passed no-fault divorce in 1979, so rakajdi's correct about them being pretty unlinked unless someone wants to argue 18 years is close  .
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
quote:...natural laws assert that only opposite magnetic fields can attract., while same poles repel. they can't bond. That is natural. Does this mean if my wife and I get divorced, each of us becomes a new married couple? Divergence of B is zero, bitches.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Divergence of B is zero, bitches. Lies!
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
Does this mean you can divorce your spouse if you no longer find them attractive?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
 I...I think I have to re-evaluate some stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
Nobody in Oregon will defend the gay marriage ban in court, so the openly gay judge hearing the case has to do it himself. Thought you'd all like a laugh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:Nobody in Oregon will defend the gay marriage ban in court, so the openly gay judge hearing the case has to do it himself. Thought you'd all like a laugh. I laughed. Someone should buy that judge a beer, in the name of judicial process.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Does this mean if my wife and I get divorced, each of us becomes a new married couple? mdemone posted:
Well let's not chuck out Maxwell just yet. Remember when everyone assumed that priests were perfect sexual monopoles that had safe industry applications in altar boy training...
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Well let's not chuck out Maxwell just yet. Remember when everyone assumed that priests were perfect sexual monopoles that had safe industry applications in altar boy training... Their monopoles were the problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Does this mean if my wife and I get divorced, each of us becomes a new married couple? Late, but check out what the strong nuclear force is. Orders of magnitude stronger than that pansy electromagnetic force, its purpose is to bind similarly-charged protons in the nucleus. You know, so any element other than hydrogen is possible That's right. Without like attracting like, the universe as we know it could not exist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:Late, but check out what the strong nuclear force is. Orders of magnitude stronger than that pansy electromagnetic force, its purpose is to bind similarly-charged protons in the nucleus. You know, so any element other than hydrogen is possible Psh, where I live it's nothin but hydrogen all day every day
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
Well, this is a new one. A state is getting their marriage ban challenged via lawsuit filed...by a church. The United Church of Christ filed suit, along with 12 clergy members and a group of gay couples, against North Carolina's ban on gay marriage. The lawsuit argues the ban violates the religious beliefs of denominations and congregants who support the recognition of gay nuptials, and clergy who want to perform them. This is the second lawsuit filed against NC's ban, the first coming earlier this month from the ACLU.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
The state Attorney General's slow-walking the ACLU case because the 4th Circuit decision (likely overturning the ban) is expected in a few months, so I wouldn't expect the UCC one to go anywhere either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
Sweeney Tom posted:Well, this is a new one. A state is getting their marriage ban challenged via lawsuit filed...by a church. The United Church of Christ filed suit, along with 12 clergy members and a group of gay couples, against North Carolina's ban on gay marriage. The lawsuit argues the ban violates the religious beliefs of denominations and congregants who support the recognition of gay nuptials, and clergy who want to perform them. This is the second lawsuit filed against NC's ban, the first coming earlier this month from the ACLU. I came here to post that  I never expected a church to go trolling, especially in NC. http://equalitync.org/latest/news/nc_clergy_bring_legal_challenge_to_amendment_one/
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
Icon Of Sin posted:I came here to post that Most wouldn't see this coming. I found out about it from the gay pastor at my church.  Not all churches are socially regressive poo poo holes. Some actually take the "care for the outcast and downtrodden, the rich can take care of themselves" teaching to heart.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
As an atheist, I admittedly don't pay attention to the internal divides of religious faiths. I will, however, welcome all pro-gay denominations as we fight for social progress. "Enemy of my enemy," and all that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:Most wouldn't see this coming. I found out about it from the gay pastor at my church. A good friend of mine's sister recently graduated from seminary and is an openly gay episcopal priest. It's pretty awesome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2014 13:38
|
|
|
AYC posted:As an atheist, I admittedly don't pay attention to the internal divides of religious faiths. I will, however, welcome all pro-gay denominations as we fight for social progress. "Enemy of my enemy," and all that. Nope. They are still idolators, worshipers of a false god. Once our homo-agenda is ascendant in these United States, they too will be forcibly sodomized and their church given over to unspeakable sexual depravity the likes of which have not been seen upon this earth since antediluvian times. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
Wow quote:UPDATE: The owner has responded to a JMG reader. From the comments of this post, this is his message: "We recently posted five 3" stickers on the front entrance to our shop. Two of these stickers are negative and prohibitive in there message. We will not serve people that are foul-mouthed, nor will we serve people that flaunt their homosexual lifestyle in our place of business and/or request us to produce promotional products that do so. Matthew Lombard, Owner." http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2014/04/kentucky-print-shop-no-gays-wanted.html?m=1
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
Well, I'm certainly never taking my business to this print shop. I mean, how hard can it be to center five identically-sized stickers? Edit: the spacing makes me think that there was a sixth sticker that was removed. Given its position in the pattern, I'd bet that it was another prohibition. Who wants to guess what other group/action/thing was also excluded?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
They updated their website with following disclaimerquote:Notice: We recently posted five 3″ stickers on the front entrance to our shop. Two of these stickers are negative and prohibitive in their message. After some public confusion as to the meaning of one which depicted a rainbow flag, we’ve replaced them with a clarification. Who knew bigots hated freemasonry
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:Edit: the spacing makes me think that there was a sixth sticker that was removed. Given its position in the pattern, I'd bet that it was another prohibition. Who wants to guess what other group/action/thing was also excluded? Some Danny Trejo looking dude was coming up and they ran out and pulled off the "crossed out mexican flag" one before he could see it
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
So, you need facial hair to enter the premises?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
Edible Hat posted:So, you need facial hair to enter the premises? Or a burqa
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:08 |
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Who knew bigots hated freemasonry Well Jack Chick has at least one tract talking about how freemasonry tricks people into secretly worshiping Satan without them knowing it which sends them to Hell.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2014 02:46
|
|
