Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (65206)	4/7/2018 12:47:16 PM
From: koan	Respond to of 362685

The answer is NO. Religious people should not be allowed that right. We have separation of church and state for a reason, with the constitution taking precedent over religion. Gay marriage is a civil right. Comparing gay marriage to marrying a cat is stupid and insulting to the gay community. <<The traditional standards, let's call them Biblical Standards, are not necessarily legal standards. They are however the way religious people choose to establish life principles. Shouldn't they be allowed that right? I can take my cat to the woods if I want to and tell him we are married. The problem comes when I try to get society to accept it as a 'legal' standard. Hoping he doesn't run off with a wild cat... who would lick my dishes clean and mouse the house then?

To: one_less who wrote (65206)	4/7/2018 1:44:31 PM
From: zzpat	Respond to of 362685

The US has never used religion to determine what is right or not. Slavery is evil and religious people owned slaves. Murder is evil and religious groups support murder. Unjust wars are evil and they support unjust wars. Hiding racism, unjust wars, murder and slavery behind religion sometimes works but it never lasts. Eventually the evil is exposed and with luck eradicated. The rise of Trump is a perfect example on complete and total moral decay.

To: one_less who wrote (65206)	4/7/2018 2:04:54 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 362685

...and I don't see how society can legally stop people from choosing their own lifestyle. The problem is that liberals want to legislate morality which is a contradiction in concepts. The traditional standards, let's call them Biblical Standards, are not necessarily legal standards. Biblical standards have long been codified into law. It's only in recent decades that fornication and sodomy have not been enforced or have been removed from the law book--to the dismay of many. Sodomy is still a felony in VA. I know that because I was on the jury for a sodomy case. And I'm old enough to remember blue laws. Much of the abortion issue is wanting to get a religious proscription codified. Advocating for criminalizing religious proscriptions is not respecting people "choosing their own lifestyle." The problem is that liberals want to legislate morality which is a contradiction in concepts. As far as legal imposition on personal liberty being placed on the general population on behalf of trans folks, I don't recall having seen anything yet. The closest I know of would be regulating bathrooms to provide special accommodations. Which doesn't seem to have legs. Maybe I'm forgetting something. It is neither better nor worse when the left advocates to restricts liberties. The left advocating to remove restrictions on liberty, aka civil rights, is not the same thing.