Something for ya Liberal's too chew on.

Interesting. The denial of rights to a section of society is occasion for celebration?

One question. What harm would it do to anyone to allow gay marriage?

goodfielder wrote:

Interesting. The denial of rights to a section of society is occasion for celebration?

To find this interesting, one must believe that the given section of society is deserving of such rights, and that such rights actually exist.

One might also find it interesting that pedophiles are denied their right to have sexs with children or that bank robbers are denied their right to enrich themselves.

Whether one believes a certain group has a specific right to a given activity is meaningless, unless one is prepared to engage in time consuming political activism.

Perhaps same sex marriages should be legal, but outlawing such unions is hardly an example of obvious disregard for the Constitution.

Your argument might gain greater traction if you resisted the temptation to scorn or demonize those who disagree with you.

To find this interesting, one must believe that the given section of society is deserving of such rights, and that such rights actually exist.

One might also find it interesting that pedophiles are denied their right to have sexs with children or that bank robbers are denied their right to enrich themselves

Whether one believes a certain group has a specific right to a given activity is meaningless, unless one is prepared to engage in time consuming political activism.

Perhaps same sex marriages should be legal, but outlawing such unions is hardly an example of obvious disregard for the Constitution.

Your argument might gain greater traction if you resisted the temptation to scorn or demonize those who disagree with you

watchmakers guidedog wrote:

---Universal Decleration of human rights quote---.

I don't think this applies to US Law's.

So? Paedophiles don't have a right to have sex with children, no-one has the right to have sex with children, as a "right" it exists for nobody because it's deemed deviant and criminal behaviour. "Bank robbers" aren't denied the right to enrich themselves, they can go and buy a lottery ticket like anyone else. Nobody has the right to rob a bank, it's deemed deviant and criminal behaviour.

I know of people that also enjoy sex with 10 year old girls, yet we use the excuse of religion, morals, and the law to exclude that class of people from forming the norms of our society.

My issue against same sex marriage is that group won't be satisfied with a civil union until everyone else is forced to have them. Perhaps if there was less heterophobia the issue wouldn't be as much of a flash point as it is.

Hmm...that's interesting. The UN recognizes rights which do not exist under the US Constitution? That is simply not the case. Inalienable rights. whether enumerated or not are protected under the US Constutution. So is equla justice under the law. Seems like someone with the Orwellian handle of "Constitutional Girl" would know that.

It's Equal Justice under the Law. "One sees a cat orange, one sees the same cat red, and the other sees it yellow. But this cat had allways been the same color since birth. The US Constitution was created and carved in stone in 1776, when all of the Politician's were Christian, that gotten most of their education from the bible.

Asses are grave and dull animals,
Our authors are grave and dull animals; therefore
Our authors are grave and dull or if you will, Reverand Asses.

You have a fast and prayer day for that purpose in which I compute five hundred thousand petitions were offered up to the same effect in New England, which added to the petitions of every family morning and evening, multipiled by the number of days since January 25th, make forty-five millions of prayers; which set against the prayers of a few priests in the garrison, to the Virgin Mary, give a vast balance in your favor. If you do not succeed, I fear I shall have but an indifferent opinion of Presbytarian prayers in such cases as long as I live.

parados, thanks for setting CG straight. Her knowledge of our history is appallingly pathetic.

BBB

BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

parados, thanks for setting CG straight. Her knowledge of our history is appallingly pathetic.

BBB

This is the kind of off hand remark that really irritates me.

It's not as though Jefferson and Franklin were the only founding fathers of our nation. In all, 55 delegates attended the Constitutional Convention sessions, but only 39 actually signed the Constitution. The delegates ranged in age from Jonathan Dayton, aged 26, to Benjamin Franklin, aged 81, who was so infirm that he had to be carried to sessions in a sedan chair.

Oliver Ellsworth - was born on April 29, 1745, in Windsor, CT, to Capt. David and Jemima Ellsworth. He entered Yale in 1762 but transferred to the College of New Jersey (later Princeton) at the end of his second year. He continued to study theology and received his A.B. degree after 2 years. Soon afterward, however, Ellsworth turned to the law. After 4 years of study, he was admitted to the bar in 1771.

William Samuel Johnson - was the son of Samuel Johnson, the first president of King's College (later Columbia College and University). William was born at Stratford, CT, in 1727. His father, who was a well-known Anglican clergyman-philosopher, prepared him for college and he graduated from Yale in 1744. About 3 years later he won a master of arts degree from the same institution and an honorary master's from Harvard. Resisting his father's wish that he become a minister, Johnson embraced law instead--largely by educating himself and without benefit of formal training.

Hugh Williamson - The versatile Williamson was born of Scotch-Irish descent at West Nottingham, PA., in 1735. He was the eldest son in a large family, whose head was a clothier. Hoping he would become a Presbyterian minister, his parents oriented his education toward that calling. After attending preparatory schools at New London Cross Roads, DE, and Newark, DE, he entered the first class of the College of Philadelphia (later part of the University of Pennsylvania) and took his degree in 1757. The next 2 years, at Shippensburg, PA, Williamson spent settling his father's estate. Then training in Connecticut for the ministry, he soon became a licensed Presbyterian preacher but was never ordained. Around this time, he also took a position as professor of mathematics at his alma mater.

John Rutledge - elder brother of Edward Rutledge, signer of the Declaration of Independence, was born into a large family at or near Charleston, SC, in 1739. He received his early education from his father, an Irish immigrant and physician, and from an Anglican minister and a tutor. After studying law at London's Middle Temple in 1760, he was admitted to English practice. But, almost at once, he sailed back to Charleston to begin a fruitful legal career and to amass a fortune in plantations and slaves. Three years later, he married Elizabeth Grimke, who eventually bore him 10 children, and moved into a townhouse, where he resided most of the remainder of his life. In 1761 Rutledge became politically active. That year, on behalf of Christ Church Parish, he was elected to the provincial assembly and held his seat until the War for Independence.

Daniel Carroll - was member of a prominent Maryland family of Irish descent. A collateral branch was led by Charles Carroll of Carrollton, signer of the Declaration of Independence. Daniel's older brother was John Carroll, the first Roman Catholic bishop in the United States. Daniel was born in 1730 at Upper Marlboro, MD. Befitting the son of a wealthy Roman Catholic family, he studied for 6 years (1742-48) under the Jesuits at St. Omer's in Flanders.

More about the founding fathers can be found here. You will find that most of those in the continental congress were episcopalian or presbytarian. Hardly a group that had no regard for religion or the bible.

CG wrote: "The US Constitution was created and carved in stone in 1776, when all of the Politician's were Christian, that gotten most of their education from the bible.

You can get as irritated as you usually want to, but when someone makes such an erroneous statement "that all...." she deserves to be shown the error or her thinking.

BBB

McGintrix, You can get as irritated as you usually want to at nearly all of my posts, but when someone makes such an erroneous statement "that all...." she deserves to be shown the error of her thinking.

BBB