Originally posted by @kellyjay
As soon as anyone draws a line in the sand that can be called intolerance, if you say that
everyone's views must be accepted, accept those that disagree with everyone's views
must be accepted you have become intolerant, and a hypocrite. The separation of church
state as good as that sounds has never been true, the state and church both lead people,
the ...[text shortened]... agree with one another, but as soon as someone
draws a line where they don't, they will clash.

Ap is a big believer in totalitarian based societies. He believes it is the future.

Originally posted by @eladar
Ap is a big believer in totalitarian based societies. He believes it is the future.

There is nothing tolerant about totalitarian governments, those views are centralized to a
very few. It is also no small wonder why getting people to stand up in a government and
write a law one way or another now days is almost a laughing matter, as soon as they do
draw a line, it doesn't matter where, so many will be up in arms. They need to grow a
couple and just do what they think is right, not because of what they can get out of it, but
because of it is right. Which of course means, lines will be drawn, but it will always mean
that.

Originally posted by @eladar
Which is why California voters passed a law defining marriage as being between a man and a woman. It was a vote of the people in a liberal state. A politically appointed leftist court over rode the will of the people.

You don't approve of judicial review?

Originally posted by @js357
You don't approve of judicial review?

By politically appointed/ political activist judges?

No.

Originally posted by @js357
You don't approve of judicial review?

Do you approve of society's will being over turned by anyone, including a single judge?
I guess we if true we are not that far away of yielding our wills over to someone authority
soon and very soon.

Originally posted by @js357
You don't approve of judicial review?

One other thing, I was responding to the false claim that most people in the US support gay marriage.

Perhaps you can get majority syppoert for a legal gay union, but not under the name marriage.

Originally posted by @josephw
BS.

Wrong. Almost 2/3's now support gay marriage:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/15/poll-same-sex-marriage-america-238393

Originally posted by @josephw
The government can stay out of the church. Like you do.

No. The church pushes, I resist. Quiet believers of any sort aren't the problem here.

Originally posted by @apathist
No. The church pushes, I resist. [b]Quiet believers of any sort aren't the problem here.[/b]

You desire people who believe differently than you to be silent so that you can push ypur belief by way of government.

Typical for people like you.

Originally posted by @eladar
You desire people who believe differently than you to be silent so that you can push ypur belief by way of government.

Typical for people like you.

No. Your assertion does not follow from my statements, and does not reflect my stance.

Noisy advocates must submit to logical and reasonable critique, and your camp doesn't fare well under that restriction.

Originally posted by @eladar
By politically appointed/ political activist judges?

No.

Is it that they are politically appointed and active you object to, or the particular decisions they make? Usually I see people only yell "political activism" when they don't like the decisions.

Originally posted by @js357
Is it that they are politically appointed and active you object to, or the particular decisions they make? Usually I see people only yell "political activism" when they don't like the decisions.

The two are hand in hand.

But if one could get rid of one aspect, it would be political activist.

Nothing in the Constitution gives anyone a right to marriage.

Originally posted by @apathist
No. The church pushes, I resist. [b]Quiet believers of any sort aren't the problem here.[/b]

So resistance means squelching dissent? Very American of you. Your rights aren't above mine.

You need to learn how to make the distinction between church and state. Resist all you want. You won't silence me. You'll have to kill me to stop me.

Originally posted by @js357
Is it that they are politically appointed and active you object to, or the particular decisions they make? Usually I see people only yell "political activism" when they don't like the decisions.

Politically appointed judges should confine their decisions to the will of the people. Otherwise it's corruption.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
As soon as anyone draws a line in the sand that can be called intolerance, if you say that
everyone's views must be accepted, accept those that disagree with everyone's views
must be accepted you have become intolerant, and a hypocrite. The separation of church
state as good as that sounds has never been true, the state and church both lead people,
the pe ...[text shortened]... they agree with one another, but as soon as someone
draws a line where they don't, they will clash.

We all stand for right against wrong, as we understand. If you like to eat my brains, and I don't want you to, well there is the grand story of life.