Closed Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 28 of 51 FirstFirst ... 1824252627282930313238 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 503

Thread: Rick Santorum openly admits to wanting Christian theocracy

  1. #271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva_TD View Post
    The People must be protected from government regardless of whether it's laws that infringe upon "Freedom Of Religion" or "Freedom From Religion" as religions in general have a dismal historical record of violating the inalienable Rights of the People.

    Rick Santorum, in advocating gender based discrimination in marriage based upon his religious beliefs and his religious intolerance of homosexual behavior, seeks to violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment and equal protection under the law is an inalienable Right for all People.
    It is perfectly OK to write laws based on our religious beliefs.

    That's where the laws against murder come from.

    But in the case of homosexuals it is not simply a religious issue.

    Because gay marriage has never been the norm is practically any society in history - Christian or not.

    In fact the most anti-Christiam of the 20th Century was the Soviet Union where gay marriage was not legal either.

  2. #272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mac-7 View Post
    It is perfectly OK to write laws based on our religious beliefs.

    That's where the laws against murder come from.

    But in the case of homosexuals it is not simply a religious issue.

    Because gay marriage has never been the norm is practically any society in history - Christian or not.

    In fact the most anti-Christiam of the 20th Century was the Soviet Union where gay marriage was not legal either.
    What an ignorant uninformed crap post. No its not OK to write laws based on religious views. You are un-American if you believe that.

  3. #273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Montoya View Post
    What an ignorant uninformed crap post. No its not OK to write laws based on religious views. You are un-American if you believe that.
    Of course laws are influenced by religion.

    And by some people's lack of religion.

    How can you separate anyone from their personal beliefs?

  4. #274

    Default


    “Only in America can you be pro-death penalty, pro-war, pro-unmanned drone bombs, pro-nuclear weapons, pro-guns, pro-torture, pro-land mines, and still call yourself ‘pro-life.’" ~John Fugelsang

    PF's Liberal Progressive Underground


  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mac-7 View Post
    It is perfectly OK to write laws based on our religious beliefs.

    That's where the laws against murder come from.

    But in the case of homosexuals it is not simply a religious issue.

    Because gay marriage has never been the norm is practically any society in history - Christian or not.

    In fact the most anti-Christiam of the 20th Century was the Soviet Union where gay marriage was not legal either.
    Ah yes 'the norm' argument.

    Ready for this? take a deep breath!

    So was misogyny and denying women numerous rights.

    Next argument please.
    "but it is nevertheless true that it is value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property. Every proprietor, therefore, of cultivated land owes to the community a ground-rent, for I know no better term to express the idea by, for the land which he holds." -- Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice

  6. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva_TD View Post
    as religions in general have a dismal historical record of violating the inalienable Rights of the People.
    Though of course atheists have an even worse record.

    Rick Santorum, in advocating gender based discrimination in marriage based upon his religious beliefs and his religious intolerance of homosexual behavior, seeks to violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment and equal protection under the law is an inalienable Right for all People.
    Strangely this went unnoticed by Constitutional scholars for centuries. lol

    Polygamists could just as easily claim discrimination. Are laws against polygamy also unconstitutional?
    Populism Means Hope for the Future: Pro-Life Anti-War Democratic Socialism

  7. #277

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by creation View Post
    Ah yes 'the norm' argument.

    Ready for this? take a deep breath!

    So was misogyny and denying women numerous rights.

    Next argument please.
    And so were the laws against men having sex with animals.

    Do you want to do away with them too?

    The fact is that homosexual men have the same right to marry that straight me do since both are free to marry any woman that will have them.

    That's as equal under the law as it can be.
    Last edited by Mac-7; Feb 28 2012 at 06:25 AM.

  8. #278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mac-7 View Post
    It is perfectly OK to write laws based on our religious beliefs.

    That's where the laws against murder come from.
    This is false. Murder is the wrongful violation of the inalienable Right to Life of a person and that is where laws prohibiting murder comes from. The fact that "religion" might also condemn murder, except when it's been done for religious reasons historically, is purely coincidental.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mac-7 View Post
    But in the case of homosexuals it is not simply a religious issue.

    Because gay marriage has never been the norm is practically any society in history - Christian or not.
    Actually many societies, including Native-American societies, accepted homosexuality as normal behavior. These were termed the "Two-Spirit People" and were highly regarded in Native-American culture.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Spirit

    There are also "laws" that recognized homosexual behavior going back to Roman times.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosex...n_ancient_Rome

    Chinese culture also accepted homosexuality often referred to as "the passion of the cut sleeve" or "the bitten peach" but also maintianed a belief in establishing heredity and family lineage.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_China

    Cultural anthropoligists have cited numerous societies where homosexuality was not only tolerated as a norm within society but also highly embraced within the society.

    BTW the USSR did not have the US Constitution and the Bill of Rigths and was a tyrannical nation in numerous regards. The question here is why would Rick Santorum or any religious zealot oppose the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment?

    "The clergy...believe that any portion of power confided to me [as President] will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion." --Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, 1800.
    The tyranny that religion could impose has rightfully been opposed by Americans since the founding of the United States. We should no more allow religious tyranny today than when Thomas Jefferson sought office in 1800.
    Republicans were more likely than Democrats to express racial prejudice in the questions measuring explicit (anti-black) racism (79% among Republicans compared with 32% among Democrats).
    Source: 2012 AP Study on racial prejudice in America (link providee on request by PM)

  9. #279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva_TD View Post
    This is false. Murder is the wrongful violation of the inalienable Right to Life of a person and that is where laws prohibiting murder comes from. The fact that "religion" might also condemn murder, except when it's been done for religious reasons historically, is purely coincidental.



    Actually many societies, including Native-American societies, accepted homosexuality as normal behavior. These were termed the "Two-Spirit People" and were highly regarded in Native-American culture.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Spirit

    There are also "laws" that recognized homosexual behavior going back to Roman times.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosex...n_ancient_Rome

    Chinese culture also accepted homosexuality often referred to as "the passion of the cut sleeve" or "the bitten peach" but also maintianed a belief in establishing heredity and family lineage.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_China

    Cultural anthropoligists have cited numerous societies where homosexuality was not only tolerated as a norm within society but also highly embraced within the society.

    BTW the USSR did not have the US Constitution and the Bill of Rigths and was a tyrannical nation in numerous regards. The question here is why would Rick Santorum or any religious zealot oppose the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment?



    The tyranny that religion could impose has rightfully been opposed by Americans since the founding of the United States. We should no more allow religious tyranny today than when Thomas Jefferson sought office in 1800.
    This is false. Murder is the wrongful violation of the inalienable Right to Life of a person and that is where laws prohibiting murder comes from. The fact that "religion" might also condemn murder, except when it's been done for religious reasons historically, is purely coincidental.
    Where do you think the idea of right to life came from if not religion?

    As for the Soviet Union it did not reject homosexual marriage on religious grounds because the Soviets rejected religion.

    It simply did not allow such an unnatural practice as gay marriage.

    Also there were many native tribes who may have harbored a number of weird ideas including cannibalism .

    So I would not use them as an irrefutable guide for humanity.
    Last edited by Mac-7; Feb 28 2012 at 06:53 AM.

  10. #280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mac-7 View Post
    Of course laws are influenced by religion.

    And by some people's lack of religion.

    How can you separate anyone from their personal beliefs?
    If an individual cannot separate their religious beliefs from their political beliefs then they cannot logically and in good faith swear the following oath of office to be president:

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
    If Rich Santorum cannot preserve, protect and defend the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment when it comes to same-gender marriage then he cannot truthfully swear this oath. He has already signed the NOM pledge which endorses actions that would violate the equal protection clause for same-gender couples seeking the legal institution of marriage. He has also sworn an oath in the NOM pledge to create Constitutional denial of equal protection under the Constitution with the proposed "marriage" amendment.

    Rick Santorum maybe a very religious person but he's unqualified to be the president of the United States or hold any public office in the United States that requires an oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the US Constitution. Such an oath establishes the supremacy of the Constitution over personal religious beliefs.
    Republicans were more likely than Democrats to express racial prejudice in the questions measuring explicit (anti-black) racism (79% among Republicans compared with 32% among Democrats).
    Source: 2012 AP Study on racial prejudice in America (link providee on request by PM)

Closed Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 28 of 51 FirstFirst ... 1824252627282930313238 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Does Rick Santorum believe he is ....
    By Phoebe Bump in forum Political Opinions & Beliefs
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Feb 21 2012, 07:15 AM
  2. Why Rick Santorum has won me over.
    By Emagatem in forum Political Opinions & Beliefs
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: Feb 17 2012, 02:23 AM
  3. I don't like Rick Santorum.
    By junius, fils in forum Political Opinions & Beliefs
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: Jan 04 2012, 07:27 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks