What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Non Footy Chat Thread II

Hollywood Jesus

Hollywood Jesus

Coach
Messages
11,677
ash411 said:
More bullshit rubbish and double talk.

You can dig all you want, you were wrong and you know it.
Click to expand...

It's not possible for me to be wrong.

You do understand my position, right? You're not that braindead to have missed it, are you?

Peoples' opinions are, at present irrelevant. Our Constitution has provisions for religious freedom. As such, any attempt tp ban the burqa should first go to the High Court to see if those provisions cover religious garb.

If so, what everyone wants is irrelevant. Only if the Constitution does not cover the burqa do peoples' opinions become relevant.

Considering there is absolutely zero talk of changing the Constitution, and the high likelihood of such a referendum being shot down by the people if it were to be held, any "Oh, but the Constitution can be changed!" stance is even more irrelevant than the current debate.

It's not that hard to understand, ash. You just have to exit your echo chamber and actually think for a minute.
 
Snoochies

Snoochies

First Grade
Messages
5,634
Bazal said:
Well by voting no he kinda is....but anyway, just my opinion. I don't understand how anyone would vote no because what business is it of theirs if two people of the same sex get a piece of paper marrying them in the eyes of the law?
Click to expand...

He never said he was voting no, just that he doesn't support it. You'll find many Christians won't vote at all and won't be holding placards and taking to the streets if SSM passes. Most, although hold to a traditional view of marriage, have no problem with SSM being legal in a civil sense but when it comes to marriage in a religious sense, they want that untouched. If gay people want to be recognised under law, that's cool. If gay people want to become a part of a faith, they enter into that faith knowing what it stands for but the Church has already muddied the waters from where it once was.

1 Corithians 5:12: What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
 
Gary Gutful

Gary Gutful

Post Whore
Messages
53,117
Gronk said:
Click to expand...
1vtep1.jpg
 
Gronk

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
77,847
@Snoochies You are most entitled to take the pure position of your church. However it's the cherry picking that I dont get.

They speak of maintaining a traditional view of marriage yet will partake in sex before marriage and also divorce. You can also throw in contraception.

So from an outsiders POV the church has evolved with the times and been gladly adopted by those within the church. They are happy to belong to a modern church when it suits, yet wish to impose medieval traditions upon others.

Does not pass the pub test. Soz.
 
Snoochies

Snoochies

First Grade
Messages
5,634
Gronk said:
@Snoochies You are most entitled to take the pure position of your church. However it's the cherry picking that I dont get.

They speak of maintaining a traditional view of marriage yet will partake in sex before marriage and also divorce. You can also throw in contraception.

So from an outsiders POV the church has evolved with the times and been gladly adopted by those within the church. They are happy to belong to a modern church when it suits, yet wish to impose medieval traditions upon others.

Does not pass the pub test. Soz.
Click to expand...

I agree with you but I personally do hold to a high standard and have actually held onto those standards myself although contraception seems to be a Catholic POV and I could take out a whole page on Catholocism but I won't. As I mentioned, the Church has muddied the waters and people will not look at their own hypocrisy, we've lowered the standards set before us and don't hold to what we should.
The governments job is to govern for all people and create law for all and they won't be scrolling through the pages of NIV looking to pass law.
Now none of us asked for the vote and now it's been put on us. The government could have done away with this but they chose to get the views from those in society, and people will vote with their conscious or not vote at all.
 
Bandwagon

Bandwagon

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
45,224
Snoochies said:
He never said he was voting no, just that he doesn't support it. You'll find many Christians won't vote at all and won't be holding placards and taking to the streets if SSM passes. Most, although hold to a traditional view of marriage, have no problem with SSM being legal in a civil sense but when it comes to marriage in a religious sense, they want that untouched. If gay people want to be recognised under law, that's cool. If gay people want to become a part of a faith, they enter into that faith knowing what it stands for but the Church has already muddied the waters from where it once was.

1 Corithians 5:12: What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
Click to expand...

This appears to me a sensible religious position, hold true to your faith, but not impose that upon others.

It's those that would see this as an attack upon religious freedoms that do themselves and their fellows a disservice. Imposing your beliefs upon others under the guise that they are imposing their beliefs upon you is nonsensical.
 
Gronk

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
77,847
Snoochies said:
I agree with you but I personally do hold to a high standard and have actually held onto those standards myself although contraception seems to be a Catholic POV and I could take out a whole page on Catholocism but I won't. As I mentioned, the Church has muddied the waters and people will not look at their own hypocrisy, we've lowered the standards set before us and don't hold to what we should.
The governments job is to govern for all people and create law for all and they won't be scrolling through the pages of NIV looking to pass law.
Now none of us asked for the vote and now it's been put on us. The government could have done away with this but they chose to get the views from those in society, and people will vote with their conscious or not vote at all.
Click to expand...

Yes and those from the church will look within and vote based on their deep beliefs.

Then there is another subset outside the church who just dont like twinkies.

<sigh>
 
ash411

ash411

Bench
Messages
3,411
Hollywood Jesus said:
It's not possible for me to be wrong.

You do understand my position, right? You're not that braindead to have missed it, are you?

Peoples' opinions are, at present irrelevant. Our Constitution has provisions for religious freedom. As such, any attempt tp ban the burqa should first go to the High Court to see if those provisions cover religious garb.

If so, what everyone wants is irrelevant. Only if the Constitution does not cover the burqa do peoples' opinions become relevant.

Considering there is absolutely zero talk of changing the Constitution, and the high likelihood of such a referendum being shot down by the people if it were to be held, any "Oh, but the Constitution can be changed!" stance is even more irrelevant than the current debate.

It's not that hard to understand, ash. You just have to exit your echo chamber and actually think for a minute.
Click to expand...
Yeah... none of that means anything,

You said the constitution cannot be changed, I said it could.

I was right, you were wrong. the rest is useless fluff you said to make yourself feel smart, but you're not.

You're wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top