It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Krazysh0t
It's actually a nice misdirect, but not really germane. The definition of marriage is the core issue.
Is the English language changing?
Yes, and so is every other human language. Language is always changing, evolving, and adapting to the needs of its users. This isn't a bad thing; if English hadn't changed since, say, 1950, we wouldn't have words to refer to modems, fax machines, or cable TV. As long as the needs of language users continue to change, so will the language. The change is so slow that from year to year we hardly notice it (except to grumble every so often about the 'poor English' being used by the younger generation!). But reading Shakespeare's writings from the sixteenth century can be difficult. If you go back a couple more centuries, Chaucer's Canterbury Tales are very tough sledding, and if you went back another 500 years to try to read Beowulf, it would be like reading a different language.
www.linguisticsociety.org...
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Krazysh0t
It's actually a nice misdirect, but not really germane. The definition of marriage is the core issue.
Pretty hard to blame forefathers for that one. Societies on their way out had plenty of homosexuality. None had raised the bar to 'marriage' like these guys have.
A new level...
Still, I don't care about a 'bakery'.
Once the self-righteous pontificate on what an individually owned business should or shouldn't do, despite 1St amendment rights, the door is now open for even more choices removed under the name of social justice.
The slope will continue...if I have gatherings at my home will I have to prove the 'correct' percentile of visitors via race or sexual preference?
Knock off the personal right, as mandated by law, of an individual business, it will continue.
Don't forget all this started with "the gov't has no business in the bedrooms of the nation". The slope has been fast.
My fear and prediction is there will be a backlash...sooner rather than later, unless I miss my guess.
originally posted by: nwtrucker
Gay marriage unheard of in any civilization previous to this is FACT. Not hyperbole.
Gay marriage and homosexuality were part of the moral landscape faced by the first Christians in Ancient Rome. Benjamin Wiker
Given that the gay marriage agenda will be increasingly pressed upon Catholics by the state, we should be much more aware of what history has to teach us about gay marriage—given that we don’t want to be among those who, ignorant of history, blithely condemned themselves to repeat it.
Contrary to the popular view—both among proponents and opponents—gay marriage is not a new issue. It cannot be couched (by proponents) as a seamless advance on the civil rights movement, nor should it be understood (by opponents) as something that’s evil merely because it appears to them to be morally unprecedented.
Gay marriage was—surprise!—alive and well in Rome, celebrated even and especially by select emperors, a spin-off of the general cultural affirmation of Roman homosexuality. Gay marriage was, along with homosexuality, something the first Christians faced as part of the pagan moral darkness of their time.
What Christians are fighting against today, then, is not yet another sexual innovation peculiar to our “enlightened age,” but the return to pre-Christian, pagan sexual morality.
www.catholicworldreport.com...
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Annee
You can spin...LOL. Utterly irrelevant to redefining marriage in the here and now. Especially when done by a minority, yea a minority against the wishes of the majority...the vast majority.
That's the way it is, though. Hear these words, this will happen to you somewhere down the line. An imposition on what you hold as basic. It will be changed without consultation or voice. You won't like it any more than the Christian base does now.
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Krazysh0t
I love how you use the quote option to cut out points in my post. Hyperbole?? Really?
Gay marriage unheard of in any civilization previous to this is FACT. Not hyperbole.
The redefinition of marriage occurred now, under this Judicial Branch with the approval of an extreme liberal socialist elite that uses redefinition as it's means to redefine this nation. FACT.
Not hyperbole whatsoever. This one incident has woken a few more folks up.
Where it all ends up? Your guess is as good as mine....
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Annee
www.mrctv.org...
One Native American said reservations didn't always use to be this way.
"John Hawk Co-Cke' (co-KAY), an enrolled member of the Osage Nation who's gay, said that before reservations were created, many tribes had no problem with men who embraced their feminine side and women who lean toward their masculine side, inspiring the term two-spirit people. Two-spirit people were sometimes given special ceremonial roles because of their ability to go into both the masculine and feminine world," he said.
Mr. Co-Cke says Christianity's’s influence on the tribes ever since the reservations were formed has influenced their stances on homosexuality.
Why Marriage Matters to Native Americans Just as the United States debates whether or not to end the exclusion of same-sex couples and their families from marriage, Native American tribes are addressing the same issue. Native American tribes are federally recognized sovereign nations—thus they can create their own policies around marriage for same-sex couples. Native American tribes have historically accepted LGBT/Two-Spirit same-sex relationships, and in 2009, the first tribe in the nation, the Coquille Tribe of Oregon, approved the freedom to marry for same-sex couples. Since then, several other tribes have extended marriage to same-sex couples to same-sex couples, with several proactively approving resolutions in favor of the freedom to marry and others newly realizing that their tribal code does not reference gender and thus, permits marriage between same-sex couples.
These Native American tribes have approved the freedom to marry:
The Coquille Tribe in Oregon (2009)
The Suquamish Tribe in Washington (2011)
The Tribal Council of the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians in Michigan (2013)
The Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians in Michigan (2013)
The Santa Ysabel Tribe in California (2013)
The Colville Tribal Council of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Nation in Washington (2013)
The Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes in Oklahoma (2013)
he Leech Lake Tribal Court in Minnesota (2013)
The Puyallup Tribe of Indians in Washington (2014)
The Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska (2015)
www.freedomtomarry.org...
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Krazysh0t
www.mrctv.org...
"John Hawk Co-Cke' (co-KAY), an enrolled member of the Osage Nation who's gay, said that before reservations were created, many tribes had no problem with men who embraced their feminine side and women who lean toward their masculine side, inspiring the term two-spirit people. Two-spirit people were sometimes given special ceremonial roles because of their ability to go into both the masculine and feminine world," he said.
Mr. Co-Cke says Christianity's’s influence on the tribes ever since the reservations were formed has influenced their stances on homosexuality.
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Annee
So what? It's the backlash. It's started....
originally posted by: nwtrucker
The point I'd make is that belief system would never have enforced the 'preferences' of a small minority onto the rest of the band.