[Pastor Ken Hutcherson testifying against a bill in WA to legalize same-sex marriage]
I think that you are saying, as a committee and as a legislature that you know better than God, since you think that it is a very minded, bigoted, not understanding and loving thing to limit marriage to one man and one woman—If you pass this bill you’re just as narrow minded, you are just as bigoted and you’re just as unloving to everything and everyone who wants to get married outside of one man and one woman, two men and two women. But since you think God is not smart enough to make it fair, you’re saying that you’re smart enough to make it fair.
68 comments
I don't think that these people understand that we marriage-equality advocates are not dictated by their personal god, nor do we care. We do not live in a Christian nation, we don't give a flying fuck what your imaginary friend says, and you have no right to tell people how they can and cannot love one another.
The end.
It's certainly not hard to know more then your god, who put fruit trees on the earth before there was a sun to help them survive.
Being more moral then your god isn't that hard either. Infact, just today, I planned on not stoning people who worked on the sabbath. And I didn't stone disobedient children.
I also sent a clearly worded message to people all around the world, and there was no problems with interpretation issues or needing a phd in theology to understand this message in context.
Clearly, I'm sooo much more powerful then god!
Marriage has always been a legal institution. The church was a latecomer to the scene, and only once they realized there was money to be made from it. There are even records of the church blessing same sex unions when it suited them.
I think Ken Hutcherson should be prevented from ever marrying or having sex because the god I worship says it's a sin
See how it sounds, douchebag?
Sorry Pastor, but most Americans don't want laws based on religion.
This bill will pass. If it doesn't now, it will later.
[Pastor Ken Hutcherson's ancestor testifying against a bill in WA to legalize interracial marriage, about fifty years ago.]
I think that you are saying, as a committee and as a legislature that you know better than God, since you think that it is a very minded, bigoted, not understanding and loving thing to limit marriage to one white man and one white woman
If you pass this bill you’re just as narrow minded, you are just as bigoted and you’re just as unloving to everything and everyone who wants to get married outside of one white man and one white woman, such as two people of different races. But since you think God is not smart enough to make it fair, you’re saying that you’re smart enough to make it fair.
Should I count this one as a fixed it for you? I wasn't entirely sure what Pastor Hutcherson was trying to say.
Ah, appeal to authority, let alone an authority you can't even prove.
Yes dumbshit, we are smart enough to make it fair. There is no logical reason why two people can't get married.
If you pass this bill you’re just as narrow minded, you are just as bigoted and you’re just as unloving...
How so? Exactly how does another couple's marriage affect your own? Why do you think it's any of your business in the first place?
Washington is one of the least godsoaked states in the US, so good luck with your "God thinks it's icky" argument.
I think that you are saying, as a committee and as a legislature that you know better than God, since you think that it is a very [narrow] minded, bigoted, [and] not [an] understanding and loving thing to limit marriage to one man and one woman
WAIT!
In the both testaments of the Bible God explicitly or indirectly allows polygamy. So isn't making legislation limiting marriage to to one man and one woman the same, i.e. thinking one knows things better than God?
@checkmate
Your mistake seems to be that you're expecting a fundie to actually have read his holy book. Simple enough mistake to make, as they always seem to have one handy- for thumping and clutching to their breast- but if you look closely, the spines of those books are all pristine, indicating never having been opened.
WHY?
No one ever tells me /why/ marriage has to be one man/one woman, and it's really starting to piss me off.
Until they give me a logical answer on that front, well, I'm ignoring the entirety of this fucking word salad.
You're the narrow-minded, bigoted, and non-understanding one here. Stop responding to people who rightfully call you a bigot by saying, "no, you!"
I think that you are saying, as a committee and as a legislature that you know better than God
So God came down and gave us His almighty opinion on the matter? No. Let's be precise. Pastor Ken, a human, has given his opinion on what he believes God thinks, based on what he read in a book written by humans that some other human told him was written by God and he believed them.
In response to Veca--
The fruit trees would survive just fine without the sun.
After all, there plenty of light on a cloudy day.
Not only God, we also know better than Darth Vader, the grinch, Freddy Krueger and other fictional villains.
So, if you support gay people having the freedom to get married, you're bigoted, but if you support banning gay marriage, you're not bigoted?
I swear these idiots can really try to put a spin on things. But really all this amounts too is, "I know you are but what am I?"
I think someone misses the main point of consent in legal marriage.
If your church wants to marry dogs and men, that's fine, it just won't be recognized by the state, just like you don't have to marry gays, since the state is the one that must recognize it
Whoever presides this committee should be issued a big, heavy "1st Amendment/Treaty of Tripoli, bitch!" stamp to hit morons in the face the minute they start blathering about Gawd's will...
"But since you think God is not smart enough to make it fair, you’re saying that you’re smart enough to make it fair."
Well, it isn't necessarily an issue of ability (though your Bible amply proves that for a supposedly omniscient being, Yahweh isn't the sharpest hunk of cheese), but incompentence is the kindest explanation I can see, since the other one would be unwillingness. How do you prefer your god, nice but dangerously inept or unfair and assholish?
So, if I'm understanding you correctly... you're against fairness.
Well, that certainly explains alot.
But since you think God is not smart enough to make it fair, you’re saying that you’re smart enough to make it fair.
Well, He wasn't smart enough to just poof humanity out of existence instead of going through that protracted and messy Flood business - He wasn't even smart enough to poof up the boat; He had to make Noah build the thing himself. Then He wasn't smart enough to figure out that killing everyone except Noah's family wouldn't solve the problem of sinful humanity, because Noah's righteousness wouldn't be inherited by his descendants like eye or hair color. Then He wasn't smart enough to just kill off the Amorites instead of stopping the sun and leaving Joshua to do His work for Him. And Jesus wasn't smart enough to use His powers to eliminate cancer or Down's syndrome, instead of wasting His miracles handing out free wine, bread and fish.
No, the God of the Bible ain't all that smart ...
Actually what we are saying is that everyone should have the same rights and morons like you shouldn't be able to ignore the first amendment and pass openly religious restrictions on marriage and social life.
So yeah. Fuck you. Learn2constitution.
He does have a point.
If marriage, traditionally meaning the union of one man and one woman, can include two men or two women, why not other combinations such as:
Should any group of persons of any combination of genders be permitted to form a legal marriage?
"I think that you are saying, as a committee and as a legislature that you know better than God, "
Since god is imaginary it would be hard to not know more than god. Unless you are a fundie pastor or mulla.
@ David F. Mayer
No, he does not have a point. Hutchinson, like all the rest of his ilk, has no logic to support his position. All he has is his own interpretation of bronze age superstitions.
When thumping the bible does not help them to get their way. Hutchinson and his ilk generally do exactly what you just tried to do: they try to turn the discussion into something it isn't in the hopes of provoking a reaction of disgust. This is what anti-equality bigots are trying to do when they ask, "Why can't I marry a sheep/a 5 year old/my mother/etc." It seems that you were trying the same tactic when you began asking irrelevant questions about plural marriages.
If you want to address the topic at hand, please do so. If you want to discuss plural marriages, find a discussion on plural marriages. If you want to pretend that A=B, prepare to be justly ridiculed.
"I think that you are saying, as a committee and as a legislature that you know better than God, since you think that it is a very minded, bigoted, not understanding and loving thing to limit marriage to one man and one woman
If you pass this bill you’re just as narrow minded, you are just as bigoted and you’re just as unloving to everything and everyone who wants to get married outside of one man and one woman, two men and two women. But since you think God is not smart enough to make it fair, you’re saying that you’re smart enough to make it fair."
Okay. Now show us on this doll where the nasty US Constitution and it's laws - which make absolutely no mention of 'marriage' - touched you...?
@ David F. Meyer:
The idea of marriage being "one man, one woman" is relatively new. The idea of "one man, as many women as he can care for" is older. Some areas put a cap on the number of wives- four in Islam and only if you could afford to care for that many, for example- while other places had no limit on wives, but men preferred a small number of wives with many concubines, as a concubine's child usually had fewer rights than a wife's child.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
