I challenge anyone to show me, where in the constitutional ratifying conventions, same sex marriages were made a right? Moreover, the 14th amendment created no new rights. It pertained strictly to freed slaves not rights for such antichrist behavior. The federal government was created to promote Christianity, thus the phrase,"In the year of OUR LORD". First chief justice John Jay made this absolutely clear in document one of the Federalist Paper. The churches need to read the history of religion in this nation. Separation of church and state is a lie by antichrists like judge Hugo Black. Nor did Jefferson ever say such in his reply letter to the Danbury Baptist. He said the federal government cannot be used by another Christian denomination to force them to do as they do, thus creating a 'wall of separation'. The states still could support Christianity only and nothing else. Antichrists have gotten in positions in the government to promote the government of Satan to war against heaven on earth which is why Christ will destroy all governments of man upon His return.
37 comments
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
- Thomas Jefferson
The federal government was created to promote Christianity, thus the phrase,"In the year of OUR LORD".
Well, if you want to play that silly linguistics game, it says "OUR LORD," not "OUR CHRISTIAN LORD" or "IN THE YEAR OF CHRIST JESUS." It was the standard designation throughout western cultures. The founders could have just as easily followed older traditions and dated it "IN THE YEAR ONE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA," but it would have put them at odds with every other country they dealt with.
"The federal government was created to promote Christianity,"
It sure seems to be that way recently. Look at all of the public spaces getting 10 commandments monuments, and all of the fundies vehemently resisting putting up monuments to other religions in the same location.
Screw the constitution and the establishment clause, apparently.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion [...]"
Now kindly STFU and DIAF, you PRATT.
Let me offer a counter-challenge: can you show me where in the Constitution straight marriage was made a right?
"Antichrists have gotten in positions in the government to promote the government of Satan to war against heaven on earth which is why Christ will destroy all governments of man upon His return."
Cue the Sex Pistols ! :P
And there are some Christian denominations today that accept same-sex marriage, so even if it were true that separation of church and state only protected Christianity, that still wouldn't mean same-sex marriage couldn't be allowed!
I challenge anyone to show me, where in the constitutional ratifying conventions, same sex marriages were made a right?
Except the Constitution says what the Government CAN do... it doesn't list the rights you are given, it lists the limits it can put on your rights... so...
Show me where the fuck the Constitution takes away the right to get married...
AMENDMENT XIV
Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.
Section 1.
"behavior. The federal government was created to promote Christianity,"
Well, everyone has explained what AD means, so we'll let that go.
You do realize that Greyhound only let black passengers sit in back by the toilets, right? And no one said anything because it was a private company, right? Until some canny lawyer brought suit based on an interpretation of the interstate trade section of the Constitution and another constraint to freedom died.
And Mr. Smiley is an idiot.
Who says their Lord was Jesus?
Many preachers at the time the Constitution was written thought they meant Lord Satan. Why else would there be "no religious test for office"? Why, that would mean an atheist could be elected! Or a Jew! Or a Muslim! Or a Satanist! Or, heaven forbid, a Quaker!
Wow, the stupid Founding Fathers - they forgot to put "Christian" in the First Amendment.
I challenge anyone to show me, where in the constitutional ratifying conventions, same sex marriages were made a right?
The Constitution doesn't give people rights. It takes them away from the government. There's a difference. So show me where in the Constitution the government has the right to deny same-sex marriages.
1) If the Fourteenth Amendment had acknowledged no new rights - rights in the Constitution are acknowledged, not bestowed - there would have been no point in amending the Constitution. Not only did it reverse Dredd Scott v Sandford, thereby acknowledging rights previously denied, but it applies to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." An originalist such as yourself would surely appreciate that if the Fourteenth Amendment pertained strictly to freed slaves, it would have said so. By the way, the Fourteenth Amendment covers a number of other things, not least that it is forbidden even to question the debt of the United States, something that the Tea Party, it its obsession with refusing to pay the debts we already owe, seems to have forgotten.
(continued)
3) While Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist association does not have the force of law, it is worth noting what it says:
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
There is no mention of any Christian denominations here, but rather of religion being a matter between Man and his (unspecified) God. In short, the Sage of Monticello disagrees.
> I challenge anyone to show me, where in the constitutional ratifying conventions, same sex marriages were made a right?
Funny. For comparison, as far as I can remember, the Constitution of Finland admittedly mentions nothing at all about gay marriage, but that's okay, it doesn't mention a damn thing about heterosexual marriage either . Why? Because it's a fucking Constitution . Marriage has shit all to do with basic human rights, citizenship issues (where marriage is admittedly relevant but only a tangential issue) and the form and organisation of the government.
People who elevate their Constitution to be some kind of a mythical super-law that invalidates the need for all other more specific laws are just special kind of delusional.
They're kind of like people who have read a few verses from the Bible and then pretend that all other parts of the Bible can be conveniently forgotten because they just don't have time to deal with that stuff. *ahem hem hem*
I challenge anyone to show me, where in the constitutional ratifying conventions, same sex marriages were made a right?
The Ninth Amendment (or possibly Tenth, I get them confused) states, in part, that the enumeration of rights and liberties* elsewhere in the Constitution and Bill of Rights was not to be taken as exhaustive, and that the government was free to delimit additional rights and/or liberties as it saw fit. This is in keeping with the ideal that the Constitution should be flexible enough to allow the country to change with the times. The legal right to privacy, for instance, is one of the "implied rights" protected by law, as justified by the Ninth.
* Rights are things citizens do that the government cannot infringe upon (within reason); liberties are things the government cannot do to citizens. The First Amendment lists several rights; the Eighth (no cruel or unusual punishment) lists liberties. And Now You Know!
Not having same-sex marriages is a violation of equal rights and equal protection of the laws.
The year of our Lord was just the way they said the date back then, like we use BC and AD, or BCE or CE now. It wasn't really religious, just a habit.
Antichrists? Are there more than one now?
I challenge you to show me, where in the constitutional ratifying convention, where your religion was established as the law.
"He said the federal government cannot be used by another Christian denomination to force them to do as they do, thus creating a 'wall of separation'"
He did not say that, liar.
Ah, more Christian nationalist revisionism nonsense. History scholars and the Supreme Court disagree.
And please show me in the Constitution where it says that same sex marriage shall be banned forever?
You fundies don't understand how the legal system in this country works. The Constitution isn't the ONLY source of law. It's just the highest. There is a thing called case law or judge-made law. When a judge makes a ruling, it becomes precedent that other courts follow and creates law.
The Supreme Court has said several times that marriage is a right and used the Fourteenth Amendment as their basis. Because marriage is a right, the government cannot discriminate against gay people without a compelling government interest and every court case regarding same sex marriage in the last year has said that there is no compelling interest.
That's how the law works and same-sex marriage will be the law of the land within the next couple of years. Get over it.
The federal government was created to promote Christianity? Dude, when you start your argument with pure, unadulterated fantasy, you've got no legs to stand on.
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.
