I'll ask this: if ever in a similar position as it was with Japan, do you think if USA had to choose between conquered by the tyranny of ISIS vs. nuking tens of thousands of men, women, and children: would the USA be justified in doing so, or should it go the pacifist route and let itself be conquered, thus sparing all those lives?
Wanting to lie, cheat, steal, murder, are natural things too, but it doesn't mean they are ok either, that's why I don't think that's a good argument in favor of homosexuality. But as I've said I don't see enough evidence to make that judgment, so I'd also agree there's no good reason.
I understand the Christian view of not wanting at all to seem to condone what it considers to be evil, but like I just told Nick, once you throw your hat into the ring of being a government-authorized business, you're pretty much at the mercy of government when it comes to doing business with those you may not care to. That's the breaks.
Like you said, Christians and others opposed to it are unable to provide a really good secular reason not to.
I don't think votes should be denied if it's currently the law to enable ordinances to be repealed by such votes, but there's a process of appeals to higher courts to override the people if their actions are deemed to be unconstitutional. Otherwise you end up with rogue governments issuing decrees without ability of the people to have any say about it.
I try to see the other side even if I don't agree, sometimes I can be a jerk about it like anyone else but that's usually not too productive.
Originally posted by Tassman
View Post
I understand the Christian view of not wanting at all to seem to condone what it considers to be evil, but like I just told Nick, once you throw your hat into the ring of being a government-authorized business, you're pretty much at the mercy of government when it comes to doing business with those you may not care to. That's the breaks.
Originally posted by Tassman
View Post
I don't think votes should be denied if it's currently the law to enable ordinances to be repealed by such votes, but there's a process of appeals to higher courts to override the people if their actions are deemed to be unconstitutional. Otherwise you end up with rogue governments issuing decrees without ability of the people to have any say about it.
I try to see the other side even if I don't agree, sometimes I can be a jerk about it like anyone else but that's usually not too productive.
Comment