• VaultBoyNewVegas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        51
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’m sure it’s just a complete coincidence then that republicans fought against marriage equality and adoption for same sex couples.

          • baru@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            35
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Ah, so you can exclude gays. And that means:

            Republicans don’t by default have anything against gays.

            Because hey, every time they do everything against gays there’s an excuse! There’s been loads and loads of excuses over the years, but hey, they really don’t have anything against gays!

            Jeez, done critical thinking would be good.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            29
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            And they are wrong because this is America, not a Christian theocracy.

            I’m not a Christian. I’m Jewish and an atheist. My wife is also an atheist. We’re married. By your excuse for Republicans, we aren’t.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                24
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                Because we did not get married based on any Christian tradition.

                Neither does anyone else.

                Marriage is a civil ceremony and America is a secular nation.

              • can@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                Because they see ‘marriage’ as a christian description of matrimony between man and woman

                I guess it depends on if it’s described as christian matrimony between man and woman

              • TurboWafflz@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Unless you were advocating for a legally equivalent alternative to marriage just with a different name for people who do not fit your incredibly narrow requirements for marriage, how exactly can you claim you weren’t trying to discriminate against people?

              • can@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                7 months ago

                Character growth, good. For the future telling people they don’t get to have legal rights because of your book is discrimination and the problem.

          • ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            And I see modern “Christians” as deplorable but that doesn’t mean I get to strip them of all their rights.

          • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Then they should demand that the state gets the fuck out of any marriage business. Unless they don’t believe in the separation of church and state, that is.

      • can@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Haha, so they’re just complicit.

        I’m sure you’re quick to chime in with “not all cops” too.