ashburnskinsfan Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 RALEIGH, North Carolina (AP) -- A state judge has ruled that North Carolina's 201-year-old law barring unmarried couples from living together is unconstitutional. The American Civil Liberties Union sued last year to overturn the rarely enforced law on behalf of a former sheriff's dispatcher who says she had to quit her job because she wouldn't marry her live-in boyfriend. http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/20/cohabitation.law.ap/index.html Should it be legal for unmarried couples to live together? After all, the bible expressly forbids fornication outside marriage, and it's often been said that our laws are based on Judeo-Christian values. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Eh...whatever...its a garbage law that in no way could ever be enforced. Much better that its eliminated, imo... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Should it be legal for unmarried couples to live together? After all, the bible expressly forbids fornication outside marriage, and it's often been said that our laws are based on Judeo-Christian values. Are you serious? This is America, not some Middle Eastern country where religion dictates what goes on. I'm glad the NE has the sense not to have a law like this.....of course we do have some pretty stupid laws still on the books... :doh: here are some gems from NY NY State Laws A fine of $25 can be levied for flirting. This old law specifically prohibits men from turning around on any city street and looking "at a woman in that way." A second conviction for a crime of this magnitude calls for the violating male to be forced to wear a "pair of horse-blinders" wherever and whenever he goes outside for a stroll. It is against the law to throw a ball at someone's head for fun. A license must be purchased before hanging clothes on a clothesline. The penalty for jumping off a building is death. A person may not walk around on Sundays with an ice cream cone in his or her pocket. While riding in an elevator, one must talk to no one, and fold his hands while looking toward the door. Slippers are not to be worn after 10:00 P.M. brought to you by this website http://tjshome.com/dumblaws.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Are you serious? This is America, not some Middle Eastern country where religion dictates what goes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 sorry..it's early, and I haven't had coffee yet...so yes sarcasm detector is broken... oh and btw...is this "It's against the law to tie a giraffe to a telephone pole or street lamp." a problem in GA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Iowa: You may shoot Native Americans if there are more than five of them on your property at any one time. At least they had the common courtesy to use the PC term Native American. all these are from the same website I already posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashburnskinsfan Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 Are you serious? This is America, not some Middle Eastern country where religion dictates what goes on. OK, it was sarcasm ... but consider .... federal funding of stem cell research .... rights of homosexual couples .... the debate over abortion law ... and state that these are not heavily influenced by religious faith. Indeed many politicians and judges claim that our laws are out of alignment with our heritage which they insist is based Judeo-Christian ethics, and they would like laws to better reflect this. I'm curious to know how far they would like this to go. Clearly Christian groups are actively engaged in lobbying to restrict rights for homosexual couples and to overturn abortion law. But are they not pursuing the sins of divorce and fornication because they are less important, or simply because they are currently out of reach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 OK, it was sarcasm ... but consider see my response to Liberty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 OK, it was sarcasm ... but consider But are they not pursuing the sins of divorce and fornication because they are less important, or simply because they are currently out of reach? because they are as guilty at these as the rest of us...why point the finger at yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashburnskinsfan Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 because they are as guilty at these as the rest of us...why point the finger at yourself? I'm not 'guilty' of anything. It's their dogma, and their salvation at stake here. I curious to hear an honest answer why they pick and choose what is important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 I'm not 'guilty' of anything. It's their dogma, and their salvation at stake here. I curious to hear an honest answer why they pick and choose what is important. I was serious. I wasn't pointing a finger at anyone. Thats what I see. It's the reason the Episcopal church exists. Someone in the religious order, or royalty wanted to do something, so it was removed as a sin....divorce being one example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashburnskinsfan Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 I was serious. I wasn't pointing a finger at anyone. Thats what I see. It's the reason the Episcopal church exists. Someone in the religious order, or royalty wanted to do something, so it was removed as a sin....divorce being one example. I'm confused now ... you mean it's OK to pick and choose which laws and which parts of the bible you follow? Then, how is it determined which religions are real and which ones are false? Seniority or membership numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 I'm confused now ... you mean it's OK to pick and choose which laws and which parts of the bible you follow?Then, how is it determined which religions are real and which ones are false? Seniority or membership numbers? I didn't say it was OK, I just said that's what I see. It's why I have a problem with alot of churches. I've been to several of different denominations, and I see alot of hipocrasy in them. As for which are real and which are false...that's for the individual to decide for themselves. What they choose to believe or not to believe. That was the greatest gift given to us as a human race...the ability to choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gchwood Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 RALEIGH, North Carolina (AP) -- A state judge has ruled that North Carolina's 201-year-old law barring unmarried couples from living together is unconstitutional.The American Civil Liberties Union sued last year to overturn the rarely enforced law on behalf of a former sheriff's dispatcher who says she had to quit her job because she wouldn't marry her live-in boyfriend. http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/20/cohabitation.law.ap/index.html Should it be legal for unmarried couples to live together? After all, the bible expressly forbids fornication outside marriage, and it's often been said that our laws are based on Judeo-Christian values. But I am sure the Oral and Anal sex are still illegal for heterosexual couples much less homosexual couples Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCsportsfan53 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 I'm confused now ... you mean it's OK to pick and choose which laws and which parts of the bible you follow?Then, how is it determined which religions are real and which ones are false? Seniority or membership numbers? You're confused because organized religion is a joke, full of ridiculous contradictions, mis and reinterpretations and decided by, governed by, changed and altered by man, not God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Money Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Great! :thumbsup: Now I can stop breaking the law one weekend at a time! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Unmarried couples living together are on the rise so it makes sense that the law "of the people" match what the people are doing. Personally I don't think it's gays that are threatening the american family I think it's no-fault divorce laws and bias custody courts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUNSTONE Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 You're confused because organized religion is a joke, full of ridiculous contradictions, mis and reinterpretations and decided by, governed by, changed and altered by man, not God. You speak for God? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rincewind Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 You speak for God? Coming from you? You constantly preach and try to get people to act like you think God wants us to. You have no right to question someone else on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUNSTONE Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Coming from you? You constantly preach and try to get people to act like you think God wants us to. You have no right to question someone else on the subject. Who appointed you authority to tell me what rights I do or don't have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCsportsfan53 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 You speak for God? Yes, I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rincewind Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Who appointed you authority to tell me what rights I do or don't have? God did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Who appointed you authority to tell me what rights I do or don't have? probably the same person who told you what kind of couples make good parents? :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUNSTONE Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 You're confused because organized religion is a joke, full of ridiculous contradictions, mis and reinterpretations and decided by, governed by, changed and altered by man, not God. Since you speak for God, tell me what "ridiculous contradictions, mis and reinterpretations and decided by, governed by, changed and altered by man, not God" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUNSTONE Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 probably the same person who told you what kind of couples make good parents?:whoknows: I don't recall saying what kind of couples do make good parents. I might have. Could you please link it for me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.