More than $83 million spent on Prop 8

reply to post by detroitslim


I didn't realize there weren't any Mormons in California.
Who knew?

You're saying all Mormons live in Utah. That's stereotyping. You think all of the men have 10 wives as well? Call me crazy, but I think there are Mormon churches in California which gives the Mormon church every right to weigh in on the matter on behalf of its members.

reply to post by Dances With Angels


The yes on prop 8 MARRIAGE ban does not say DON'T BE GAY ..........go ahead love who you want to no one really cares as long as they are not effected.

Marriage has ALWAYS been MAN and WIFE. To allow any alteration of this tradition is to make it meaningless instead of the beautiful commitment and happiness it should stand for. There has always been homosexuality in our history, but marriage has only been a tradition of the family a father and mother.

Now how about domestic partnership that they can do ........or even a civil registry of gay partners is fine by us married people. If they want the comforts of being married then they should not choose to be gay and get married. If they choose to be gay then accept a domestic partnership as your tradition to show the world he/she is the one forever for you. Insurance should accept this the same as accepting a married partner, adoptions should accept this and allow them to be parents both to the child they raise.

NO ONE IS SAYING YOU CAN LOVE ANOTHER SAME SEX PERSON .............BUT MARRIAGE IS A HEADERALSEXUAL TRADITION ONLY PICK A NEW TRADITION FOR WHAT EVER YOU ARE WANTING MARRIAGE IS FREAKING TAKEN ALREADY.

THATS IT real real simple

Originally posted by detroitslim

As this was a states rights issue, it was completely inappropriate for an out of state entity like the Mormon church to expend so much in resources in this campaign. I don't think Utah would like an association of aggressive California hippies pushing a gay marriage statute in Salt Lake City. That would probably be widely regarded as one group overstepping its bounds to meddle in another state's affairs.

It doesn't matter what a bunch of hippies living in Utah do or don't do but calling the state of utah the mormon Church in a straw man argument to suggest this was inappropriate is as ridiculous as saying every catholic shouldn't vote because the Vatican isn't in Los Angeles.

The Mormon Church has every right to fund anything like this they choose to the same as Pepsi Cola did the millions they have for gay rights.

This idea that Church and State means Government with using it as a religious gag order is bunk and is against first ammendment rights

reply to post by Dances With Angels


gay marriage killed the dinosaurs...I knew there was a correlation...now maybe I can get my book published

reply to post by moocowman


I am sooooo sorry you had the experiences you may have had in marriage that did not go well. But not all marriages end up like the tale you tell on how many wind up being like. I wont dispute your version of what some can erode into, its true many do take this path sadly enough.

Marriage is not about what "I GET OUT OF IT" OR "WHAT SHE TAKES FROM ME" nor are there really any preset up rules .........EXCEPT FAITHFULLNESS!!!!! If a person cheats its because they are not feeling their needs being cared for at home/ or they have stopped commuicating with their spouse and no longer feel conected sexually.

I have been engaged several times, I really thought I loved the guy but never felt like I could say yes at the alter, so I did not get married to someone I didn't 100% feel I could commit myself to. I was happy to know I didn't get married just because everyone else did, spinster hood here I come. I accepted this, after a few unexpected medical crisises with loved ones not myself, I met a man in the exact stage or phase I was in ..........and we just felt so complete and right from the first kiss. I love being married to him he hardly irritates me at all. We laugh all the time, enjoy eachothers company, like really enjoy eachothers company not just for what we get out of the other person. Hell he can have his money, his house, and a really hot sexy wife who would do anything to make him happy honestly.

He is head over heals kissing the quicksand I walk upon .......spitting out the sand and grit smiling as he puckers up to kiss again. We are so much alike in spirit in goals, intelligence, abilities to survive and be a team player. We comunicate everything, rarely disagree which is odd and cool mostly different then prior partners. I don't mother him, he doesn't tell me what I can wear (well he rather I walk around naked but thats the only hint of a request lol) He asks for me and I drop whatever I'm doing if possible and am happy to do anything that makes him smile and love me more. And yeah we have been married a few years already.............I've never been so happy and loved so completly.

To cheat would never ever cross our minds we look and of course a guy has gotta have his porn, but he says now he can't even enjoy that stuff when I've made reality so much much more fun for him. I'm not jealous, insecure, bossy, controling, nagging, porn is cool by me I simply don't trip on the small chit!

Bills are paid we do things together not because we have to but we'd rather not have someone else cause they'd screw things up when we know we can do anything together right. I know I wont ever get divorced that is what a marriage should be like.


I wish everyone could just forget the petty crap enjoy their partners, and enjoy life. The partner is a person you love and care for unconditionally, its not someone who you mold or require to be who you want them to be forever trying to bend them into some mold. Love a person for being who they are. Too many relationships are one sided and lack concern for the others feelings. It doesn't have to be like that.

Speak without offending listen with out defending

Originally posted by moocowman

That has to be one of the most repugnant and ignorant posts I've ever read, and I'm pretty easy going.

nevertheless you're obviously unaware how many women like a penis in the rectum and have been doing so throughout their marriages.

Well Opinions vary, but your finding it repugnant is exactly why I don't want our kids being taught sex for sex sake and in spite of your reprisal, the fact is, that this is the very issue that gays have traditionally been about, SEX and who they have it with.

I am not my sexual habits and it is not what defines me. Gays however not only want us to make that what defines, them, they want to make it a "Class Distinction" and use the most tortureuosly construed explanations to align themselves with the civil rights movement when the even civil rights leaders say it doesn't even compare.

If this is how they define themselves and this is the basis for their argument then YOU CAN EXPECT me to say it like it is because that description I gave sums it up not by MY terms but THEIR own!

It isn't about what they contribute to society as anything more than the sex they engage in. Marriage traditionally has been about Family and those who have intentions of same.

The fact that YOU automatically assume that I think it is ONLY gays that have sex this way, Proves my point.

As I have assumed you would find that a bit over this over top.

So to further exploit the ridiculousness of your initial argument, it is in your own words like you say, "sex is sex".

I agree and it is varied and it comes in many kinds shapes and positions and for me or anyone else to set a precedent that requires such sexual practice to be seen as the reason this makes this argument a logical one, is asinine. Whether it is based on sexual practice whether I am having anal sex with a male or female.

This isn't about sex then is it and it isn't about depriving those who have sex this way or that way their equal rights.

This is about a unique partnership and since the dawn of religion it has been celebrated for its uniqueness as it is the ONLY kind of relationship that requires a further committment to the very life that this and only this kind of sex with this kind of relationship can bring about.

I am afraid your being repulsed by the plane truth is your problem but the fact is that Gays have that kind of sex and their relationships are predicated on sex, they parade on streets using signs that announce who they have sex with, they dress in those parades like leather clad maledom, cross dressers while their transgendered counterparts dress baring their scars for breasts they have had removed in a a gruesome display of "Hey Fundies! Look At Me!" while the lesbians claim they may not go down in history but they will go down on my sister.

This is about sex and finding a way to force the rest of us so accept it and like you,, finding my blunt charachterization of this union repugnant, I can only say,,,

You know how I feel.

You see, you automatically assume that I have no clue how many woman have sex that way, when that is not the point because woman that have sex that way with a man cannot gain the benefits you list for the same reason gays cannot because how they have SEX is NOT the issue and shouldn't be because it is NOT what defines US so making it a class distinction is NOT a basis for the Gay argument

Reducing Marriage to who we have sex with and how we have it is no reason to have the benefits you listed just as you argued. So the reason to reduce marriage to couples having sex is nothing unique about it and nothing virtuous either.

Its just plane stupid








[edit on 3-2-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by screamo
Correct me if i'm wrong but...i don't think Christ had a standing on the gay issue. Why bring him into this? No one knows what Jesus would do for certain so don't assume he was with or against.

I was/am for Prop 8 because i see one point for marriage, procreation, gays can't do that as far as my knowledge goes.

If the sole point of marriage is procreation, then by your measure anyone infertile does not deserve the benefits of marriage. Widows, women with hysterectomies, men who have had vasectomies - none of them should be allowed to marry either?

Originally posted by alkali
reply to post by detroitslim

 

You're saying all Mormons live in Utah. That's stereotyping. You think all of the men have 10 wives as well? Call me crazy, but I think there are Mormon churches in California which gives the Mormon church every right to weigh in on the matter on behalf of its members.

No, that gives the members of Mormon churches in California the right to weigh in on civil and political matters in the state of California.

The national headquarters of the church of Latter Day Saints, based in Salt Lake City, Utah (I believe) has no business at all donating $197,000 to political causes in the state of California.

For that matter, in this country with a supposedly strict doctrine of "the separation of church and state", there is no church that should be making political contributions to any cause.

And quite frankly, every person who understands how precious the freedom to worship freely and without prejudice truly is should be up in arms over the meddling of any church in state affairs. In state, out of state, Mormon, Catholic, Methodist, or Islamic... Civic matters belong to one realm, spiritual to another, and one thing history has proven with absolute clarity is that when one religious denomination gains civil authority, everybody suffers.

My metaphor might have been overly simplified, but the point is still clear - citizens of Utah, regardless of their faith, wouldn't appreciate a concerted effort by freaky Californians to meddle in their state policies. To the pro-gay marriage citizens of California, the meddling of the Mormon church is especially galling because it is an entity who shouldn't be involved in the local politics plunging in far deeper than they should.

[edit on 4-2-2009 by detroitslim]

Originally posted by frustrated831
reply to post by Dances With Angels

 

The yes on prop 8 MARRIAGE ban does not say DON'T BE GAY ..........go ahead love who you want to no one really cares as long as they are not effected.

Marriage has ALWAYS been MAN and WIFE. To allow any alteration of this tradition is to make it meaningless instead of the beautiful commitment and happiness it should stand for.

Now how about domestic partnership that they can do ........or even a civil registry of gay partners is fine by us married people. If they want the comforts of being married then they should not choose to be gay and get married. If they choose to be gay then accept a domestic partnership as your tradition to show the world he/she is the one forever for you. Insurance should accept this the same as accepting a married partner, adoptions should accept this and allow them to be parents both to the child they raise.

NO ONE IS SAYING YOU CAN LOVE ANOTHER SAME SEX PERSON .............BUT MARRIAGE IS A HEADERALSEXUAL TRADITION ONLY PICK A NEW TRADITION FOR WHAT EVER YOU ARE WANTING MARRIAGE IS FREAKING TAKEN ALREADY.

THATS IT real real simple

I wasn't going to respond any more to this thread tonight, but your logic absolutely baffles me.

Marriage is a beautiful and sacred tradition, that Britney Spears can indulge in for an extended weekend in Las Vegas yet couples that have spent 20+ years together should be denied? Over 50% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce, but altering the definition of marriage somehow reduces that statistic?

And it's OK to be gay, but not married. You really need to explain to me how gay marriage affects you. Not in hysterical terms, but in simple and plain ways that gay marriage somehow ruins your life.

Because from my perspective, as a recently engaged heterosexual male in his late 30's, I can't see any way at all that gay marriage has anything to do with me. If my former co-worker could marry the guy he's been with for 20+ years, that might make the annual Christmas party he has a more family-like affair... but that would be a nice thing, so I'm for that.

Just some last, quick thoughts:

* The supreme court famously found that separate but equal is not equal.

* Nobody "chooses" to be gay except drunken college girls who kiss other girls just for attention from frat boys. All the gay people I know spent years "choosing" to be straight, or wishing that they're "straighten up" with little success.

* Nowhere in your argument do you show that you've done any serious consideration of what freedom and equality truly mean.

* And please, for the love of whatever God you worship, learn to spell. "HEADERALSEXUAL" is so grotesquely misspelled that it deserves a mocking post all its own.

Originally posted by Marmota monax

Originally posted by ImaNutter
I don't even want to hear one stinking word from a religious person, saying that God said this, God said that. Well how about this, didn't Jesus supposedly die for ALL of our sins? What about the other myriad of contradictions on Christianity? You're going to ignore all those but take a stand on this one issue? Give me a break. Christians who take a stand on gay marriage because of what the bible says, is hypocrisy at it's finest. Most, if not all of you, break one of the ten commandments every single day as well as commit other sins.... but are too righteous to see that for what it is. Hypocrisy.

Any good Christian is a sinner and lives with that realization everyday.

Any good Christian also knows Jesus befriended prostitutes and tax collectors.

Any good Christian knows Jesus did die on the Cross for the forgiveness of all peoples sins.

Jesus also gave us rules to live by.

Is it still hypocrisy if I know and live by the above but wish to defend my beliefs because the Bible says I should and because I have a clear right to the religion of my choice?

So to not be hated by you I need to adopt your values and live by them?

No it becomes hypocrisy when "Jesus gave you rules to live by" but you break those rules, acknowledge it, and then turn around and say homosexuals can't break this particular rule.

Good Christians are hypocrites when they value and hold so dearly that sanctity of marriage, when 50+% of marriages end up in divorce anyway. Really holy, eh?

Any good Christian is a sinner?

Okay, then what is the difference between a good Christian and a homosexual? You break a rule that is okay IN YOUR EYES TO BREAK but they break one IN YOUR EYES is bad to break? See... this... is the hypocrisy I speak of.

I didn't say I hated Christians, I didn't say you have to adopt my beliefs, but I DO think you should take a long hard look at your own hatred and beliefs. This is an instance where it has absolutely NO, ZILCH, NONE influence or impact on your life... but Christians stand against it. What, do you think when (it is when not if) something like Prop 8 passes you will divorce your wife/husband and marry the opposite sex? Struggling with your own sexuality? Are you Ted Haggard? Are you Catholic? Probably not... but I still don't understand why you live by and say "God is Love" and then deny Love to others... which has no impact on your life whatsoever... other than you blindly sticking up for ideals you have admitted you yourself, or any Good Christian, don't even follow...which is in what way beneficial for you?

reply to post by 29083010384959

Ya know, I really think that homosexuality should start being taught in Sex Ed classes as normal human behavior...

Sex Ed is not to teach our young practices, and different interactions during sex...it is taught under the guidelines of informing about pro-creation. I am quite certain that homosexual intercourse has not/can not pro-create life. That is the basis for Sexual Education...

My OPINION is that a union between gay couple should include a sexual union, a monetary union, a domestic union, etc...but not the sanctity of Marriage. The term Marriage is intended as joining a male and a female in the moral and legal observation for intended procreation.

I think that gay couples are looking more at this as a way for the GOV to discriminate against them, but I disagree. I think this is a way for the GOV to set, and uphold boundaries that are supposed to be taken as constructive.

I think that a gay couple that has been together for any length of time should have the ability to act in behalf of the other partner, receive the estate of a partner at passing(done in a will), share both in the fruits, and detriments of partnership, so on...but that does not HAVE to be achieved through "Marriage"!

Accept this or not...this is how I see it! So be it!

Ironic that the gay couple who fought so hard for the right to marry in Massachussetts are now getting divorced.

Article here.

They fought so hard just so they could end up divorcing each other? What a joke.

reply to post by leisuredrummer


Ha ha ha

That is a funny little side-note...

I guess it is not too pertinent to this discussion, but I remember the whole "Loving eachother" and wanting the ability to get married to show such...now divorcing. I wonder which one gets the gold mine, and which one gets the shaft...

Originally posted by ImaNutter
Here is my take on this...



In all actuality, the ones who continue to stand against gay marriage on the stance that we "can't redefine marriage" is no different from the racists who said whites and blacks couldn't marry. We redefined marriage for them, why can't we redefine marriage for homosexuals?


This is about HUMAN rights. Dooper the dope tried to say "well next it's beastiality" or next it's giving rights to pedophiles... no, Dooper the Dope... you don't understand this is about Human Rights. Beastiality violates animal rights, because the animal does not consent and it harms the animal. Animal's don't have sex for pleasure (except dolphins I think). On another point, we're not the same species.

There is nothing wrong with two human beings who love each other getting married. We redefined marriage before, it will happen again very soon.

In 50 years history will look back at this time in similarity with the times of segregation. Same principle.

But I understand some of you cling to your dogmatic ideals so desperately, even when in the wrong, because that's all you've got. You don't want to see things from an objective view point. You don't want to look at things rationally. You would rather irrationally tie two things together that have no business belonging in the same sentence to desperately try and make yourself not look ignorant... but you fail....

I have yet to hear, and will never hear, a rational argument for not allowing homosexuals to marry....and I'm still waiting. Besides, how friggin' holy is that union when 50% of couples end up divorced anyway? The gays couldn't possibly do any worse than you bible thumpers.

(*Please forgive my botched attempts at quoting above, Im relatively new as a poster here.*)

The homosexual union affects me nor mine at all, thus my opinion on such is based on an intellectual rather than a moral one.

(Note as well, this is neither a condemnation or approval for said lifestyle; rather its addressing one particular point.)

Having literally grown up in the shadow of the civil rights struggle in the southeastern US I see this as rationally not even remotely similar to that race-based movement.

Its seldom addressed by either side the potentially 'invisible nature' of homosexuality.

In Selma or Montgomery 45 years ago you were visibly either black or white, for instance, and were judged based on that physical characteristic alone.

This however is about a lifestyle choice or arguably a biological inclination rather than an easily identifiable visual situation. A homosexual may or may not choose to partake in this lifestyle, and may or may not hide the lifestyle at any rate, but the fact is the particular group CAN make it less obvious as to their sexual orientation.

In that very clear way, it is nothing similar to race-based struggles.

I feel in fairness that needs to be kept foremost in any discussion of this issue.

Please understand, this isnt advocating 'hiding' what one is. It is to point out that other groups facing perceived inequalities simply didnt have the option of environmental/societal 'blending'.

Even religious groups(also a target of perceived discrimination)
often do exhibit cultural markers such as long established religion based customs that are social identifiers, thus making it harder to blend into the 'mainstream'.

The homosexual group has no truly accepted social markers across the board and are thereby given an inherent cultural advantage over prior targeted groups.

This may in that respect make this a somewhat unique situation. And not really comparable to past issues dealing with segregation other than in very abstract and broad terms.

Again, points to ponder at the very least.

Originally posted by detroitslim

No, that gives the members of Mormon churches in California the right to weigh in on civil and political matters in the state of California.

The national headquarters of the church of Latter Day Saints, based in Salt Lake City, Utah (I believe) has no business at all donating $197,000 to political causes in the state of California.

For that matter, in this country with a supposedly strict doctrine of "the separation of church and state", there is no church that should be making political contributions to any cause.

When are you people going to learn what separartion of church and state means! Was this about making a State Religion of the Mormon Church in CA?

NO! So it doesn't apply

Was this about the state of CA to impede the Mormons right to religious expression there?

NO! So it doesn't apply

Learn the constitution for pete's sake

I'm not mormon and I applaud what they did THANK YOU MORMON CHURCH!

Where you people get the idea that because some woman and men fail at marriage gives gays the right to be married is absolutley WRONG (as if gays aren't gonna fail at it too lol)

While you gays and gay supporters like to focus on the 50% of men and woman that fail at it you forget one thing,,

50% make it work!

I love it when gays focus on the negative making it the butt of a joke while in the same voice they fight so hard to be a part of the butt of that same joke (no pun intended)

Talk about hypocrisy,,




[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by ImaNutter


I didn't say I hated Christians, I didn't say you have to adopt my beliefs, but I DO think you should take a long hard look at your own hatred and beliefs. This is an instance where it has absolutely NO, ZILCH, NONE influence or impact on your life... but Christians stand against it. What, do you think when (it is when not if) something like Prop 8 passes you will divorce your wife/husband and marry the opposite sex? Struggling with your own sexuality? Are you Ted Haggard? Are you Catholic? Probably not... but I still don't understand why you live by and say "God is Love" and then deny Love to others... which has no impact on your life whatsoever... other than you blindly sticking up for ideals you have admitted you yourself, or any Good Christian, don't even follow...which is in what way beneficial for you?

You guys bring up well known Christians that have screwed up in their Christian walk as if being a Christian is an easy thing to do.

IT ISN'T!

In fact YOU should EXPECT Christians, like you should expect ALL mankind to screw up!

Since when did you or anyone else think Christians were perfect?

Ill give you a clue,

THEY AREN'T PERFECT!

Some don't even try, but that doesn't have anything to do with my own Christian walk nor should it, nor should it give reason to toss the entire religion to the wayside. That kind of Logic should have us making homosexuality outlawed for spreading AIDS if that were the case.

So until you TRY to be a Christian yourself, don't think you can come in here cherry picking those who have had personal failings and use it to broadsweep the whole idea under in some twisted logical fallacy to substantiate your reasons to make same sex marriage seem unfair under some asinine human rights argument. This is NOT a human rights issue nor is it a equal rights issue

Everyone is a hypocrite son, and YOU are no different but that doesn't make it right by taking one of Gods laws that whether we fail at it or not doesn't give you the right to debase it further into depravity because some fail at it. That isn't what this is about. When God gave moses the ten commandments, it was the law and it proves to us that man can't even follow ten much less alll those man has made for himself.

It was to show us we can't do it on our own and IF we could, then who needs a savior?

Get it now?

So why then are you asking us to exascerbate the situation without so much as asking for that same saviors existence in your own life?

Yeah,, uh huh




[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by Aermacchi


Learn the constitution for pete's sake

[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]

I would advise you to study up on the constitution as well. My draft of the constitution has a preamble declaring all men are created equal, and have inalienble rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

I missed the paragraph in there that says "Aermacchi's definition of marriage shall supercede the rights of everyone else to live as they please."

It amazes me that your panicky fear of gay marriage has you running into the arms of government, begging to have your freedoms reduced. If allowing gay marriage is the price of freedom, then so be it.

There is no reasoned argument against gay marriage. Especially you, Aermacchi, can't put together a coherent argument beyond "it's just plane [sic] stupid." You've allowed your dislike of gays to distort your sense of reason. And ultimately, the anti-gay marriage arguments will fail, just like the Jim Crow laws did in the south.

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Originally posted by ImaNutter


I didn't say I hated Christians, I didn't say you have to adopt my beliefs, but I DO think you should take a long hard look at your own hatred and beliefs. This is an instance where it has absolutely NO, ZILCH, NONE influence or impact on your life... but Christians stand against it. What, do you think when (it is when not if) something like Prop 8 passes you will divorce your wife/husband and marry the opposite sex? Struggling with your own sexuality? Are you Ted Haggard? Are you Catholic? Probably not... but I still don't understand why you live by and say "God is Love" and then deny Love to others... which has no impact on your life whatsoever... other than you blindly sticking up for ideals you have admitted you yourself, or any Good Christian, don't even follow...which is in what way beneficial for you?

You guys bring up well known Christians that have screwed up in their Christian walk as if being a Christian is an easy thing to do.

IT ISN'T!

In fact YOU should EXPECT Christians, like you should expect ALL mankind to screw up!

Since when did you or anyone else think Christians were perfect?

Ill give you a clue,

THEY AREN'T PERFECT!

Some don't even try, but that doesn't have anything to do with my own Christian walk nor should it, nor should it give reason to toss the entire religion to the wayside. That kind of Logic should have us making homosexuality outlawed for spreading AIDS if that were the case.

So until you TRY to be a Christian yourself, don't think you can come in here cherry picking those who have had personal failings and use it to broadsweep the whole idea under in some twisted logical fallacy to substantiate your reasons to make same sex marriage seem unfair under some asinine human rights argument. This is NOT a human rights issue nor is it a equal rights issue

Everyone is a hypocrite son, and YOU are no different but that doesn't make it right by taking one of Gods laws that whether we fail at it or not doesn't give you the right to debase it further into depravity because some fail at it. That isn't what this is about. When God gave moses the ten commandments, it was the law and it proves to us that man can't even follow ten much less alll those man has made for himself.

It was to show us we can't do it on our own and IF we could, then who needs a savior?

Get it now?

So why then are you asking us to exascerbate the situation without so much as asking for that same saviors existence in your own life?

Yeah,, uh huh




[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]

You still didn't explain why Christians are allowed to break the rules but homosexuals aren't. God is Love.

Answer me one question... how is this not a humans rights/equal rights issue? Are you saying that homosexuals are not human or they don't deserve equal rights? Please... just answer me that one question, straight forward, to the best of your ability.



[edit on 4-2-2009 by ImaNutter]

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by maus80
reply to post by Common Good

 

This is complete unadulterated ignorance! You think non-religious people, or people belonging to a religion that doesn't address marriage, do not get married in the USA? Think again! The CEREMONY can be religious, or it can be disco-pimp themed, or anything in between. The legal contract has ZERO to do with religion, and everything to do with the rights of the two parties entering into said contract.

How many times have you heard "Will you marry me? Uuuh...I can't, I don't have Jesus in my heart..."

Aaargh!! I've over-dosed on ignorance for the day, I need to read something happy and smart and fun now...

Both sides are ignorant. The Gays refused to accept a Domestic Partnership with the same rights and privileges as Marriage. The opposition is not against giving them the rights but don''t want it called Marriage. That means that the real issue is something else. Either it is the word "Marriage" they covet or they are just whining to whine. If not about this, it would be something else.

I'd like to ask you what you what you thought about segregation policy? What you just advocated seems exactly like the separate but equal policies enacted throughout the US. I'm not trying to sound rude or anything, but it seems pretty clear your advocating a homosexual segregation policy.

Perhaps that's why many gay people don't accept it, because they've seen what happens when you go for anything less than total equality.

I really, honestly can't believe I'm sitting here reading through some of these posts. It's equality, people. If, when I die, I stand before the judgement of God and He asks why I supported gays in marriage, I will say I loved my neighbor as I would myself and cast no stones at others. I will tell him I advocated no change in scriptures, but an equal opportunity for everyone to live as partners under secular law, "Give to Ceasar what belongs to Ceasar and God what belongs to God" seems pretty cut and dry on separation of Church and State to me. But what do I know, that's just in the bible

Originally posted by detroitslim

Originally posted by Aermacchi


Learn the constitution for pete's sake

[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]

I would advise you to study up on the constitution as well. My draft of the constitution has a preamble declaring all men are created equal, and have inalienble rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

I missed the paragraph in there that says "Aermacchi's definition of marriage shall supercede the rights of everyone else to live as they please."

It amazes me that your panicky fear of gay marriage has you running into the arms of government, begging to have your freedoms reduced. If allowing gay marriage is the price of freedom, then so be it.

There is no reasoned argument against gay marriage. Especially you, Aermacchi, can't put together a coherent argument beyond "it's just plane [sic] stupid." You've allowed your dislike of gays to distort your sense of reason. And ultimately, the anti-gay marriage arguments will fail, just like the Jim Crow laws did in the south.

Here is your coherant argument smart guy andf if you would read the thread for once you would know that I have already addressed these yes IGNORANT arguments for the umpteenth time

12 arguments and ALL of them have yet to be refuted

Read em and weep