RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes

RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

thetammyjo -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 1:12:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: darq I love how many of you personally attack me simply because I choose not to redefine the word marriage to suit the rest of the world. Gay people are welcome to have a civil union and all those wonderful tax cuts and so and so forth, in my opinion. Just don't call it marriage ... I don't hate gay people ... I'm offended by the term 'fag' ... I'm not a bigot ... I just think its wrong to redefine the term marriage to suit your own desires. I'm a bit shocked at the kind of attitudes circulating amongst a group of 'open minded' individuals ... You're only open minded as long as everyone agrees with you? This ammendment as it stands also says that gays cannot be allowed any rights that are the same as married people -- so what exactly would these 'civil unions' give them then? I think our founding fathers would be deeply offended by the idea of the federal government getting this far into the private lives of citizens.

darq -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 1:13:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSideOfThMoon Darq that wasn't waht you said in the first place though was it, you just stated that it was wrong. What I don't see is how people who accept homosexuals cannot accept marriage between homosexuals. Marriage, to be fair, is not about the children. If children are the reason you are getting married it is the wrong reason. Same goes for tax cuts... Marriage should be for the pure and simple reason of, Love, wanting to make that commitment to spend the rest of your life with somebody... It is wrong ... And thats my opinion. The good news for everyone else is that I don't get to make the rules ... I just get to make my own opinions ... If you don't like the thought of gay marriage being disallowed, I suggest you stop slamming the personal character of people who disagree with you and get out there and do something about getting gay marriage ALLOWED. Yammering on about it on a forum won't do any good but it is entertaining to watch ya'll chase your tails. (When I say YOU, I don't mean YOU personally ... I mean YOU as a group of people who want gay marriage ...)

thetammyjo -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 1:15:16 PM)
Overall I think this and the Flag burning ammendment is a scam to get the voters unset and to the polls and to distract them from the fact that the Congress is not doing its job in helping to run the federal government and provide oversight to the other branches of the federal government. Sadly some people will always be fooled by this scams.

pahunkboy -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 1:23:07 PM)
kick ass post! damn. I am not offended by the word "fag" - not as presented in the context of this post. [tho] lets remember that people are free to have an opinion. You post hit me like a train. Wow.

pahunkboy -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 1:25:36 PM)
Darq- I think 1 or 2 have been rough on you. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Moloch -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 1:38:29 PM)
Jesus Christ on A cracker with celery salt, why does the Gov. Give a shite about what two consenting adults do?! Didnt we kick the Brits square in the balls for telling us what to do?

misfire -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 2:15:04 PM)
I don't see the problem with gay marriage. Nor do I see the problem with civil unions. If the religious folk don't want gay people to get married in a church, then so be it. Let them get married on a beach or in City Hall and call it a civil union.. 'cos what it all boils down to is this: no matter what you call it, you still have that slip of paper that says you're recognised by the government as a happy, loving couple -- and you're entitled to tax breaks and benefits because of it. There's absolutely no reason why two people who love each other cannot be recognised by the government -- and given access to the benefits heterosexual couples are given. (All the benefits are listed at http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/og97016.pdf -- it's a 75 page letter, so.. you've been warned.) stalks off, grumbling about stupid wedge issues

LaTigresse -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 2:16:42 PM)
I suppose it is redundant of me to say I disagree with the bann. Hetro relationships having nothing to do with children being more protected. If that was the case there would be no child abuse. That is just a rediculous statement to attempt to defend a rediculous close minded religious right point of view. And I better get out of this thread before I really get wound up........

Lordandmaster -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 2:21:36 PM)
What's sad about this country is not simply that our elected representatives make bullshit statements like this--but that the people listen to them and keep re-electing them. We're suppose to oppose gay marriage because it's bad for children? Where did the children come from? I guess the "protect the children!" argument is the crap-du-jour for the right wing right now. We're supposed to tolerate the attack on online porn because that's supposed to be protecting children too. I have a question. Who's protecting the children from ENVIRONMENTAL DEVASTATION? quote: ORIGINAL: darq "Marriage between one man and one woman does a better job protecting children better than any other institution humankind has devised," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn. "As such, marriage as an institution should be protected, not redefined."

pahunkboy -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 2:28:09 PM)
LMAO on environmental. [we could throw in ADD meds- sugars, and obesity too...] 64 out of 67 air monitors FAILED in PA during a recent period. Thats before we dereg the smoke stacks the drift in from Cleveland, Detroit and CHicago.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 2:33:26 PM)
quote: I have a question. Who's protecting the children from ENVIRONMENTAL DEVASTATION? "Chicken Little" a/k/a Al Gore. http://www.algore04.com/ Just purchase 20,000 acres of speculative future waterfront property in Nevada.

missgiveNTake -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 2:54:47 PM)
What if two people get married that were born the same Gender, but one had Gender reassignment surgery? Marriages and divoces used to be between two people. Then the government wanted to keep track of them and came up with a marriage license. Call it what you want, but I believe 2 consenting adult have a right to choose what they want to do with their lives. Also, if their are children in the family then there is one absent parent somewhere or the child still sees both parents the same as any other divorce couple sets up visitation. Whatever happened to seperation of church and state?

stef -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 3:24:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: missgiveNTake What if two people get married that were born the same Gender, but one had Gender reassignment surgery? The laws on that vary from state to state. ~stef

MistressLorelei -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 4:18:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: darq I love how many of you personally attack me simply because I choose not to redefine the word marriage to suit the rest of the world. Gay people are welcome to have a civil union and all those wonderful tax cuts and so and so forth, in my opinion. Just don't call it marriage ... I don't hate gay people ... I'm offended by the term 'fag' ... I'm not a bigot ... I just think its wrong to redefine the term marriage to suit your own desires. I'm a bit shocked at the kind of attitudes circulating amongst a group of 'open minded' individuals ... You're only open minded as long as everyone agrees with you? I have made no personal attacks... but I believe that those who are in favor of gay marriage are the open-minded ones. One human being loves another human being so much that he/she wants to be allowed to share his'her life with another human being, and have the same rights granted to them that others who are married in his/her country have... that's what 'we' want.. It's close-minded to dictate what gender these human beings have to be. It is shocking how close-minded some people can be... especially when some of them are running our country.

RiotGirl -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 4:24:02 PM)
quote: Riot, No opposition here to anyone's choice for a mate, but the issue of gay marriage is really simply a smoke screen for the real issue. The reason behind the opposition or support of gay marriage goes way beyond the thinking of any post so far. There is only one thing that makes this an issue at all - MONEY! true that. Isnt it always about money?

RiotGirl -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 4:29:18 PM)
quote: (When I say YOU, I don't mean YOU personally ... I mean YOU as a group of people who want gay marriage ...) LOL personally dont really care. Its non of ones business. Not who'se getting laid, by whom, what kids are being born because of it, whose cheating and whose not, whose a player and whose a prude.... yeah really. What goes on behind close doors stay there. Whether its straight, gay, bi, vanilla or kinky. Not anyones business. Same for whose getting married to who. Yeaaaaaaaaaah.. think this one will take a walk to the nearest church and say "Hey YOU CANT GET MARRIED!!!!! i think its wrong" LOL they're gonna like look and think "that chick belongs in the loony bin" and then ask ... "why the hell do you care"

FangsNfeet -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 5:58:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: darq I love how many of you personally attack me simply because I choose not to redefine the word marriage to suit the rest of the world. Gay people are welcome to have a civil union and all those wonderful tax cuts and so and so forth, in my opinion. Just don't call it marriage ... I don't hate gay people ... I'm offended by the term 'fag' ... I'm not a bigot ... I just think its wrong to redefine the term marriage to suit your own desires. I'm a bit shocked at the kind of attitudes circulating amongst a group of 'open minded' individuals ... You're only open minded as long as everyone agrees with you? Personal attacks? No but you should never dish out what you can't take. Anyhow, which term of marriage are you talking about? http://marriage.about.com/cs/generalhistory/a/marriagehistory.htm http://marriage.about.com/od/historyofmarriage/ http://www.jimgilliam.com/2003/11/the_definition_of_marriage.php http://www.thelawencyclopedia.com/term/marriage?gclid=CP7A97m7sIUCFU2uJAodeFFsvw http://anthro.palomar.edu/marriage/glossary.htm

MistressSassy66 -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 6:19:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: misfire I don't see the problem with gay marriage. Nor do I see the problem with civil unions. If the religious folk don't want gay people to get married in a church, then so be it. Let them get married on a beach or in City Hall and call it a civil union.. 'cos what it all boils down to is this: no matter what you call it, you still have that slip of paper that says you're recognised by the government as a happy, loving couple -- and you're entitled to tax breaks and benefits because of it. There's absolutely no reason why two people who love each other cannot be recognised by the government -- and given access to the benefits heterosexual couples are given. (All the benefits are listed at http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/og97016.pdf -- it's a 75 page letter, so.. you've been warned.) stalks off, grumbling about stupid wedge issues When bishop and I decided on a Union Ceremoney W/we went to the Unitarian Universalist Church in O/our area.The Minister was a white haired old lady...she made U/us have visits with her just like some other churches do. She would not do a ceremony if she thought there was a chance of a break up. She came to O/our house for a small ceremony.It was beautiful. I feel that My God accepts US as being married...I could give a fuck what the so called Goverment says. Worried about Partner not getting insurance,make them the benficiary on policies.Have wills drawn up naming partner,give POA to your partner.Do all of these things and theres not much that can be done so that a Partner gets nothing. I am going through the process because I dont want to lose My home or have bishop lose hers if something happens.

pinkee -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 6:22:25 PM)
So, did A/anyone contact Y/your Senators? pinkee

MstrssPassion -> RE: Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes (6/5/2006 6:42:17 PM)
quote: missgiveNTake: What if two people get married that were born the same Gender, but one had Gender reassignment surgery? quote: The laws on that vary from state to state. ~stef Look at the case of my partner(M2F) & myself(genetic female). She has not completed her transition & our state refuses us a license. The law makers can't have it both ways. We are basically facing a situation where transsexuals are going to be refused a license regardless of target gender, birth gender or the gender they wish to marry.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

2.734375E-02