100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Iowa Legallizes Gay Marriage | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Thomas...you and your posts are a predictable mess. Do married people have legal rights that are bestowed on them by virtue of marriage? Yes So...if marriage is not a right as you state...let's ban heterosexual marriage. Pretty amusing that the republicans...who used to say they were states rights people are appeasing the small minded hateful bigots that want a Constitutional Amendment against gay marriage on the federal level when they are the same people who employ the states rights argument when seeking to limit peoples access to abortion. In abortion the federal government is wrong I guess in being the law of the land but they are more than ready to amend the Constitution to ban gay marriage. Funny stuff eh? Please...pick a position? Haven't you neocons figured it out yet? The republicans are having their way with you hysterical sheeple. They secured power in the legislator and the executive branch and was there any legislation to ban abortion or gay marriage? Nope..just that badly written in defense of marriage act...the author of the bill even says it was badly written. Your votes are secured by your prejudice and fear. The same fears that must make you neocons think if gay marriage is made legal you might have to marry someone of the same sex. If abortion is legal you will have to have one. If porn is on the internet you have to watch it. If guns are legal you have to own one...oh...wait...you like that... Grow up...you have been had. Do you ever bother to read what you post?Marriage is not a right for straight people either.Every American has rights under the constitution and marriage is not one of them.The concept of marriage has been around as long as this country has,and it did not involve homosexuals.What the gays are doing is trying to wipe out the meaning of a tradition and re write it to fit their agenda.Since marriage is defined as a man and a woman the only way the gays will get their way is to totally re write the definition of marriage.It's understandable that the majority of the people do not want something they think is very sacred and special to be re written by a bunch of homosexuals.The people of America simply want what they have already had for hundreds of years.You should not take that away from them especially after they voted for it? If you re write marriage do you think men or woman should be allowed to marry animals.What about brother and sisters that want to get married.Where does it stop? Your other issues such as abortion and porn serve no purpose other than to get off the subject. Do you think the votes of the American people should not count anymore? How can you compare two gay people getting married to marrying animals? Or marrying family members? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While you are slamming racist republicans you might be interested to know Obama is against gay marriage also! http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/11/obama-on-mtv-i.html Obama Says He Is Against Same-Sex Marriage But Also Against Ending Its Practice In Calif. November 02, 2008 6:36 PM ABC News' Teddy Davis, Sunlen Miller, Tahman Bradley, and Rigel Anderson report: Barack Obama's nuanced position on same-sex marriage is on full display in an MTV interview which is set to air on Monday. Obama told MTV he believes marriage is "between a man and a woman" and that he is "not in favor of gay marriage." At the same time, Obama reiterated his opposition to Proposition 8, the California ballot measure which would eliminate a right to same-sex marriage that the state's Supreme Court recently recognized. "I've stated my opposition to this. I think it's unnecessary," Obama told MTV. "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage. But when you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that's not what America's about." "Usually, our constitutions expand liberties, they don't contract them," he added. What does Obama have to do with this topic, Thomas? Does it make you feel better to note that Obama is against gay marriage? Do we really know that just because he says it, would he have won if he said he was for it? Would anyone win if they said that? Being for gay marriage is political suicide and everyone knows that. No president can be completely honest about this issue and win, for or against. It's funny we expect honesty in government yet we give them the very reasons they absolutely can't be honest about certain issues. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas...you and your posts are a predictable mess. Do married people have legal rights that are bestowed on them by virtue of marriage? Yes So...if marriage is not a right as you state...let's ban heterosexual marriage. Pretty amusing that the republicans...who used to say they were states rights people are appeasing the small minded hateful bigots that want a Constitutional Amendment against gay marriage on the federal level when they are the same people who employ the states rights argument when seeking to limit peoples access to abortion. In abortion the federal government is wrong I guess in being the law of the land but they are more than ready to amend the Constitution to ban gay marriage. Funny stuff eh? Please...pick a position? Haven't you neocons figured it out yet? The republicans are having their way with you hysterical sheeple. They secured power in the legislator and the executive branch and was there any legislation to ban abortion or gay marriage? Nope..just that badly written in defense of marriage act...the author of the bill even says it was badly written. Your votes are secured by your prejudice and fear. The same fears that must make you neocons think if gay marriage is made legal you might have to marry someone of the same sex. If abortion is legal you will have to have one. If porn is on the internet you have to watch it. If guns are legal you have to own one...oh...wait...you like that... Grow up...you have been had. Do you ever bother to read what you post?Marriage is not a right for straight people either.Every American has rights under the constitution and marriage is not one of them.The concept of marriage has been around as long as this country has,and it did not involve homosexuals.What the gays are doing is trying to wipe out the meaning of a tradition and re write it to fit their agenda.Since marriage is defined as a man and a woman the only way the gays will get their way is to totally re write the definition of marriage.It's understandable that the majority of the people do not want something they think is very sacred and special to be re written by a bunch of homosexuals.The people of America simply want what they have already had for hundreds of years.You should not take that away from them especially after they voted for it? If you re write marriage do you think men or woman should be allowed to marry animals.What about brother and sisters that want to get married.Where does it stop? Your other issues such as abortion and porn serve no purpose other than to get off the subject. Do you think the votes of the American people should not count anymore? How can you compare two gay people getting married to marrying animals? Or marrying family members? Because he doesn't have the capacity to put himself in someone else's place to know how ridiculous that is. Only someone who refuses to look at all sides of this could say something that insane. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is ultimately the same battle that has been fought since the inception of the country. If you believe in states rights, then you have to accept the good and the bad. You can't pick and choose. In such a polarized, partisan country, we need the right of the states to choose whats right for the people living there. I do not support a federal amendment banning gay marriage. I am as right wing as they come, but being an advocate for the 10th amendment, I feel that if a state allows something I might not agree with its their right.
This about rights. When the day comes that we the people, bow to the Federalist juggernaut, our rights will disappear. Everyones rights. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm glad I don't live in Iowa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm glad I don't live in Iowa. Could you please explain the point to that remark? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Giocamo
on
Mon 04/06/09 08:36 AM
|
|
to each their own........ Liberals are so funny...when it comes to abortion...they want to keep government OUT of it...when it comes to gay marriage...they have no problem at all...with government intevention...I posted something months ago...called Taking Sides...basicly it was about govenment getting involved in dictating social policy...deciding whats right and wrong...what should be legal or illegal...when this happens...it forces people to take sides...which leads to bickering and arguing...the analogy I used then was this...there are opera lovers and there are rock and roll lovers...both groups are free to enjoy there own music...everyone gets along fine...no arguing...no discourse...now suppose the government stepped in and decided that starting tomorrow...there be no more opera music...what would happen ?...opera lovers would be outraged and seething...especially at rock and roll lovers...they would be at each others throats...what was once a peacful and happy arangement would no longer be...people would be forced to take sides...because the government / courts...decided what was " good "...for the people...whenever government...dictates social policy...if forces people to take sides...it causes outrage...discourse...arguing...and fighting...the best way to avoid this...is to allow the people to vote on it...allow the people to determine what they want...and...may the best...right...and...socially acceptable side win...although...this won't happen...because if it was up to the people to decide...gay marriage wouldn't stand a chance...actually...I'm pretty sure if left up to the people...to vote on legalizing abortion back in 1973...it would have been voted down...ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...for the 50's.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The founder of this country were very much aware of dangers of letting the majority decide the rights of the minority.
Hence the representative democracy. I have said this on many occasions and I think it is a fair comparison. Had the majority been allowed to decide the issue of slavery it it quite likely they would have supported it in a referendum. Would that have made slavery right? If tradition is so swell and should guide the present and the future women would be in real trouble. After all...traditionally women were not allowed to vote, own property have inheritance rights...so because traditionally that was right does it make it right now too? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Representative democracy only applies to the federal government. Every state elects its own representatives by majority vote. If we were to be totally subservient to the federal government there wouldnt be a 10th amendment. The founders made it clear that states have the right to deal locally with issues. There is no debating that fact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Giocamo
on
Mon 04/06/09 09:28 AM
|
|
this is a recording.....***beep***
Liberals are so funny...when it comes to abortion...they want to keep government OUT of it...when it comes to gay marriage...they have no problem at all...with government intervention...I posted something months ago...called Taking Sides...basicly it was about govenment getting involved in dictating social policy...deciding whats right and wrong...what should be legal or illegal...when this happens...it forces people to take sides...which leads to bickering and arguing...the analogy I used then was this...there are opera lovers and there are rock and roll lovers...both groups are free to enjoy there own music...everyone gets along fine...no arguing...no discourse...now suppose the government stepped in and decided that starting tomorrow...there be no more opera music...what would happen ?...opera lovers would be outraged and seething...especially at rock and roll lovers...they would be at each others throats...what was once a peacful and happy arangement would no longer be...people would be forced to take sides...because the government / courts...decided what was " good "...for the people...whenever government...dictates social policy...if forces people to take sides...it causes outrage...discourse...arguing...and fighting...the best way to avoid this...is to allow the people to vote on it...allow the people to determine what they want...and...may the best...right...and...socially acceptable side win...although...this won't happen...because if it was up to the people to decide...gay marriage wouldn't stand a chance...actually...I'm pretty sure if left up to the people...to vote on legalizing abortion back in 1973...it would have been voted down...ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...for the 50's.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is a recording.....***beep*** Liberals are so funny...when it comes to abortion...they want to keep government OUT of it...when it comes to gay marriage...they have no problem at all...with government intevention...I posted something months ago...called Taking Sides...basicly it was about govenment getting involved in dictating social policy...deciding whats right and wrong...what should be legal or illegal...when this happens...it forces people to take sides...which leads to bickering and arguing...the analogy I used then was this...there are opera lovers and there are rock and roll lovers...both groups are free to enjoy there own music...everyone gets along fine...no arguing...no discourse...now suppose the government stepped in and decided that starting tomorrow...there be no more opera music...what would happen ?...opera lovers would be outraged and seething...especially at rock and roll lovers...they would be at each others throats...what was once a peacful and happy arangement would no longer be...people would be forced to take sides...because the government / courts...decided what was " good "...for the people...whenever government...dictates social policy...if forces people to take sides...it causes outrage...discourse...arguing...and fighting...the best way to avoid this...is to allow the people to vote on it...allow the people to determine what they want...and...may the best...right...and...socially acceptable side win...although...this won't happen...because if it was up to the people to decide...gay marriage wouldn't stand a chance...actually...I'm pretty sure if left up to the people...to vote on legalizing abortion back in 1973...it would have been voted down...ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...for the 50's.... Repeating yourself isn't going to make everyone else agree that the 50s were better. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is a recording.....***beep*** Liberals are so funny...when it comes to abortion...they want to keep government OUT of it...when it comes to gay marriage...they have no problem at all...with government intevention...I posted something months ago...called Taking Sides...basicly it was about govenment getting involved in dictating social policy...deciding whats right and wrong...what should be legal or illegal...when this happens...it forces people to take sides...which leads to bickering and arguing...the analogy I used then was this...there are opera lovers and there are rock and roll lovers...both groups are free to enjoy there own music...everyone gets along fine...no arguing...no discourse...now suppose the government stepped in and decided that starting tomorrow...there be no more opera music...what would happen ?...opera lovers would be outraged and seething...especially at rock and roll lovers...they would be at each others throats...what was once a peacful and happy arangement would no longer be...people would be forced to take sides...because the government / courts...decided what was " good "...for the people...whenever government...dictates social policy...if forces people to take sides...it causes outrage...discourse...arguing...and fighting...the best way to avoid this...is to allow the people to vote on it...allow the people to determine what they want...and...may the best...right...and...socially acceptable side win...although...this won't happen...because if it was up to the people to decide...gay marriage wouldn't stand a chance...actually...I'm pretty sure if left up to the people...to vote on legalizing abortion back in 1973...it would have been voted down...ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...for the 50's.... Repeating yourself isn't going to make everyone else agree that the 50s were better. what a ya hocin' me for !!...I thought you were in NC...gulp !!...lol... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is a recording.....***beep*** Liberals are so funny...when it comes to abortion...they want to keep government OUT of it...when it comes to gay marriage...they have no problem at all...with government intevention...I posted something months ago...called Taking Sides...basicly it was about govenment getting involved in dictating social policy...deciding whats right and wrong...what should be legal or illegal...when this happens...it forces people to take sides...which leads to bickering and arguing...the analogy I used then was this...there are opera lovers and there are rock and roll lovers...both groups are free to enjoy there own music...everyone gets along fine...no arguing...no discourse...now suppose the government stepped in and decided that starting tomorrow...there be no more opera music...what would happen ?...opera lovers would be outraged and seething...especially at rock and roll lovers...they would be at each others throats...what was once a peacful and happy arangement would no longer be...people would be forced to take sides...because the government / courts...decided what was " good "...for the people...whenever government...dictates social policy...if forces people to take sides...it causes outrage...discourse...arguing...and fighting...the best way to avoid this...is to allow the people to vote on it...allow the people to determine what they want...and...may the best...right...and...socially acceptable side win...although...this won't happen...because if it was up to the people to decide...gay marriage wouldn't stand a chance...actually...I'm pretty sure if left up to the people...to vote on legalizing abortion back in 1973...it would have been voted down...ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...for the 50's.... Oh for a way to send you directly back to the 50's, where you clearly had a sheltered life. Had you been a grown up back then, unfortunately I think you still would have missed what actually went on then. It's the only explanation for that narrow mindedness. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey!!!
My funny stuff got deeeeleted...  Rewarding the union of marriage with rights and benefits that can only be obtained with a legal marriage and then using a Christian definition of what constitutes it(a legal marriage) is punishing those who do not fit into the description. Plain to me that it is clearly discrimination. why should gays not be allowed those benefits? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is a recording.....***beep*** Liberals are so funny...when it comes to abortion...they want to keep government OUT of it...when it comes to gay marriage...they have no problem at all...with government intevention...I posted something months ago...called Taking Sides...basicly it was about govenment getting involved in dictating social policy...deciding whats right and wrong...what should be legal or illegal...when this happens...it forces people to take sides...which leads to bickering and arguing...the analogy I used then was this...there are opera lovers and there are rock and roll lovers...both groups are free to enjoy there own music...everyone gets along fine...no arguing...no discourse...now suppose the government stepped in and decided that starting tomorrow...there be no more opera music...what would happen ?...opera lovers would be outraged and seething...especially at rock and roll lovers...they would be at each others throats...what was once a peacful and happy arangement would no longer be...people would be forced to take sides...because the government / courts...decided what was " good "...for the people...whenever government...dictates social policy...if forces people to take sides...it causes outrage...discourse...arguing...and fighting...the best way to avoid this...is to allow the people to vote on it...allow the people to determine what they want...and...may the best...right...and...socially acceptable side win...although...this won't happen...because if it was up to the people to decide...gay marriage wouldn't stand a chance...actually...I'm pretty sure if left up to the people...to vote on legalizing abortion back in 1973...it would have been voted down...ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...for the 50's.... Oh for a way to send you directly back to the 50's, where you clearly had a sheltered life. Had you been a grown up back then, unfortunately I think you still would have missed what actually went on then. It's the only explanation for that narrow mindedness. wouldn't you also be narrow minded...seeing as though you can't accept the way I was brought up...the way I think ?...that cuts both ways Boo Baby... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is a recording.....***beep*** Liberals are so funny...when it comes to abortion...they want to keep government OUT of it...when it comes to gay marriage...they have no problem at all...with government intevention...I posted something months ago...called Taking Sides...basicly it was about govenment getting involved in dictating social policy...deciding whats right and wrong...what should be legal or illegal...when this happens...it forces people to take sides...which leads to bickering and arguing...the analogy I used then was this...there are opera lovers and there are rock and roll lovers...both groups are free to enjoy there own music...everyone gets along fine...no arguing...no discourse...now suppose the government stepped in and decided that starting tomorrow...there be no more opera music...what would happen ?...opera lovers would be outraged and seething...especially at rock and roll lovers...they would be at each others throats...what was once a peacful and happy arangement would no longer be...people would be forced to take sides...because the government / courts...decided what was " good "...for the people...whenever government...dictates social policy...if forces people to take sides...it causes outrage...discourse...arguing...and fighting...the best way to avoid this...is to allow the people to vote on it...allow the people to determine what they want...and...may the best...right...and...socially acceptable side win...although...this won't happen...because if it was up to the people to decide...gay marriage wouldn't stand a chance...actually...I'm pretty sure if left up to the people...to vote on legalizing abortion back in 1973...it would have been voted down...ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...for the 50's.... Oh for a way to send you directly back to the 50's, where you clearly had a sheltered life. Had you been a grown up back then, unfortunately I think you still would have missed what actually went on then. It's the only explanation for that narrow mindedness. wouldn't you also be narrow minded...seeing as though you can't accept the way I was brought up...the way I think ?...that cuts both ways Boo Baby... [BABY!?] Did I hit a nerve Gio? You said "may the best right and socially acceptable side win"? Please!! Tell me just how open minded that is again? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is a recording.....***beep*** Liberals are so funny...when it comes to abortion...they want to keep government OUT of it...when it comes to gay marriage...they have no problem at all...with government intevention...I posted something months ago...called Taking Sides...basicly it was about govenment getting involved in dictating social policy...deciding whats right and wrong...what should be legal or illegal...when this happens...it forces people to take sides...which leads to bickering and arguing...the analogy I used then was this...there are opera lovers and there are rock and roll lovers...both groups are free to enjoy there own music...everyone gets along fine...no arguing...no discourse...now suppose the government stepped in and decided that starting tomorrow...there be no more opera music...what would happen ?...opera lovers would be outraged and seething...especially at rock and roll lovers...they would be at each others throats...what was once a peacful and happy arangement would no longer be...people would be forced to take sides...because the government / courts...decided what was " good "...for the people...whenever government...dictates social policy...if forces people to take sides...it causes outrage...discourse...arguing...and fighting...the best way to avoid this...is to allow the people to vote on it...allow the people to determine what they want...and...may the best...right...and...socially acceptable side win...although...this won't happen...because if it was up to the people to decide...gay marriage wouldn't stand a chance...actually...I'm pretty sure if left up to the people...to vote on legalizing abortion back in 1973...it would have been voted down...ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...for the 50's.... Oh for a way to send you directly back to the 50's, where you clearly had a sheltered life. Had you been a grown up back then, unfortunately I think you still would have missed what actually went on then. It's the only explanation for that narrow mindedness. wouldn't you also be narrow minded...seeing as though you can't accept the way I was brought up...the way I think ?...that cuts both ways Boo Baby... [BABY!?] Did I hit a nerve Gio? You said "may the best right and socially acceptable side win"? Please!! Tell me just how open minded that is again? meaning...if the majority decides they're not ready or wanting gay marriage legal...at this time...then we move on...and...vote on it another day...without running to the supreme court to reverse any decision...I have every belief that in time...it will be legal in all 50 states...although I'm quite sure...I may be long gone by then...or...not... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep...a guy that was born in what 1954 or 1955 should have fond memories of the 50's.
Someone carried you around, fed you, bathed you, played with you...things must gone straight to hell in a hand basket around 1960 when you took that first walk to kindergarten eh? Funny stuff... Both sides do not enjoy the same rights, obligations and privileges when it comes to marriage. If they did we wouldn't be having this conversation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep...a guy that was born in what 1954 or 1955 should have fond memories of the 50's. Someone carried you around, fed you, bathed you, played with you...things must gone straight to hell in a hand basket around 1960 when you took that first walk to kindergarten eh? Funny stuff... Both sides do not enjoy the same rights, obligations and privileges when it comes to marriage. If they did we wouldn't be having this conversation. why are your memories of the 50's...Gospel [ sorry ]...and...mine fiction ?...funny how that works...my point is...from 54 to 66...was a time in my life...that will never be seen again...perfection... for me...ME !!...MEEEEEEEEE !!!...my life...my family...not you...ME...that was a perfct time...for someone else...maybe not...for me...yes...little league baseball...summer vacations...ME ME ME ME...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ahh
So when you were a child blissfully ignorant of reality playing and being cared for America was a good place? Now that you are an adult with obligations who is unable to escape reality America is a bad place? |
|
|
|
|
