N104UA From United States, joined Dec 2007, 796 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 weeks 23 hours 24 minutes ago) and read 3715 times:
Preface- I do not live in Maine, I live in Colorado, I am not gay but many of my close friends are, I know that this is long but I feel that it must be.
-----
Yesterday (3 Nov 2009) Maine became another state to tell a group of citizens "You are second class citizens," This is focused to the people who voted for this or support those who do. WHY DO YOU CARE, why can you as the majority tell the minority that they can not marry, because they are different than you. I am not saying that your religion is required to support it, your church can be as discriminatory as you want. You say that we redefine marriage, well just so you know we have redefined marriage many times in the past, 45 years ago 16 states had laws on the books that did not allow interracial marriage, that means that the President of the United States. People who support these horrible laws quote the bible as fact why it is not right AMERICA IS NOT A CHRISTIAN NATION (read the Treaty of Tripoli and Article XI if you have any questions about that) but what when Jesus said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." How would you feel if someone told you that you could not marry!! I know that another argument against gay marriage is "It is not healthy for children to grow up with out a mother and a father" Well then you are saying that every single mother and every single father is doing a bad job, then I would like you to be out there supporting a law prohibiting divorce (Jesus said that divorce is not in God's plan). If you do not support gay marriage I want to know HOW DOES THIS AFFECT YOU, nothing is going to happen to your marriage, your marriage will not become invalid, the world will not explode! If you can name one negative thing that will happen to straight people if gay marriage is made legal I really want to know. I can not believe that in 2009 we are telling people that they are second class citizens because of who they are!!
"Forget regret or life is yours to miss...no other road no other way no day but today"
JpetekYXMD80 From United States, joined Jul 2003, 3458 posts, RR: 38 Reply 1, posted (4 weeks 23 hours 17 minutes ago) and read 3711 times:
They should be.
YAY!! I'm SO happy my fellow citizens can now be denied equal protection under the law! Looks like he won the goddamn superbowl.
Really, sickening, but I wouldn't be so happy either had the vote been 5% different. This is not the venue to determine minority rights. Denying gay marriage is unlawful under the equal protection guaranteed by the United States Constitution, and no popular referendum changes that. Just another example of how we are moving in the right direction, but bigotry, ignorance, and the theocrats who feed off and mobilize this is alive and well. How would a popular referendum on women's suffrage have gone back in the day? What about equal rights in the 1950s and 60's south?
Now you know how those of us with brains in California felt almost exactly one year ago... I'm actually pretty surprised a New England state like Maine would overturn their same-sex marriage law... but I guess a lot of people were surprised when CA did too. Crazy world we live in.
Airstud From United States, joined Nov 2000, 422 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (4 weeks 22 hours 35 minutes ago) and read 3634 times:
Then put an initiative on the ballot to change the law so that a domestic partner has the same visitation rights as a spousicus. There's piles of polls that show the same people who oppose gay marriage have no objection to so expanding the rights of dp's.
Since the m word seems to set so many people off, why not just change the phraseology, is what my point is.
JpetekYXMD80 From United States, joined Jul 2003, 3458 posts, RR: 38 Reply 7, posted (4 weeks 22 hours 25 minutes ago) and read 3618 times:
Quoting Airstud (Reply 6): Then put an initiative on the ballot to change the law so that a domestic partner has the same visitation rights as a spousicus. There's piles of polls that show the same people who oppose gay marriage have no objection to so expanding the rights of dp's.
Since the m word seems to set so many people off, why not just change the phraseology, is what my point is.
Want to know what my point is? The 'm word' in most cases has been the preferred play-card of the opposition. Look at all the state marriage referendums in 2006 and 2008 which had absolutely no movement or prospect of gay marriage being legalized in the foreseeable future... through all the scare tactics and BS that went on so publicly in the CA referendum, untruths about education, child manipulation, Utah financiers trying to lead us to theocracy.
Sure, gay marriage has become legalized in some places, and i've been wary that some people have been to ambitious and it may backfire at some point. BUT, in the majority of cases with these referendums, not only are they the "m word", but are preemptive strikes at any kind of rights for gay relationships whatsoever.
They frequently have read like this: "Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state."
WIth that second sentence: civil unions: BOOM. partnership benefits: BOOM.
In most cases this is not 'protecting marriage', its cold, callous, and most of all unconstitutional strikes at any kind of rights for homosexuals.
It's bigotry, it's bullshit, and anyone who supports that better get used to hearing a hell of a lot from me.
You are mostly right about the polls, and support rising for DPs, civil unions, whatever. BUT the ones in control of the opposition pulling the strings don't feel that way, and people have either ignorantly or intentionally decided that a word is more important than any kind of rights after being coerced into this decision by these referendums far beyond the scope of marriage. Either way, when push comes to shove, many of those "just not marriage" folks are talking the talk, certainly not walking the walk.
San747 From United States, joined Dec 2004, 3884 posts, RR: 13 Reply 8, posted (4 weeks 22 hours 4 minutes ago) and read 3593 times:
Quoting JpetekYXMD80 (Reply 7):
It's bigotry, it's bullshit, and anyone who supports that better get used to hearing a hell of a lot from me.
I'll be right with you. There is no excuse for supporting restricting rights to a group of people. I'm actually wondering, just like last year with the whole CA Prop 8 fiasco, why this issue is one that can be voted on? I thought the whole basis of our country's Constitution was that minorities can't just be deprived of rights over the whims of the majority.
MSNDC9 From United States, joined Jul 2009, 394 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (4 weeks 21 hours 21 minutes ago) and read 3566 times:
Quoting San747 (Reply 8): I'm actually wondering, just like last year with the whole CA Prop 8 fiasco, why this issue is one that can be voted on? I thought the whole basis of our country's Constitution was that minorities can't just be deprived of rights over the whims of the majority.
Couple of reasons.
1. Marriage isn't recognized at the Federal level for anyone. Generally speaking, the Fed doesn't care about your marital status and it honors civil unions so there's no equal protection issue. They simply won't get involved in a State sanctioned issue. That said, if you have a constitutional amendment, then that would obviously change.
2. Marriage is generally considered an act or a rite. The State generally issues a license to allow the act or rite to be performed, and by definition a license can be revoked if the terms of the license do not conform to State Law. If the constitution allows voters to define what the terms of license issuance are, then you get the California result. In legal terms, a marriage license in every state doesn't hold any more weight than a Driver License does. Its the certification of an event (i.e... You aren't marrying your mom/dad, your sister/brother, aunt/uncleor a cousin and that you only have one husband/wife - some states have different standards here as well with regard to how far out on a limb of a family tree you have to go to be legal).
It seems to me that those who want to see gay marriage on the books are going about it the wrong way. I personally prefer the State oversight of Marriage just go away period and Marriage be left to the Church where it was until Polygamy became an issue when Utah became a State (the irony of Mormon Church involvement on this issue). This alone would end the debate. Those who aren't part of a church get a civil union - problem solved. If people want a ceremony to go along with it, then by all means - have at it.
People chucking the bible around on one side and screaming about it on the other side aren't going to gain any points here. I'm pretty much sick of hearing about it from both sides.
EA CO AS From United States, joined Nov 2001, 9918 posts, RR: 73 Reply 10, posted (4 weeks 20 hours 15 minutes ago) and read 3523 times:
Quoting MSNDC9 (Reply 9): People chucking the bible around on one side and screaming about it on the other side aren't going to gain any points here. I'm pretty much sick of hearing about it from both sides.
I'm especially weary of hearing people scream for this to be voted on by the people, and then shriek in horror when they don't get the result they wanted.
For the record, I support gay marriage - but damn, I do NOT support the name-calling that comes from the GLBT community and their supporters when public votes like this don't turn out their way.
Calling people out as homophobes and bigots isn't the way to engender support the next time your cause is voted on.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
Ferengi80 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2007, 477 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (4 weeks 18 hours 38 minutes ago) and read 3485 times:
Okay, firstly, apologies for the long post here, but its something I think should be said.
There's a lot of religious people out there who believe the Bible word for word. Don't get me wrong, I class myself a Christian, but I believe the Bible is Man's interpretation of the Word of God. It's the way people understood what God was saying and wrote it down. And some of 'em got it a little bit wrong.
Now I am a huge fan of The West Wing, and one of the greatest quotes from the entire series comes from the episode The Midterms, the third episode of the second series. In this, President Bartlet addresses a group which includes a radio talk show host by the name of Jenna Jacobs. The following pretty much sums it up...
JENNA JACOBS
I don't say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr. President. The Bible does.
BARTLET
Yes, it does. Leviticus.
JENNA JACOBS
18:22
BARTLET
Chapter and verse. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I had you here.
I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21: 7.
(small chuckles from the guests) She's a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, and
always clears the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be? While
thinking about that, can I ask another? My Chief of Staff, LeoO McGarry, insists on working
on the Sabbath, Exodus 35:2, clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police? Here's one that's really important,
'cause we've got a lot of sports fans in this town. Touching the skin of a dead pig makes
us unclean, Leviticus 11: 7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins
still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point? Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother, John, for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn
my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?
Jenna Jacobs fidgets uncomfortably.
BARTLET
Think about those questions, would you? One last thing, while you may be mistaking this
for your monthly meeting of the Ignorant Tightass Club, in this building, when the President
stands, nobody sits.
There's a lot in the Bible that today is totally irrelevant. It is quite obvious that the parts on homosexuality are included here.
Our God loves us all for who we are, He made us the person we are.
There is a line in the Neil Diamond song "Brother Love's Travelling Salvation Show" that also hits the nail on the head - "Brothers and Sisters - black or white, big or small, gay or straight, rich or poor, God's Children All"
Elite From Hong Kong SAR, PRC, joined Jun 2006, 2328 posts, RR: 12 Reply 12, posted (4 weeks 18 hours 37 minutes ago) and read 3485 times:
I don't think "the people of Maine should be ashamed of themselves" just because they disagree with your position, you know. To you, it may be clear cut, but right now this is a very controversial and hotly debated topic.
NIKV69 From United States, joined Jan 2004, 8368 posts, RR: 56 Reply 13, posted (4 weeks 18 hours 21 minutes ago) and read 3471 times:
Quoting Elite (Reply 12): I don't think "the people of Maine should be ashamed of themselves" just because they disagree with your position, you know. To you, it may be clear cut, but right now this is a very controversial and hotly debated topic.
Mir From United States, joined Jan 2004, 13146 posts, RR: 65 Reply 14, posted (4 weeks 18 hours 13 minutes ago) and read 3460 times:
Quoting Elite (Reply 12): I don't think "the people of Maine should be ashamed of themselves" just because they disagree with your position, you know.
No, they should be ashamed of themselves because they have voted to deprive a certain group of people of the rights that most Maine residents have. I don't care what they think about my position on gay marriage, or gay marriage itself.
Aaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 4496 posts, RR: 22 Reply 15, posted (4 weeks 18 hours 12 minutes ago) and read 3460 times:
Quoting Airstud (Reply 6): Since the m word seems to set so many people off, why not just change the phraseology, is what my point is.
Because then it's separate but equal - what part of that don't people get? Why does it have to be separate?
Quoting MSNDC9 (Reply 9): 1.Marriage isn't recognized at the Federal level for anyone. Generally speaking, the Fed doesn't care about your marital status and it honors civil unions so there's no equal protection issue. They simply won't get involved in a State sanctioned issue. That said, if you have a constitutional amendment, then that would obviously change.
If that's the case then the federal government needs to throw out the 1000+ rights and privileges that are already conferred to married straight couples by a litany of federal statutes, not the least of which is DOMA.
Just as the federal government is bloated and inefficient, it can't even keep track of the discrimination it has already established with regard to gays. Thankfully we have the GAO to at least get some work done.
Quoting Elite (Reply 12): I don't think "the people of Maine should be ashamed of themselves" just because they disagree with your position, you know.
It has nothing to do with a mere position. It's always upsetting when Americans tramp all over the flag and the memories of thousands of fallen soldiers by standing against their neighbors and individual liberty while upholding values our current ideological enemies hold dear.
"Sentimentality plays with sweet intentions in place of good sense." - Jane Jacobs
KiwiinOz From New Zealand, joined Oct 2005, 1483 posts, RR: 6 Reply 16, posted (4 weeks 18 hours 11 minutes ago) and read 3460 times:
I wouldn't worry about these sort of backward, outdated rulings anymore. As previous posters have alluded, this is more reflective of the diminishing importance of marriage as an institution, rather than the significant discrimination.
Over the course of history, it means little. In 10 years, some of these states will catch up with modern societal thinking anyway and overturn these rulings, and concurrently, the importance of marriage will be further diminished so people won't give a darn anyway.
If it's legal status people are looking for, this can be attained in other ways. If it's recognition of partnership/love.....well I don't think marriage plays a huge part in itself
"I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal. "
LTBEWR From United States, joined Jan 2004, 9363 posts, RR: 7 Reply 17, posted (4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3451 times:
There are many people out there who are very closed minded as to GLBT persons. They believe from their faith or from their cultural upbringing, that to be gay or lesbian is immoral and abnormal. You have some of faith who believe that to oppose same-gender marriage will get them a better chance to get into Heaven and stay out of Hell. I bet all but a tiny number of regular church attendees voted against gay marriage in Maine, probably hyped up further from almost every church, temple or mosque pulpit for weeks to vote against it, perhaps in violation of IRS rules. It also trips over the line between 'Church and State' protections in our Constitution.
A public official marriage is not recognized by most faith groups, yet we recognize faith ministers to officiate for governmental legal status marriage. As I have suggested here and elsewhere, we need to change the laws as to who can legally officiate marriages or DP's to only public government employees or individuals who are licensed by the state and won't discrimate. Some countries (Belgium for one) do not recognize faith ministers to officiate marraiges, one has to have to do it before a government official or file papers. That is the way we should go too.
Charles79 From United States, joined Mar 2007, 1089 posts, RR: 8 Reply 18, posted (4 weeks 17 hours 56 minutes ago) and read 3445 times:
This country never ceases to amaze me. We travel thousands of miles to bring "freedom" and "liberty" to other cultures yet find it totally acceptable to deny the most basic human right of equality to millions of citizens back home.
Hypocrisy is not a strong enough word to describe these cowards.
Cgnnrw From Germany, joined May 2005, 749 posts, RR: 5 Reply 19, posted (4 weeks 17 hours 15 minutes ago) and read 3409 times:
53% of Maine residents are complete idiots.
Quoting Airstud (Reply 6): Then put an initiative on the ballot to change the law so that a domestic partner has the same visitation rights as a spousicus.
Not so easy because I'm sure the same idiots who oppose gay marriage laws would use the same scare tatics to prevent this too...."only a legal husband and wife should be allowed to decide over life and death". Also what about inheritance issues? I'm sure there are plenty of cases where some dipshit family member opposed a testament leaving them nothing but the gay partner everything.
At least with a "covers it all" gay marriage law the necessity to have ballots jpassed each and every time to get "approval" for these issues is rule out.
KPWMSpotter From United States, joined Dec 2006, 150 posts, RR: 2 Reply 20, posted (4 weeks 17 hours 9 minutes ago) and read 3402 times:
This is honestly the first time I've been ashamed in my home state.
Maine's politics tend to lean liberal socially and conservative fiscally...the way things should be. But damn. I don't understand how the Catholic initiative to repeal gay marriage found so many voters who are willing to be flamingly ignorant and intolerant.
I am beyond words now. I thought my vote would be one I could be proud of, showing that Maine was above the ignorance and fear that prevails elsewhere. Well, it turns out that there's a whole lot more ignorance and fear than I knew about.
Mir From United States, joined Jan 2004, 13146 posts, RR: 65 Reply 21, posted (4 weeks 16 hours 45 minutes ago) and read 3363 times:
Quoting KPWMSpotter (Reply 20): I thought my vote would be one I could be proud of, showing that Maine was above the ignorance and fear that prevails elsewhere.
You can still be proud of your own vote, and the votes of the 47% who voted against a ban.
Eventually, enough people will come to their senses and realize that disagreeing with gay marriage is not justification for banning it. If people don't like gay marriage, then they shouldn't get one - seems simple enough, but the desire to impose one's beliefs on others through legal means is too alluring for some. It's a real shame.
N104UA From United States, joined Dec 2007, 796 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (4 weeks 15 hours 3 minutes ago) and read 3277 times:
Quoting San747 (Reply 5): Now you know how those of us with brains in California felt almost exactly one year ago
Oh I know I have been pissed off since Colorado passed Amendment 43 in 2006 defining marriage.
Quoting Airstud (Reply 6): Then put an initiative on the ballot to change the law so that a domestic partner has the same visitation rights as a spousicus. There's piles of polls that show the same people who oppose gay marriage have no objection to so expanding the rights of dp's.
That is horrible that is like saying that girls can go to something but we won't call it school, because only boys can go to school, but we will tell the girls that we are teaching them all the same stuff, while we are giving the boys a better education, what would you think of that
This makes me think of Deuteronomy 22: 13-21, that says that a marriage shall only be considered valid if the wife is a virgin and if she is not a virgin, her father shall stone her to death at the front door of his home
if we are going to start using the bible as a way to make our national laws why not uses this passage, and also while we are at it ban all pork and shellfish also.
Quoting Ferengi80 (Reply 11): There's a lot in the Bible that today is totally irrelevant. It is quite obvious that the parts on homosexuality are included here.
Exactly, plus since America is not a christian nation, we should not use the bible at all to make any laws
Quoting Elite (Reply 12): I don't think "the people of Maine should be ashamed of themselves" just because they disagree with your position, you know. To you, it may be clear cut, but right now this is a very controversial and hotly debated topic.
How would you feel if I took a right from you just because of who you are.
Quoting Charles79 (Reply 18): This country never ceases to amaze me. We travel thousands of miles to bring "freedom" and "liberty" to other cultures yet find it totally acceptable to deny the most basic human right of equality to millions of citizens back home.
Hypocrisy is not a strong enough word to describe these cowards.
Mt99 From Bouvet Island, joined May 1999, 4001 posts, RR: 9 Reply 24, posted (4 weeks 14 hours 51 minutes ago) and read 3258 times:
Quoting Cgnnrw (Reply 19): 53% of Maine residents are complete idiots.
No, 53% of the people who voted are idiots.
How can gay marriage win in an election? I don't think it can.
Who is going to vote to allow gay marriage? 99% Gays, most friends of gay people, some family members of gays,and a few straight people that dont know any gay people but support the cause.
Who is going to vote to block it? 80% of Church goes who are fed lies and "values" every Sunday.
If you do the simple math of population (10% gays vs 60% church goers), there is no way that gay marriage can be approved by a majority.
Its OK. Give it 10 years - by then it will all be a bad dream
DXing From United States, joined Nov 2008, 2410 posts, RR: 13 Reply 25, posted (4 weeks 14 hours 31 minutes ago) and read 3236 times:
Quoting N104UA (Thread starter): You say that we redefine marriage, well just so you know we have redefined marriage many times in the past, 45 years ago 16 states had laws on the books that did not allow interracial marriage, that means that the President of the United States
No matter the color of their skin it does not change the fact that it was one man and one woman. One man and one man, or one woman and one woman redefines the word no matter how you would like to think differently.
Quoting JpetekYXMD80 (Reply 3): Yeah, only have to break up if you're in the ICU trying to visit your partner and your attorney isn't by your side with a mountain of paperwork.
You can give POA to anyone. Your living will can stipulate who is to make medical decisions on your behalf. Your argument has been debunked many times over by many different people some gay some not.
Quoting San747 (Reply 8): I thought the whole basis of our country's Constitution was that minorities can't just be deprived of rights over the whims of the majority.
If that were true then Utah would have been admitted as a State without having to outlaw bigamy.
Quoting N104UA (Reply 23): How would you feel if I took a right from you just because of who you are.
Marriage has always been defined by the States. Some courts have ruled that the laws defining marriage are unconstitutional as they are written, but where have they said that marriage is a "right"?
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
26 Aaron747: Only if people let it. My marriage or how I feel about it doesn't change any when I see two members of the opposite sex together. Wifey is right here
27 FLY2HMO: Took the words out of my mouth. We've declared war on countries ruled by religious fanatics and yet the bible thumpers in our own soil are making imp
28 Airstud: Exactly. As contemporary society struggles with this question (in a way that future society may jolly well not), the question people are up against i
29 RussianJet: I have a question. I am not wading in to whether this is right or not because I'm sick of hearing about it. But, why is it that 53% or those who vote
30 Seb146: Look at the countries that HAVE legalized civil unions. Have they been thrown into civil war? Have they disbanded? Also, gay marriage is an OPTION. J
31 MaverickM11: But has it? It's never been debated with a shred of credible evidence. This is not healthcare, or the war in Afghanistan, or anything where there are
32 LAXintl: This issue now has been in voter hands now in 31 states. And all of 31 of these states have decided along the same lines. I think its ridiculous to c
33 NIKV69: Here we go again. Marriage is not a right, it is something governed by the state and voted on. Jesus will you stop with the name calling? People have
34 Revelation: Well, to be fair, it does potentially extend a whole range of benefits like sharing medical insurance that do not currently exist, no? If so one coul
35 UAL747: For the 400th time, if I get married to another man, does it diminish your marriage any? Are your kids going to grow up and all of a sudden turn gay?
36 RussianJet: I can understand your upset, but will you listen to what you're saying? YOU this, YOU that. It's all very 'them and us'. Illogical it might seem to y
37 UAL747: Umm, that's what this entire vote was about. "Them and Us." And anti-gay marriage advocates/voters, are the ones who are doing the labeling my friend
39 N104UA: Yes but in the 1950s people were saying that it is against the bible for interracial marriage, and now almost everyone is fine with interracial marri
40 LAXintl: How about a paradigm shift for the GLBT community. Instead of showing that you are different, or have a unique niche in society, portray yourselves ar
41 FlyPNS1: 200 years ago the same "everyday Americans" would have voted to ban interracial marriages, ban women from voting, ban Native Americans from being rec
42 DXing: Sorry, people are what make up the government and the majority of the people, even black people, don't see it that way. Interracial and same sex are
43 NIKV69: Exit polls have never been reliable and are never accurate and furthermore becoming a tool for more left wing propaganda. Who cares? Had nothing to d
44 Mt99: Ahh,. ok.. so you have nothing back up your claim. Great.
45 LAXintl: Yes absolutely in the context of their times. What might happen in 10, 100 or 1000 years to mankind and his understanding and beliefs surrounding soc
46 UAL747: Guys, we could go about debating everything and defer the argument to a race debate, majority rules debate, etc., but can anyone honestly provide me w
47 EA CO AS: But to those who are deeply religious about the rite of marriage - not the state-codified aspect of it - it DOES change how they feel. Read on... And
48 LAXintl: OK I'll bite; I think you need to remember people don't vote based on scientific or statistical data, and neither are laws primarily designed around
49 NIKV69: I have plenty, Maine is not a far right state. What is an exit poll going to tell you? Your going to ask someone leaving a voting booth if they thump
50 FlyPNS1: I tend to believe that it is mostly those with strong religious beliefs that are voting against gay marriage. These types of votes bring those people
51 UAL747: So it goes back to religious teachings then? Is there ANYTHING that justifies this argument that is NOT Religious based? UAL
52 LAXintl: And is that a crime? Since when is having religious views or being older = "bit behind the curve". Regardless this group seems to hold the societal p
53 Mt99: Apparently 50% of the population may have voted. So 53% of the 50% - that's about 25% of the entire population voted against gay marriage. 25% of the
54 FLY2HMO: I think you're gonna have a hard time finding atheists or religious people who haven't been brainwashed by their church amongst those who voted. No.
55 Vikkyvik: Same exact thing could have been said back when folks were fighting for interracial marriage. How dare they want to marry someone of a different race
56 JpetekYXMD80: Sometimes I feel as if i talk to the wall.. Inconvenient facts for many of your arguments..
57 MaverickM11: That happens to heterosexuals, so that's not so much a change as more of the same. Seems to dovetail nicely with what the administration is doing any
58 Clemsonaj: What you are suggesting is exactly what is happening throughout the nation and the world. For the longest time gay people were forced to form enclave
59 San747: Yes, I understand gay marriage opponents are a diverse group, but it doesn't make them right. Absolutely. I just don't feel this subject is one that
60 LAXintl: We have to appreciate that religion very broadly shaped very basic way societal understandings exist today. Look at the Ten-Commandments for examples
61 Slider: And you just nailed it there. I had this discussion with a few people already today. First, I’m not going to stake a claim on either side, but it d
62 JpetekYXMD80: Why is the leadership against gay rights feeling the need to more of then than not include preemptive strikes against civil unions, domestic partners
63 JakeOrion: The only true concrete, coherent, scientific and statistical fact is neither a man/man or woman/woman cannot conceive a child. What is the true essen
64 Revelation: Wake me up when there is a shortage of people willing to breed. Till then, it's a non-issue. Scientifically, the sun is burning 4 million tons of hyd
65 LAXintl: I don't know - go ask one of the groups that write the ballot measures. But from legal background I suspect the language is meant to ensure that marr
66 PSA53: I will second those inputs.Gays have not done a good PR relations.In fact,It's been,in some cases, as hateful of those they accused.Sometimes,it has
67 Slider: Well said and I don’t say this to be inflammatory or provocative, but many gays are very thin-skinned and that doesn’t help. A buddy of mine said
68 Airstud: "[Y]ou tell someone they cannot marry but someone else can" isn't the whole of the situation. The law doesn't say 'If you are a gay person then you c
69 RussianJet: Just out of interest, what is the basis for that assertion? Doesn't make it just a Christian issue though. They don't decide who turns up to vote or
70 MaverickM11: "Idiot" is probably more appropriate, because only an idiot would go through so much effort to defend himself from a bogeyman that doesn't exist.
71 Revelation: Yes, but the population of the entire Earth is monotonically increasing.... And there are gay people in the North, South, East and West...
72 Clemsonaj: Bigotry is blind, uninformed intolerance of someone or something. Those are excellent examples, however many opinions on marriage are based on not be
73 Yellowstone: Until they provide a rational reason - and "the magic invisible man in the sky said so" doesn't count as rational - they are being irrational. Suppos
74 LH459: Ah yes, the old "slippery slope" argument. It falls apart when you examine the experience of other countries that have successfully enacted domestic
75 2H4: A great article was published in the Philadelphia Enquirer on Sunday. Some particularly good excerpts: "The purpose of constitutional guarantees of e
76 FlyPNS1: It is, if those religious convictions are being used to squelch the rights of others.
77 San747: That should be the end of the argument right there. Allow any two legal, consenting adults to marry each other should they desire so, make it a writt
78 LAXintl: --> Many would say, that power and teachings of religion is the ultimate guidance. There simply cant be a higher authority, and provides many the rat
79 UAL747: .....yet, they'll let a convicted child molester/rapist marry and let that person have children, but OH NO, don't let the gays get married let alone a
80 Yellowstone: Until you can demonstrate that God exists, basing your beliefs on his existence is irrational. I'm not saying that's a bad thing for your everyday li
81 FLY2HMO: I'm pretty sure the majority of atheists (myself included and all the ones I know, which are many) consider the gay marriage thing a non-issue. I als
82 EA CO AS: Well, from a philosophical standpoint... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_ontological_argument
83 Tootallsd: In theory the concept of the USA is amazing. In practice it is a lie and a shame. This vote is just the latest in dozens and dozens of chapters.[Edite
84 FlyDeltaJets87: For starters, I am for gay marriage, and voted against the "Marriage Defining" Amendment here in Florida last year. I don't buy the "sanctity of marri
86 JpetekYXMD80: You are absolutely right, and we need to be careful not to simplify matters beyond reality. I have been very outspoken about what I perceived to be h
87 2H4: In virtually any cultural or religious group, there will always be a subset of brash and over-the-top individuals. It's up to all of us to become rea
88 UAL747: You didn't just watch the latest episode of South Park did you?
89 2H4: Funny thing...I did indeed just watch it and yet never made the connection when writing my above post. That's pretty damn funny. 2H4
90 Yellowstone: A good point. It is uncomfortable for many people, I think, to admit that it is not just hard-core right wing Christianity that is the problem. Mains
91 DXing: Ok, lets redefine the word murder. I mean who cares who's being killed as long as it's not somebody you know right?
92 2H4: One of the commandments says "Thou shalt not kill". Yet, somehow, many religious people applaud putting a bullet through someone's head when you're i
93 FlyDeltaJets87: This is exactly what I'm talking about. I'm a CONSERVATIVE Christian and I support gay marriage. Yes, I lean conservative more for economic reasons t
94 PWM2TXLHopper: Well, as a voting citizen of Maine, I for one am glad Mainer's flushed this garbage down the john! Marriage has always been between as between a man a
95 Pwm2txlhopper: That's only your opinion they're lies! Does anybody really know? No. And nobody will until they die. But that debate aside. There's plenty of non rel
96 DXing: Since virtually every nation that has ever gone to war has gone with their God supposedly on their side, then no, the word has not been redefined.
97 PWM2TXLHopper: That's where you're wrong. I assume you're from Southern Maine/Portland area? Maine's a big place and the only liberal/progressive areas are in these
98 Mir: How many gay people do you know? Now think about how many of them would obviously stand out as gay if you took a passing glance at them on the street
99 FlyDeltaJets87: That's certainly a fair point. I'll be curious to see the response to this, if there is one (JpetekYXMD80 did to an extent in Reply 86, calling the b
100 UAL747: This subject has become too sensitive for me. I've let myself get emotionally wrapped up in this fight with usual suspects on far too many occasions,
101 PWM2TXLHopper: RIght on! I know I'm not the only one in Maine who voted for gay protections and rights in 2005 because I am a fair, tolerant person,who believes tha
102 San747: No offense, brotha, but that speech could have been used 40 years ago when interracial marriage was being decided on, or 150 years ago when slavery w
103 PWM2TXLHopper: For those opposed, it's not about how it affects us personally. We're thinking about society as a whole, not just about ourselves and what we want, o
104 San747: Why is that a bad thing? That's a very serious question. I thought in the United States, we had a right to pursue happiness as long as we don't hurt
105 DocLightning: I see, so if a ban on interracial marriage were to pass and people were to cry racism, you would call that "name-calling"? Sorry, but my relationship
106 Vikkyvik: Not trying to be an ass, but I sincerely hope you're not basing your own personal views simply on what you think are mainstream societal views. Why w
107 JpetekYXMD80: Because putting their fingers in their ears and saying la la la la, i don't see you makes them feel better. Seems kind of running contrary to the Dec
108 JpetekYXMD80: The scariest thing is that people actually believe that Democracy is a nothing more than a majority rule system across the board, not built on the co
109 DocLightning: Hopper has called me "disgusting," "immoral," and accused me of being the downfall of society. Me, personally. So has QXatFAT, by the way, who called
110 JpetekYXMD80: Ain't that the truth! This kind, loving soul will even go as far as to say gays shouldn't be harassed! [Edited 2009-11-05 00:04:28 by jpetekYXMD80]
111 Jcs17: Sorry, there is nothing to be shameful about if one votes against gay marriage. I personally do not care. There are good arguments one way or the othe
112 RussianJet: That doesn't really make a lot of sense. 53% voted against. Are you saying that all of those were "Bible Thumpers"? Common sense would tell one that
113 EA CO AS: There's a difference, however, between, "I'm gay!" and, "I'm gay - and YOU HAVE TO BE OKAY WITH IT!" Many of those brash, over-the-top individuals co
114 JpetekYXMD80: Soo.. there are not valid arguments for a position you, yourself, hold? Thats..interesting.
115 LTBEWR: One problem with these anti-same gender marriage referendas is that they bring out the most conservative voters much more than in an election without
116 Yellowstone: I meant "liberal Christian" in the same sense as, say, the phrase "reform Jew." Its a description of the way one approaches religion, not a political
117 Mir: Why shouldn't they? Homosexual marriage is a non-event, and should be treated as such. In case you haven't noticed, the sanctity of marriage left the
118 Mt99: Agreed. And you know what i bet the amount of people who "don't care either way" far outnumbers the religious nuts who vote gay marriage down. Proble
119 N229NW: So again, I ask those who claim they don't hate gays but their "faith" determines that they should rally others and spend money to make people vote to
120 Seb146: Is there someplace where the actual question was posed? I would like to see the wording of it. Could it be that it is one of those "a no vote is a yes
121 BlackProjects: Eventually your president will get his finger out and start making it a federal law that same sex people can marry and take it away from the states. H
122 Yellowstone: Another question along those lines - if your stance is "it's not me, it's my church/faith," why didn't you look a little harder for a less discrimina
123 EA CO AS: If you'd re-read what I'd written, you'd see I was saying I'm not convinced the arguments of those AGAINST gay marriage are valid. This is one place
124 Aaron747: ...as you define them, seem to lack libertarian values. Government has no right to tell people how to conduct their lives in my view, period - and th
125 MarSciGuy: I'm guessing the people that tipped the vote away from equality were the rural, backwoodsmen, lumbermen, fishermen and farmers (there are still a fai
126 FuturePilot16: I would like to see your proof of that. That's how it is in this country, if you go against the popular option, you get slaughtered. We all saw hat h
127 FlyDeltaJets87: Fair enough. What you have to understand is for the 5% of the population or so who are gay, they are biologically wired that way. There are gay anima
128 Sbworcs: Yet we have to sit there and bless your lifestyle without question? How is me marrying someone of the same sex going to be bad for society? So its ou
129 FlyPNS1: I have no idea, but that's what many in the anti gay marriage crowd believe. For some reason, people are supposed to decide who they will marry based
130 LAXintl: So its OK for this 5% to define what the other 95% must accept at moral, and ok? Thats one of the big issues here -- The mainstream is being forced t
131 FlyPNS1: So in your view, it would have been best if Rosa Parks had just kept sitting in the back of the bus instead of creating a stir by refusing? In your v
132 Mir: And that's fine for them to have that belief system, but that doesn't justify using the law to enforce that belief system on others. Good point. They
133 FLY2HMO: Not all, but i'm sure that at least 3/4 of those who voted against it are in one way or another. The rest probably fall into the very narrow minded c
134 DocLightning: No. Because nobody is insisting that anyone accept anything. The point is that the other 95% does not have the right to decide our rights. That's the
135 RussianJet: That's pure speculation. I'd prefer to see figures from a credible source to back up such an assertion. Really? Surely that is in fact exactly what h
136 FlyDeltaJets87: YES, because for most (I'm guessing 99%) of people who are gay are not gay by choice. They aren't gay to be "different". They're gay because they're
137 DocLightning: Incorrect. There are things that are expressly NOT to be decided by popular vote, including the election of the President (which is decided by electo
138 IMissPiedmont: Why should the people of Maine be ashamed and what did they do to make anyone a second class citizen. Get over it. Sorry but this is getting old fast.
139 LAXintl: You are equating gay marriage with a Black civil rights issue which it is not. There is no presumed right to marriage. Marriage like gaining a driver
140 San747: Come on, really? You actually think there is still a SUBSTANTIAL amount (I know the number definitely isn't zero, but I'm willing to bet it's not hug
141 Jpetekyxmd80: Oh, I understand. You are upset at them for acting like they are different after you tell them that they are different and undeserving of the same ri
142 San747: As far as I know in this country, the only qualification for marriage is age, and obviously that depends on what state you're in. Otherwise, unlike a
143 Sbworcs: Can I just ask all the anti gay marriage people on here - what would YOU do if one of your Children came to you and told you that they were gay and wa
144 DocLightning: I'm sorry, but that's bulldroppings. Can a Catholic Church refuse to marry two Hindus? Yes. And yet Hindus are allowed to marry. The same would be tr
145 AM744: That would be really interesting. I for one support same sex civil unions that allow for inheritance, medical decisions, loans and whatever. I have o
146 Mt99: Do Britney Spears and K-Fed's children get an complete picture of first hand human behavior? You think that Michael Jackson's kids will be completely
147 San747: Probably, but once the child is old enough to be going to school and interacting with other kids, I think that mission portion of that picture would
148 Airstud: There is a fair amount of balderdash being bandied about on this thread by people on both sides of the argument, but so far, equating marriage with h
149 San747: OK, Mr. Cynical, we all know how people joke around about marriage being a living hell, but for two mature individuals, marriage can be a very happy
150 Mir: Accept it as legal, yes. But that doesn't mean you have to like it, nor does it mean that you have to recognize the marriages. As far as churches go,
151 Airstud: That's fantastic, and I wish them continued happiness. I was merely trying to inject a bit of levity into a thread that seemed to need it.
153 Vikkyvik: A marriage can just as easily NOT involve children. And more importantly, there are plenty of unmarried people who have children. If we're going to t
154 N229NW: Well every single parent family already does this. Furthermore, gay couple that want children often adopt, and most of the kids they adopt would othe
155 LAXintl: They are indeed free to advertise gay cruises if they wish, however in my professional and business experience, I would not segmentise and market to
156 Mir: Perhaps. And in that case the church should win the argument. Plain and simple. Keep dreaming, because when a president firmly in the corner of the r
157 JRDC930: I agree with Maine, and with California. To avoid the inevitable flame war, that is all i have to say. I know on Anet i will be in the minority who fe
158 JpetekYXMD80: If you're not going to say why you feel that way, why bother coming here at all? That goes for anyone.
159 LAXintl: Maybe, maybe not. But as the same-sex marriage camp has pushed their agenda, much of America has woken up and now 31 states quite rapidly have passed
160 Mir: This is generally the sign that people don't have rational reasons for their positions. And none of the 53% were just "along for the vote", right? It
161 LAXintl: Sure some of the 53%, just went along one side or the other. I'm sure there was a core group of die-hards on both sides, with the vast majority of vo
162 Airstud: Well actually a Constitutional amendment never goes to the President. Once it's passed by 2/3 of each house of Congress; it goes to the State legisla
163 DocLightning: And we know that the church will win. Because nobody can force a church to marry someone the church doesn't want to marry.
164 N104UA: Read the Establishment clause of the constitution, and nothing will be forced on your church Yes because I did not hear a radio ad today telling me t
165 RussianJet: I take your point, but on other matters (and I hear what you say about civil rights) that is effectively what happens. Wait, albeit without a vote, I
166 Pellegrine: Those people who discriminate based on race, sex, sex orientation, religion, nationality, eugenic, intellectual level, physical measurement, education
167 San747: Luckily, the American legal/political system is designed to prevent exactly what you described... which is why I'm still flabbergasted about why this
168 Aaron747: Given your strong stance on the issue, I have deep doubts about that. Ostensibly what a gay person does in their home is no different from what you o
169 Mir: In other words, you can't prove this: because we have no idea what percentage of either side was a special interest group. -Mir
170 BlackProjects: So your States are Braking the Letter or the United States 1st Law. __________________________________________________________ We hold these truths to
171 RussianJet: Who said gay people were to be denied a life together? A life together is certainly permitted. No real life at all? That's a little dramatic, and the
172 BlackProjects: Well if the Above 1st Law was followed exactly the way it is above Discrimination against Gays would be a NO-NO as it would brake the Law . They are b
173 AM744: I gave it some thought yesterday and arrived to the exact same conclusion. There are lots of succesful single dad or mom families. So I fail to see a
174 N104UA: oh I know and to all of those Christians here that still think Gay Marriage is wrong ""Love is Patient and Kind. It does not envy, it does not boast,
175 Vikkyvik: Not saying you're intentionally misleading, but that certainly has never happened to me. And I've certainly left blanks on my ballots.
176 LAXintl: You dont know me and I dont expect you to. But I have a very diverse social circle. Might even surprise you to know I've even been a big brother and
177 Sbworcs: You say we do not know you yet state that it is a moral issue - why should my sexualtiy and choice of partner be a moral issue for you?
178 LAXintl: You are free to partner up with who you desire. The topic of this thread is about same-sex marriage, not if can people have relations.
179 JRDC930: I already told you why im not elaborating; Im in the minority that agrees with the people of Maine, and i dont feel like dealing with a slew of attac
180 Sbworcs: OK thanks I can have a relationship - why then can't I legally marry the partner of my choice?
181 Aaron747: Because he believes in a government that polices sexual mores and limits individual liberty.
182 LAXintl: As has been posted here many times, but here we go again. The most basic fundamental premise (and hence legal requirement) of marriage is that it inv
183 DocLightning: You just made quite a claim. Now, prove it. Oh, and here's a puzzler for you: are you talking about sex or gender? Consider Jamie Lee Curtis. Her sex
184 LAXintl: Listen Doc, you can try to twist words, but you very well understand what I mean.
185 Mir: We really don't. You keep throwing this "the fundamental principle of marriage is that it is between a man and a woman" line out there. All we're ask
187 Aaron747: As has been asked many times and unanswered, why are you against individual liberty with respect to choice of adult consensual marriage partners and
188 LAXintl: Take a pick, but for me these do well to start with. -its biblical concept -its excepted societal norm for centuries -its correct -its the law -its o
189 FLY2HMO: which not everyone shares... and it is well known Greece has had homosexuals since the dawn of their civilization and it was a widely accepted lifest
190 Mir: All of those (save for "it's the law", because that would be using the existence of the law to justify the existence of the law - doesn't work that w
191 Aaron747: Specious reasoning at best, self-proclaimed superiority of ideas and opinion at worst. There are hundreds of faiths on this planet that don't involve
192 LAXintl: You asked and I provided some examples. You are free to ignore or refute them but they are my beliefs and ones I feel are very valid. I have and will
193 JRDC930: Dont waste your time with them. Morality is relative to them, so your not gonna get any where on this issue.
194 Mir: And I explained why those examples don't support what you're advocating. Morality is a very relative thing, to everyone. That's why you can't arbitra
195 DocLightning: No. I don't understand what you mean. I also don't understand why you CARE what I want to call my relationship with the man I love.
196 JRDC930: So murder is ok in certain circumstances? good to know. Thats what moral relativeism means right? Ther is nothing good or wrong right? Im sorry but i
197 RussianJet: Can that question not be inverted? Why do you care what the relationship is called so much? Surely it's two sides of the same coin. Either it's an im
198 DocLightning: Would you be willing to give up straight marriage and call it a partnership? If so, then I wouldn't care. As long as I get the same opportunities as
199 Aaron747: Ridiculous straw man reasoning. There is absolutely no connection between run of the mill consensual sexual relations and murder. They are on a diffe
200 RussianJet: Why give up? What is wrong with different but equal? There's no use pretending that marriage hasn't always been between a man and a woman, but that's
201 BlackProjects: These laws are Temporary If your President does the decent thing and decides to enact a federal law oking Gay marriage the nay Sayers will come unstuc
202 Mir: Figured someone would try and pull this. Marriage is between consenting adults. Murder is not. That should go a long way toward explaining why you ca
203 1stfl94: And this is why minority rights should not be decided by a popular vote.
204 Jamincan: The idea of having a separate institution that confers the same rights is really not overly well though out. First, it isn't equal. Even if all of th
205 BlackProjects: God is an Invention of MAN so is the Bible unless some of you out there can Prove other wise. So all the Religions Claiming to be the Word of GOD are
206 RussianJet: Why? The fact is we are all different in some way. No use pretending otherwise. I am not aware of any such differences between civil partnerships and
207 KiwiRob: Ok I don't agree with what Maine has done but sometimes minorities just have to suck it up, if the majority of people what something to happen then th
208 JRDC930: No, both are moral issues, if your going to say morality is relative like the person i originally quoted, then maybe they should have specified, what
209 Yellowstone: We may all be different in many respects, but we are all equal before the law. Setting up separate institutions for separate classes of people violat
210 DocLightning: Ok, then who decides what is moral and what isn't moral? It seems from your post as if it's you.
211 San747: I agree with you, but in this country, coming out explicitly in favor of gay marriage means forgetting about winning re-election even in small congre
212 RussianJet: As opposed to.......you? We all do, collectively. It's called society. No one person does.
213 JRDC930: Agreed. And if you dont like the idea of morlity based on societal standards, then you can move to spain, where they have no problems with stuff like
214 Aaron747: More fallacious reasoning. One wonders where some people ever learned this type of uncritical thinking! Can't have one or the other? No room for comp
215 JRDC930: Im not suggesting that. I know state sanctioned gay marriage wont require me to mary a gay person. But it does legitimize something i belive to be il
216 Aaron747: Homosexuals do not have an "agenda" per se - they seek to have their relationships equal before the law. Using those words demeans the struggle of in
217 RussianJet: Playing devil's advocate here, but why can't exactlty that reasoning apply to not allowing homosexual unions to be called marriage? On one hand you c
218 Yellowstone: In many US states, adultery has long been decriminalized. Did this act legitimize adultery, or impose adultery as normal?
219 Aaron747: Because in a non-religious context such as government marriage license there is no logical basis for continued gender/sex-based discrimination. Over
220 JRDC930: Well thats what party politics is for, as long as conservative or liberal judges stand on the bench, then it doesnt matter what the constitution says
221 Aaron747: That's nice to know - glad you love your country and its ideals so much
222 OA412: For the 10 trillionth time, LGBT individuals in this country are not seeking special rights. We are seeking equal rights, period end of discussion. I
223 Vikkyvik: Moral absolutism is just an easy cop out for people who want to be authoritarians. Indeed. And we're not all equal. Except in the eyes of the law. An
224 LAXintl: Too bad they are not good enough for you. But for me, and million others each one of those reasons is a valid point as to why marriage is solely betw
225 San747: It's about all people having an equal voice in how they're governed. There's a very big difference. It shouldn't be, but in this country you're actua
226 JRDC930: I follow my religious beliefs first, the constitution is far below that. I will thank the constittion for allowing me the right to disagree with it t
227 San747: I think people on both sides of this issue would consider that a severe flaw in judgment. This country would be nothing near what it is today without
228 OA412: I take great offense to being called abnormal. I was born gay and no amount of posturing from anyone is going to change that fact. I don't need the l
229 Mir: I don't care whether it's moral or not. I care whether it's legal. The two, despite various attempts to tie them together, are not equivalent. Not in
230 UAL747: JRDC930, I know I said I wasn't going to get back into this thread, but I was just wondering what your Religious Affilation was within the Christian C
231 JRDC930: Im sorry, but the constitution doesnt say what i have to base my vote on.Theres nothing that says i CANT vote based on religious reasons. I can vote
232 JpetekYXMD80: First of all, you would be astounded at the number of Obama-hating, strongly conservative identifiers that support gay marriage. Dick Cheney support
233 FlyDeltaJets87: A) That's because you're too ignorant to see it as "normal". For that 5% of the population, being gay is "normal". It's how they're genetically built
234 JRDC930: Never said i was a fan of democracy; and it doesnt make me any worse if i dont like democracy or would like to eliminate it. I must admit a democracy
235 JRDC930: Have you looked into atheism lately? i hear that doesnt require as much self restraint or faith in anythingYou dont like the church? leave we can do
236 Yellowstone: How weak do your morals have to be for you to need them to be enforced by your government? I'm sorry that you're a moral submissive, for lack of a be
237 JpetekYXMD80: Don't let the door hit you on your way out.. good riddance!
238 RussianJet: That is the truth, isn't it? No, I didn't say that. Neither have I said the opposite.
239 JpetekYXMD80: Let me guess... our religious right communist probably loathes Lawrence v. Texas, too.
240 San747: Wow. I have conservative friends, and I have devoutly Christian friends that would argue against gay marriage with me as adamantly as you have, but n
241 Cws818: And what, instead of democracy, would you suggest? If you have frequent flyer points on any Star Alliance carrier, CA 121 will get you to Pyongyang.
242 Aaron747: Well you've certainly proven to be the paragon of Catholic values with your intolerance and inability to question reality. Jesuit scholars be damned,
243 BlackProjects: When was this missed by some people? The president said he backed the rights of gay couples, saying they should have the "same rights and responsibili
244 1stfl94: This might sound horribly cynical but I suspect Obama will wait until the last possible moment before doing something about gay marriage at Federal le
245 UAL747: Ummm, I wonder if JRDC930 realizes that being a Catholic means he's a minority in the US? By this logic, if the US were a Theocracy, and a "tyranny by
246 Mt99: The religion that has paid out billions to settle child abuse charges? Yes. wonderfully moral. If you move to China - youd have to stop being Catholi
247 LAXintl: Amazing, you guys are lambasting JRDC930 for following his convictions and voting by them. No where is there a requirement that says how American's mu
248 FlyDeltaJets87: We already have. When the Catholic church tells my mom to choose between her "Catholic faith" and her "Lutheran husband", we were like "Okay, that's
249 Yellowstone: There is no law saying what one must consider when voting, to be sure. But in a democracy, it is your civic responsibility to be informed about the d
250 JRDC930: Ahh...so a few cases prove the majority...excellent generalization skills. Also an irrelevant ad hominem argument. Um... you have no right to judge m
251 FlyDeltaJets87: Like whether or not the earth is flat or that the earth is the center of the universe, right?
252 UAL747: True, but you are evading my point. My point was, that since Protestants are the majority, you believe that they should be able to take away your rig
253 JRDC930: Actually, since i was in Catholic school, evolution was seen as acceptable. And i personally have reconciled evolution with my beliefs; again i beliv
254 JpetekYXMD80: So let me get this straight. With all you've said about being a strict Catholic and how you will leave the country without a defined morality and hav
255 Mt99: You are diminishing child abuse. You are embracing the "moral" code of an organization that has kept abusive priests from facing charges. Sure a "few
256 DocLightning: Well, I am going to tell you something: when your religion holds the view that one class of human beings are somehow inferior or sinful simply for ex
257 UAL747: JRDC930, The fact that you would give up everything you have in the US, including your rights to practice your religion freely, (the religion which yo
258 FlyDeltaJets87: Um, the 14th Amendment; that one dealing with Civil Rights. And the way the Electoral College is set up, the minority vote can win, as we saw in
259 LAXintl: There you go again. Calling someone an ill informed voter and now even telling them not to vote! Firstly you have no right to deny anyone a vote. Sec
260 UAL747: I'm not sure if you are married, or not. But, if I get married to a man, does it redefine your marriage? Is your marriage any less valid? Does it har
261 San747: Yes, because apparently the church can do no wrong. It may be a few cases, but they were very widespread. If it were just one or two priests in Bosto
262 OA412: You can vote for whatever you wish but at the end of the day we are a secular society governed by the rule of law not by religious morality. As such,
263 Mir: Your right to do that, but it's not helping this country. You are correct that there is no legal requirement. I do believe, however, that there is a
264 LAXintl: Well I think we have spent 250+ post trying to do that. While it should be a simple issue, many are questioning the the premise of one of the most ob
265 JRDC930: Wow, i didnt realize you kenw me so well, you can make such assumptions... And you call me judgemental...all americans who belive in communism must b
266 San747: We disagree on the issue and how much religion should be a factor in determining law, but ultimately, we both care about making America a better plac
267 JpetekYXMD80: So you're telling me that a country accepting abortion, and the countless abortions that are performed daily, is tolerable and something you could de
268 JRDC930: Why are you and other users so gung ho about pointing out how "bad" china or singapore are? Dont you want "evil" "undemocratic" "authoritarian" "jerk
269 FlyDeltaJets87: So you're saying you can tolerate MURDER more than you can tolerate two gay people being married? Because that's how the Catholic church views aborti
270 JpetekYXMD80: Am I intolerant of threats to my democracy, both foreign and domestic? I sure as hell am. What a mess. You'd feel like you were oppressed if you had
271 UAL747: ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Are you a totally different person than the JRDC930 who posted in the Shooting thread where you said that since they have a Middl
272 JpetekYXMD80: Talk about having a la carte religious priorities...
273 JRDC930: Ok, ill move to Singapore then. So what? what do you care about where i move. Im not a muslim so i wont move to Iran. I believe in living in a countr
274 FlyDeltaJets87: The LEAVE. I can assure you that you will not be missed. God. You can fly to SFO or LAX and then even take Singapore Airlines from there to SIN. Good
275 Aaron747: It's not only them, it's those of us who are their relatives, colleagues and dear friends (in my case, all three). This is not a one-dimensional grou
276 JpetekYXMD80: Notice that hes never commented about premarital sex or birth control issues. Convenience, perhaps?
277 UAL747: And it continues: Now from the Health Care Thread: "The current plan is certainly very half-baked, and doesnt cover enough people. like you said, we n
278 FlyDeltaJets87: Please post a trip report on here when you do, so we can see the proof that you've actually followed through on what you said (because many of us on
279 JpetekYXMD80: So what now, vote for the religious right communist party? Go start that one up. if you can get more people to vote for you than WBC members, i'll ma
280 Aaron747: Yet it still occurs, with regularity, and has, for thousands of years - from the tribes of New Guinea to the fields of Persia and royal courts of Chi
281 JRDC930: No i dont. I vote Republican because i have no other choice; i hate their economic policy, i have said that here before. But i hate the lack of moral
282 FlyDeltaJets87: I'm the one who's more offended by MURDER than gay marriage, yet I'm the "moral relativist", especially when MURDER violates one of the 10 Commandmen
283 Aaron747: Have you now openly stated your thinly veiled death wish for other forumers??
284 JpetekYXMD80: How do you feel about premarital intercourse and birth control? Oh, you mean, the lack of wanting to shove personal religious beliefs and preferences
285 JpetekYXMD80: And you don't care if he leaves the country, while apparently he'd just as well see you dead. What a wonderful beacon of morality!
286 JRDC930: At this point, i dont feel like adressing any of your further remarks, directly. I told you, why i feel the way i feel, i told you why i vote republic
287 FlyDeltaJets87: Because you haven't been able to address many of them. We've asked numerous times about birth control and contraception and your views on those, sinc
288 JpetekYXMD80: Coward. This is like the perpetual.. If _____ candidate wins, i'm going to Canada. Only this makes a fraction of sense comparatively. Nothing is bett
289 UAL747: Wow, now that is about the biggest Joan Crawford queeny departure I think I've ever seen on a.net. But to spice it up, I'd add a little of this: For
290 JpetekYXMD80: I like to call people like you 'the great unifier'.
291 San747: That's a pretty ironic statement, considering what you've been saying all during the thread concerning the US.
292 San747: Agreed. Did you know there as many as ONE openly atheist members of Congress? The days of those with religion are numbered...
293 FlyDeltaJets87: That, and he said he wouldn't care if someone who's a "moral relativist" was to "pass on", while that someone (me) just so happens to be military. Hm
294 Cws818: So you have no problem with the Tiananmen Square crackdown? Democrats don't "love abortion." Nobody "loves abortion." Democrats just believe that abo
295 Seb146: I have not checked in on this thread for a few days, but I really want to address this comment: I grew up gay in the middle of nowhere. From my exper
297 JRDC930: Geeze why the hell are those such issues for you? To answer your question; Yes i believe there should not be premarital sex, and i wouldnt use birth
298 FlyDeltaJets87: My, such intellect. But wouldn't the Catholic church frown upon that? Impure thoughts. Masturbation. The list goes on. We'd just hate to piss off
301 Cws818: Differences of opinion are the raison d'etre of democracy. The "marketplace of ideas" is what facilitates the democratic process. And what cause, exa
302 DocLightning: I get to be part of a circle jerk with FlyDeltaJets87? *shakes head* Wait. Family board. Family board... Well, guess what? You hate me because I was
303 SA7700: This thread has run its course and will now be locked. Any posts made after this post, will be deleted for housekeeping purposes. Rgds SA7700
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Dec 2007, 796 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2007, 477 posts, 
From Hong Kong SAR, PRC, joined Jun 2006, 2328 posts, 
From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 4496 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Oct 2005, 1483 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2005, 749 posts, 
From Bouvet Island, joined May 1999, 4001 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
