ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:02 am

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,125628,00.html

...rather surprising to me.

Not sure whether to be happy or sad, but I think overall, this is a good thing!
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Amendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:08 am

Well based on your title you must be overjoyed.

But then again, it was no surprise. Too many RINO's and commies in the Senate. Of course Lurch and Sir Sue-A-Lot couldn't even make the vote. Guess they didn't want to go on record and drop a few points in the polls.
"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
VSlover
Posts: 1860
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 1:36 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays

Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:10 am

sad?

how might one be sad about the repeal of basic civli liberties/writing bigotry INTO the most sacred of american documents??
 
ATL2CDG
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 3:13 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:15 am

Heaven forbid that we follow in the footsteps of most other advanced Western democracies that extend rights to all people without bias to sexual orientation! Bush can kick and scream all he wants, but you'll never find the 2/3 vote in both houses to pass a constitutional amendment. Most people understand that the U.S. Constitution is about preserving rights, not taking them away.
Ignorantia juris neminem excusat.
 
iflyatldl
Posts: 1796
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2003 1:41 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:17 am

It's a step in the right direction.... but, I'm not holding my breath.  Big grin
Ah, Summer, Fenway Park, Boston Red Sox and Beer.....
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:22 am

OK well, now that this exercise in primary season politics is over can we get back to the real issues? If anyone thought this had a chance of passing the senate with 48 democrats and 25 moderate republicans they were on crack. This was a simple, and probably misguided attempt to appease the far right fundamentalist christians. At least here when the religious zealots lose some vote very few of them will take up arms against the government.

Back to the economy and the war on terrorism.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
phxairfan
Posts: 781
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 6:22 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays

Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:24 am

I favor civil unions instead of marriage, but I do not think their should be laws/amendments about them. What people do on their own time is their business. Would I be rioting in the street if it passed, no. Am I going to be partying in the street since it didn't, no.
 
jamesag96
Posts: 2007
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2001 2:59 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:47 am

Good, now they can let it be what it is, a States Rights issue.

Why Kate, You're not wearing a bustle. How lewd.
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Amendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:56 am

Good, now they can let it be what it is, a States Rights issue.

Problem is the federal courts won't let it be. Activist judges, such as Kennedy, Souter, Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, and O'Connor would force it upon every state if they have the chance.

The House is working on a bill that would strip the federal courts of their ability to hear any case relating to marriage. Congress is grated such authority in Article III, Section 2. It has been done many times in the past and only requires a simple majority vote in Congress. Then and only then it will it be a real "states issue".
"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
N6376M
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 12:54 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:00 am

This is a very good thing. Right wing nuts need to understand that being a conservative means that you want less government intervention in citizen's lives not more.

The lame ass argument that gay marriage would destroy the sanctity of the institution is absurd. Heterosexuals with our 50%+ divorce rate have already done that. Furthermore, the notion that someone else being married or remaining married affects my marriage is crazy.

Why should our federal government carve out a group of people and deny them certain rights and legal protections?
 
jaysit
Posts: 10186
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:01 am

"anyone thought this had a chance of passing the senate with 48 democrats and 25 moderate republicans"

25 moderate republicans? Where?
I can count no more than 6.
Plus, the GOP has Zell Miller who is more conservative than some of the most conservative Republicans !
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
garnetpalmetto
Posts: 5351
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:38 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:01 am

All I have to say is thank God for "activist judges." Without them, separate but equal would still be the standard down here in the South, interracial marriages would be illegal, and it would be illegal for a consenting heterosexual couple to engage in oral sex in many states.

I was quite pleased to see this blow up in Frist's face.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
 
luisca
Posts: 1530
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:37 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:04 am

I did not know that the house could do that (see reply 8) that seems like the best alternative this moment, to save the issue from activist judges.
If it ain't Boeing (or Embraer ;-)) I ain't Going!
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:06 am

The lame ass argument that gay marriage would destroy the sanctity of the institution is absurd. Heterosexuals with our 50%+ divorce rate have already done that. Furthermore, the notion that someone else being married or remaining married affects my marriage is crazy.

Read what has happened in countries that have legalized queer marriage. The vast majority of children are born out of wedlock, divorce rates rose even higher (mostly because homosexuals do not stay "married") and fewer and fewer people act get married. Homosexual marriage does destroy the concept of marriage and their are multiple studies by many organizations to back this up.
"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
garnetpalmetto
Posts: 5351
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:38 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:08 am



Read what has happened in countries that have legalized queer marriage. The vast majority of children are born out of wedlock, divorce rates rose even higher (mostly because homosexuals do not stay "married") and fewer and fewer people act get married. Homosexual marriage does destroy the concept of marriage and their are multiple studies by many organizations to back this up.


Funny, opponents of interracial marriage said the same thing back in the '50s and '60s.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
 
ATL2CDG
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 3:13 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:10 am

B757300:

First, human rights are not a state rights issue. It's a federal concern.

Second, find here Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution:

Clause 2: In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

I see nothing whereby the Congress has the authority or the ability to dictate what cases or concerns are subject to review by the federal court system. They may be able to remove the Supreme Court from jurisdiction, but be rest assured that the federal court system below the Supreme Court will continue to fight for the continuation of rights, not the ending of them.

These are NOT activist courts as neo-conservative prefer to label them. These courts, both on the state and federal level, have a responsibility to interpret various laws as written, and with the U.S. Constitution and her amendments as the supreme law of the law, make decisions regarding the constitutionally of said laws. A legislature writes a law restricting the rights and privileges of a select group of people; the courts finds this a violation of the equal protections amendment (and rightly so). It's quite simple.

If you want to live in a society by which the laws are dictated through a religious authority, move to Iran. The United States is a secular federal republic and the government has an obligation to protect the rights of ALL citizens, not just those that wear a cross, slap a Jesus-fish on the back of their SUV and mindlessly follow George W. Bush.

[Edited 2004-07-14 23:15:21]

[Edited 2004-07-14 23:24:32]
Ignorantia juris neminem excusat.
 
iflyatldl
Posts: 1796
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2003 1:41 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:14 am

I've never understood why it can't just be referred as a "Civil Union" instead of marriage. My partner and I had ours almost two years ago in Vermont and if we were living in Vermont as opposed to Georgia, we'd basically be treated like a married couple. Massachusetts and San Francisco's intentions were great, but Vermont seems no problem with the Civil Union concept. At the same time it keeps the right-wing over zealous religious fanatics at bay.  Big grin
Ah, Summer, Fenway Park, Boston Red Sox and Beer.....
 
jaysit
Posts: 10186
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:21 am

"divorce rates rose even higher (mostly because homosexuals do not stay "married")"

Really?

How much higher? Given that people like you are always crowing about how the percentage of homosexuals are no more than 1% of the overall population, an increase in gay divorce (even assuming that ALL gay couples should divorce) should have no statistical bearing on overall divorce rates which are exceptionally high among straights to begin with. (About 50% in the US, 50% in the Netherlands, 45% in Canada).

Math may be hard for Barbie, but its even harder for you !

You and quivering lipped lisping Frist need to go back to the drawing board.
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
N6376M
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 12:54 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:24 am

B757300 - please list what countries you are referring to and what studies show the relationship between legalization of same-sex marriage and the outcomes you describe.

I think you're just talking out of your ass and making up statistics to support your claim.

Remember there's something called the post hoc fallacy which means that just because something occurs after an event, it doesn't mean that it is caused by the event.

Primitive man didn't understand this. That's why they though that sacrificing virgins would calm the Gods and offer them protection from an earthquake but never realizing that an earthquake's occurance had nothing to do with the sacrifice or lack of sacrifice of a virgin.

 
jamesag96
Posts: 2007
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2001 2:59 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:02 am

Contrary to what many choose to believe, this is not a civil rights issue and in no way compares to the issues facing people of color.

I think the activist judges are trying to trump the system to promote their own beliefs without regard to the laws of the land and the will of the people. There is a right and a wrong way to do this, these judges, and these mayors are going about it the wrong way.

Not that anyone cares, but I believe that a same sex couple should under the bindings of a union have the same rights and privileges that a man/woman union would.

Seriously, could same sex couples do much worse than the already sickening 50% divorce rate?

It appears to me, that it is far too easy for anyone to get married same sex or not...Brittany Spears, J-Lo....a few of my cousins. Ridiculous.

J
Why Kate, You're not wearing a bustle. How lewd.
 
SegmentKing
Posts: 3224
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2000 7:16 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:10 am

I'm gay and against gay marriage.... marriage is a religious term that is only going to radicalize the right wing & make them MORE miltant..

anyway... I'm glad that it never got to the floor, but it's a sad day in Washington when your supposive "future" president misses so many votes, including this one.

I'm wondering if the gays & lesbians are going to support Kerry now..

anyway, i'm glad to hear it was shot down :P
~ ~ ~ ~ pRoFeSsIoNaL hUrRiCaNe DoDgEr ~ ~ ~ ~
 
jamesag96
Posts: 2007
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2001 2:59 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:23 am

Why would gays and lesbians support Kerry now...he has said the same things Bush has said regarding Gay Marriage...well as of yesterday he had. No telling today.  Smile

Another question, why is it Gays and lesbians? Isn't the term "Gay" like an umbrella for both sexes? Seems a tad redundant.

J
Why Kate, You're not wearing a bustle. How lewd.
 
mdsh00
Posts: 3968
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 11:28 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:39 am

Back to the economy and the war on terrorism.

Thank you. I'm so sick of this Gay Marriage Amendment crap. There are so many other problems both in the country and in the world that are more important than gays wanting to get married. This is simply Conservative pandering to their base, meanwhile wasting time and taxpayer money on their zealotry.
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change."
 
vafi88
Posts: 2981
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 10:32 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:59 am

Don't worry, I said it, and I meant it, Right wing nuts usually don't like change and hate anything that doesn't benefit them!

I said that people who support the bill also were or would be against desegregation of our public places in the 50s/60s and would probably be racist...

It's no news to me that b757300 thinks this way.
I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
 
ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:23 am

Contrary to what many choose to believe, this is not a civil rights issue and in no way compares to the issues facing people of color.

...really? Do expand on that.



(I could however, save you the time by stating that unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that gays are not born as they are, you're wasting your time).
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
AIR757200
Posts: 1466
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2000 8:30 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:43 am


At least my Senator is on my side as I received this E-mail...


"Thank you . . .

. . for contacting me to share your opposition to the federal
marriage amendment to the Constitution. I share your concerns.
On July 14, 2004, the Senate considered a procedural vote related
to the proposed Constitutional Amendment. I voted against this
measure, and it failed by a vote of 48-50.

This is an emotional issue for many people whose diverse opinions
reflect their strong convictions. The United States Constitution has
acted as a safeguard for our liberties since 1787. It is my belief
that this celebrated document should only be amended in
extraordinary circumstances. This is not such an occasion.
I
believe that we must respect the rights of those in committed
relationships - rights most of us take for granted, like visiting a
critically-ill loved one in the hospital or shared property
protections.
...."

It continues for another paragraph or so. However, I put in bold for the reason why I was against the FMA.. The FMA does NOT belong in our Constitution of FREEDOM and RIGHTS.
 
JAL777
Posts: 2453
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 10:13 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 10:25 am

As a card carrying member of the Republican party... I am absolutely................




relieved. What a STUPID idea.
 
jaysit
Posts: 10186
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 10:27 am

"Contrary to what many choose to believe, this is not a civil rights issue and in no way compares to the issues facing people of color."

Really?
How so? Lets hear it from the straight white guy.

Well, let me tell you - as a person of color - that I find homophobia just as obnoxious as any form of racism. Oh, and while we're at it, sexism is pretty heinous too (just in case you're going to surprise us with some other pearls of wisdom).
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 10:35 am

Amen to this! It's sad that Bush remains firmly under the thumb of the religious right on this issue, another example of how their misguided influence continues to reach into government when church and state should remain separated. Thankfully, such a myopic measure didn't pass muster, here.

"Too many RINO's and commies in the Senate."

What an incredibly sophomoric comment, B757300. It makes you sound much younger than what your profile says. Why are you so afraid of "queers", as you call them? What specific harm have they done you, pray tell? Pathetic!  Angry
 
garnetpalmetto
Posts: 5351
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:38 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:09 am

What an incredibly sophomoric comment, B757300. It makes you sound much younger than what your profile says

Funny, his age changed in his profile. It's now at 21-25....I call shenanigans.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
 
jamesag96
Posts: 2007
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2001 2:59 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:43 am

Concordeboy...I'd be wasting my time then because I too tend to believe that people are born that way. I have several family members and some close friends that are gay and I get easily riled up when they are treated negatively.

There is no way around it, I over generalized, and for that I apologize.

With regards to the topic, I have always believed, much to the dismay of a few friends (Central Texas what do you want?) that as long as two people love each other they should be able to realize all of the benefits of a union/marriage.

Re: Jaysit, I am man enough to admit when I type before I think, lets see you atone for 90% of your posts.



Why Kate, You're not wearing a bustle. How lewd.
 
DC10GUY
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 5:52 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:47 am

Let me get this "straight" The fag hating republicans have complete control of both the congress and the senate and the white house but they won't ban gay marriage ??? What are they turning liberal or something ???
Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:52 pm

Are we back to really important stuff yet, or are we still bitching about the President appeasing the hard right religious in his party? If we are still there we need to be careful before someone starts to examine what the opposition is doing to appease its hard-line zealots.

Oh, and quit making blanket statements about "fag hating republicans"...you are guilty of prejudical behavior by those carelessly thrown remarks. Frigging bedwettingcommiepinkoliberal. (see? sucks don't it?)
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
User avatar
Aloha717200
Posts: 3739
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:50 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:59 pm

I am really surprised that even a good many of the GOP senators opposed this bill as well.


There is NEVER a valid excuse to write bigotry and discrimination into our constitution, a document that stands for freedom and equality. Writing bigotry into it is no less despicable than writing an amendment that delcared minorities to be a lower class.

Gays are people who who have the same rights to the pursuit of happiness as anyone else.


"Protecting marriage", please....please....TELL me how the Gay community is jeopardizing marriage? I don't see them trying to prevent hetero marriages from happening....in fact all I see is them trying to enjoy the same happiness as anyone else. They should have the right to marry their loved one.

I support gay marriage. I find it disgusting that our compassionate conservative president can't find it within his heart to see that Gays deserve the same rights as anybody else. Or at the very least, the right to civil unions.
 
DC10GUY
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 5:52 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:02 pm

Sometimes the truth hurts... The republicans are not standing up for the family dude ??? America is in trouble. Men are marring men women marring women and the REPUBLICANS let America down ...
Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
 
diamond
Posts: 3000
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:01 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:15 pm

Somewhere in the 'bunker', Cheney, Bush and Rove are having a scotch on the rocks, and sampling their latest contraband Cuban cigars.

Why? Because this whole thing is playing out just exactly as they had planned.
Blank.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:31 pm

A very good thing. I think the Republicans should go back to one of their core issues, states' rights, and let each state decide for themselves. It isn't, nor should it be a Federal issue, and we certainly should not have a Constitutional Amendment, putting forth state-sanctioned discrimination.
 
DC10GUY
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 5:52 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:35 pm

Diamond, You hit that nail on the head... As long as the gay issue is on the front page the Americans coming home in coffins problem will slip from the front page ... Sounds like a plan to me.
Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
 
ATL2CDG
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 3:13 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:35 pm

Alpha 1:

The Republicans gave up their 'core issues' with international 'intervention', bigger government and hijacking of social policy. It's all smoke 'n' mirrors for them: preach one thing and practice another.
Ignorantia juris neminem excusat.
 
johnboy
Posts: 2560
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 9:09 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:14 pm

Hey, here's some food for thought!

For those that that care to view, it's the news story that states European study shows that same-sex marriage doesn't hurt society.

Not quite what the Doctor (Frist) ordered, I'm afraid!


http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?date=2004/07/14/4

PS For those repeating what Rush, Michael, Sean, and Bill have to say...please check out your facts. Ignorance is not pretty.
 
ussherd
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Amendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:04 pm

Meanwhile, back in the UK the the House of Lords voted 148 to 130 to add an amendment onto the Civil Partnerships Bill, to allow close relatives who are over the age of 30 and have been living together continually for 12 years to form a civil partnership. This would mean parents, children, siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles, nephews and nieces would be able to form a civil partnership and access all the rights and responsibilities associated with this new legal relationship for same-sex couples. This is widely viewed as a wrecking tactic on the part of the Conservative Peers in th Upper House. The Bill has now passed back to the House of Commons and the government has undertaken to remove this amendment (sponsored by Conservative peer Baroness O'Cathain) which makes the Bill unworkable and undermines hundreds of years of family law. Organisations such as the Law Society and Carers UK say this Bill is the wrong vehicle for such changes. The earliest the Bill could receive royal assent and become law, if it is not delayed at any stage, would be late 2004. However, it will take another 12 months to implement the Civil Partnership Act and same-sex partners would then be able to register from late 2005.

What actually happens remains to be seen. The bill could die, the two Houses could come to an agreement or the Government could re-introduce the same bill next year... in the latter case the Bill would not need to be passed by the Lords to become law, but this is usually only happens under exceptional circumstances.


Cada loco con su tema...
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13469
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:31 pm

Quote from BBC item about this:

"BBC religious affairs correspondent Jane Little says that to many Americans the constitution itself is sacred - despite 11,000 attempts, it has been amended only 17 times in 200 years."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3895439.stm
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:36 pm

11,000 attempts ? Blimey - I wonder what they were all for...
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
N6376M
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 12:54 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:49 pm

B757300 -

Where are all your "facts" about the runaway divorce and illegitimacy rates? You've shown yourself to be a bull$hit artist with a big bark but very little (ney, no) substance to back what you claim to be "facts".

If making yourself look stupid was the goal, I'll borrow a phrase from our President - MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

-76M
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 10:34 pm

Facts are that gays getting married, while I'm against it for my own reasons, will not threaten traditional families, if those who start traditional families would take their own committments mor seriously. If there were not a 50% divorce rate among married couples; or the instances of domestic violence that occur, would anyone be worried about the traditional family? I doubt it.

The excuse that this threatens traditional families is just a cover to try and legitimize their personal discomfort and laothing of gays. And to take it to the extreme of a Constitutional Amendment is just the wrong way to go.
 
jaysit
Posts: 10186
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:40 pm

"A very good thing. I think the Republicans should go back to one of their core issues, states' rights, and let each state decide for themselves."

Lets see this for what it is.
The Republicans are no more torchbearers for states rights than the Dems are. The GOP used "states rights" as a catch word for its grand Southern strategy. It doesn't exactly hold states rights dear in any sense of the term other than as political strategy.

In the end, both parties will use any strategy possible: Dems will use the power of the Fed. govt and states rights to push for greater civil rights; the GOP will do the same to restrict those rights.

Frankly, the way the Senate played this out was probably for the best. The notion of marriage as a heterosexual joining IS quite indelibly ingrained in societies, and its quite understandable how some people of good conscience are uneasy with it. I can see how my Grandma (were she alive) would conjure up an image of Dennis Rodman in a white gown. Cultural imagery is hard to overcome !

For this issue to be eventually resolved to the satisfaction of everyone - jurists and the public - we will have to have a legal definition of marriage that includes civil unions such that the public can see civil unions as being separate, but the law can view a civil union as being a subcategory of marriage.

Stifling the debate - and banning civil unions too - as the current Senate bill did, is something that Bill Frist should be totally ashamed of.
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:48 pm

Since there most likely isn't a statistic on the divorce rate of gay couples... what is the "separation rate" on these unions? I have read and heard percentages in the upper 70's and time frames of approximately 2-3 years? I too am against gay marriage in general, but would see no problem in a civil union contract or something similar. Tax breaks would be a benefit, as would health care coverage from one or the other as well. Just about everything else can be covered in contracts or wills.

If any of those statistics are close to accurate, it would be a good time to become a "Gay Partnership" Attorney, as it appears there will be lots of business coming your way when Bob and Fred, or Susie and Kathy decide to separate and have to divide their property.....
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

JeffM

Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:52 pm

JeffM: Since there most likely isn't a statistic on the divorce rate of gay couples... what is the "separation rate" on these unions? I have read and heard percentages in the upper 70's and time frames of approximately 2-3 years?

You´d have to compare that to the separation rate of married or unmarried hetero couples, however. And since there´s already an above-50% divorce rate for married couples, I´d guess the overall numbers would be at least in that ballpark...
 
garnetpalmetto
Posts: 5351
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:38 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:53 pm

Where are all your "facts" about the runaway divorce and illegitimacy rates? You've shown yourself to be a bull$hit artist with a big bark but very little (ney, no) substance to back what you claim to be "facts".

I still think it's funny that his age has changed downward overnight...B757300 is one of those users who, when you provide a cogent argument, slithers back under the rock from whence he came. Once a question is raised that isn't answered by the Bush talking points, he quickly shuts up.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
 
jamesag96
Posts: 2007
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2001 2:59 am

RE: Senate Rejects Bid For Ammendment Against Gays!

Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:30 am

While I don't agree with Mr. Stretched 757...maybe the guy had a birthday.

As for you maybe you should stop calling the kettle black...with some of your posts I am questioning the value of education at Gamecock U.
Why Kate, You're not wearing a bustle. How lewd.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: speedygonzales, TheF15Ace and 23 guests