PDA

View Full Version : Cali courts uphold the gay marriage ban


Crisco
05-26-2009, 07:41 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30936298

I like what the Judge said about the people having the right to vote to change their constitution.

A judge without his head of his bum.

CAVEMAN
05-26-2009, 10:38 PM
Finally some sanity!

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 03:05 AM
How will you benefit now that CA has banned gay marriages? How do you feel about interracial marriages?

Boy, they sure showed them gays something, huh?

NateR
05-29-2009, 03:22 AM
How will you benefit now that CA has banned gay marriages?

It shows that the people are still in control of their own government. There might be a lot of people supporting gay marriage, but there are obviously a lot more against it.

How do you feel about interracial marriages?

Seriously? I'm disappointed in you. I actually believed you were smarter than this. It's irrelevant, the two issues are completely unrelated.

Obviously the blacks in California can understand the difference between race (something you are born into) and sexual preference (something you choose), because they were the deciding factor for passing the gay marriage ban in California.

Why don't you ask Obama and Biden about how they feel about interracial marriage? Because last I checked they both opposed gay marriage as well.

Boy, they sure showed them gays something, huh?

We showed them that America is still a Democracy and they're views are still in the minority. That's all that matters.

huan
05-29-2009, 03:56 AM
How will you benefit now that CA has banned gay marriages? How do you feel about interracial marriages?

Boy, they sure showed them gays something, huh?
Are you kidding me?

There is no comparison between race and sex. Do you want to tell me there is no difference between a man and a woman?

I'm so sick of hearing this race card argument because it sounds so persuasive yet couldn't be more false. Males and females are inherently different, their brains are different. These differences are significant. There are no inherent differences between races.

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 03:59 AM
It shows that the people are still in control of their own government. There might be a lot of people supporting gay marriage, but there are obviously a lot more against it. The ones who are against it have nothing to lose, therefor it doesn't hurt them emotionally or financially. Imagine if you were told you weren't allowed to marry the one you love and wished to be bonded with for life, enjoying the liberties and freedoms that a marriage entails.


Seriously? I'm disappointed in you. I actually believed you were smarter than this. It's irrelevant, the two issues are completely unrelated.

I'm actually disappointed in those who wish to deny others the benefits in which they are entitled to, namely marrying the one they love.


Obviously the blacks in California can understand the difference between race (something you are born into) and sexual preference (something you choose), because they were the deciding factor for passing the gay marriage ban in California.

Evidence has already been offered up to you to show that there is a strong possibility that being gay is not a choice for some. You just don't accept it. I think the blacks that voted against it are just as wrong as any other people of any other race who voted against it.


Why don't you ask Obama and Biden about how they feel about interracial marriage? Because last I checked they both opposed gay marriage as well.

I don't need to as I know where they stand on that issue. I disagree with them on that issue and others believe it or not.



We showed them that America is still a Democracy and they're views are still in the minority. That's all that matters.

We've been through this before. We are not a democracy, but a republic. Remember when Tyburn added that we were a federal republic?

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 04:19 AM
Are you kidding me?

Have you read history when interracial marriages were illegal? Those were some bad times. I feel that eventually the same will happen when gay people will be allowed to marry, and people will look back on today and think that these times were bad in the fact that people were trying to make laws to deny gays the right to pursue "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."


There is no comparison between race and sex. Do you want to tell me there is no difference between a man and a woman?

No, which is why I didn't.


I'm so sick of hearing this race card argument because it sounds so persuasive yet couldn't be more false. Males and females are inherently different, their brains are different. These differences are significant. There are no inherent differences between races.

There are many biological differences between races. I believe that your statement is somewhat wrong. My comment wasn't to compare races and sexual orientation, but to compare the denials of marriage to both groups based upon social issues.

Some here think the government is too big when they try to take away rights that they have a self-interest in. Yet those same people are all for big government taking away or stifling the rights of citizens that don't live the lifestyle they wish them to.

MattHughesRocks
05-29-2009, 04:42 AM
A marriage is between a penis and a vagina.As it should be.

J.B.
05-29-2009, 04:55 AM
A marriage is between a penis and a vagina.As it should be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQvnZOR_oIk :laugh:

Crisco
05-29-2009, 05:21 AM
How will you benefit now that CA has banned gay marriages? How do you feel about interracial marriages?

Boy, they sure showed them gays something, huh?

lol. How do you benefit from them allowing gay marriages?

Why does it matter if I benefit from them banning it? It's an issue I and apparently most people in California feel strongly about.

I have no issue what so ever with civil unions.

A marriage is between a man(of any color) and a woman(of any color).

I'm sorry if the people voted against you this time.

I don't really like your tone. It was actually very rude and it made me want to punch you square in your face. I figured I'd say something about it so it didn't fester and come out in an unrelated post. I apologize for those feelings but I personally believe you know full well you deserve them.

Neezar
05-29-2009, 05:21 AM
I'm actually disappointed in those who wish to deny others the benefits in which they are entitled to, namely marrying the one they love.




Entitled to???

What if I was in love with a married man? Would I be entitled to be able to marry him just because I loved him?

NateR
05-29-2009, 05:43 AM
The ones who are against it have nothing to lose, therefor it doesn't hurt them emotionally or financially. Imagine if you were told you weren't allowed to marry the one you love and wished to be bonded with for life, enjoying the liberties and freedoms that a marriage entails.

Liberties and freedoms? Obviously you've never been married. :laugh:

I'm actually disappointed in those who wish to deny others the benefits in which they are entitled to, namely marrying the one they love.

I would disagree. Marriage is not a right, it's a privilege, and no one is entitled to it. In fact, why are people entitled to these benefits just because they get married? Why can't a single person enjoy some of these benefits and entitlements as well?

Show me where the Constitution guarantees the "right of marriage."

I personally believe that the government shouldn't even be involved in the marriage business. Either you get married in a church or you don't get married at all. What about atheists? You ask. Why do atheists care about marriage in the first place?

Evidence has already been offered up to you to show that there is a strong possibility that being gay is not a choice for some. You just don't accept it. I think the blacks that voted against it are just as wrong as any other people of any other race who voted against it.

Yeah, I remember, your "evidence" wasn't evidence at all. The only people it convinced were those who already believed that people are born gay. Not to mention those people who are dumb enough to believe that the internet is a reliable source of information. :blink:

I don't need to as I know where they stand on that issue. I disagree with them on that issue and others believe it or not.

But it shoots down your silly notion that this is somehow tied with racism.

We've been through this before. We are not a democracy, but a republic. Remember when Tyburn added that we were a federal republic?

We are also a government of, by and for the people. Our government is a servant to the will of the people, not the other way around.

Bonnie
05-29-2009, 06:19 AM
Liberties and freedoms? Obviously you've never been married. :laugh:



I would disagree. Marriage is not a right, it's a privilege, and no one is entitled to it. In fact, why are people entitled to these benefits just because they get married? Why can't a single person enjoy some of these benefits and entitlements as well?

Show me where the Constitution guarantees the "right of marriage."

I personally believe that the government shouldn't even be involved in the marriage business. Either you get married in a church or you don't get married at all. What about atheists? You ask. Why do atheists care about marriage in the first place?



Yeah, I remember, your "evidence" wasn't evidence at all. The only people it convinced were those who already believed that people are born gay. Not to mention those people who are dumb enough to believe that the internet is a reliable source of information. :blink:



But it shoots down your silly notion that this is somehow tied with racism.



We are also a government of, by and for the people. Our government is a servant to the will of the people, not the other way around.

:laugh:

Liberties and freedoms are definitely NOT condusive to a cohesive and enduring marriage. I guess he hasn't heard about that "ball and chain" clause you guys are always complaining about. :wink:

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 06:35 AM
lol. How do you benefit from them allowing gay marriages?

I have nothing at stake in the issue, just like you. I don't feel the need to deny them their ability to pursue "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."


Why does it matter if I benefit from them banning it? It's an issue I and apparently most people in California feel strongly about.

I'm asking if you do. What effect does it have on you? Does it hurt you financially, physically?


I have no issue what so ever with civil unions.

So it's just semantics?


A marriage is between a man(of any color) and a woman(of any color).

That's not the way it always was.


I'm sorry if the people voted against you this time.

I don't live there and didn't vote on the issue. It doesn't affect me one way or the other.


I don't really like your tone.

I really don't care. You've been quite rude to me and if you want to dish it, expect to take it.


It was actually very rude and it made me want to punch you square in your face. I figured I'd say something about it so it didn't fester and come out in an unrelated post. I apologize for those feelings but I personally believe you know full well you deserve them.

What was rude? Nothing. You just have issues that you should maybe work on. You act like such a childish punk. You aren't worth my time anymore. We'll talk when you grow up some.

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 06:36 AM
Entitled to???

What if I was in love with a married man? Would I be entitled to be able to marry him just because I loved him?

If he got divorced, yes.

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 06:55 AM
Liberties and freedoms? Obviously you've never been married. :laugh:

I've suffered with my friends through their marriages. :laugh:


I would disagree. Marriage is not a right, it's a privilege, and no one is entitled to it. In fact, why are people entitled to these benefits just because they get married? Why can't a single person enjoy some of these benefits and entitlements as well?

Some of the benefits a single person would have no use for. There are tax benefits married folks who chose to have kids get that I don't feel are right either.


Show me where the Constitution guarantees the "right of marriage."

I believe it falls under the scope from the DOI.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.


I personally believe that the government shouldn't even be involved in the marriage business. Either you get married in a church or you don't get married at all. What about atheists? You ask. Why do atheists care about marriage in the first place?

You wish to use religion to deny someone the chance for marriage. Atheists still wish to form a marital bond with their partner. Why would you wish to deny this? Isn't it better for society and families for a bond of marriage to be given rather than have a society full of unwed people cohabitating which may lead to promiscuity and then possibly a deterioration of the family structure?


Yeah, I remember, your "evidence" wasn't evidence at all. The only people it convinced were those who already believed that people are born gay. Not to mention those people who are dumb enough to believe that the internet is a reliable source of information. :blink:

You just don't agree with it, but there are many out there that do agree with the evidence I linked to. You yourself seem to use the internet to garner information. What does that make you?:blink:


But it shoots down your silly notion that this is somehow tied with racism.


The issue wasn't about racism, but how due to views of society, marriages weren't allowed. I already explained that though. If you choose not to accept it fine, I feel no need to further expand on my response. I think I stated my intentions with clarity.


We are also a government of, by and for the people. Our government is a servant to the will of the people, not the other way around.

What about the people it is doing a dis-service to?

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 06:57 AM
:laugh:

Liberties and freedoms are definitely NOT condusive to a cohesive and enduring marriage. I guess he hasn't heard about that "ball and chain" clause you guys are always complaining about. :wink:

I see the ball and chain every time my married friends are permitted by their wives to go out. The better leash is now the cell phone.:laugh:

VCURamFan
05-29-2009, 07:01 AM
Dude, I gotta say, you need to learn how to stop talking to yourself! :laugh:

I'll let you in on a little type: multi-quote within a single post!!

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 07:10 AM
Dude, I gotta say, you need to learn how to stop talking to yourself! :laugh:

I'll let you in on a little type: multi-quote within a single post!!

I've got to get my post count up, and this is how I do it.:laugh: I like to give everyone the attention that they deserve. Thanks for the tip, I'll definitely give it a thought in my next series of replies.

p.s. Congrats on graduating. How do you like post-college life?

VCURamFan
05-29-2009, 07:12 AM
Meh. I'll like it more once I get a job. :laugh:

J.B.
05-29-2009, 07:14 AM
Actually, yes, a lot of it IS semantics Buzzard.

I guess you don't know much about our constitution (you are from Canada right?), but if we just permitted "marriage" to homosexuals, then under equal protection, the 14th Amendment, we would have to allow ANYBODY to get married. It may sound like small cookies, and something we could easily stop, but it's still very real.

There is also a lot of principal involved in the matter. The majority of people in the country do NOT condone homosexuality no matter how much you try to argue that it is wrong or bigoted. As long as people are given the chance to vote on the issue, it will be shot-down. It also don't matter how much you try to argue that people are born gay, nobody really cares to hear it because there is no DEFINITIVE evidence that proves it. When the day comes that there is, it will still be probably 50 to 100 years before it's truly accepted among mainstream society, and even then they will still be ridiculed and a VAST minority.

I personally could care less if two guys or two girls want to get "married", but I also don't think we should have to change our personal views in order to suit them. As long as it's put before a vote, I will vote against it because I don't see it as right. Furthermore, when it comes to "benefits" of marriage, I don't really see any unless you have children, at least from a monetary/tax aspect. I don't know any gay couples who can have children outside of a lab, so I think it's easy to see where even some liberal minded people see a difference between hetero marriage and gay marriage.

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 07:33 AM
Actually, yes, a lot of it IS semantics Buzzard.

I guess you don't know much about our constitution (you are from Canada right?), but if we just permitted "marriage" to homosexuals, then under equal protection, the 14th Amendment, we would have to allow ANYBODY to get married. It may sound like small cookies, and something we could easily stop, but it's still very real.

There is also a lot of principal involved in the matter. The majority of people in the country do NOT condone homosexuality no matter how much you try to argue that it is wrong or bigoted. As long as people are given the chance to vote on the issue, it will be shot-down. It also don't matter how much you try to argue that people are born gay, nobody really cares to hear it because there is no DEFINITIVE evidence that proves it. When the day comes that there is, it will still be probably 50 to 100 years before it's truly accepted among mainstream society, and even then they will still be ridiculed and a VAST minority.

I personally could care less if two guys or two girls want to get "married", but I also don't think we should have to change our personal views in order to suit them. As long as it's put before a vote, I will vote against it because I don't see it as right. Furthermore, when it comes to "benefits" of marriage, I don't really see any unless you have children, at least from a monetary/tax aspect. I don't know any gay couples who can have children outside of a lab, so I think it's easy to see where even some liberal minded people see a difference between hetero marriage and gay marriage.

Nope, from the good old USA. I actually misstated the life, liberty, pursuit of happiness as being from the Constitution originally, but clarified it as being from the DOI. While I don't know the constitution by heart, I am familiar enough with it to know what needs to be known, and if I have questions, I'll look it up.

The majority of people won't be the ones being denied marriage. You can still keep your views while allowing them to be married.

There are many marriage benefits which you are unaware of, doesn't mean that they aren't there.

Do you ridicule them because they wish to be legally joined? If so, why?

J.B.
05-29-2009, 07:47 AM
Nope, from the good old USA. I actually misstated the life, liberty, pursuit of happiness as being from the Constitution originally, but clarified it as being from the DOI. While I don't know the constitution by heart, I am familiar enough with it to know what needs to be known, and if I have questions, I'll look it up.

The majority of people won't be the ones being denied marriage. You can still keep your views while allowing them to be married.

There are many marriage benefits which you are unaware of, doesn't mean that they aren't there.

Do you ridicule them because they wish to be legally joined? If so, why?

Oh, I thought you were from Canada for some reason, my bad! Where r u from?

1. Well, no, I can't actually keep my views and allow them "marriage" as you say, because I will admit, as I already did, it is partially about semantics.

2. Okay, you are right, there are other benefits, but they are relatively small unless you have children. You know that, and I know that. Sure, they are there, and I don't really care if gay people get them, but you are still asking me to change my belief structure by giving them those same rights. It may sound silly, but it's true. As long as it's an issue that is being put up for a vote, you are going to get a majority vote against it because most people just don't think it's right.

3. I try not to ridicule them at all, because in my view they are just sinners, no better or worse than any of us. I just don't approve of the homosexual way of life, and it's not something I will ever see myself condoning. Does that make sense to you?

Crisco
05-29-2009, 12:47 PM
How will you benefit now that CA has banned gay marriages? How do you feel about interracial marriages?

Boy, they sure showed them gays something, huh?

It was this statement that was rude. Incase you didn't realize I felt I should point it out to you.

Avoid me if you wish. "It doesn't effect me one way or another physically or financially"

Oh and for future reference you should probably add emotionally to that.

Neezar
05-29-2009, 02:27 PM
Entitled to???

What if I was in love with a married man? Would I be entitled to be able to marry him just because I loved him?

If he got divorced, yes.

Why if he got divorced? What if it that will make me happy, being married to a married man?

You're using 'the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness' gig but there has to be boundaries. That isn't open ended.

You see where I am going with this.....

Miss Foxy
05-29-2009, 02:52 PM
I am against gay marriage. I believe we must sanctify marriages. I believe allowing same-sex marriages is just allowing our children to see perversions. I think it is confusing to a young mind.

TurnOnTheBrightLights
05-29-2009, 03:06 PM
I'll have the unpopular opinion here, but hey thats what America's all about right?

Anywho, I'm conflicted with the Gay Marriage debate.

I don't think you should deny someone from seeing their sick loved one in the hospital and stuff like that, so I'd say I'm in favor of Gay Marriage. Just because I don't agree with homosexuality doesn't mean I have the right to deprive someone of the right to form some sort of union with someone else.

Miss Foxy
05-29-2009, 03:13 PM
How will you benefit now that CA has banned gay marriages? How do you feel about interracial marriages?

Boy, they sure showed them gays something, huh?
I don't think the race card can be used on this one. Gay marriage is morally wrong. Interracial marriages is a personal decision the anatomy would still be male and female no matter what the color is. I don't understand whats wrong with some people and the whole speech about this doesnt affect them? It should! Where are we gonna draw the line as a nation?

Miss Foxy
05-29-2009, 03:16 PM
I'll have the unpopular opinion here, but hey thats what America's all about right?

Anywho, I'm conflicted with the Gay Marriage debate.

I don't think you should deny someone from seeing their sick loved one in the hospital and stuff like that, so I'd say I'm in favor of Gay Marriage. Just because I don't agree with homosexuality doesn't mean I have the right to deprive someone of the right to form some sort of union with someone else.
If you really disagreed with homosexuality you would not be for Gay Marriage. You are either with it or against it.

TurnOnTheBrightLights
05-29-2009, 03:24 PM
If you really disagreed with homosexuality you would not be for Gay Marriage. You are either with it or against it.

Well my point is that I'm for Gay Marriage, and mainly because I don't think being gay is a choice. I won't lie, the act makes me uncomfortable, but I'm not outraged by it either. People are who they are, and they can't help it.

I'm trying to be as respectful as possible with this. I can see why people would be against it. Its definitely a controversial subject to say the least.

Miss Foxy
05-29-2009, 03:29 PM
Well my point is that I'm for Gay Marriage, and mainly because I don't think being gay is a choice. I won't lie, the act makes me uncomfortable, but I'm not outraged by it either. People are who they are, and they can't help it.

I'm trying to be as respectful as possible with this. I can see why people would be against it. Its definitely a controversial subject to say the least.
You are being respectful and so am I. If I am making you feel uncomfortable I apologize in advance. Usually I don't get too crazy unless its regarding Serra, GSP.
I disagree although we can debate for years and years over the topic if someone is born gay or not they have a choice to act upon it.
You stated the act makes you uncomfortable? I agree thats why I don't want my children to see a gay couple parade around town living as man and wife....Imagine how a 6yr old processes that?

TurnOnTheBrightLights
05-29-2009, 03:42 PM
You are being respectful and so am I. If I am making you feel uncomfortable I apologize in advance. Usually I don't get too crazy unless its regarding Serra, GSP.
I disagree although we can debate for years and years over the topic if someone is born gay or not they have a choice to act upon it.
You stated the act makes you uncomfortable? I agree thats why I don't want my children to see a gay couple parade around town living as man and wife....Imagine how a 6yr old processes that?

Everyone here is being respectful. I just said it cause I know its a very sensitive topic and other forums I've been on can get a bit heated (though everyone here seems a lot more mature, which is refreshing when it comes to the internet), as it should be.

The thing about it making me uncomfortable, I think it has to do with the way I was raised (Irish Catholic upbringing).

Crisco
05-29-2009, 03:43 PM
I'll have the unpopular opinion here, but hey thats what America's all about right?

Anywho, I'm conflicted with the Gay Marriage debate.

I don't think you should deny someone from seeing their sick loved one in the hospital and stuff like that, so I'd say I'm in favor of Gay Marriage. Just because I don't agree with homosexuality doesn't mean I have the right to deprive someone of the right to form some sort of union with someone else.

Believe it or not close to everyone here believes they should have the same legal rights as regular married couple. The thing we disagree is on is whether they should actually be called marriages.

Civil unions with the same rights is fine with me. It is not a marriage.

The liberal arguement is what's the difference then?

I agree. What is the difference? Take your civil union and be happy.

TurnOnTheBrightLights
05-29-2009, 03:54 PM
Believe it or not close to everyone here believes they should have the same legal rights as regular married couple. The thing we disagree is on is whether they should actually be called marriages.

Civil unions with the same rights is fine with me. It is not a marriage.

The liberal arguement is what's the difference then?

I agree. What is the difference? Take your civil union and be happy.

I can agree with that.

To me anyways, "marriage' is more of a religious ceremony/practice.

Crisco
05-29-2009, 04:01 PM
I can agree with that.

To me anyways, "marriage' is more of a religious ceremony/practice.

EXACTLY!

So you didn't really know it but you agreed with us :wink: :laugh:

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 06:43 PM
I am against gay marriage. I believe we must sanctify marriages. I believe allowing same-sex marriages is just allowing our children to see perversions. I think it is confusing to a young mind.

Is it as confusing as a parent with child having a sexual relationship with another unmarried person?

Buzzard
05-29-2009, 06:55 PM
Why if he got divorced? What if it that will make me happy, being married to a married man?

You're using 'the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness' gig but there has to be boundaries. That isn't open ended.

You see where I am going with this.....


If you get married, wouldn't you then be married to a married person?

To me your argument doesn't hold water. The reason being when 2 gay men/women marry, they aren't breaking up a relationship in order to marry, where in your scenario you are. There is quite a difference.

What if because of a certain sin you commit on a daily or weekly basis, you were denied marriage? Yeah I know it is a "what if" question, but it seems that the ones wishing to deny others something based on a religious value are casting stones while being guilty of many sins themselves. Marriage isn't only for religious people, so perhaps the gay couples don't see their orientation as being morally wrong.

Have to go, would love to continue this later. Have a great day all.

NateR
05-29-2009, 06:56 PM
Is it as confusing as a parent with child having a sexual relationship with another unmarried person?

Well, that's wrong as well. Of course it happens, but those people aren't asking to be "sanctified" by the state.

The problem here is that somewhere along the line a few people have started to consider gay sex as normal and as healthy as hetero sex. I would disagree with that and most people who are against gay marriage would as well. It's a perversion of the natural use of the human body, there is nothing healthy or normal about it and the last thing we need to do is teach our children that it is acceptable behavior.

NateR
05-29-2009, 06:57 PM
Marriage isn't only for religious people,

Since when?

Crisco
05-29-2009, 07:05 PM
Since when?

:cool: :wink:

Miss Foxy
05-29-2009, 07:41 PM
Is it as confusing as a parent with child having a sexual relationship with another unmarried person?
What are you trying to say? If your hinting around that I do that? WHO, WHAT, WHERE, AND HOW I do someone is none of your business. My children do not know my sexual business thank you very much!! As a matter of fact any gal with class would not bring that out in front of her children!:angry:

Crisco
05-29-2009, 07:43 PM
and for the record being a little boy or girl it's much less striking to see a man and woman kiss then to watch two dudes go at it.

If you don't think it is then you are twisted.

Mac
05-29-2009, 07:52 PM
Ha ha ha , Buzzard supports homo rights. HA HA HA HA

Crisco
05-29-2009, 07:59 PM
Ha ha ha , Buzzard supports homo rights. HA HA HA HA

:laugh: :laugh: It sounds funny when someone says it.

Neezar
05-29-2009, 08:23 PM
If you get married, wouldn't you then be married to a married person?

To me your argument doesn't hold water. The reason being when 2 gay men/women marry, they aren't breaking up a relationship in order to marry, where in your scenario you are. There is quite a difference.

What if because of a certain sin you commit on a daily or weekly basis, you were denied marriage?
If I know the rules of the game and choose to play that way then so be it.
Yeah I know it is a "what if" question, but it seems that the ones wishing to deny others something based on a religious value are casting stones while being guilty of many sins themselves. Marriage isn't only for religious people, so perhaps the gay couples don't see their orientation as being morally wrong.

Have to go, would love to continue this later. Have a great day all.

No, you are assuming that I meant to break up the relationship. What if we were all agreeable? Why shouldn't we be allowed to marry? It is our pursuit of happiness, right? What about the teacher and her 13 year old lover who wanted to get legally married? They both wanted it and didn't see it as morally wrong so why not?

I am showing you that your 'pursuit of happiness' argument doesn't hold water.

NateR
05-29-2009, 08:28 PM
I'd be interested to know how "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" applies to gay marriage or marriage in general. Especially since homosexuality would have been considered a crime in the days of our Founding Fathers.

Crisco
05-29-2009, 08:30 PM
I'd be interested to know how "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" applies to gay marriage or marriage in general. Especially since homosexuality would have been considered a crime in the days of our Founding Fathers.

Agreed.

NateR
05-29-2009, 08:33 PM
Or how giving them the right to civil union isn't a fair enough concession.

Yeah, they should be happy with civil unions. To try to claim that this is somehow a Civil Rights issue on the same level as the segregation days from the 50s and 60s is really just a slap in the face to what African-Americans truly suffered through in those days.

If this is really about tax breaks and other benefits, then it just cements the notion that this is all for selfish, materialistic reasons. Love has nothing to do with it.

ufcfan2
05-29-2009, 09:55 PM
Let same sex marriage happen,should'nt they allowed to be miserable as anyother married couple :tongue0011:


I'm at odds with this whole scenrio no matter how you cut it. One part says who cares really, we should be mature enough as a nation/world to tolerate this stuff by now. We don't need the whole fire and brimstone talk for every situation that we don't morally agree with.
The other part of me finds it somewhat distastfull especially two dudes,its just plain raunchy. Now two women on the other hand Im all down for nothing more sexy than two women.........(bleep,bleep,bleep):rolleyes:
In all seriousness its a complex situation to say the least and no matter ur religious view or moral views I think we need to do whats best for the whole. Lets face it ur not gonna stop same sex relationships evah so lets work it out for the best for everyone..Just remember ur personal views are'nt the same as theirs,but we tend think they should be(this could be said for pretty much anything).

Crisco
05-29-2009, 10:01 PM
Let same sex marriage happen,should'nt they allowed to be miserable as anyother married couple :tongue0011:


I'm at odds with this whole scenrio no matter how you cut it. One part says who cares really, we should be mature enough as a nation/world to tolerate this stuff by now. We don't need the whole fire and brimstone talk for every situation that we don't morally agree with.
The other part of me finds it somewhat distastfull especially two dudes,its just plain raunchy. Now two women on the other hand Im all down for nothing more sexy than two women.........(bleep,bleep,bleep):rolleyes:
In all seriousness its a complex situation to say the least and no matter ur religious view or moral views I think we need to do whats best for the whole. Lets face it ur not gonna stop same sex relationships evah so lets work it out for the best for everyone..Just remember ur personal views are'nt the same as theirs,but we tend think they should be(this could be said for pretty much anything).

No one is trying to stop them or tell them they can't be together.

The best situation for everyone involved is civil unions and they already have that compromise.

The gay movement are the ones pushing and upping the ante on the fight. They should take the civil unions and live out their lives together like they say they want too instead of trying to further ignite the flames just so they have something to do on the weekends.

And your right we do have different opinions on the matter. I as a Christian take it very seriously. This is a sacred institution that this country makes a mockery of on a daily basis with its 60% divorce rate. HOWEVER, 2 WRONGS do not make a RIGHT.

Civil union is the compromise that you speak of. They are just too hell bent on rubbing it in Christian faces to move with their lives and stop thinking only of themselves.

Buzzard
05-30-2009, 09:25 AM
Well, that's wrong as well. Of course it happens, but those people aren't asking to be "sanctified" by the state.

Unlike the fornicators, the gays wish to solidify their relationship and have it legally recognized as a mutually exclusive married relationship.


The problem here is that somewhere along the line a few people have started to consider gay sex as normal and as healthy as hetero sex. I would disagree with that and most people who are against gay marriage would as well. It's a perversion of the natural use of the human body, there is nothing healthy or normal about it and the last thing we need to do is teach our children that it is acceptable behavior.

To those who feel that they were born gay, it is normal and healthy. I don't know any gay folks who "chose" to be gay.

Since when?

Since the first time a non religious person was married.


What are you trying to say? If your hinting around that I do that? WHO, WHAT, WHERE, AND HOW I do someone is none of your business. My children do not know my sexual business thank you very much!! As a matter of fact any gal with class would not bring that out in front of her children!

Just like WHO, WHAT, WHERE, AND HOW they do someone should be none of your business, but you make it yours. You have already alluded to your personal business on a public forum, so it is quite possible that people who you wish didn't know your business do.


Ha ha ha , Buzzard supports homo rights. HA HA HA HA

Yep, sure do. Just as I would support your rights if I felt that they were being infringed on. I'm an equal opportunity advocate, even if I am not affected in it. If I feel you are being treated unjustly, I will come to your defense.



No, you are assuming that I meant to break up the relationship. What if we were all agreeable? Why shouldn't we be allowed to marry? It is our pursuit of happiness, right? What about the teacher and her 13 year old lover who wanted to get legally married? They both wanted it and didn't see it as morally wrong so why not?

I am showing you that your 'pursuit of happiness' argument doesn't hold water.

If you were all agreeable to share in a marriage, I say go for it. I am not being harmed by what you do behind closed doors and it should be no business of mine.

A thirteen year old person isn't legally allowed to make adult decisions. If the thirteen year old person is capable of showing the courts that he/she is {can't think of the word}, then it again is none of my business. In ancient times, people got married at ages younger than that. I believe it is written in the bible. I may be wrong, but I believe I have read about younger marriages in the bible.

My pursuit of happiness argument hold more water than your does in my opinion. Your results may differ.


I'd be interested to know how "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" applies to gay marriage or marriage in general. Especially since homosexuality would have been considered a crime in the days of our Founding Fathers.

Couldn't that also be said for interracial marriages? Not to equate the civil right issue with the marriage issue except for the point of a denial of liberties that each side has encountered.


Yeah, they should be happy with civil unions. To try to claim that this is somehow a Civil Rights issue on the same level as the segregation days from the 50s and 60s is really just a slap in the face to what African-Americans truly suffered through in those days.


If this is really about tax breaks and other benefits, then it just cements the notion that this is all for selfish, materialistic reasons. Love has nothing to do with it.

I don't know what reasons these people have. If marriage and a civil union had the exact same benefits, I could agree, since they don't, I don't agree.

I could give more examples, but you probably wouldn't understand the context. Not to be impolite in my reply, but I don't think I could phrase it in a way as to convey my meaning without raising the hackles of the forum. In this instance, I will keep quiet.

Thanks for taking the time all to reply to my posts. I do enjoy these discussions and respect your opinions on this issue, even if they differ from mine.

J.B.
05-30-2009, 11:45 AM
To those who feel that they were born gay, it is normal and healthy. I don't know any gay folks who "chose" to be gay.

You don't know any folks who will admit they chose to be gay is probably more accurate. It's human nature to try and downplay things to make them seem outside of our control when we do things that deep down we know are wrong or when society is not comfortable with it.

Why do so many gay men act like, and talk like girls? Are they born that way too, or do they choose to act that way?

Miss Foxy
05-30-2009, 07:32 PM
FOR YOU BUZZARD,
Yes I have shared personal information on this forum with fellow members, however I have not shared my intimate business with anyone. I think your a piece of garbage as of now. Please do not even respond to my post. I hope you disappear off this forum, but unfortunately I don't have a genie in a bottle. I don't think you have anything to offer the world aside from being a prick. You stick up for everything thats wrong you like playing the Devils Advocate I suppose...Go ahead and continue to make assumptions on peoples lives you obviously have nothing to do. Oh and the next time you make any reference to my "bedroom" secrets I will escalate this I promise you.... That should not be tolerated.:angry:

NateR
05-30-2009, 07:39 PM
FOR YOU BUZZARD,
Yes I have shared personal information on this forum with fellow members, however I have not shared my intimate business with anyone. I think your a piece of garbage as of now. Please do not even respond to my post. I hope you disappear off this forum, but unfortunately I don't have a genie in a bottle. I don't think you have anything to offer the world aside from being a prick. You stick up for everything thats wrong you like playing the Devils Advocate I suppose...Go ahead and continue to make assumptions on peoples lives you obviously have nothing to do. Oh and the next time you make any reference to my "bedroom" secrets I will escalate this I promise you.... That should not be tolerated.:angry:

It's a standard tactic of Gay Rights activists. If someone doesn't agree with you, then drag their name through the mud.

Buzzard
05-30-2009, 08:25 PM
FOR YOU BUZZARD,
Yes I have shared personal information on this forum with fellow members, however I have not shared my intimate business with anyone. I think your a piece of garbage as of now. Please do not even respond to my post. I hope you disappear off this forum, but unfortunately I don't have a genie in a bottle. I don't think you have anything to offer the world aside from being a prick. You stick up for everything thats wrong you like playing the Devils Advocate I suppose...Go ahead and continue to make assumptions on peoples lives you obviously have nothing to do. Oh and the next time you make any reference to my "bedroom" secrets I will escalate this I promise you.... That should not be tolerated.:angry:

I never meant to cause you anger or to allude that you are not a good person. I don't know you well enough to make a decision. You have made allusions to your personal business, and I apologize if I have offended you by referring back to it. I just find it a bit hypocritical that you wish to deny others of things based upon morals when your own actions could possibly called into question. You wish to have your personal business kept personal and private, but seem to have no problem delving into another persons personal business and denying them privileges. That is quite hypocritical in my opinion.

If you wish to threaten me over the internet, have at it. Escalate it if you wish, but don't expect me to do any of that in return or to shake in my shoes. You're angry because some of what I say hits home and you can't stand it. Name calling shows that you have no real arguments in the issue, so you revert to it when you have nothing to say. I have more to offer this world then you will ever know, and your assumptions are just that.

Have a great weekend.


It's a standard tactic of Gay Rights activists. If someone doesn't agree with you, then drag their name through the mud.

How have I dragged her name through the mud? I am far from a gay rights activist. Posting on a message board is as far as I have gone. As I have said before, it doesn't affect me one way or another. I just don't know why people can't keep their noses out of other peoples business and trying to deny them the ability to marry. If a civil union provided them the exact same benefits, I would have nothing to argue about.



You don't know any folks who will admit they chose to be gay is probably more accurate. It's human nature to try and downplay things to make them seem outside of our control when we do things that deep down we know are wrong or when society is not comfortable with it.

I think my statement is more accurate. I don't know any gay folks now that I am aware of. The ones I knew before and those I worked with stated that they always felt how they did, and didn't just decide to be gay. I think it's a slightly ridiculous assumption to think people would choose to be something which brings such a stigma upon themselves. I believe some may have chosen to be in that lifestyle, but not everyone. I could be wrong, but that's the way I see it. I can respect that you don't like it, I don't really think about it except when participating in a discussion such as this. I think we have both said our pieces on this issue and I can accept that we disagree on this issue.

TurnOnTheBrightLights
05-30-2009, 08:26 PM
It's a standard tactic of Gay Rights activists. If someone doesn't agree with you, then drag their name through the mud.

Remember the VP Debate in 2004? When John Edwards brought up Dick Cheney's daughter?

It actually made Dick Cheney a sympathetic figure for I think the only time during the Bush Administration. lol.

Or what the liberal media did to Sarah Palin and her family. I didn't agree with her on a lot issues either, but that was nothing more than character assassination. Even Mike Gravel defended her on a radio show.

Miss Foxy
05-30-2009, 09:05 PM
I never meant to cause you anger or to allude that you are not a good person. I don't know you well enough to make a decision. You have made allusions to your personal business, and I apologize if I have offended you by referring back to it. I just find it a bit hypocritical that you wish to deny others of things based upon morals when your own actions could possibly called into question. You wish to have your personal business kept personal and private, but seem to have no problem delving into another persons personal business and denying them privileges. That is quite hypocritical in my opinion.

If you wish to threaten me over the internet, have at it. Escalate it if you wish, but don't expect me to do any of that in return or to shake in my shoes. You're angry because some of what I say hits home and you can't stand it. Name calling shows that you have no real arguments in the issue, so you revert to it when you have nothing to say. I have more to offer this world then you will ever know, and your assumptions are just that.

Have a great weekend.



How have I dragged her name through the mud? I am far from a gay rights activist. Posting on a message board is as far as I have gone. As I have said before, it doesn't affect me one way or another. I just don't know why people can't keep their noses out of other peoples business and trying to deny them the ability to marry. If a civil union provided them the exact same benefits, I would have nothing to argue about.




I think my statement is more accurate. I don't know any gay folks now that I am aware of. The ones I knew before and those I worked with stated that they always felt how they did, and didn't just decide to be gay. I think it's a slightly ridiculous assumption to think people would choose to be something which brings such a stigma upon themselves. I believe some may have chosen to be in that lifestyle, but not everyone. I could be wrong, but that's the way I see it. I can respect that you don't like it, I don't really think about it except when participating in a discussion such as this. I think we have both said our pieces on this issue and I can accept that we disagree on this issue.
When have I said I have sex with him to anyone on here? I don't talk about what I do behind closed doors. If I do or not thats my burden not yours to try to make a mockery of me. Don't apologize you knew what you were doing. I morally do not agree with someone being gay, however I still respect them as human beings and try not to pass judgment. Its people like you that are so pro-gay marriage that want to twist my personal opinions and shoot me down as a person to accomodate your views. Im sorry I am not being a hypocrit asking to be married in a church being a floozy right? So basically the door is closed behind me I think gays should do the same. No one wants to see it!

Miss Foxy
05-30-2009, 09:10 PM
By the way I was not threatening you when I mean escalate it I was referring to a complaint on your post. I can battle people for days and not get offended, but when you are trying to post something really personal directly to me thats where I draw the line.
Your little phrase about it hitting close to home doesnt phase me one bit! I know what I do and what I am so does GOD.... Guess what? Thats all that matters I walk with my head high and your talking about people minding other peoples business...?? Ohhh the irony in that one. Don't hate on me, because I will stand up for my beliefs and not feel intimidated.

NateR
05-30-2009, 09:21 PM
Personally, I think the notion that gays are being denied ANY of their Constitutional rights by not allowing them to marry, is a load of crap.

Mormons believe in polygamy, but we've been denying them their definition of marriage for centuries now. I don't hear anyone fighting for their "right" to have more than one spouse.

This is all just a bunch of politically correct nonsense.

J.B.
05-30-2009, 09:35 PM
I think my statement is more accurate. I don't know any gay folks now that I am aware of. The ones I knew before and those I worked with stated that they always felt how they did, and didn't just decide to be gay. I think it's a slightly ridiculous assumption to think people would choose to be something which brings such a stigma upon themselves. I believe some may have chosen to be in that lifestyle, but not everyone. I could be wrong, but that's the way I see it. I can respect that you don't like it, I don't really think about it except when participating in a discussion such as this. I think we have both said our pieces on this issue and I can accept that we disagree on this issue.

I don't really think about it outside of these types of discussions either, and I agree with you that if people want to be gay, it really has no direct effect on my life. However, I have my own personal theories about what makes people gay that I have formulated over time in knowing people who are gay, and the small amount of reading I have done on the subject. Personally, I think it's a psychological disorder that is almost always onset by some sort of childhood trauma. It does not always mean they were sexually abused, as I think it can be a number of things that cause it.

I also think that a lot of people who say they have just "always felt that way" are either omitting some of the truth, or they have some deeply repressed issues that they never dealt with. Almost like they have been lying to themselves for so long they actually believe it's true. That is just MY personal opinion, and I don't say that to be offensive to anybody in any way.

I too, respect that we share a difference of opinion. :wink: