Gay Marriage

[Moonbeam]

Great posts lunar.

Thank you.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Since when does the constitution, federal or state, have anything to do with what the majority wants? If that were the case, we'd have black-only schools, white-only schools, no interracial marriages, complete seperatism, rampant racism and Christianity forced down our throats. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

Judging somebody because of their innate qualities like skin color and gender is intolerable. Not granting special rights to somebody because of a chosen lifestyle is not unreasonable.

Actually, in a decade or two, you and you're fellow progressive liberals will be looked back on as the hippies are now...reckless and stupid. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: piasabird


You silly gay people think the world revolves around you, you are so funny.

You silly bigot people think life revolves around you, you are so funny.:roll:

Let me get one thing clear.

Supporting gay rights does not make one gay.
Supporting the decriminalization of drugs does not make one a drug user.
Supporting euthanisa does not make one sucidal or a closet Dr. Kevorkian.
Etc etc etc..
The common theme here is indivdual *freedom* to do what you want with your body. The nanny government has no place protecting me from myself or denying benefits to any group based on personal morality choice unless it violates others rights. They are there to protect individual freedoms and insure equal standing before the law like homosexual marriage for example

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Since when does the constitution, federal or state, have anything to do with what the majority wants? If that were the case, we'd have black-only schools, white-only schools, no interracial marriages, complete seperatism, rampant racism and Christianity forced down our throats. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

Judging somebody because of their innate qualities like skin color and gender is intolerable. Not granting special rights to somebody because of a chosen lifestyle is not unreasonable.

Actually, in a decade or two, you and you're fellow progressive liberals will be looked back on as the hippies are now...reckless and stupid. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

How would you like it if I discriminated against you because you were Christian? That's YOUR chosen lifestyle, not mine.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Great posts lunar.

Thank you.

Oops....

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Since when does the constitution, federal or state, have anything to do with what the majority wants? If that were the case, we'd have black-only schools, white-only schools, no interracial marriages, complete seperatism, rampant racism and Christianity forced down our throats. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

Judging somebody because of their innate qualities like skin color and gender is intolerable. Not granting special rights to somebody because of a chosen lifestyle is not unreasonable.

Actually, in a decade or two, you and you're fellow progressive liberals will be looked back on as the hippies are now...reckless and stupid. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

The notion of "Separate but Equal" was thought to be a remedy for years. It won't work! Marshall argued this and Warren and brethren agreed Unanimously.

I don't think the 'Hippies' were reckless and stupid by any rationalization. They were the youth of the day. They were the kids of WWII and Korea forced to endure a venture into the realm of war for war's sake. They are many of today's leaders. Long haired freaky CEO's and the like.. They also are among the highest educated and intellectually endowed of the era.
They saw hate and tried to shed love upon it. They saw war and tried to end it. They saw bigotry and tried to thwart it. And, they saw tomorrow and tried to embellish it... for you!

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Since when does the constitution, federal or state, have anything to do with what the majority wants? If that were the case, we'd have black-only schools, white-only schools, no interracial marriages, complete seperatism, rampant racism and Christianity forced down our throats. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

Judging somebody because of their innate qualities like skin color and gender is intolerable. Not granting special rights to somebody because of a chosen lifestyle is not unreasonable.

Actually, in a decade or two, you and you're fellow progressive liberals will be looked back on as the hippies are now...reckless and stupid. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

How would you like it if I discriminated against you because you were Christian? That's YOUR chosen lifestyle, not mine.

For centuries the Protestant looked upon the Catholic as sub-human in Ireland and in England. Can you imagine that... both Christian and they just had to find someone to hate. Had to be able to look down on an entire class of people and these Catholic folks were in their own country. Now bring those same hating Christians to America where it is OK to be Protestant or Catholic and who can these folks look down their noses at...? Used to be the Oriental, the Native American Indian, the African... well I guess then the Soviets and now we've run out of folks to hate so we have to look within our own groups for minorities who've dared expose their vulnerability to hate.... but, we've at least found a group...

 

[LunarRay]

Food for thought...

In Romer v. Evans, Supp.12 the Supreme Court struck down a state constitutional amendment which both overturned local ordinances prohibiting discrimination against homosexuals, lesbians or bisexuals, and prohibited any state or local governmental action to either remedy discrimination or to grant preferences based on sexual orientation. The Court declined to follow the lead of the Supreme Court of Colorado, which had held that the amendment infringed on gays' and lesbians' fundamental right to participate in the political process. Supp.13 The Court also rejected the application of the heightened standard reserved for suspect classes, and sought only to establish whether the legislative classification had a rational relation to a legitimate end.


The Court found that the amendment failed even this restrained review. Animus against a class of persons was not considered by the Court as a legitimate goal of government: ''f the constitutional conception of 'equal protection of the laws' means anything, it must at the very least mean that a bare . . . desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot constitute a legitimate governmental interest.'' Supp.14 The Court then rejected arguments that the amendment protected the freedom of association rights of landlords and employers, or that it would conserve resources in fighting discrimination against other groups. The Court found that the scope of the law was unnecessarily broad to achieve these stated purposes, and that no other legitimate rationale existed for such a restriction.

The entire decision

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Since when does the constitution, federal or state, have anything to do with what the majority wants? If that were the case, we'd have black-only schools, white-only schools, no interracial marriages, complete seperatism, rampant racism and Christianity forced down our throats. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

Judging somebody because of their innate qualities like skin color and gender is intolerable. Not granting special rights to somebody because of a chosen lifestyle is not unreasonable.

Actually, in a decade or two, you and you're fellow progressive liberals will be looked back on as the hippies are now...reckless and stupid. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

How would you like it if I discriminated against you because you were Christian? That's YOUR chosen lifestyle, not mine.

Everybody already does...don't you read the boards? I'm not complaining. I might, now, however, suggest we need to pass a law that forces your kids to recognize creationism as a possibility for the existence of the universe. You'd love that, wouldn't you?

 

[Moonbeam]

Please please please, just let me be a bigot and don't tell me about it. That's all I ask except to vote my bigotry.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Since when does the constitution, federal or state, have anything to do with what the majority wants? If that were the case, we'd have black-only schools, white-only schools, no interracial marriages, complete seperatism, rampant racism and Christianity forced down our throats. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

Judging somebody because of their innate qualities like skin color and gender is intolerable. Not granting special rights to somebody because of a chosen lifestyle is not unreasonable.

Actually, in a decade or two, you and you're fellow progressive liberals will be looked back on as the hippies are now...reckless and stupid. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

How would you like it if I discriminated against you because you were Christian? That's YOUR chosen lifestyle, not mine.

Everybody already does...don't you read the boards? I'm not complaining. I might, now, however, suggest we need to pass a law that forces your kids to recognize creationism as a possibility for the existence of the universe. You'd love that, wouldn't you?

I'd trust that my kids were intelligent enough to make up their own minds when they heard all theories in question. Don't think any one theory should be taught exclusively.

 

[LunarRay]

Darkhawk28

I'd trust that my kids were intelligent enough to make up their own minds when they heard all theories in question. Don't think any one theory should be taught exclusively.

Not even the notion by the Catholic Church that only Catholics can go to heaven? I wonder if that has changed since the days the Jesuits drummed that edict into the heads of their students.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Since when does the constitution, federal or state, have anything to do with what the majority wants? If that were the case, we'd have black-only schools, white-only schools, no interracial marriages, complete seperatism, rampant racism and Christianity forced down our throats. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

Judging somebody because of their innate qualities like skin color and gender is intolerable. Not granting special rights to somebody because of a chosen lifestyle is not unreasonable.

Actually, in a decade or two, you and you're fellow progressive liberals will be looked back on as the hippies are now...reckless and stupid. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

How would you like it if I discriminated against you because you were Christian? That's YOUR chosen lifestyle, not mine.

Everybody already does...don't you read the boards? I'm not complaining. I might, now, however, suggest we need to pass a law that forces your kids to recognize creationism as a possibility for the existence of the universe. You'd love that, wouldn't you?

I'd trust that my kids were intelligent enough to make up their own minds when they heard all theories in question. Don't think any one theory should be taught exclusively.

Fine but in the science class lets science please, not fundie hocum.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Since when does the constitution, federal or state, have anything to do with what the majority wants? If that were the case, we'd have black-only schools, white-only schools, no interracial marriages, complete seperatism, rampant racism and Christianity forced down our throats. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

Judging somebody because of their innate qualities like skin color and gender is intolerable. Not granting special rights to somebody because of a chosen lifestyle is not unreasonable.

Actually, in a decade or two, you and you're fellow progressive liberals will be looked back on as the hippies are now...reckless and stupid. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

How would you like it if I discriminated against you because you were Christian? That's YOUR chosen lifestyle, not mine.

Everybody already does...don't you read the boards? I'm not complaining. I might, now, however, suggest we need to pass a law that forces your kids to recognize creationism as a possibility for the existence of the universe. You'd love that, wouldn't you?

Show me one place christains are denied rights and equal protection before the law of any other citizen based on thier affiliation? You can't. Socially, there are ignorant bigoted atheists too, people are that way period bugs the sh1t outta me, so I won't argue about the discrimmination part. But the day christians/muslims of anyone else is told by the state they can't marry, or can't live the life they want as long as it does'nt harm a third party, I'll defend them too.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Since when does the constitution, federal or state, have anything to do with what the majority wants? If that were the case, we'd have black-only schools, white-only schools, no interracial marriages, complete seperatism, rampant racism and Christianity forced down our throats. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

Judging somebody because of their innate qualities like skin color and gender is intolerable. Not granting special rights to somebody because of a chosen lifestyle is not unreasonable.

Actually, in a decade or two, you and you're fellow progressive liberals will be looked back on as the hippies are now...reckless and stupid. Anybody that denies this is fooling themselves.

How would you like it if I discriminated against you because you were Christian? That's YOUR chosen lifestyle, not mine.

Everybody already does...don't you read the boards? I'm not complaining. I might, now, however, suggest we need to pass a law that forces your kids to recognize creationism as a possibility for the existence of the universe. You'd love that, wouldn't you?

I'd trust that my kids were intelligent enough to make up their own minds when they heard all theories in question. Don't think any one theory should be taught exclusively.

Fine but in the science class lets science please, not fundie hocum.

Well, true, but people learn elsewhere other than school. Do I think creationism is a possiblility? Sure I do. Anybody that knows scientific thinking understands that theories are theories until disproven. I have a theory that we're all an experiment in an alien kid's petrie (sp) dish. Is that theory just as valid as "creationism"? Sure it is. Can't be proven OR disproven. I'd let my kids believe what they want to believe. Science class should teach about "creationism" only as a theory, nothing more. Can't pretend that that theory doesn't exist, that wouldn't be scientifically correct either.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Well, true, but people learn elsewhere other than school. Do I think creationism is a possiblility? Sure I do. Anybody that knows scientific thinking understands that theories are theories until disproven. I have a theory that we're all an experiment in an alien kid's petrie (sp) dish. Is that theory just as valid as "creationism"? Sure it is. Can't be proven OR disproven. I'd let my kids believe what they want to believe. Science class should teach about "creationism" only as a theory, nothing more. Can't pretend that that theory doesn't exist, that wouldn't be scientifically correct either.

Well, if creationism is possibly true, then evolution isn't fact...it's merely a theory, so has no place in Science courses either. Now we're getting somewhere!

 

[LordMagnusKain]

To CAD the cunning bigot, the wily weasel of the well turned wriggle, who has spent the last several days and paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph trying to put a nice lawerly and legalistic face on his dead nuts desire to deny gay people the same simple access to the rights and priveleges ALL Americans should enjoy.

if all should enjoy it why do we limit it to 2 people? Why not allow all people access to the right of saying ?this person should be on my medical to? and ?we should be able to adopt??

Why draw lines around gays?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

To CAD the cunning bigot, the wily weasel of the well turned wriggle, who has spent the last several days and paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph trying to put a nice lawerly and legalistic face on his dead nuts desire to deny gay people the same simple access to the rights and priveleges ALL Americans should enjoy.

if all should enjoy it why do we limit it to 2 people? Why not allow all people access to the right of saying ?this person should be on my medical to? and ?we should be able to adopt??

Why draw lines around gays?

Because having more than one mate is dangerous to your health. You can wear our your organ and the monkey goes on unemployment. A definite negative for society.

And you are not getting anywhere Hero because Creationism isn't a theory it's a made up pile of crap. Evolution is a fact and the theory of evolution is it's explanation. The fact of evolution disproves the pile of crap called Creationism. It can't possibly be true because it's a fact that life evolved. The mechanism by which evolution occurred are open to speculative adjustment but not the fact of evolution. Just as the tie between mass and gravity may somehow hide a deeper truth and the theory of gravity may someday change, we will still have the fact of gravity itself just as we have the fact of evolution. By the way, the earth revolves around the sun, in case you hadn't heard.

 

[LordMagnusKain]

Because having more than one mate is dangerous to your health. You can wear our your organ and the monkey goes on unemployment. A definite negative for society

good then why don't you call for what you truly want, hypocrite.

I want a return to a time when divorces where rare, and extra martial sex of all kinds was a shameful thing.

 

[Hossenfeffer]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Because having more than one mate is dangerous to your health. You can wear our your organ and the monkey goes on unemployment. A definite negative for society

good then why don't you call for what you truly want, hypocrite.

I want a return to a time when divorces where rare, and extra martial sex of all kinds was a shameful thing.

That's fine by me. Allowing gays to marry isn't going to keep that from happening.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Because having more than one mate is dangerous to your health. You can wear our your organ and the monkey goes on unemployment. A definite negative for society

good then why don't you call for what you truly want, hypocrite.

I want a return to a time when divorces where rare, and extra martial sex of all kinds was a shameful thing.

In that case you will want to learn something about your unconscious and how we all feel like the worst in the world. You will discover that emotionally damaged human beings are looking for the love they can't give themselves out there in the world where they will never find it. You will see that what people call love is a short term emotional bandage they place on their hidden wounds that temporarily gives them a high. Then reality and daily ritual set in and arguments and suddenly there's that suspicion that we aren't really loved comes rearing its ugly head. So we abandon the lover because they have ceased to be a fix and move on to a hew high only to be disappointed again. Human beings are vacuum cleaners sucking off vacuum cleaners. The hole in our soul is huge and into it we can pour all the love in the world to no avail. Only he who is willing to see that his want for love is due to his own self hate can do the work of repair. In this life, the love you make is equal to the love you take. It is the exact same love and there is nothing to do but give. If you get anything in return from somebody else you will be very lucky. All you will ever be able to do in this world is to influence others by your actions. You can't change people because you want them to be different. And you can't rob Peter to pay Paul.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

To CAD the cunning bigot, the wily weasel of the well turned wriggle, who has spent the last several days and paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph trying to put a nice lawerly and legalistic face on his dead nuts desire to deny gay people the same simple access to the rights and priveleges ALL Americans should enjoy.

if all should enjoy it why do we limit it to 2 people? Why not allow all people access to the right of saying ?this person should be on my medical to? and ?we should be able to adopt??

Why draw lines around gays?

Because they are bigots. They want to limit people from the "right" to marry by limiting it to 2 people, or 2 people who aren't immediate family. How dare they trample the "rights" of these people only seeking the happiness and love the rest of us have.

:roll:

CkG

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Because having more than one mate is dangerous to your health. You can wear our your organ and the monkey goes on unemployment. A definite negative for society

good then why don't you call for what you truly want, hypocrite.

I want a return to a time when divorces where rare, and extra martial sex of all kinds was a shameful thing.

You can... LMK, you can if you want... but, maybe others don't. Maybe they've no interest in their neighbor's life style it is their own they seek to live.
Maybe my belief indicates I shouldn't commit monogamy. Maybe others believe in celebacy... We is all kinds of folks.

Good Grief... I can't even imagine having more than one woman to live with or sharing my life with... but, others may... I live my way.. and don't let other's means and methods change that..
I figure that we're all on a probation of sorts... here on earth.. and for me engaging in behavior that may distract ME from my objective is not acceptable for ME to do.. so I don't.. and I'm happy as a pig in slop with my life.
I'm not all that interested in playing in the Heavenly Augusta with a real long waiting list.. so what they do in Sodom is of no concern of mine.. If God didn't design it that way and is quite aware of it all then I'm wrong but still happy as that piggy in slop.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

To CAD the cunning bigot, the wily weasel of the well turned wriggle, who has spent the last several days and paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph trying to put a nice lawerly and legalistic face on his dead nuts desire to deny gay people the same simple access to the rights and priveleges ALL Americans should enjoy.

if all should enjoy it why do we limit it to 2 people? Why not allow all people access to the right of saying ?this person should be on my medical to? and ?we should be able to adopt??

Why draw lines around gays?

Because they are bigots. They want to limit people from the "right" to marry by limiting it to 2 people, or 2 people who aren't immediate family. How dare they trample the "rights" of these people only seeking the happiness and love the rest of us have.

:roll:

CkG

You still haven't explained to me, Caddy, my dear, why the courts should never have interfered with the states outlawing interacial marriage. How dare they. no?

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Well, true, but people learn elsewhere other than school. Do I think creationism is a possiblility? Sure I do. Anybody that knows scientific thinking understands that theories are theories until disproven. I have a theory that we're all an experiment in an alien kid's petrie (sp) dish. Is that theory just as valid as "creationism"? Sure it is. Can't be proven OR disproven. I'd let my kids believe what they want to believe. Science class should teach about "creationism" only as a theory, nothing more. Can't pretend that that theory doesn't exist, that wouldn't be scientifically correct either.

Well, if creationism is possibly true, then evolution isn't fact...it's merely a theory, so has no place in Science courses either. Now we're getting somewhere!

hear hear!

while we're at it. down with the theory of gravity!!