Who shouldn't have the right to vote

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Elect John McCain and his ultra-right wing partner and that might actually might happen...along with public execution of gays and witches (gulp!). Old John ain't to fond of black folk so who knows....

John McCain and Obama say basically the exact same thing about gays (they should have all the same rights as straight couples except for that term "marraige"). And they are both not in favor for a constitutional amendment to define marraige. So I dont know where you got that Somer.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

John McCain and Obama say basically the exact same thing about gays (they should have all the same rights as straight couples except for that term "marraige"). And they are both not in favor for a constitutional amendment to define marraige. So I dont know where you got that Somer.

and yet only reps indulge in hysteria.....

i would disagree with both on that issue. call it what you want, but as soon as married couples started getting perks from the govt for legally tying themselves to each other, they opened up that pandoras box--once it became a civil issue, due to govt via license requirements and claiming deductions--well, there's that 'all created equal' thing we claim to go by. you can't give rights to some adults, and not others.

i just don't understand why some are so hysterical (aughhghgh, gays, aughghhg)--it makes no sense. how does anyone's life get affected by a gay person? how would my life change if gays could marry? it wouldn't. people need to mind their own dammed business!!

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Danzig

and yet only reps indulge in hysteria.....

i would disagree with both on that issue. call it what you want, but as soon as married couples started getting perks from the govt for legally tying themselves to each other, they opened up that pandoras box--once it became a civil issue, due to govt via license requirements and claiming deductions--well, there's that 'all created equal' thing we claim to go by. you can't give rights to some adults, and not others.

i just don't understand why some are so hysterical (aughhghgh, gays, aughghhg)--it makes no sense. how does anyone's life get affected by a gay person? how would my life change if gays could marry? it wouldn't. people need to mind their own dammed business!!

Amen sista! I saw these people protesting the other day to make marraige 1 man and 1 woman... I wanted to ask them if I married my partner, how that would affect their lives?

But I didnt feel like wasting my time. I would like to ask that to Gov. Palin though.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Amen sista! I saw these people protesting the other day to make marraige 1 man and 1 woman... I wanted to ask them if I married my partner, how that would affect their lives?

But I didnt feel like wasting my time. I would like to ask that to Gov. Palin though.

you'd be wasting your time.

she's probably get you to call that guy to come and put a spell over you like he did her-to protect her from witches. LOL, that's so funny.
anyway, she thinks you can pray gay away, so she'd probably suggest that route to you-you know, for your own good. she wouldn't want you to BURN IN HELL.

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Amen sista! I saw these people protesting the other day to make marraige 1 man and 1 woman... I wanted to ask them if I married my partner, how that would affect their lives?

But I didnt feel like wasting my time. I would like to ask that to Gov. Palin though.

No on gay marriage; yes on equal treatment





































Joe Biden






















Gays should not face discrimination but should not marry



















Obama














not overwhelming from these guys is it...

[Danzig]

oh...separate but equal? now...where have i heard that before????

[Mike]

Mark this liberal as No on gay marriage; YES on civil unions


Why do you guys and gals want to get "married" anyways? I think marriage is more of a religious ceremony, and religions should have the right to say no to it(gay marriage).

If you can tell me a benefit to being married that isn't covered by Civil Unions(we have 'em here in Vermont, I think we were the first), let me know, I don't know much about the details


Now, I'm unmarried and living with my opposite sex partner for 13 years now, and we have two kids. So I guess I don't care much about marriage

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by Mike

Mark this liberal as No on gay marriage; YES on civil unions


Why do you guys and gals want to get "married" anyways? I think marriage is more of a religious ceremony, and religions should have the right to say no to it(gay marriage).

If you can tell me a benefit to being married that isn't covered by Civil Unions(we have 'em here in Vermont, I think we were the first), let me know, I don't know much about the details


Now, I'm unmarried and living with my opposite sex partner for 13 years now, and we have two kids. So I guess I don't care much about marriage

they always have and nothing about that changed with the court ruling.

the only people being "forced" to perform gay marriages in california are county clerks. they also have to marry interracial couples regardless of their personal opinions.

churches in california regularly refuse to marry couples that aren't members of their sect. why would you think they can't refuse to perform a gay marriage?

this is like saying that laws preventing a restaurant from discriminating means i have no say about who can join me at home for dinner. it ignores the difference between public and private space. it's utter nonsense.

i really do think at least some of the people getting really worked up over this have to be serious closet cases. they doth protest too much.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Mike

Mark this liberal as No on gay marriage; YES on civil unions


Why do you guys and gals want to get "married" anyways? I think marriage is more of a religious ceremony, and religions should have the right to say no to it(gay marriage).If you can tell me a benefit to being married that isn't covered by Civil Unions(we have 'em here in Vermont, I think we were the first), let me know, I don't know much about the details


Now, I'm unmarried and living with my opposite sex partner for 13 years now, and we have two kids. So I guess I don't care much about marriage

now, what about the churches who support gay marriage? they're out there.
you don't have to understand why someone would want to get married-that's got nothing to do with it. i don't understand why two folks would live together, and raise a family without making that commitment-doesn't mean i think there should be laws against it.

[2Hot4TV]

Originally Posted by Danzig

oh...separate but equal? now...where have i heard that before????

No, just different.

1 Man and 1 Woman is call marriage.

A gay couple is something different and you can call it anything you want except Marriage.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV

No, just different.

1 Man and 1 Woman is call marriage.

A gay couple is something different and you can call it anything you want except Marriage.

That's one opinion

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV

No, just different.

1 Man and 1 Woman is call marriage.

A gay couple is something different and you can call it anything you want except Marriage.

why?

i think the high divorce rate, as well as having multiple marriages, has done more to damage the supposed sanctity of marriage than allowing gay people the same rights (no more, no less) as straight folks. tell me, if gays can call it marriage (since two adults, joining their lives, committing to each other, etc is basically marriage, regardless of their sex) how does that affect you? your life? your marriage, assuming you're married? i bet it won't. how could it? i have been married for almost 23 years to a wonderful guy...it bothers me tremendously to see folks who are married treat each other badly, or cheapen their vows by being disrespectful, hatefuly, downright mean, or selfish. they're certainly not teaching their children to honor marriage by doing so.
so, a guy or gal can get married, divorced, remarried, divorced, remarried, ad nauseum...and that's just ducky because it's a guy and a girl.
but two guys, two girls. oh, put on the brakes-how dare anyone want to damage marriage? HAH! that's a riot.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Danzig

and yet only reps indulge in hysteria.....

i would disagree with both on that issue. call it what you want, but as soon as married couples started getting perks from the govt for legally tying themselves to each other, they opened up that pandoras box--once it became a civil issue, due to govt via license requirements and claiming deductions--well, there's that 'all created equal' thing we claim to go by. you can't give rights to some adults, and not others.

i just don't understand why some are so hysterical (aughhghgh, gays, aughghhg)--it makes no sense. how does anyone's life get affected by a gay person? how would my life change if gays could marry? it wouldn't. people need to mind their own dammed business!!

MORMONS are sending money into Cali from Utah(against the gays.) We already had a vote on something like this back in 2000. My guess is it goes the same way this time(against the gays.) If it doesn't, then they will put it back on the ballot until it passes.

[Mortimer]

You would never think someone this irascible and an obvious AB member , with prison tats to prove it, would be such a sissy.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

MORMONS are sending money into Cali from Utah(against the gays.) We already had a vote on something like this back in 2000. My guess is it goes the same way this time(against the gays.) If it doesn't, then they will put it back on the ballot until it passes.

i saw that prop one is the second most expensive ballot issue, behind only the presidential election. crazy stuff.
thing is, majority shouldn't rule on this-just because a majority votes for it, doesn't mean it's constitutional to ban gay marriage.
if they voted to get rid of freedom of the press, the first amendment would still be in force.

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i saw that prop one is the second most expensive ballot issue, behind only the presidential election. crazy stuff.
thing is, majority shouldn't rule on this-just because a majority votes for it, doesn't mean it's constitutional to ban gay marriage.
if they voted to get rid of freedom of the press, the first amendment would still be in force.

prop 8 is a "initiative constitutional amendment" in california.

so yes, it would be constitutional under california state law to discriminate against gay marriage if it passes.

we've had laws that outlawed interracial marriage and banned certain ethnicities from buying property where they wanted in the past. noted liberal earl warren championed internment for americans of japanese descent during ww2.

there's a long history of discrimination in california. we're not immune to xenophobic seizure's.