Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hope you feel the same way about progressive taxes, gun laws, expression of religion, and a whole host of other things that the left has been watering at the mouth to cram down our throats..
I feel the same way about anything either side is trying to ram down our throats.
I used to think we lived in a 'free' country.
I've come to believe that we live in a country full of people who feel it incumbent upon themselves to dictate how people should conduct their lives in the name of __________ fill in the blank.
This issue keeps coming up because people are fed up with others telling them that how they live is 'wrong' or 'unnatural' or _________ fill in the blank again.
Enough already. It really is nobody else's business who someone marries.
This is crazy talk. Look....... for those of you who don't know me I'm Rush Limbaugh right. I have a Sarah Palin for President yard sign in my front yard as I write this. Today I drank my first bottle of Rush Limbaugh's Two if By Tea iced tea he just released last week.(it's really good by the way and $100,000 a month, yes.. a hundred thousand a month, goes to the children of wounded US Marines and federal law enforcement officer's for their college education, a worthy cause in my opinion.) I don't apologize for what I believe and I think that people should be left alone to do as they please. What in Great God's Earth does it hurt a heterosexual couple if a gay couple is "married"??? It's the word marriage I believe. "Marriage" is the basis for the whole objection to gay couples being joined legally. If it's SUCH a big deal then define it by gender if you need to. Gays that I have met don't mind being called Gay....they are !! So call it GAY marriage... who gives a bleep. As long as gay people are allowed the same legal rights as heterosexual couples call it bananna cream pie for all I care. Are we REALLY going to get hung up on a stupid definition? It's like someone naming the Maine hockey team the Yankees... I suspect it would offend baseball fans all over the state but you know what...it's just a name!! Leave people alone and maybe they will leave you alone. Chances are if gay marriage is approved by the voters your church will be the same, the grocery store will still stock the same items, hunting season won't go away,Gays won't be confiscating guns, it will still be cold in the winter, and gay lifestyles will not be taught as the majority lifestyle in public schools. As I have said three times now THE PUBLIC SHOULD DECIDE. Then we will know that which ever side wins there is a majority in favor of that position. Eventually it will most likely pass....life is different than we grew up. Times have changed. We can argue for better of worse but the change is upon us and we have to deal with it in a civil manner. I've said all I need to on this subject.
While I don't disagree with your premise and statement it is founded through a mindset of honesty and assuming everyone is simply for promoting that which you speak of.
I probably can't put elston in the box of radicalism, but to ignore that there are very VERY radical groups with an agenda is foolish. There are, and frankly many of them are behind a lot of these legislative push.
I'm (stuck) in CT for now. I watched it start as civil unions. Most people were fine with it. Then it went to marriage. Most people were not fine with redefining marriage, and our legislation shot it down. However, a radical decided to legislate from the bench and overturned the legislature.
So it's over now, everyone is living in peace right? Oh hell no. More and more radical legislation keeps getting introduced.
The latest is what's been coined the bathroom bill. It's a transgender rights bill. (Pushed BTW by the same activists who have been behind the scenes the whole time.)
It's bad law, hardly enforceable with no real standard. However, what it does do is allow men to claim "unsure" or "confused" about their sexuality and *by law* join an all woman's gym, use the ladies locker room at a unisex gym, use the women's bathrooms. It also prevents teachers from being put on paid admin leave while going through a sex change so your 1st grader gets to see this surgical and hormonal transformation take place before their eyes.
Transgender issues are known psychological disorders. How it's gotten piggybacked onto the "gay" agenda is telling.
I can go on, but you get the point. I was supposed to be about civil unions, then it became about marriage, now we are opening pandoras box and potentially giving sexual predators and perverts another avenue to exploit. Great.
What's next? The schools. Yes, the school. There are bills to change curriculum to basically indoctrinate children that homosexuality is perfectly normal choice if they want too. ziiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiip...wait. That's MY roll as a parent, not the governments.
But isn't that what most of this is about in the first place? An attempt to turn homosexuality into something normal? To be told you are perfectly fine?
Seems to be. I've seen this fight first hand in this state and it's been very eye opening to see just how much radicalism is around this. I'm a friend of Peter Wolfgang of the Family Institute of CT who testified and was at ground zero during all these debates. He's broadcast who and what in real time right from the capital so no third hand info.
•“Recruiting children? You bet we are. Why would we push anti-bullying programs or social studies classes that teach kids about the historical contribution of famous *****s unless we wanted to deliberately educate children to accept ***** sexuality as normal?”
• “I and a lot of other people want to indoctrinate, recruit, teach and expose children to ***** sexuality—AND THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.”
The author then goes on to assert that those who disagree with this viewpoint are just “ignorant, hateful little morons.”
And yea, that author has direct ties to the current administration so no influence at all. Nope. None.
Quote:
Originally Posted by waccamatt
The tyranny of the majority should never trump the rights of a minority.
Your premise that the majority is automatically tyrannic is flawed and agenda riddled. However, the idea is correct.
We do not live in a democracy. I'll say it again. We DO NOT live in a democracy. We are democratic republic. Democracy is nowhere in our founding documents, and when the founders talked about it, it was with total disdain.
There is nothing prohibiting free exercise of religion in a curriculum referencing same sex marriage.
There are a lot of parts in the Bible condemning interracial relationships, and in the 60s a judge cited God as separating the races on different continents for a reason and that they were not meant to be together. It's funny how I don't hear about religious people citing immorality of interracial marriages anymore. There's plenty of evidence of it being immoral according to the Bible! Plenty.
The reason is because religions are based on ideas and texts that were written centuries ago. It is, by nature, anti-progressive. Religion does make progress, just as I'm sure 99% of people who consider their morals based on their religion would say that there is nothing wrong with interracial marriage. Unfortunately, because religion is based on the idea that there is a definitive right and wrong based on what a particular supernatural being wants, it is incredibly stubborn.
Because so many people are religious in this country, something else needs to be the driving force towards leading into a progressive society. Time and time again that has been government. And every issue government has intervened on in the past that has outraged the religious community of its time eventually becomes universally agreed upon by the religious community down the line (abortion is what they're currently learning to accept).
And gay marriage is next. It'll happen. I promise.
A. Yes there is disregard for my and others religous liberty when such laws are passed as I have demonstrated above with one example. Whether you like it or not, I have a constitutional right in plain sight that does not allow you to trounce on my ability to practice my religion. It's clear as a weather bell.
B. There is nothing in the bible that one can make a solid case to keep races separate. If it's attempted, it's a failed premise and why it did not stand up. However, it's *very clear* about homosexuality. Black and white.
C. You are equating homosexuality on the same plane as race. That's really where the debate boils down to. Are you born gay? You're surely born black or latino etc. There is no conclusive proof that one is born gay, just verbal testimony. And that testimony is counted by other testimony of those who "used to be gay". I know, they weren't really gay. By who's standards and measurement? What science backs it up? None.
You have yet to make a very good argument for your statement that our positions are radical. Society in its current nature has been changing radically for the past couple hundred years and even more so in the past 20 years. If my supporting gay marriage is radical because it is a fairly recent idea, then my answer for you on what other radical changes to society I support is this:
I support flying devices across oceans. Imagine how radical that idea was to someone 200 years ago.
I support the insane idea that everyone can communicate with everyone through the world wide web. What? The world wide web??? COMPUTERS?? PHONES THAT YOU CARRY WITH YOU.... ALL THE TIME??? Go back 40 years and tell the average joe what society would be like 40 years into the future and you'd be met by people who think your notions on how society will change are insanely radical and far, far out in left field.
I know history fairly well: there was no belief nor disbelief in the propriety of having "flying devices cross the ocean", or in having phone or computers. Obviously a red herring.
This notion isn't radical. That is why you haven't had any "takers" to argue with you why it is radical. Your initial assumption is wrong to start with.
Through the ages, marriage has meant both genders. To now propose having a gender marry itself is, by its very defintion, a radical idea.
Couldn't agree more 7th generation. Beating a dead horse. We will never solve this issue and it will never go away no matter which way the people vote. Any issue that is split exactly down the middle as this issue is will NEVER be solved as one side will always believe they can sway "just a few more votes" their way. The only way it will be settled is by a constitutional ammendment.
There is little chance the current administration will be re elected given their dismal performance thus far. If this issue is visited by a new, more conservative administration, it may very well go down with a constitutional ammendment. If I were gay and wanted to be married I would move to a state that allows it now as I do not see it changing in this state any time soon given the current make up of the governor and legislature and the direction the tide is now running. If the Constitutional ammendment does come gay marriage will be illegal in all 50 states again...and it will be many many years before the issue is revisited. If you're married legally before then you'll most likely be grandfathered and your marriage will be recognized despite a change in the law or constitution.
Is it right??? No it isn't but I would not bet on the next administration doing the right thing. The current administration threw the gays pretty much under the bus by doing nothing about it.(Obama does not support gay marriage by the way). Don't expect Republicans to be any more sympathetic to the cause.
I know history fairly well: there was no belief nor disbelief in the propriety of having "flying devices cross the ocean", or in having phone or computers. Obviously a red herring.
Not a red herring at all, actually.. all the fact that there was no belief or disbelief does to prove is just how radical the ideas were. People weren't even thinking about them only a short time before they actually happened.
While I don't disagree with your premise and statement it is founded through a mindset of honesty and assuming everyone is simply for promoting that which you speak of................
Your premise that the majority is automatically tyrannic is flawed and agenda riddled. However, the idea is correct........
A. Yes there is disregard for my and others religous liberty when such laws are passed as I have demonstrated above with one example. Whether you like it or not, I have a constitutional right in plain sight that does not allow you to trounce on my ability to practice my religion. It's clear as a weather bell.
B. There is nothing in the bible that one can make a solid case to keep races separate. If it's attempted, it's a failed premise and why it did not stand up. However, it's *very clear* about homosexuality. Black and white.
C. You are equating homosexuality on the same plane as race. That's really where the debate boils down to. Are you born gay? You're surely born black or latino etc. There is no conclusive proof that one is born gay, just verbal testimony. And that testimony is counted by other testimony of those who "used to be gay". I know, they weren't really gay. By who's standards and measurement? What science backs it up? None.
Anyhow, I have to get working...gotta get out of this state as soon as I can.
First - so you believe the quest for equal rights for homosexuals is in reality an operation with the agenda of corrupting our society? And we're the radicals, huh?
Second - I don't disagree with your response to the tyranny statement. Tyranny is much too strong a word to use in this situation. But we do in fact live in a democratic republic, meaning that we vote in representatives of the people as lawmakers. So they have perfect right and based upon our system there is no wrong in the fact that these representatives legalized gay marriage. Just as there is no wrong that people voted it down by referendum. I'm not saying you said it was wrong for government to legalize gay marriage, but a lot of people who are against gay marriage seem to believe that it isn't within the government's right to legalize it.
Third - I could really give a flying frack if people are born gay or not. Homosexuality is a natural occurrence. No one decides to be gay or straight. It just happens. I have a friend I grew up with. The people she primarily hung out with were me and her brother because that's all the neighborhood had to offer. She had short hair throughout her childhood and was often mistaken as my brother. She excelled at sports and took on the interests of her brother and I. She turned out to be a lesbian. Now.. was her interest in things associated with boys when she was younger a product of her lesbianism or was her life during childhood responsible for her lesbianism? I really don't care.. it was all very natural. It's what happened and she did not choose to be what she is.
Because it is a natural occurrence that can lead to a perfectly happy and healthy life, they should be awarded the same rights as anyone else. To not do so is discriminatory.
I don't think you understand just what practicing religion means. Talking about homosexuality in school is by no means preventing you from "practicing religion".
A. Yes there is disregard for my and others religous liberty when such laws are passed as I have demonstrated above with one example. Whether you like it or not, I have a constitutional right in plain sight that does not allow you to trounce on my ability to practice my religion. It's clear as a weather bell.
I completely and totally disagree with you on this. Your right to practice your religion, no matter what it is, is NOT being infringed on if gay marriage passes.
The Bible is for you to study, for you to follow NOT to beat over the heads of other people. If the Bible is telling you that gay relations are wrong, then YOU do not partake in gay relations. However, the Bible also states that "thou shalt not judge lest ye be judged"...in other words, follow the Bible, do what it tells you and spend LESS time worrying about what other people are doing and more time ensuring that YOU are right with God.
As was said, it is not your business what people do behind closed doors as long as both parties are adults and consenting. If you believe it is against what the Bible says, then let GOD doll out the punishments, it is NOT for YOU to decide. (Disclaimer, "you" being general, not personal.)
Someone earlier mentioned the decay in marriages and what was part of the problem. The decay in marriage, some of it has to do with people not marrying for love but lust, desire or they read way too many fairy tales as a kid. So many think that once they get that piece of paper, everything turns out magical and all live happily ever after.
Then reality sets in and they find out that you have to actually work at relationships, not be selfish, give and take, on and on and on.
Some people get married because they feel obligated. Some people get married because they don't feel whole. Some people get married to fit what they think society and family is telling them to do. (Although people are waking up to that and more and more people are remaining single.)
Gay marriages can end up the same way but I think, (opinion alert), that because they have to fight to be accepted and fight to get married, that by the time they do get married, they know they are in love. Some have lived together for years.
If two people love each other, if two people can provide a wonderful, loving, safe home for a child in need of a family, who has the right to tell them, "no"?
The argument about the marriage and infringement of rights is that some will say that everyone has the right to get married, no one is denying even a gay person to get married. They just have to marry someone of the opposite gender. Those who are upset about the use of the word, "marriage" have said, (and I know this for a fact because I know some of these people), they are perfectly fine with the term, "civil union". So, in some cases, it all boils down to the use of a word.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. For gays, having gay marriage recognized and legal IS the pursuit of happiness.
That's it, I'm spent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
By who's standards and measurement? What science backs it up? None.
