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.
Well, if it passes, it will be one less redeeming quality for the state otherwise known for... well, nothing.
Yeehaw states. Yeehaw values.
A state known for nothing? That is the way we like it. It is a great place to live and we want to keep all the libs just where they are at now- on the coasts.
Interestingly, we "hillbillies" have one of the highest literacy rates, highest ACT scores, lowest unemployment levels, and best standards of living in the US. We have family owned factories which have not been rooted up and sent overseas as well as a finance and ag based economy that does well when the rest of the nation suffers (see the Dakotas, Nebraska).
Unfortunately, any coastal types who have moved here really like it. We want you to stay right where you are and away from us illiterate rubes.
Another positive result of the 2010 election - returning issues such as this back to the legislature instead of rogue courts.
I do believe a couple of those activist judges got thrown out on their behinds in the last election.
Actually three were thrown out. The others will not be long on the bench. They will either be impeached or voted out in the next election.
One of my friends is leading the charge in the state legislature against these whackos- a REAL representative who does not want a second term and just wants to do the right thing. Now that is refreshing for a politician and it is too bad our national "leaders" do not follow suit. Instead, they are there to get re-elected and stuff thier pockets.
Ahhh, when the majority can enforce their moral beliefs on the minority. That's what America was created for, right???
Don't be sucking on sour grapes. The liberals did the same thing in California when a minority is imposing their beliefs on the majority sucks to be bit back on the ass doesn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
Well, if it passes, it will be one less redeeming quality for the state otherwise known for... well, nothing.
Yeehaw states. Yeehaw values.
Hey hey. Remember. Tolerance and sensitivity for different opinions or does that only apply to other liberals?
Ahhh, when the majority can enforce their moral beliefs on the minority. That's what America was created for, right???
Its got nothing to do with morality, I dont think homosexuality is immoral, do you? I simply admit that its a sexual disorder, nothing more & nothing less. Theres other sexual perversions, should we let any of them marry whatever the focus of their particular disorder is & consider it equal to normal marriage between opposite sex couples?
Or, if it is a moral issue, is it your stance that its better to allow the minority to dictate to the majority? Should we start putting the losers of elections in office instead of winners? Should we create law from bills that did not get a majority vote?
With the trickery of the far left last year, in which gay marriage was "passed" into Iowa law via judicial activist fiat, the Iowa House and Senate is taking another approach.
Recognizing the rights of the individual and believing that the government shouldn't have the power to discriminate based on sex or sexual orientation is not a leftist idea.
It is, in fact, quite the opposite. This equating support for civil rights as being leftist is one of the more idiotic, baseless and ignorant pieces if propaganda coming from the extreme RIGHT these days.
Because those on the extreme Right are not conservatives - they are authoritarians, and authoritarians are against everything that America is.
I'm just not an authoritarian fascist that thinks I can use the apparatus of government to impose my own religious or moral beliefs on others, when their behavior doesn't affect my rights at all.
Last edited by CaseyB; 02-25-2011 at 05:57 AM..
Reason: rude
Morality also includes the idea of letting other people have different moralities, especially when those moralities don't infringe on you in any way shape or form. The only instance where one can ride their high horse is when the morality of another impacts them or the collective in some quantifiable way. Gay marriage and homosexuality affect no one but the participants. So, butt out and go back to school and learn something.
It amazes me how people zoom in on sexuality instead of love. Do heterosexuals marry each other because they are heterosexuals or because they love each other?
Opposing gay marriage is certifiably hateful for there is no logical reason to oppose it. There is no argument against it. You may argue against it for yourself but you have no right to tell others it is not for them or to keep them from doing it. Iowa's Supreme Court made the right (as in Constitutionally supported) decision and now a ignorant and fuming minority wants to impose their will where it doesn't belong. Children of the corn, indeed!
If the gays want the same benefits that married couples have, let them go the civil union route, but no, they must try and usurp "marriage" for their own political agenda, making it easier to declare it "normal" and "natural", making it easier to teach the kids that as well.
Everywhere it has come to a vote by the people, it has failed, even in bluer than blue California.
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.
sucks to be bit back on the ass doesn't it?
