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.
Its because civil unions really aren't the same thing as being, you know, married.
Then call it something else that sounds more committed. Marriage isn't exactly a great institution these days with so many feeling it's just a ceremonial commitment that's easy to get out of if it doesn't work out. Heck, many heterosexuals don't even get married anymore. Like I said, I have no problem with SSM. I was just wondering why they chose this fight instead of civil unions, which I believe would be a far more palatable concept for people to accept.
Those that want that legalized are using the same argument homosexuals are and have used. They are born that way...complete BS...hasn't stopped homosexuals though.
That isn't an answer to my question. I asked you why it is ok to discriminate against gays and violate their rights? Your response was unrelated nonsense.
Then call it something else that sounds more committed. Marriage isn't exactly a great institution these days with so many feeling it's just a ceremonial commitment that's easy to get out of if it doesn't work out. Heck, many heterosexuals don't even get married anymore. Like I said, I have no problem with SSM. I was just wondering why they chose this fight instead of civil unions, which I believe would be a far more palatable concept for people to accept.
These judges are forcing their single will on an entire population which had the chance to allow homosexual "marriage" and in Texas case over 70% decided against it. That includes letting homosexuals and their allies to vote as well..they had their voice they lost so stop trying to force something on the people something they don't want obviously. I am saying the NG was used to force white schools to allow black students to attend. I wouldn't put it past Obama to order the NG to stand guard in EVERY clerk of courts office to ensure homosexuals are given "marriage licenses".
Sometimes the majority of people are oppressors denying the minority their Constitutional rights. The role of the courts in those instances is to protect the minority from what is, essentially, mob rule. As for integration, the National Guard was used to force schools to allow students to attend. There is no such thing as "white public schools". They are just schools. There is no such thing as "separate but equal". A legal separation inherently leads to inequality. And unfortunately, it's the minority that always gets the short end of the stick. You may love this, yourself, seeing yourself as a member of the majority. But it is WRONG. It goes against everything this country stands for.
Those that want that legalized are using the same argument homosexuals are and have used. They are born that way...complete BS...hasn't stopped homosexuals though.
Yep. I think the judge will rule in favor of the degenerates and I don't know what will happen then. Might be time to break my oath of not ever voting again and push for Santorum to run for president..maybe he can fix this.
I am not doing anything. The Federal government and its favoritism is splitting this nation in half.
Wanna bet?
Well when it is legal to have a same sex marriage in Texas, you are more than welcome to start that civil war you keep promising, but I don't think it is gonna be a 50/50 split for you....I doubt you would even score a single percent that supported you in your civil war.
Well that was gosh darn neighborly of them do let them vote!
I have no problem with ANYONE voting just point out your homosexual friends and their allies voted as well..they were given a voice and they lost..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi
I believe Texas will challenge it to the Supreme Court.
Indeed I do as well.Lets hope it takes a while to get there maybe once a Conservative president is in office and we have 2 or 3 SCJ retire and we can put a few decent ones in there.
Then call it something else that sounds more committed. Marriage isn't exactly a great institution these days with so many feeling it's just a ceremonial commitment that's easy to get out of if it doesn't work out. Heck, many heterosexuals don't even get married anymore. Like I said, I have no problem with SSM. I was just wondering why they chose this fight instead of civil unions, which I believe would be a far more palatable concept for people to accept.
Would you be willing to give up your own marriage in favor of a civil union?
Didn't think so.
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.
