Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-05-2009, 12:14 AM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
24,511 posts, read 33,317,235 times
Reputation: 7623

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
And she and her husband did a beautiful job of healing that wound and going on to a huge victory last November.
And will most likely be the reason why Republicans will gain seats in Congress next year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-05-2009, 12:15 AM
 
Location: McKinleyville, California
6,414 posts, read 10,493,911 times
Reputation: 4305
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyGem View Post
For all the people on this thread who want to argue that the government should stay out of marriage, let me remind you that around the world where gay marriage IS legal, it is BECAUSE of government intervention that homosexuals are allowed to marry.

It is not because a vote by the people has ever affirmed it.

What you are witnessing in the United States is the will of the people being elevated above the will of the government and that's the way we do things in the United States.

The people have once again spoken.
All around the world where interracial marriage is legal is also because the government stepped in. Where have you been? The SCOTUS itself stepped in and made interracial marriage legal, it was not up to a vote of the majority. Marriage is indeed a right, Loving vs Virginia determined that. And for all of people that keep saying to accept civil unions or domestic partnerships, if that is the case, why are you trying to strip us of those to? You all are just selfish pigs who do not know the value of the 1049 rights you take advantage of and abuse with your repeated divorces. Obviously you cannot get marriage right yourself, since the divorce rate is rapidly approaching the 60% mark. Do you understand that? Nearly six out of ten marriages fail. So much for the sanctity of marriage, you heterosexuals yourselves have made a joke of marriage. If you are going to "let" us have civil unions and domestic partnerships, at least be fair and humane and not steal them back. The LGBTQ people should have to pay less in taxes since we are being treated like second class citizens with a different set of rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2009, 12:27 AM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,674,422 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
And will most likely be the reason why Republicans will gain seats in Congress next year.
You think that Michelle Obama's comment from last summer is the likely reason why Republicans will gain seats in Congress next year? Man, that's a special brand of optimism you've got!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2009, 12:28 AM
 
23,654 posts, read 17,514,296 times
Reputation: 7472
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDragonslayer View Post
All around the world where interracial marriage is legal is also because the government stepped in. Where have you been? The SCOTUS itself stepped in and made interracial marriage legal, it was not up to a vote of the majority. Marriage is indeed a right, Loving vs Virginia determined that. And for all of people that keep saying to accept civil unions or domestic partnerships, if that is the case, why are you trying to strip us of those to? You all are just selfish pigs who do not know the value of the 1049 rights you take advantage of and abuse with your repeated divorces. Obviously you cannot get marriage right yourself, since the divorce rate is rapidly approaching the 60% mark. Do you understand that? Nearly six out of ten marriages fail. So much for the sanctity of marriage, you heterosexuals yourselves have made a joke of marriage. If you are going to "let" us have civil unions and domestic partnerships, at least be fair and humane and not steal them back. The LGBTQ people should have to pay less in taxes since we are being treated like second class citizens with a different set of rights.
And this is the reason people do not want to see marriage disintegrate any further. Yes, it is bad with all the divorces but you think gays would never divorce?

As for interracial marriages that is apples and oranges. Those marriages are between a man and a woman.

If you want to get into paying less taxes for not having as many rights I think most all of us can come up with a reason our taxes should be lowered because we don't have as many rights as others in some way. That has been tried before and never flew.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2009, 12:29 AM
 
Location: McKinleyville, California
6,414 posts, read 10,493,911 times
Reputation: 4305
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
Not necessarily. In my state, a civil union is the same as marriage. Stroke of a pen.
Really? It gives them all the rights that straight married people get? We want and deserve the federal rights too, not just a few paltry state rights that you will allow us to have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2009, 12:35 AM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,674,422 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDragonslayer View Post
Really? It gives them all the rights that straight married people get? We want and deserve the federal rights too, not just a few paltry state rights that you will allow us to have.
You will concede, however, that DOMA is the issue in that situation, right? When it comes to federal benefits, it doesn't matter if a state calls same-sex unions civil unions or marriage, they're still locked out from having federal benefits.

Of course, I don't expect the anti-gay crowd to have thought it through that far, but you and I can have an intelligent conversation without them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2009, 12:39 AM
 
Location: McKinleyville, California
6,414 posts, read 10,493,911 times
Reputation: 4305
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcadca View Post
You are missing the point. Many say that gays should not marry because of the religious issues so I will ask again if you had to choose which would you want her to do?

I am not asking what you would LIKE her to do I am asking if you had to choose from these two options only.
Maybe a better one would be; Would one rather their daughter, if she were a lesbian, marry a man, live a lie and never be happy, or be with the woman she loves? My older brother, who is also gay, chose to live a lie, get married, twice and divorced twice and now he is miserable and unhappy, he hates himself and his life and blames it on believing he would go to Hell if he admitted to being gay. I on the other hand did not choose to live a life of dishonesty, have been with the same man for over 30 years and the only thing that makes me unhappy right now is being denied the rights I deserve as a US citizen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2009, 12:40 AM
 
25,157 posts, read 53,952,004 times
Reputation: 7058
He denounced it because being gay was like being a criminal back in those days. It was a criminal act. You could be punished with jail time. It was also a mental illness at that time. Why would you screech out "Look at me. I'm gay" like everyone does these days. Look at Ellen, and Rosie the gayest women on earth haha.

Quote:
Originally Posted by okccowboy View Post
Liberace denied his homosexuality to the very end of his life. He was hardly "open" about it. Liberace sued the Daily Mirror for libel in 1956, testifying in a London court that he was not a homosexual, and had never taken part in homosexual acts. He won the suit, partly on the basis of the term fruit-flavored, which was held to impute homosexuality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2009, 12:47 AM
 
23,654 posts, read 17,514,296 times
Reputation: 7472
Ellen and Rosie have also broken up with their partners. If married they would need to go through a divorce. Maybe they can save some of their fortune for not being married.

Ellen's ex didn't get squat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2009, 07:02 AM
 
9,803 posts, read 16,194,504 times
Reputation: 8266
Quote:
Originally Posted by janelle144 View Post
Ellen and Rosie have also broken up with their partners. If married they would need to go through a divorce. Maybe they can save some of their fortune for not being married.

Ellen's ex didn't get squat.
No,no,no, gay couples never split up. --SARC
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:40 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top