[pheaton]

Originally Posted by DTO Luv

You can't say without grossly over looking the facts that homosexuals are denied certain rights in this country. When it comes to marriage heterosexuals are allowed to marry the of age, consenting person they choose to marry. Homosexuals do not have the same right as heterosexuals to marry the of age, consenting person of their choice.

That's because you have the right to do what you want under the law, not just whatever you want to do. Can polygamists marry the 10 people they want to marry? No, it's illegal.

The law is the way it is, not to give everyone a warm fuzzy feeling, but to benefit the common good of society, the common good is the definition of fair when it comes to law. The law is there to encourage you to get married to someone of the opposite sex so that you can have lots of kids that will work and benefit society and most importantly to pay taxes.

Not marry someone of the same sex, get all of the tax breaks, only to complain about how nobody will let you adopt a child, or end up with some kid that you warp into thinking they can mold the law into whatever they want.

[DTO Luv]

At what point does your right to marry the person of your choice if your gay stop, but it goes on for heterosexuals? You agree that personal choices can lead to different, protected classes, but but at what point do the choices you make or your inherrant state of being, make it ok for you to be denied civil rights based on your choice or state of being?

Honestly, I wouldn't have a problem with more than one spouse as long as all parties are of age and mutually consenting. Plus it's in the bible so it must be ok and that's what some people are wanting to base American laws and rights on.

Whether you think homosexuality is a choice or natural, you can't deny that in the past people have been denied rights, among them marriage, based on situations they didn't chose. 40+ years ago our President's parents, my parents, my brothers parents, and my nephews parents wouldn't have been allowed to marry based on their race alone. You don't choose what race you are, however some people thought it was ok to legislate who could and couldn't marry who based on statuses they couldn't change. So again I ask, why is this different for homosexuals?

[DTO Luv]

Originally Posted by pheaton

That's because you have the right to do what you want under the law, not just whatever you want to do. Can polygamists marry the 10 people they want to marry? No, it's illegal.

The law is the way it is, not to give everyone a warm fuzzy feeling, but to benefit the common good of society, the common good is the definition of fair when it comes to law. The law is there to encourage you to get married to someone of the opposite sex so that you can have lots of kids that will work and benefit society and most importantly to pay taxes.

I'm surprised at your position on this. I figured based on your posts that you would be a conservative leaning person as well as a religious person. I'm shocked that as a conservative, who usually oppose government involvement in peoples lives, that you're saying that the love you would feel for your spouse means nothing and that your sole existance is to live by the guidelines of federal government to increase their income and you're fine with it. I guess conservative just doesn't mean what it used to when it comes to the government interfering with peoples day to day lives. I guess being a liberal I think the government should ensure peoples persuit of life, liberty, and happiness.

[DTO Luv]

Originally Posted by Omaha Rocks

Drive across the river, buddy.

No thanks. I like to keep my tax dollars on this side of the river. Until I read your posts I wasn't aware we were in such dyer financial situations with our government being bankrupted by lack of funds treating gangmembers in emergency rooms.

[Omaha Rocks]

Originally Posted by DTO Luv

No thanks. I like to keep my tax dollars on this side of the river. Until I read your posts I wasn't aware we were in such dyer financial situations with our government being bankrupted by lack of funds treating gangmembers in emergency rooms.

So you won't go across the river and into Iowa, where gay marriage is fully legal. Instead, you choose to sit on your lazy butt and complain here in Omaha where it isn't yet legal.

Why should I feel the least bit sorry for you?


Bayliss Park is beautiful, by the way.

[pheaton]

Originally Posted by DTO Luv

I'm shocked that as a conservative, who usually oppose government involvement in peoples lives, that you're saying that the love you would feel for your spouse means nothing and that your sole existance is to live by the guidelines of federal government to increase their income and you're fine with it. I guess conservative just doesn't mean what it used to when it comes to the government interfering with peoples day to day lives. I guess being a liberal I think the government should ensure peoples persuit of life, liberty, and happiness.

The government has 6 fundamental functions as outlined in the preamble of the constitution. One of them is indeed to secure the blessing of liberty. Each person's individual liberties and freedoms are protected. However, boundaries must be set so that the freedoms of one person would not interfere with other citizens'. Freedom is the power to do what we should do, not what we want to do.

[SurfOmaha]

Originally Posted by pheaton

The government has 6 fundamental functions as outlined in the preamble of the constitution. One of them is indeed to secure the blessing of liberty. Each person's individual liberties and freedoms are protected. However, boundaries must be set so that the freedoms of one person would not interfere with other citizens'. Freedom is the power to do what we should do, not what we want to do.

Great point, gays want the gov't to protect their liberties and freedoms, too. Its funny how the religious right calls homosexuality a choice and therefore cannot be protected under the Constitution, yet a person can choose to be any religion, can be born into Christianity and convert to any other religion, yet whether or not sexual orientation is a choice or not, people who are gay cannot be protected? Sounds like hypocrisy to me.

Remember, religion flies you into buildings!

[Omaha Rocks]

Originally Posted by SurfOmaha

Great point, gays want the gov't to protect their liberties and freedoms, too. Its funny how the religious right calls homosexuality a choice and therefore cannot be protected under the Constitution, yet a person can choose to be any religion, can be born into Christianity and convert to any other religion, yet whether or not sexual orientation is a choice or not, people who are gay cannot be protected? Sounds like hypocrisy to me.

Remember, religion flies you into buildings!

This whole post sounds like jibberish to me. What are you saying?

[SurfOmaha]

Originally Posted by Omaha Rocks

This whole post sounds like jibberish to me. What are you saying?

That fact that you don't get it, is a perfect example of the ignorance gays and lesbians have to deal with here In Omaha and the rest of Nebraska. You make up any excuse to support the denial of rights we should get. Religion is a choice, yet it is a protected class. Race and sexual orientation are not choices, yet race is protected and sexual orientation is not. This must be corrected.

[Calvinist]

Originally Posted by DTO Luv

I'm surprised at your position on this. I figured based on your posts that you would be a conservative leaning person as well as a religious person. I'm shocked that as a conservative, who usually oppose government involvement in peoples lives, that you're saying that the love you would feel for your spouse means nothing and that your sole existance is to live by the guidelines of federal government to increase their income and you're fine with it. I guess conservative just doesn't mean what it used to when it comes to the government interfering with peoples day to day lives. I guess being a liberal I think the government should ensure peoples persuit of life, liberty, and happiness.

There are many many limitations on marriage, but how can you possibly legislate right to marry for love? Are you suggesting we just throw out all laws in any circumstance if there is love?