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.
Actually, in Texas, the result was much more lopsided: 76% voted for the ban in that state, 24% voted against it.
And to really drive home the message, Texas not only banned same-sex marriage, they banned civil unions as well. What nice people they have in Texas! (Sorry, afo.)
I was one of the 76%, so I guess I count as one of those "not nice" Texans.
I honestly can't believe it was that high.
This is the text....
Quote:
Sec. 32. MARRIAGE. (a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.
(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.
(Added Nov. 8, 2005.)
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 05-09-2009 at 10:36 PM..
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,020,628 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theliberalvoice
Exactly. That is my point. Thanks for saying it better than I ever could! LOL
The finalsay: the thing is, if you are going to tolerate gay marriage and things like that, then you must tolerate people who think it's wrong because of the bible. this country is divided, and it always will be.
I do tolerate them. I had posted a post (I think it is post three) where I said Miss California has the right to support "opposite marriage" if she pleases. I dont care what she thinks.
Also, how tolerant are you towards people who are for gay marriage? Or do you just bring up the Bible or something?
And why aren't you all tolerant towards Pagan faiths who are ok with a homosexual union? Should they be denied too because of the Bible (which has no place in their faith)
How tolerant are you towards Pagans who are ok with gay marriage in their religion but the Church not allowing them?
I'm tolerant in the sense that I respect that folks are going to have different viewpoints from my own but I am not going to embrace every viewpoint, especially those I find harmful to society.
This is where debate often breaks down. What liberals deem as intolerant is any viewpoint that does not coincide with liberal dogma. If you want to preach tolerance, then start being tolerant of the fact that not everyone is going to share or embrace your viewpoints. Why is it that liberals get to define what is and isn't tolerance in the first place? Who gave liberals that moral authority to make that determination?
Huh?
Liberals dont define anything. If anything, conservatives think they do because they got "God" on their side and their little man written book of tales (The Bible or Quran) suddenly gives them the right to dictate abortion and gay and lesbians lives. Sad sad sad.
Maybe this is why I've been agreeing with a lot of your posts tonight. I have a strong libertarian streak in me when it comes to almost all issues! This is also why I have major objections to much of what the Obama administration is doing, and a bit of what the Bush administration did. Both of those administrations did a lot to expand the powers of the federal government, which goes against my libertarian views.
When the Bush Administration's Department Of Justice decided to dedicate several FBI agents to surfing the internet so they could look for "obscene" adult porn to prosecute, that's when they really lost me. I'm serious.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,020,628 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canerican
I have always been reasonable. I will never say that one political ideology is inherently better than another. I will always say that Christianity is better than any other religion, and I derive all my political beliefs from there. But since Christianity is inherently inclusive, I will always welcome people to talk with me, and join me. I don't judge people, but I will never condone things I disagree with, and since this is a political board we are supposed to disagree right?
For me it is about my Christian faith in the end, if I cannot justify a political belief by my faith I won't support it. I don't see how being principled can ever be considered irrational. In my opinion, choosing your political beliefs according to what makes you feel good is crazy - the right thing isn't always what's easiest or what makes you popular, or even feel good about yourself. But if you can live with yourself, and know that your beliefs are founded, you are a true winner, whether you happen to be a crazy Conservative, or loony Liberal.
Liberals dont define anything. If anything, conservatives think they do because they got "God" on their side and their little man written book of tales (The Bible or Quran) suddenly gives them the right to dictate abortion and gay and lesbians lives. Sad sad sad.
And they sit here accusing liberals? LMAO!
Abortion and gay marriage have been legislated for quite a long time.
I'm non-religious and am generally (though not completely) against abortion, BTW. So don't bring "God" into this.
Also...LiberalVoice...you need to understand that MOST liberal Americans are Christians!
I do not claim to speak for all conservatives, it was a generalization.
I accept what you're saying. In the future, however, you may want to use the word "I" a little more often and "we", "us", and "our" a little less often. Here's what you said:
Conservatives do not care if two gay men want to have a private marriage ceremony, we just do not want you to force us give up some of our tax dollars so government can support and endorse that marriage.
Abortion and gay marriage have been legislated for quite a long time.
I'm non-religious and am generally (though not completely) against abortion, BTW. So don't bring "God" into this.
Why not? Everyone else brings up "God" to defend their viewpoints so why can't I?
EDIT to something you added on after: Once again, why state the obvious? I know most liberals are Christians. What has that got to do with anything? Most liberals are Christian BUT the difference is (unlike most conservatives) they dont let it blind them.
One problem I have with many liberals is they feel that because you can't prove religion, as you stated, you should not teach anything that is based on religion. The premier example of this is Intelligent Design. The premise of Intelligent Design is that the universe, and the life in it, was created by an intelligent being. For many people, that being is who they call God. The concept of Intelligent Design does not establish any particular religion, though it acknowledges a supreme being.
On the other hand, "science" has given us the theory of Evolution. Like Intelligent Design, Evolution also cannot be proven. Yet, these same liberals that don't want Intelligent Design taught in our schools are in favor of teaching Evolution, another unproven theory.
Can you explain to me why these liberals permit this hypocrisy?
Speaking for myself, I realize that both theories are unproven, but I see more evidence to support evolution than I do to support intelligent design or a "supreme being". If something can't be explained, I don't automatically say, "Well then it must be something that God is doing."
Not all unproven theories are equal.
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.
(Sorry, afo.)
