Archive for Wednesday, January 2, 2008

Gay couples enter into civil unions

January 2, 2008

Advertisement

— Dozens of gay and lesbian couples entered into civil unions in New Hampshire in the early moments of New Year's Day as a new state law legalized the partnerships after midnight.

Organizers said that they checked in 37 couples for an outdoor ceremony on the plaza of the New Hampshire Statehouse - the building where the law was adopted and signed in 2007. Participants bundled up against below-freezing temperatures.

New Hampshire's civil unions law - enacted by the Democrat-dominated Legislature early last year and signed by Democratic Gov. John Lynch in May, gives same sex couples the same rights, responsibilities and obligations of marriage without calling the union a marriage.

New Hampshire follows Vermont, Connecticut and New Jersey in allowing civil unions. Massachusetts is the only state that allows marriage. New Hampshire estimates that as many as 3,500 to 4,000 civil unions will be performed this first year.

Comments

SettingTheRecordStraight 7 years, 7 months ago

"New Hampshire's civil unions law.... gives same sex couples the same rights, responsibilities and obligations of marriage without calling the union a marriage."

That's because it isn't marriage. It never will be marriage.

RonaldWilson 7 years, 7 months ago

scenebooster (Anonymous) says:

"That's because it isn't marriage. It never will be marriage."

Not as long as small-minded bigots like STRS seek to control what others do with their lives.

Defender (Anonymous) says:

STRS is just mad because some people gained some rights. We all know that STRS is a greedy, hatefilled bigot.


Does anybody really take these leftie loons seriously anymore?

SettingTheRecordStraight 7 years, 7 months ago

Scenbooster and Defender,

Gay "marriage" is not, nor will it ever be, marriage. You can dress it up and make up any name you want for it, but marriage will always be the union of one man and one woman.

Bradley Kemp 7 years, 7 months ago

The semantic aspect of this argument is hilarious. Words mean what people intend them to mean, and no words have their meanings "reserved" for one purpose or another.

If same-sex couples in New Hampshire (or anywhere else) call their relationship a "marriage," no one can or will stop them. If current trends continue, that will be exactly what happens, and the practice will continue to spread, and "marriage" will mean the same thing for same-sex couples as it now does for mixed-sex couples.

monkeyspunk 7 years, 7 months ago

What about when a man marries a dog?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21768663/

OK, in all seriousness (just kidding)...

When did this happen!?!?! Surely I should have known when this happened, I mean, shouldn't my marriage have been affected in some way? Shouldn't I have noticed a change, somehow my marriage mean something less than it did before...I mean that is what everybody says right?

No way this happened, must be a joke, because not a damned thing changed in my household.

monkeyspunk 7 years, 7 months ago

I thought RobotRage was what happened in the Terminator.

monkeyhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

BTW, how is that Lawrence registry working out for the charter signers? Has anyone accomplished what they hoped for?

LeAnne Stowe 7 years, 7 months ago

Tomorrow the love of my life and I will have known each other 25 years. Any of you who have been happily married and no affairs in 25 years feel free to comment. What's that deafening silence coming from the Right, second marriage and "mistakes forgiven" crowd?

I don't give a rats ass what its called, the constitution says I should be treated equally. Now give me my tax money back!

acg 7 years, 7 months ago

I see the bigots and haters are out in full force this morning. And why would I think a new year would bring about a new way of thinking for some of these idiots? Congrats, all the new couples. May you find wedded bliss (or something akin to it) in your new unions.

ksdivakat 7 years, 7 months ago

Good Morning all, I just wanted to say, that just because someone doesnt believe in gay civil unions, does not necessarily mean that they are bigots. We all have a right to believe in something or not, that doesnt make a bigot, a bigot is someone who hates, thats all, im not debating the issue, im not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone...Im just saying..................

gr 7 years, 7 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

moo 7 years, 7 months ago

How about a compromise: the government shouldn't be in the business of marriage at all. The government should give everyone civil unions and equality under the law and then whoever wishes to can get "married" in a church. My parents have been happily married for over 25 years, but their relationship would not be any different if it was a "union" and not a "marriage." Marriage is historically just a legal contract that has been used for the exchange of property (including women). As a woman, I don't know that I would want to be labeled with such a term anyway. In addition, as a person who believes in equal rights for all, I don't want a buzzword that the Christian right uses to stir up fear of homosexuals to be applied to my relationship with someone I love. Love is a private matter and did not even become an expected part of marriage until a quite recent chapter in human history. Having said all of this, this is the land of the free, people, equal rights for all.

Erin Parmelee 7 years, 7 months ago

Wow. I love how pretty much any article mentioning gays brings out the 2nd grader in everyone. Does it make you feel better to insult people? "Homo", "Fudgepacker". Very impressive. I'm just wowed by the astounding intellect being displayed. Exactly what are you people so afraid of??

moo 7 years, 7 months ago

Haha, I love all the suggestions that somehow gay civil unions are a slippery slope. Who will we be allowed to marry next? Animals? Robots? Sex toys??? There is quite a large difference between allowing consenting adults to have their loving, mutual relationships recognized by the federal government and allowing people to marry dogs. As far as I know, animals and robots cannot consent to a relationship with a human (bestiality is rape, in effect), nor can they own property, pay taxes,or open bank accounts. In addition, I do not believe that many animals are asking for and being denied a family member's rights to coverage under their significant other's healthcare plan or visitation rights in hospitals.

EXks 7 years, 7 months ago

Word of advice to DollyHeeHaw.....

As a kid, when I said or did something STUPID, my granny used to tell me,....

"If they had put your brain in a chicken it would run straight to the butcher!!"

moo 7 years, 7 months ago

Thanks, Made in China, I guess I just don't get why people in a relationship should get tax breaks and such perks. It makes sense for some other rights involving health care and custody of children, and all committed couples should share these rights. I agree that the "superstitious veneer," as you put it, of marriage is pretty silly. Isn't love an amazing enough thing without the extra hoopla?

ksdivakat 7 years, 7 months ago

hey there anniein kansas...............my parents have been married for 55 years, neither has ever had an affair and they have many many friends who have been married for several decades. you asked to get your tax money back....but there is a marriage penalty tax.....so if you want marriage then be prepared to pay the tax......or should that be waived for gay people??

hawklet21 7 years, 7 months ago

I'm sure annie wouldn't mind paying her taxes (marriage penalty tax, or whatever else) as long as she is viewed as a human being equal to everyone else in the country.

ksdivakat 7 years, 7 months ago

oh yeah, and the most important part of the message should be this.....if you think that a civil union or a marriage will give the partner death benefits.....you better think again! I used to work in the mutual fund industry and i can tell you this.....we would have over 250 cases tied up in court at a time of gay couples who "willed" their estate or put it in trust and named their partner as the trustee, or named their partner the durable POA.....and the decedents family STILL has a right as the blood relative to contest it in court and 9 times out of 10 the bio family wins. And before everyone starts calling me a bigot or alefy loonie or a righty tighty...or wahtever ya'll call people on here, I am not against it, I am also not for it, its not my job to judge anyone, and i dont, but all this negative energy that stems from this is all for nothing.....the question was asked how the registry here in lawrence is working out for those folks.....nobody responded because nobody can! It didnt do a dang thing for anyone............its useless!

hawklet21 7 years, 7 months ago

What question? This is an article about New Hampshire! It's not about how the Lawrence registry works.

frazzled 7 years, 7 months ago

ksdivakat, the point is that if two consenting adults choose to enter into a relationship with legal rights and responsibilities, their gender shouldn't matter. It's simply an issue of equal protection.

If gay couples had the same legal status as straight couples, then those 250 cases wouldn't be tying up the court system.

Magpie 7 years, 7 months ago

Congratulations to all of the happy couples! I wish I could get each of them a Cuisinart.

SettingTheRecordStraight 7 years, 7 months ago

frazzled,

Gender doesn't matter in terms of a legal contract. It does, however, matter in terms of a state-recognized sexual relationship, which is what marriage and civil unions are.

If the homosexuals only wanted a legal tie, a well-written contract would suffice. But they want so much more than that. They want society's recognition of their relationship as legitimate. That's why all the cries for "equality" are hollow and meaningless.

There is equality under the law for those wanting to enter into a contract; there is not equality for those wanting marriage to be something it isn't.

moo 7 years, 7 months ago

Actually, STRS, the amendment to the Kansas state constitution a couple of years ago used such broad language to ban civil unions that it endangered same sex legal contracts of any kind. Just a point of interest.

sfjayhawk 7 years, 7 months ago

I have a question for STRS and the other bigots out there:

I am a man, 'married' to a woman. We were not 'married' in a church or by anyone affiliated with a church. We do not go to church, nor do we believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. We are very suspicious of organized religion, and believe strongly in a separation of church and state. We do have certain rights under the law (joint custody of our assets and survivorship rights for example). In your definition of Marriage - do my wife and I qualify as being 'married' or as just having a civil union?

hawklet21 7 years, 7 months ago

Magpie- Love it. I'll give the toasters :)

Tychoman 7 years, 7 months ago

"They want society's recognition of their relationship as legitimate."--STRS.

It IS legitimate. Next topic, please. I'm glad I could clear that up for you bigots.

Casey_Jones 7 years, 7 months ago

Everyone's missing the real problem here: "civil union" isn't an option when editing your relationship status on facebook.

Tychoman 7 years, 7 months ago

Way to be original, Bears. Such a unique thought, from such a unique person.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Congratulations New Hampshire! It is a good start but it doesn't go far enough. As some have pointed out here, my church will "marry" my partner and me. My government will not grant me the same rights and responsibilities as my straight counterparts. Civil Unions are still second to marriage. They are not recognized the moment you cross the state line. They are not recognized by the federal government. There are over a thousand federal benefits that gay couples can not get that straight people take for granted. These benefits by the way were documented by the government not some lefty group.

My long term monogomous same sex relationship is real and it survives despite not having the legal ties that bind my straight counterparts. We could just walk away from our relationship without any messy divorce or legal fees. We stay together in a storm of controversy in a world that discounts and reduces our relationship to sexual acts discribed in locker room and school yard pejoratives. We love each other are committed and that is why we stay together.

Until just a few years ago the federal government upheld laws that punished the physical expression of our love. Now as a voting, taxpaying, American Citizen, I expect to have the same rights and responsibilities as my straight counterparts. With Liberty and Justice for ALL, does not mean only for SOME.

SettingTheRecordStraight 7 years, 7 months ago

Let me sum it up. Homosexuals do not want marriage and/or civil unions for the legal protections they offer; those are available through a contract. What the homosexual community wants is recognition, legitimacy, special consideration, "tolerance," and a new place in society.

Erin Parmelee 7 years, 7 months ago

Dont_Feed_The_Bears (Anonymous) says:

God created Adam and Eve: not Adam and Steve..

Please see my earlier post, and thank you for providing a prime example.

What are you trying to prove here Bears? That you can name call? I don't even think you accomplished that, but if a post like that makes you feel better about your "manhood", go ahead buddy. Whatever gets you through the day.

PS: Marion, it PAINS me to agree with you (because I normally want to throttle you) but well put. :)

EXks 7 years, 7 months ago

God created Adam and Eve,

Wow, if this statement is true, there was a lot of of INBREEDING, meaning brothers marrying sisters???

ksdivakat 7 years, 7 months ago

OMG! Defender...how rude! Do you really expect to get your point accross in such a hatful way?? Perhaps you are biggoted to straight people?? thats what it sounds like to me! Dang....nobody can have an opinion that differs with the gay community, otherwise people are stupid, morons, whatever the flavor word for the day is.....maybe this part of the reason why its so hard for straight people to swallow it...when asked or debated they are shot in foot and demeaned, the question was asked several threads up about the lawrence registry and of course it was side stepped with a snide comment...so again....what good has the lawrence registry been?? has it given any recognition to anyone who didnt have it before?? No it hasnt, has it given them any other rights? no it hasnt....this is just the same as racism, and until everyone can talk about it both gay and straight in a civil manner, then its never going to go anywhere....so i purpose that we start an adult dialogue, that doesnt blame, shame, demean, anyone, but a real open and honest conversation about it....thats gonna be the real beginning!

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

A simple google search of "federal marriage benefits" gives an overwhelming amount of documentation. Sorry for the cut and paste job but this is just a sample.

On the order of 1,400 legal rights are conferred upon married couples in the U.S. Typically these are composed of about 400 state benefits and over 1,000 federal benefits. Among them are the rights to: joint parenting;
joint adoption;
joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents);
status as next-of-kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent;
joint insurance policies for home, auto and health;
dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support;
immigration and residency for partners from other countries;
inheritance automatically in the absence of a will;
joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or leaves the house or apartment;
inheritance of jointly-owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship (which avoids the time and expense and taxes in probate);
benefits such as annuities, pension plans, Social Security, and Medicare;
spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home;
veterans' discounts on medical care, education, and home loans; joint filing of tax returns;
joint filing of customs claims when traveling;
wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children;
bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child;
decision-making power with respect to whether a deceased partner will be cremated or not and where to bury him or her;
crime victims' recovery benefits;
loss of consortium tort benefits;
domestic violence protection orders;
judicial protections and evidentiary immunity;
and more....
Most of these legal and economic benefits cannot be privately arranged or contracted for. For example, absent a legal (or civil) marriage, there is no guaranteed joint responsibility to the partner and to third parties (including children) in such areas as child support, debts to creditors, taxes, etc. In addition, private employers and institutions often give other economic privileges and other benefits (special rates or memberships) only to married couples. And, of course, when people cannot marry, they are denied all the emotional and social benefits and responsibilities of marriage as well.

ksdivakat 7 years, 7 months ago

scenebooster...thank you...yes it was a freudian slip! I guess....I never thought about it that way but ok! LOL

pity2bu 7 years, 7 months ago

Defender,

Here's my two cents now regarding your comment toward STRS.

Recognition for what; you have come out of the closet!

Legitimacy for: to make what legit. You want to add your man to your insurance medical plan in case something pops up later or is it you just want to tell every other man he's yours... if that's the case, hang a sign on his a**, or better yet maybe a C-ring might be another special attraction for you and your other lost souls.

Special consideration for? You want special consideration well then find an island and take all those with you and then you can become the HPIC. You got it right, Head + Man's Flute + in Charge. Then you will be recognized, be legit and you will have special consideration by all your people.

So you continue making up crap because you cannot deal with the anxiety of coming out of the closet. Well I'm sorry that I won't cry you a river. You sound like you might need a little anxiety medication to help you cope on this subject.

Like HodgePodge said, "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve," unlike the scriptures written in your unrecognized bible. I, Adam take Steve to be my butt-buddy for eternity, to bear and harvest my fruit and nuts..... and so on.

So get over it, just be glad Lawrence gave you a registry. You want anything more than that pack up and move to New Hampshire.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Pity oh Pity, I think we may just have to protect marriage after all. We need to protect marriage from straight people that take it for granted and trivialize it as you do in your post.

preebo 7 years, 7 months ago

"Gay "marriage" is not, nor will it ever be, marriage." -Setting The Record Straight (hmmm. are we sure?)

"Massachusetts is the only state that allows (gay) marriage."

Leave it to Kansans to make intolerance fashionable again.

ksdivakat 7 years, 7 months ago

pity2bu.....how dare you! Dont you EVER associate yourself as a christian and refer to my bible! I am a christian, and nowhere in my bible did God say one time to hate gays, its not in there, you wont find it! Its not our job as christians to judge anyone, its our job to love them. I am offended for every gay man and woman who reads this today, your hatred and ignorance are very apparant, I hope you do not have children who you are spewing your hate to and teaching them the same thing. Didnt your mama ever teach you that you catch more flys with honey than you do vinegar?? Hey are you sure your name shouldnt be fred phelps???

EXks 7 years, 7 months ago

God created Adam and Eve,

If this statement is true, there was a lot of of inbreeding, meaning brothers marrying sisters???

Maybe this explains the rampant DNA strain of stupidity exhibited in some you A-holes.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Bears, perhaps you would like conform to the golden rule of both the Bible and society. How about a little "love thy neighbor as thy self"?

Are you taking your stand against marriage equality from the Bible? Leviticus 18-20 perhaps? You may choose to read the passages completely and acknowledge the context. You will probably find that you and others you feel are superior to gay people are committing abominations. These might include wearing cotton/polyester clothing, eating shrimp and pork, working on Sunday and a host of other things that just don't seem too important anymore.

Remember that when you point your finger at others the other fingers smell like shrimp and bacon.

moo 7 years, 7 months ago

Interesting. I sort of thought you guys believed that God created everyone: Adam, Eve, and Steve. So are you appointing yourselves to be judges of God's creations? Sounds a bit like arrogance to me. Anyone remember what the bible says about pride, or does that just not fit your personal cliff's notes version of the "good word?"

gypsy10 7 years, 7 months ago

I just wrote a paper on Domestic Partner Benefits. Amazing how little access partners have to their loved ones when it comes to Federal Laws - complete BS! It is COMPLETE BS that a biological family member can over-ride a domestic partner's last wishes (even if it is in a legal contract). The government needs to get their conservative heads out of their A$$es.

Gay Okay said: "Now as a voting, taxpaying, American Citizen, I expect to have the same rights and responsibilities as my straight counterparts. With Liberty and Justice for ALL, does not mean only for SOME".

Every "LEGAL" citizen in America pays their taxes, has the right to vote and I agree with Gay Okay! America should start realizing how diverse our country is and give our "legal" taxpaying citizens the same rights as their straight counterparts have.

temperance 7 years, 7 months ago

Don't Feed The Bears has no use for anyone who doesn't think that homosexuality is a mental illness. And why should he? He's too busy smearing Iraq war veterans and thinking up witty bon mots like: "Bill and Hillary met because they were both dating the same woman! :)"

And remember people, "The problem is not with capitolism." http://www2.ljworld.com/users/Dont_Feed_The_Bears/comments/?page=5 http://www2.ljworld.com/users/Dont_Feed_The_Bears/comments/?page=6 http://www2.ljworld.com/users/Dont_Feed_The_Bears/comments/?page=8

Erin Parmelee 7 years, 7 months ago

Dont_Feed_The_Bears (Anonymous) says:

I am now famous!

Yeah, like Hitler.

Kathy Getto 7 years, 7 months ago

DirtyLinen (Anonymous) says:

Made_in_China (Anonymous) says:

"Marriage is a civil contract invented to deal with property rights. Any other levels of meaning are inventions of Mother Church done for her own selfish reasons."

Absolutely, gay partners should have the same property rights as heterosexual couples. Including the right to pass down, through inheritance, that property to their natural children. Oh wait:


Let's see, can a heterosexual couple pass down, through inheritence, property to their adoptive children? Or maybe a neice or a nephew? You are truly being ignorant, Dirty, in an attempt to compensate for your lack of knowledge. Marriage IS a contract and If a contract was voluntarily entered into, doesn't involve activity that is already illegal, and doesn't involve direct harm to others, the state should recognize and enforce it. This is why we allow persons to purchase goods that are destructive (for example, cigarettes and alcohol) and that offend the majority's sensibility (for example, pornography.) Look around and tell me honestly the sanctity of your religious bonding is alive and well.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Not only is marriage equality the American thing to do, it should appeal to the money grubbing part of the Radical Right Wing Republican in some of the posters on this thread.

Marriage Equality is money maker.

The economy gains in other direct ways, as well, according to the report,"spending on new weddings alone would generate $2 billion for businesses in the wedding industry," reported co-author Gary Gates, senior research associate at the Williams Institute.

Kathy Getto 7 years, 7 months ago

Marriage was created so men could control their money and property with a religious stamp of approval, nothing more, nothing less.

bd 7 years, 7 months ago

It ain't happenning here folks , so give it up and move to New Humpshire!

pity2bu 7 years, 7 months ago

Defender, Do you really think I care that a MORON like you reported me to the BLOG police. You just could not accept the truth...

Married and have two kids, what does that have to do with the article and this blog.

ksdivakat, you need to jump to one side of the fence or the other instead of walking the top strand talking out of both sides of your mouth.

You gotta love stirring the pot, it brings out the real traits of each of the bloggers.

EXks 7 years, 7 months ago

Only a matter of time before same sex marriage DOES happen, because if you ask most logical people 30 and under, same sex marriage is a NON-ISSUE! Repeat NON-ISSUE!

Only a matter of time before you old farts finally DIE off and a new generation takes over, only a matter of time.....tick tock, tick tock.

Bitterfalls 7 years, 7 months ago

Christianity is the new Gay. I hereby reserve the word "Christian" to mean "Cryptosporidium".

Maybe the church needs to get out of the marriage business?

Kathy Getto 7 years, 7 months ago

Now, now, Dirty - simmer on down, there will be a more harmonious outcome. Name calling is certainly not necessary and only proves my point - lashing out instead of participating in coherent, intelligent discourse is the first sign of one lacking knowledge in the subject at hand.

I did not assume you were married at all, but rather spoke of all marriages annointed by religion.

Bigotry against religion is a new one for me. I have a choice in which fairy tale I believe in thank you so much.

Obvious discrepancy to you is one that produces a child. Lame argument since you so kindly pointed out not all marriages include the production of children. Homophobia has many signs, many you possess.

pity2bu 7 years, 7 months ago

Dirty Linen thanks for clearing the stagnant air here. You hit the nail right on the head... At least someone here is sane and logical. Everything here is about Christianity or sexual preference not about the article at hand.

But you have to admit, there is nothing like stirring the pot at times to get the bloggers blood pressure rising to almost the boiling point.

Kathy Getto 7 years, 7 months ago

BTW - Love in America is behind the times, I am afraid.

Q. What countries currently allow same-sex registered partnerships / civil unions? A. Denmark, 1989.

Norway, 1996.

Sweden, 1996.

Iceland, 1996.

France, 1999.

Vermont, USA, 2000.

Germany, 2001.

Finland, 2002.

Luxembourg, 2004.

New Zealand, 2004.

Connecticut, USA, 2005.

Britain, 2005. New Jersey, USA, 2006.

New Hampshire, USA, 2008.

Oregon, USA, 2008. The rights available to same-sex couples vary from country to country.

Q. What countries currently allow same-sex marriage? A. The Netherlands, 2001.

Belgium, 2003.

Massachusetts, USA, 2004.

Canada, 2005.

Spain, 2005.

Kathy Getto 7 years, 7 months ago

No, pity - the article is about a CONTRACT. Do you know the definition of the word CONTRACT?

hawklet21 7 years, 7 months ago

"gay couples can call their relationship whatever they want. They're never going to create a new life." They may never create a new life, but I'm sure that many gay couples can provide a perfectly wonderful home to a child in need, if only they were allowed to more often. Sorry to stir the pot. I didn't wanna!!!

Kathy Getto 7 years, 7 months ago

Me, too, hawklet - there are so many children needing a good home and loving parents.

RonaldWilson 7 years, 7 months ago

Whether homosexuality is a mental illness, or genetic, or a learned behavior, one thing we do know for sure is heterosexuality is the natural order of things. Without it we cease to exsist. Without heterosexuals, there would be no homosexuals. In order for the heterosexuals to continue producing homosexuals for the benefit of other homosexuals, it would seem to me the homosexuals would want the heterosexuals to remain happy and allow them to keep their monopoly on marriage so as not to interrupt the breeding process. And, as I've predicted before, the homosexual community is going to become the most rabid pro-lifers you'll ever come across (I know, poor choice of words) once they isolate the gay gene. The homosexuals will be worse than Phill Kline when it comes to checking records for reasons to abort. Yes, I'm assuming some people would kill their baby for no other reason than it might be homosexual.

BigPrune 7 years, 7 months ago

Lipstick lesbian couples should be allowed to marry a man.

One can only dream.

hawklet21 7 years, 7 months ago

RonaldWilson, do you mean to tell me that gay people can't use test tubes, eggs, sperm, and those little pipettes? hahahaha. Thank goodness those crazy homos won't be able to reproduce in case anything happens to the heteros!

whatatown 7 years, 7 months ago

I'm always amazed when I read these comments that I somehow live in what is seen as the most liberal town in Kansas, yet these posts just show that the citizens of Lawrence are no more open minded than those I ran away from in SE Kansas.

Corey Williams 7 years, 7 months ago

When will all you people get it through your thick skulls? Marriage is supposed to be: one man+one woman+one woman!

RonaldWilson 7 years, 7 months ago

hawklet21 (Anonymous) says:

RonaldWilson, do you mean to tell me that gay people can't use test tubes, eggs, sperm, and those little pipettes? hahahaha. Thank goodness those crazy homos won't be able to reproduce in case anything happens to the heteros!


I don't know. How do you reproduce a homosexual? How do you know that's what's going to come out of your test tube? We are equipped with the ability for heterosexual reproduction, it's the behavior of the homosexual that defines it.

Roadkill_Rob 7 years, 7 months ago

whatatown,

A lot of the "posters" who hate liberals don't live here. And those that do live here represent a very small minority of the population...you don't have to live in a town to post on a town's newspaper.

SettingTheRecordStraight 7 years, 7 months ago

pity2bu,

Don't worry about Defender. He reports EVERYBODY he doesn't agree with to the site administrator (right after he calls you every name in the book).

RonaldWilson 7 years, 7 months ago

scenebooster (Anonymous) says:

"one thing we do know for sure is heterosexuality is the natural order of things."

I wonder, genius: does homosexuality occur in nature?


Yes it does. My statement is no less true. Photosythesis occurs in nature as well, but that does not mean that heterosexuality is not the predominate means of reproduction, and therefore the natural order.

pity2bu 7 years, 7 months ago

Settingtherecordstraight,

Thanks I appreciate it STRS. I guess it goes to show you that I am not the only unedgumacated moron on this site. He truly is one himself. But at least we don't go running to mama everytime we don't get our way, or don't believe like the majority thinks we should.

I got your back STRS. Have a good one!

gr 7 years, 7 months ago

Defender at 8:53 a.m.: "You need to get a life and stop worrying about what happens in the lives of other people. Wow, what a moron."

Defender at 10:25 a.m.: " "So, I guess dead deer humpers are allowed in New Hampshire now." No, but your amazing ignorance is still your right in every state of the union."

Guess some who SAY others shouldn't worry about what happens in the lives of other people, don't really mean it. All this gibberish about "equality", "equal rights", "what is it hurting", is just pointless blabbering. It's not really meant.

Katara 7 years, 7 months ago

sfjayhawk (Anonymous) says:

I have a question for STRS and the other bigots out there:

I am a man, 'married' to a woman. We were not 'married' in a church or by anyone affiliated with a church. We do not go to church, nor do we believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. We are very suspicious of organized religion, and believe strongly in a separation of church and state. We do have certain rights under the law (joint custody of our assets and survivorship rights for example). In your definition of Marriage - do my wife and I qualify as being 'married' or as just having a civil union? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ So why hasn't anyone answered this question?

RedwoodCoast 7 years, 7 months ago

So is marriage a Christian doctrine that is defined by a legal and/or spiritual union between a man and a woman? Or is the legal and/or spiritual union between a man and a woman seen by Christian doctrine as a marriage?

But seriously, people, what the heck is it going to do to YOU if Jack and Jerry or Ann and Stacy get married? I give those same-sex marriage bans 30 years lifetime at most.

Seriously. I think we have bigger issues in the world to deal with.

Oracle_of_Rhode 7 years, 7 months ago

Congratulations to all the happy couples out there!

EXks 7 years, 7 months ago

So, what's the greater threat to our society and the free world???

  1. same sex marriage????

OR

  1. the nut jobs in Pakistan with their finger on the nuke button?????

No I ask you, who is a bigger threat ???

deskboy04 7 years, 7 months ago

I think that it is strange that everyone gets so fired up about this.

Opinionation 7 years, 7 months ago

I don't see how there can even be an argument about this. What are straight people losing if gay people are allowed to marry? Nothing.

Nobody is trying to take away the rights of straight people to wed, so what harm does it do if gay people wed?

If you honestly think that homosexuality is "unnatural", then let homosexuals be unnatural, and you can go on thinking that they will burn in hell if that makes you happy in some twisted way.

Katara 7 years, 7 months ago

americorps (Anonymous) says:

Marriage was a civil service and not a product of the church until the late 1500's ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Exactly! The Council of Trent is when it happened.

George_Braziller 7 years, 7 months ago

I'd just like to have a recognition of the relationship that I have been in for 16 years this March. I don't give a crap if you call it "marriage" or a "civil union." I'd just like to know that if he or I are in a place where one of us is on death's door we can at a minimum have an opportunity to say good bye without someone telling me that I'm not a family member and thus don't exist.

It doesn't hurt your marriage because it is is MY relationship. If you think that we're going to hell because of some stupid Leviticus reference then so be it.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Is homosexuality natural? Well duh, of course it is. It is only a variation of nature. Gayness is observed in most all species. Is it as common as heterosexuality, decidely no.

Are both diamonds and coal natural and made of the same element carbon? Yes, they are only one is more precious and less common. Gay people are God's beautiful, precious gems meant to be appreciated. Like other gems they compliment each other when placed together in an appropriate platinum setting with other gems.

My partner in life is my precious gem. Without him I am only a solitare pear shape. I am still a stunning beauty to behold but lonely. Still in Kansas alas we are diamonds in the rough waiting for our platinum setting. I want my GD ring and the rights and responsibilities that go with it!

Bitterfalls 7 years, 7 months ago

I agree with some things said here, others things not so much.

I think the issue is not so complex.

jonas 7 years, 7 months ago

"lildos (Anonymous) says:

wow, 142 comments in 12 hours:"

It's one of the guaranteed topics, along with anything concerning Iraq and, strangely, anything concerning Al Gore.

The real funny thing is that the actual content is pretty much never new.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Some historical perspective about so called "traditional marriage". From Wikapedia under History of same-sex unions.

Christian Europe

Historian John Boswell claimed the 4th century Christian martyrs Saint Sergius and Saint Bacchus were united in the ritual of adelphopoiesis, which he calls an early form of religious same-sex marriage After the Middle Ages in Europe, same-sex relationships were increasingly frowned upon and banned in many countries by the Church or the state. However, Historian John Boswell argued that Adelphopoiesis, or brother-making, represented an early form of religious same-sex marriage in the Orthodox church, and Alan Bray saw the rite of Ordo ad fratres faciendum ("Order for the making of brothers") as serving the same purpose in the medieval Roman Catholic Church. In the Balkans, same-sex marriage survived until modern days, in the form of the Albanian rite of vellameria, "brother bond."

In late medieval France, the practice of entering a legal contract of affrÃrement provided a vehicle for civil unions between unrelated adults who pledged to live together sharing 'un pain, un vin, et une bourse' one bread, one wine, and one purse

Oh and just a tid bit. The King James Bible that many Christians use to justify their abuse of gay people was commissioned by a very Very VERY gay man named King James.

Dixie Jones 7 years, 7 months ago

what i dont understand is.......are of the gay people forcing you to become gay with them? are they twisting your straight arm to become one of them? do they shame you because you are straight? no they dont and we should not judge others. do you judge someone because the dont drive a MBW? do you judge someone because they arent the same color as you? do you judge someone cause the have a limp? More than likely if you judge someone because they are gay then your the type of person who judges others . SHAME on you. Until you walk a day in that person , (gay,color,poor,disabled), dont you DARE judge them.

Tychoman 7 years, 7 months ago

To RonaldWilson: Photosynthesis isn't a form of reproduction. Get your facts lined up before you decide to continue posting pro-bigotry drivel. Homosexuality is a natural thing, and just because it isn't predominant doesn't necessarily make it undesirable. Glad I could clear that up for you.

To everyone: It'd be nice to see some namecalling that doesn't use the word "stupid" or "moron" because I've lost count how many times that appears on this board.

Oh, by the way, we gays want to force our beliefs on everybody else. Yeah. That's it. Because we're convinced, like you, that if you had to accept gay marriage, it'll destroy your own marriage, turn you gay, turn your kids gay, and kill your puppies, and burn your house down. We'll leave your cats alone, though. They're OK.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Tychoman, having received my toaster oven for recruitment acheivements, I completely agree with you. I look forward to seeing you at the next Secret Gay Agenda meeting. BTW I plan on making a motion to kill cats next. Personally I can't stand those fur ball coughing little monsters they always claw me when I have sex with them. Do you think a proposal to destroy all breeder hauling minivans with Jesus Fish emblems will pass? The Gay Mafia is going to have to lay off some Nancys after completing this years missions in the War on Christmas.

Oh and just an update, since Senator Craig has blown his cover (ooopsie, pun-I'm such a silly goose) we will have to elect another undercover operative to spread HIV to the Christian Straight Married With Children population.

Yours in Satan's Service

Recruiting Children Since 1980

Tychoman 7 years, 7 months ago

God I miss Reagan.

Ted Haggard for President.

Tychoman 7 years, 7 months ago

Oh, by the way gayokay (my new hero) I already got my flatscreen HDTV for contributing to the deviance of children.

Gays 1, Christmas 0.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Unfortunately, Ted Haggard is not available to caucus (tee Hee) for nomination for the Republican party candidate for president. He is currently being deprogrammed. He is making good progress. He can now put his whoo haa into his wife but he still has to staple a Playgirl Centerfold on the headboard. Mrs. Haggard is still adjusting to getting flipped over and looking over her shoulder to answer to her husband's querie's (tee Hee) as to who's the daddy? Ted is making such progress that he can even sit through ten minutes of a sports game without commenting on the pretty costumes or channel surfing for ice dancing. Still a lot of work to go though, Ted can't stop giggling when he hears the sports play by play mention of "balls".

Tychoman 7 years, 7 months ago

Gayokay, your last post was full of inappropriate words!!

Such as: "available" "progress" "into" "wife" "is."

I'm surprised at you and always expected you to be more mature than this. Piff. Mmm nothing like Playgirl. The working senator's...er, I mean, the working pastor's...I mean the working man's...nope. The working woman's Playboy! There we go.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Oh Dearie (lisping and flinging my wrist while sashaying), I'm tho thorry. I thurely would neverth purpouthly offend anyoneth with inappropriate wordsth.

braesmom 7 years, 7 months ago

scenebooster (Anonymous) says:

"marriage will always be the union of one man and one woman."

Sez who?

"sez" the bible.

Kathy Getto 7 years, 7 months ago

While some of the bigots' comments on this thread tend to make me want to argue, it is not worth my breath. Homophobia is no different than racism - pure fear of something different (thank the Godess for differences in people!). Continue to live in fear, I pity your poor souls.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

You know, just because your pastor doesn't approve of same sex nuptials doesn't mean another pastor doesn't. This is a country that supposedly allows religious freedom.

That said, there is no substantive reason for the government to ban same sex marriage. In fact there are many reasons for the government to promote stable relationships. The same people that would call gay people promiscuous spreaders of disease on one side of their mouth will deny someone the opportunity to legally commit to a monogomous marriage out of the other side of their mouth.

Unlike Ted Haggard, and his buddy Senator Craig y'all can't have it both ways.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

I think that those who believe it is their duty to codify their religious beliefs and impose their radical right wing lifestyle on others have a lack of faith in their God and their religion. They are afraid that God can't manage a differing view. They are afraid their kids if given a choice will not follow in their hateful footsteps. They are terrified that the ol'time religion they were raised on might actually have some flaws. People in general are very disturbed when their belief system is challenged.

My understanding of the Amish gives me a great respect for these people. They traditionally allow their young adults to go out into the world to experience life outside their faith. Most go a little wild for a while and then eventually return to the fold. This is where I disapprove, if the younguns decide not to return to the church they are then shunned and given up as if they were dead. How cold.

But the point is,how can one have faith and follow a belief system if one has no choice? This is why God gave us free will.

Dixie Jones 7 years, 7 months ago

gayokay is my new hero ! wrist flingin and all

Bradley Kemp 7 years, 7 months ago

You couldn't be more right, gayokay. Those with the shakiest religious beliefs are always the most ardent in trying to persuade others to conform to those beliefs.

Always.

RonaldWilson 7 years, 7 months ago

"I think that those who believe it is their duty to codify their religious beliefs and impose their radical right wing lifestyle on others...."


But, it is you imposing your lifestyle on others. You are seeking the change, to deviate from the norm. We are seeking to secure the traditions that have served society well, not trash the foundations of society and rebuild it with a new morality.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Dollypawpaw, the adults are talking. Jeezus, I swear, children should be seen and not heard from until they visit from boarding school.

But since you asked so nicely I cranked up the old Google search engine for you. You really must try it some time.

Transgender From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Transgender (IPA: /trÃ:nz&&char114&& dÊ'ÉndÉ'/, from (Latin) derivatives [trans <L, combination form meaning across, beyond, through] and [gender <ME <MF gendre, genre <L gener- meaning kind or sort]) is a general term applied to a variety of individuals, behaviors, and groups involving tendencies that diverge from the normative gender role (woman or man) commonly, but not always, assigned at birth, as well as the role traditionally held by society.

Transgender is the state of one's "gender identity" (self-identification as male, female, both or neither) not matching one's "assigned gender" (identification by others as male or female based on physical/genetic sex). "Transgender" does not imply any specific form of sexual orientation; transgender people may identify as heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, pansexual or asexual. The precise definition for transgender remains in flux, but includes:

"Of, relating to, or designating a person whose identity does not conform unambiguously to conventional notions of male or female gender, but combines or moves between these."[1] "People who were assigned a gender, usually at birth and based on their genitals, but who feel that this is a false or incomplete description of themselves."[2] "Non-identification with, or non-presentation as, the gender one was assigned at birth."[3] A transgender individual may have characteristics that are normally associated with a particular gender, identify elsewhere on the traditional gender continuum, or exist outside of it as "other," "agender," "intergender," or "third gender". Transgender people may also identify as bigender, or along several places on either the traditional transgender continuum, or the more encompassing continuums which have been developed in response to the significantly more detailed studies done in recent years.[

Kathy Getto 7 years, 7 months ago

RonaldWilson (Anonymous) says: But, it is you imposing your lifestyle on others. You are seeking the change, to deviate from the norm. We are seeking to secure the traditions that have served society well, not trash the foundations of society and rebuild it with a new morality.


Marriage customs have always reflected public need and opinion. Social habits have a strong tendency to become customs. A habit may develop into a genuine custom simply because people are inclined to disapprove of anything which is unusual. In early history, politics and money trumped emotions, today marriage is supposed to be the ultimate expression of love. Who are you to determine the extent of the love two people (of any sex) have for one another? In case you hadn't noticed, society changes, daily.

RonaldWilson 7 years, 7 months ago

Scenebooster,

Am I forcing them to be strait? Where does the constitution secure the right to a gay marriage? Anybody can come up with asinine questions like you do. Your contributions to these forums are juvenile at best. Your arguments are always contrary to normal, traditional, regular points of veiw and I think you take those positions purely for entertainment value. Either that or you have burned out your brain cells with another form of entertainment.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Mr. Wilson, Sir you are in error. I just want to live my life with same rights you take for granted.

Who is trying to pass a Federal Amendment to ban same sex couples from getting hitched? Answer: the radical right wing religious conservatives. If my government were to allow this voting taxpayer the right to marry my long time committed monogomous partner it would in no way infringe upon your ability to live your life as you choose.

You on the other hand are attempting to impose your belief system on me and my partner in life. " In order to create a more perfect union" I am only attempting to achieve the American ideal of equality. You on the other hand would relegate persons you disagree with to hide in the shadows as second class citizens. Forgive me for showing you and your ilk the hypocrisy of your ways. I bet you call yourself a patriot? It is far more patriotic to work for social justice. If you want to promote your brand of religion fine just keep it off my freedoms.

Following your line of logic Mr. Wilson we would still own slaves, women would not have the right to vote, and people with different skin color would not be allowed to marry. How dare those cotton picking negros push their beliefs on those rightous slave owners! Just where did those uppity women get off putting shoes on and marching out of the kitchen to the voting polls. Hrrmpf! Infernal inferior women disrespecting traditional values anyway! Gosh Darn interacial couples. How could they fall in love and want to have the same rights and resposibilities as those who have the same skin color. Really, the nerve!

Conservative=stagnation Progressive=change and innovation

Time and progress keep marching on. The dinosours are extinct because they could not adapt. Mr. Wilson, I suggest you learn how to adapt. If you can not or are not willing then get the heck out of the way and let others live their lives. We will all be judged by our maker. It is not up to you, as God is quite capable without you.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Scenebooster, good question. Where does the constution address sexual orientation? Just where does it say that Heterosexuals shall have rights and resposibilities of marriage but others shall be discriminated against? I don't think it says anything of the sort. In addition, I don't think the constitution grants a predominant religion the right to impose their views on others who's religious views about marriage are less popular. In fact the First Amendment protects us from such an established government religion.

The pre amble does however say something to the order of we hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal. I doesn't say anything about one man and one women being equal. It says all men. One could infer from that that all women are equal also. Ergo one man plus one man are equal and one women and one women are also equal.

M+M=M+M W+W=W+W W+M=W+M

Do the math it makes sense.

RonaldWilson 7 years, 7 months ago

"Who defines what is "normal, traditional, or regular" points of view? I find your positions to be not only ignorant, but contrary to normality:"


Fine. Let's call the whole thing off. I'm sorry I can't conform to your way of "thinking".

The way that homosexuals are imposing their lifestyle on others is that they want to change the rules and definition of an established institution, an institution that many people take very seriously. Whether you believe they have they right or not, it's still an imposition.

EXks 7 years, 7 months ago

DollyHeeHaw.....save the comedy to Jay Leno, he's much funnier and smarter.

Roland Wilson, amazing just how INSECURE you really are. Grow up Miss Dorothy! You're NOT in the 19th century anymore!

Bitterfalls 7 years, 7 months ago

I'm not married, and I am pretty happy about that.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Mr. Wilson, I work, I go home, I greet my man with a kiss, we eat dinner, we watch some TV, we go to bed, we get up and do it again. Once every four years I vote for president. I mow my lawn, I paint my house, I pay my taxes. My life is really quite mondane. No wild chandalier swinging sex parties. I haven't even been in a gay bar in years since I quit drinking and smoking. And yes, I worship Jesus at a church that practices God's unconditional love. You would even be welcome. It is Metropolitan Community Church of Topeka. I'll save a seat for you and remember you in my prayers.

Just how am I imposing my "lifestyle" on you or anyone else. For Cher's sake I don't even dare make public displays of affection for fear of being beaten to death with a baseball bat. You see the kind of religious intolerance you preach and teach gives violent homophobes tacit approval to kill people. Doesn't that make you feel holy?

Dear Mr. Wilson, You can sit in a hot tub with a goat and it wouldn't really bother me. As long of course that you could verify that the goat had indeed given and was capable of giving consent.

Yours in Christ's Love

RedwoodCoast 7 years, 7 months ago

I think Marion's theory works well in cases like that of Fred Phelps. Phelps is both good and bad for homosexual equality: for one, he is soo far out there that no one dares take him seriously, but he also provides a point of reference from which people like RonaldWilson can distance themselves and still claim legitimacy.

This is one of the last great unresolved fights of the civil rights era. It is about providing the equality granted under the constitution to every citizen beneath its canopy, which is why these same sex marriage amendments will one day be repealed. They are de jure inequality, and history will view them as such.

Bitterfalls 7 years, 7 months ago

Will Gay couples be able to use the handicapped parking spaces at the skating rink?

Bitterfalls 7 years, 7 months ago

After reading this debate, I am absolutely convinced that my opinion remains unchanged.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Interesting story Marion. I did look up the car. Impressive, while not what I would discribe as a gear head. I am not afraid to work on cars. I've changed the head on a '78 Chevy Nova with a 250 straight six. My man is also a performing arts genius. Isn't it funny how persons no matter their sexual orientation tend to complement each other. Sometimes I say I'm handy and he's dandy.

Thank you so much for pointing out that the men you knew were interested in each other and not you. Statistics consistently point out that pedophiles are overwhelmingly heterosexual men with the victims being female. All the gay men I associate with want their lovers to be mature. Just like in straight society youth is over emphasized but if anyone is chasing after someone underage they are considered sicko and just sad.

It is a shame that your parents allowed fear to deny you the further experience of both different people and the talent of the violin instructor. Likewise, I and my partner are well educated talented professionals and have much to offer children if not as parents but as mentors. I am reluctant to even put myself in a position of being alone with kids because some bigot could accuse me of harming a child.

Katara 7 years, 7 months ago

sfjayhawk (Anonymous) says:

I have a question for STRS and the other bigots out there:

I am a man, 'married' to a woman. We were not 'married' in a church or by anyone affiliated with a church. We do not go to church, nor do we believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. We are very suspicious of organized religion, and believe strongly in a separation of church and state. We do have certain rights under the law (joint custody of our assets and survivorship rights for example). In your definition of Marriage - do my wife and I qualify as being 'married' or as just having a civil union? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ So why hasn't anyone answered this question? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ So is anyone going to actually address sfjayhawk's question? I'm curious about the answer too.

lianne 7 years, 7 months ago

Life's too short to be anything but happy, so why not let them be happy and get married?! Seriously! I'm not gay, but I have no problem with it. I'm happily married and I think everyone should have that right!

Sharon Aikins 7 years, 7 months ago

I find these forums interesting, a place for people to express their feelings and thoughts as well as their intelligence and stupidity. Having said that, I find that most of it is crap expressed by people with nothing better to do with their time.

I am a straight woman. I am divorced. I am a statistic of striaght marriages. And I feel that any two people who love each other have the right to be "married" and share the same rights as anyone. I'm guessing there are probably as many long term gay relationships as straight ones, if not more. What harm does it cause me if two people want to be married, no matter their sex? It seems to me that it is fear that causes a lot of the ignorance. Touching a gay person will not make you gay if you aren't. Living with a straight person will not make you straight if you are not. Why is it so hard to accept what is strange or different from ourselves?

It seems to me that religion gets in the way of responsible thinking at times. It's easier to spout verse than the think for oneself. And that is everyone's right if they so choose as well. What the bible thumpers fail to recognize is that there are others out there who do not share their opinions and might actually not be wrong. And they might not always be right, no pun intended.

I read through a lot of these comments today because I expected to find just what I did. Here was a subject with two well-defined sides. We wonder why nothing gets solved in this country, this world. Maybe it's because a lot of us have our feet cast in concrete, along with our minds, and would never consider that the other person has some meaningful thoughts as well that may not agree with ours. Without compromise on all parts, how can a problem like this ever be resolved? But if it were, what would you all have to argue about and point fingers at each other regarding and what purpose for calling each other names? Yep, I'm a moron and proud of it. At the same time, I'm fairly intelligent, don't always see things the way others do but don't fear them because I don't.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

I am not a theologin nor an attorney. And I hope I'm not a bigot. For what it is worth i'll give my two cents to facilitate discussion.

Since sfjayhawk says that he was not married in the church or by clergy I'll venture a guess that his/hers is a civil marriage. That is because they are opposite genders and their union through the faith and credit clause is recognized by the federal government and all the states and DC. If it were a civil union it would only be recognized in the state that they were legally united and not by almost all other states nor the federal government. If they have a legitimate marriage license from an authorized government authority then they are married in what is commonly called a civil ceremony. The wild card is the unknown factors like if the state they are in recognizes common law marriage.

See the funny thing about this issue is that I and my same sex partner can be "married" in the eyes of our church and our God but can't obtain a justice of the peace civil ceremony with a license. The two actually have nothing to do with each other. The Church/God thing is important to many but it is the License that makes it legit in the eyes of the state.

denak 7 years, 7 months ago

Because the legal answer--the one that matters--does not reflect certain people's religious beliefs. In the state of Kansas, you can have the biggest wedding ever put on, but it means absolutely nothing in the eyes of the law. A couple can go down to the courthouse, sign a marriage certificate and be in and out of there in 15 mins and be more married than the couple who had the huge religious ceremony. As far as the state is concerned, the only thing that matters is that legal document--the marriage certificate. Religion doesn't enter into this. Marriage is a state and federal function and should remain that way.
As for civil union, they are a second rate substution and eventually they will fall to the wayside to be replaced with marriage with all the rights given to individuals through that institution. Civil unions are not as good as marriage because they do not fall under the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution. A same sex marriage in Massachussets or a civil union in New Hampshire is not recognized in the other 49 states. Whether some people like it or not, same sex marriage will one day become a reality because to deny homosexuals or lesbians the right to marry-a marriage that is recognized in all 50 states--is to deny them the right to due process, equal protection and to violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause. No state has the right to violate the language and intent of the Constitution. The Constitution and case law clearly recognize the fundamental right to marry. This fundamental right will eventually extend to homosexuals and lesbians. To do otherwise, is unconstitutional. And that is what it comes done to. What does the law say. It doesn't matter what one's religion says. Only what the Constitution says.

Dena

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Well said Dena. If you know and would oblige, please illuminate common law marriage and the extent that it is recognized.

Thank you

Tychoman 7 years, 7 months ago

Post Scores: Rational free-thinkers: 201812723 Bigoted religious hypocrites: 0.

Dang. I'm waiting to be impressed with your original thoughts, STRS, Dolly, RT, Ronald, etc. I guess I'll be waiting a long time.

EXks 7 years, 7 months ago

DollyHeeHaw.....Did yer ma slap ya in the noggin' too many times as youngin'????...... cuz child you ain't right in the head, you're one bottle short of six pack.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Conservatives who are antigay frequently reduce Gay people to sex acts or carriers of disease like rats in the black plauge or dangerous to children. Sorry but when I hear the words "sex act" I think of circus music and plates spinning on sticks.

But when people are reduced to acts or behavior they are dehumanized. This is Gay bashing 101. This tactic has been utilized thoughout history to marginalize groups. Once a said group is dehumanized it is far easier to justify oppressing them assaulting them or even exterminating them. Because after all, they are less than human.

How many times have we heard gay people called various names that crudely depict sex acts? This practice denys people the basic human dignity that we would give any stranger on the street. Never mind that not all gay people enjoy or engage in every sex act uniformly. Furthermore, it is overlooked that heterosexuals often engage in the same acts. So if gay people are reduced to crudely named sex acts then what about persons who are abstainant or perhaps aged or in a relationship where for what ever reason they just aren't getting any? What about straight people who are abstainant or aged or married but not having sex. Are they still straight? Of course they are.

An offshoot of the above is the concept of love the sinner hate the sin. This is only a variation of the same thing. Some groups actually believe that being gay is an illness that is caught or taught. The happless victim is still dehumanized but attempts are made to degay them. If a person stops doing those offensive sex acts that define gay people they will somehow not be gay anymore. What you get is a homosexual that is still turned on by the same gender but is frustrated sexually. Sexual Orientation either gay or straight or any mark on a continuem in between is not an illness and it does not need to be cured.

What needs to cured is the irrational fear of homosexuality. But don't worry, I don't hate the haters. I hate the sin and not the sinner.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Right thinker pipes up again, "BTW, I'm skiing in March with my wife and kids, a nephew, another couple and a gay freind. Am I cleared?" This is the famous some of my best friends are__ argument. If one is biased towards a minority the attempt is made to vindicate one's self by claiming to befriend a member of said group.

That's okay RT some of my best friends are bigots. For example, Fred Phelps and his cult actually have helped the cause of equality. However, for persons like yourself RT, Phelps is yard stick to measure yourself and distance yourself from the word bigot. Your not as bad as Phelps, right? After all some of your best friends are gay.

Thank you for voicing your opinions RT. I don't expect to change your mind anymore than I expect to change Phelps' mind. But without your comments I wouldn't have an opportunity educate and influence middle of the road persons thinking through cogent discussion. This is also excellent practice for when I go up to the Capitol and lobby legislators for equality.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Imagine that, the land of apartheid is more evolved in equality than the USA. Shameful.

EXks 7 years, 7 months ago

R_T, in reading your comments, I don't think you're a mean spirited bigot. I suppose like my parents and grandparents, your line of thinking is the result of growing up in a different generation and upbringing....... and you're entitled to your opinions (as am I). Many of our opinions, belief systems, and morals are the result of exposure to the dictates of society at the time. Therefore I would never expect their generation to comprehend the complex issue of homosexuality or same sex marriage. I mean, how could they, growing up in the 1930's in the middle of no-where Kansas??

I think like most logically thinking conservatives, you respect someone as a person, but do not agree with one's sexual orientation or completely understand.

More discussion and understanding the point of view on both sides of this issue needs to be addressed rather than hysterical name calling, which again, both sides are guilty of.

Tychoman 7 years, 7 months ago

Exks, I wouldn't give RT that much credit in terms of being from a different generation. He's purposefully antagonistic towards other posters on this ridiculous forum. He may be mean-spirited, but he's toeing the line at 'bigot.'

RT, you and Dolly continue to distinguish yourselves among the users here. What with your original, thoughtful, ...wait I just can't lie anymore. You two, and STRS should all change your names to "non-thinkers", because absolutely none of your posts have demonstrated even a rudimentary ability for rational thought. You ask ignorant questions expecting real answers, and then when they are given to you, you ignore the answers and twist the truth into a lie to throw back in the faces of those who are trying to engage in a real debate.

Way to contribute to the evolution of thought.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Bears, ditto about a furry wolf puss that smells like cat food and bleeds a forth of the time. Gag, hack, hack. But if that is what gets you through the night then by all means tear it up. Just wear a condom so you don't spread disease and produce another abortion. Please though, if you say you're going to call then do. Some breeders are such bed hoppers. Filthy sex obsessed perverted baby killing sodomites.

But this is a case in point of reducing gay people to a sex act thus dehumanizing them. If you can't take it then don't dish it.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Ah yes, evolution.

Ever heard of recessive and dominant genes? Gay is the norm. Just not as common. Breeders pass on recessive genes to their offspring who may or may not exibit the traits. Then the second generation breeds and the gene may become evident.

The tired old argument that because gay people or other examples in biology don't reproduce as often as their straight counterparts and their traits would eventually die out holds not a drop of DNA.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Dolly you are a hoot,

I realize that vagina's serve a purpose I just decline to put my parts in those parts. I mean how would drug addicted prostitutes earn their next fix?

I spent nine months trying squeeze my way out of a vagina. I have no intention of attempting to return to one.

I just don't understand why so many guys have such infantile desires to return to the womb and to breast feed again. Different strokes for different folks. Don't worry I won't attempt to ban you from getting married.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Yeah, and I'm really Ron Jeremy. He/she what ever. I'm having fun too. Thanks for playing guys.

bd 7 years, 7 months ago

I think yall have said enough to provide Tim Wilson with enough material for a new song!

Bradley Kemp 7 years, 7 months ago

"Here's a little experiment you can try. Put a colony of heterosexuals on an isolated deserted island, and a colony of gay men on another one. Then go back in 100 years or so and see which colony still exists."

If you did this experiment, the colony of gay men would disappear. On the other island, assuming anyone at all survived, you'd find a mixed colony -- predominantly heterosexual with a comparatively small population of homosexuals.

In fact, homo sapiens has been doing this experiment for millennia with just such results.

EXks 7 years, 7 months ago

Personally, I like what the grand dame Mae West had to say about the subject of marriage...

"Marriage is a great institution, but I'm not ready for an institution yet"

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

I already covered this Dirty Linen from 1/2/2008 11:57PM gayokay (Anonymous) says:

Some historical perspective about so called "traditional marriage". From Wikapedia under History of same-sex unions.

Christian Europe

Historian John Boswell claimed the 4th century Christian martyrs Saint Sergius and Saint Bacchus were united in the ritual of adelphopoiesis, which he calls an early form of religious same-sex marriage After the Middle Ages in Europe, same-sex relationships were increasingly frowned upon and banned in many countries by the Church or the state. However, Historian John Boswell argued that Adelphopoiesis, or brother-making, represented an early form of religious same-sex marriage in the Orthodox church, and Alan Bray saw the rite of Ordo ad fratres faciendum ("Order for the making of brothers") as serving the same purpose in the medieval Roman Catholic Church. In the Balkans, same-sex marriage survived until modern days, in the form of the Albanian rite of vellameria, "brother bond."

In late medieval France, the practice of entering a legal contract of affrÃrement provided a vehicle for civil unions between unrelated adults who pledged to live together sharing 'un pain, un vin, et une bourse' one bread, one wine, and one purse

Oh and just a tid bit. The King James Bible that many Christians use to justify their abuse of gay people was commissioned by a very Very VERY gay man named King James.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Dolly, are you really against sodomy? Like oral much? Traditionally, anything but missionary position coitus was once considered sodomy.

If you are truely against sodomy I suggest you not engage in it. Otherwise stay out of my bedroom.

But for variety sake how about giving a little Gamorrah a try. Don't knock it until you've tried it.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Dolly, Nambla? Really?

Do a little check on who the child raping pervs usually are. Straight men with female victims.

I and all the gay men I know don't like little dingaling. In fact young and dumb is really a turn off.

Yet again another attempt to dehumanize and demonize gay people to justify discrimination.

Erin Parmelee 7 years, 7 months ago

gayokay (Anonymous) says:

Bears, ditto about a furry wolf puss that smells like cat food and bleeds a forth of the time. Gag, hack, hack.


Aw man. I've been with you ALL day gayokay, but I think you just gave me vaginal shame! :) (And I always think mine is so cute too.....) Cat food?? Really??

denak 7 years, 7 months ago

Since we are talking about "gay sex" which really has nothing to do with marriage, I thought it might be illuminating for some if they knew what the number one sex act among homosexuals is? Any guesses. If you guessed anal sex, you're wrong.

The number one sex act among homosexual men is oral sex.

The number two sex act among heterosexuals is oral sex. And considering that most heterosexuals consider oral sex de rigeur, it might just be number one one day.

At least you can't get pregnant that way!

Dena

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Well Thank You HodgePodge,

I didn't mean to offend. Just demonstrating the old saying "to each their own". I'm sure your gi gi is a Fancy Feast. And when you tinky winky you only make a little drop of sweet honey.

It's just when they are unkemp they are more like Wiska's Seafood Dinner. WOW, I mean you open up that can and it's like low tide on a hot day. To be fair though, Mangina must be properly maintained as well.

Frederic Gutknecht IV 7 years, 7 months ago

Dollypawpaw says: You know you have a problem when you have to explain yourself.


It's a bigger problem when you CAN'T!

You've made no attempt to explain your irrational fear. You can only do so in words presumed to be channeled. You are an unthinking freak.

Freak OUT...duh duh duh duh duh duh duh...Freak...so sheikh...

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Cool thanks for the videos.

The Donna Summer really takes me back. Too bad she went from being the queen o disco to the queen o mean. Us gay people invented disco and made Donna Summer the phenom that she was. Then she tried getting born again and she botched the job.

Bitterfalls 7 years, 7 months ago

I can't let a statement like that go unchallenged.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

What are you after? Dirty Linen?

Oh I don't claim that all objections to gay marriage are based upon the Bible. Actually you will find precious little about homosexuality in the Bible. Leviticus is usually the foundation of justification of treating gay people with disdain. But those passages are taken out of context and only part of the laws are still obeyed. Only the ones pertaining to a reference of men laying with men. Which actually is pertaining to pagan prostitution rituals in the church is ever brought up. As for Jesus, there is not one mention that he uttered about being gay. Not one. Jesus did however constantly teach us to Love our Neighbor as Ourselves.

Obviously some people have their own reasons for thinking that gay people are not American Citizens and not equal to their heterosexual counterparts. You seem to be one of those. Exactly what is your explaination? Look, I gave you a place to start X2 now why don't you do a little research. But here is again another example. If you could tell me what your point is that you are fishing for perhaps I could better give you some information so you can have that gotcha feeling you crave. There seems to be some deep seated need of yours to feel superior to gay people.

In late medieval France, the practice of entering a legal contract of affrÃrement provided a vehicle for civil unions between unrelated adults who pledged to live together sharing 'un pain, un vin, et une bourse' one bread, one wine, and one purse

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Linen asks, "when was being gay the norm?"

It is and always has been the norm. Just because something is less frequent in it's occurance doesn't make it not normal. Being gay is natural, it occurs in nature, it is normal.

Haley's comet only comes around about every 70 years. But it has and will continue to for millions of years. Haley's comet is a norm. Now, so what if being gay isn't norm. What does that have to do with anything?

What is actually not the norm is for gay people to be persecuted as they are now. In the past there were many examples of indiginous peoples holding gay people or "twin spirits" in high regard.

What ever your objections are to same sex nuptiuals they need to pass some very hard tests to stand up to constitional scrutiny. What are your justifications?

IAmBefore 7 years, 7 months ago

"What not China? Japan? India? Middle east? Africa?"

Same-sex Marriage IS legal in South Africa.

Sharon Aikins 7 years, 7 months ago

Dollypawpaw (Anonymous) says:

"If only we all could be as deep and worthwhile, as effervescent and full of life as you Jesus, I mean redmoon.

How can I cast a shadow in your path?"

You can't, I fear, because I see colors not just black and white. If I had to share my path, I would choose someone open minded and interesting. You proved my point exactly. Thanks for the help.

Tychoman 7 years, 7 months ago

You're comparing a loving relationship to being disabled and being a veteran? Your argument doesn't make sense.

You want justification for why gayokay and I should be allowed to marry the men we love? You want to know why just living together isn't enough? It's about us being entitled (and we are) to the same benefits and responsibilities held against any other married couple. Like paying taxes, inheritance rights, insurance, hospital visitation, gift registries at JC Penney and Sears. Some places in the country do grant ghosts of those rights, but they don't hold up even in the next town. More places deprive us of those rights than those that do.

I don't understand why people like you assume that just because a lot of people in the country don't take marriage as seriously as it should means that we won't take it seriously either.

Marriage doesn't have to be religious. I don't see why there is such a fuss about that. And calling a non-religious marriage a "civil union" doesn't hold the weight. Why? Because civil unions aren't required (like marriage) to be recognized across state lines. It's a new kind of separate but equal, and is ridiculous.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Dirty sheets, Traditions, customs do not dictate laws. Our consitution does.

"But until enough of the other members of the society in which you live change their beliefs and opinions as to what constitutes "marriage," that isn't something you're entitled to. "

We don't run our country by mob rule. If we did we would still have a ban on interracial marriage.

Do yourself some schoolin' on the fourteen amendment.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Doma has not been ratified. The supremes have not heard a case because the law has not been challenged. The law does not exist yet. High School Civics.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Where does the constitution guarantee the right to marry at all?

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Loving VS. Virginia, the fourteen amendment was key in the decision to allow interacial marriage.

Brown VS. Brown, the fourteen amendment. Seperate but equal is not equal. Again the fourteenth amendment protecting equal protection under the law.

Dirty Linen, why do you hate America so much as to deny ALL it's citizens equality?

To say that one can marry anyone they want but not someone they love is trivializing marriage. It is like saying you can vote for what ever candidate you want as long as it is a Republican. Everyone has the same rights? What's the problem?

kansas778 7 years, 7 months ago

gayokay (Anonymous) says:

"To say that one can marry anyone they want but not someone they love is trivializing marriage."


Marriage hasn't been about love until recently. Marriage is a legally binding contract that says the couple will be faithful to each other and they each get half of the marital property. The the state has many reasons for recognizing and enforcing these contracts: ensuring that fathers are certain the children are theirs so they take an interest in raising them, providing property upon divorce for the spouse that has not earned income but provided for the marriage by taking care of children and the home, encouraging parents to raise and provide for children together, thus lessening the burden on the state to provide for children of single parents, and others as well.

It is not that a marriage contract between same sex couples would have no benefit at all for the state, but it redefines the purpose of marriage from the foundation of a family to something between a person and "someone they love." This leads to people not seeing marriage as the appropriate action to take when having children, and this is shown in countries where gay marriage has been enacted as more and more couples do not get married even after having multiple children together.

You legal argument fails because marriage is not a fundamental right like life, liberty, or property. So, like how the state can deny certain people the right to vote (felons), certain people the right to a driver's license (underage and those who can't pass the test), so on and so forth, the state can deny certain couples the right to marry. Your argument that this violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment would lead to a parade of horribles, and then the state would have to recognize marriages between other types of peoples, like polygamists and so forth.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Kansas 778,

Polygamy,

The only places on earth that I am aware of that polygamy is readily taking place are in Utah, Nevada, parts of Mexico. It is already illegal there and so is Gay Marriage. Where Gay marriage is allowed. Massachusettes, Canada, Europe, South Africa. Not an issue. Your slippery slope argument falls.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Dirty, I'm off to church. I'll deal with you later.

kansas778 7 years, 7 months ago

I'm sorry gayokay, I'll try harder to live up to your stereotype in the future.

And you're right tychoman, there are plenty of bigots here, take gayokay for example.

kansas778 7 years, 7 months ago

Gayokay, gay marriage was not approved in those places based on your equal protection argument, but based upon legislation. And if you think that a few places in the US are the only places in the world where polygamy takes place, then you are poorly informed.
http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/worldcul/Codebook4EthnoAtlas.pdf Check sections #8 and 9.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Dirty, You noted after I mentioned Massachusettes that same sex marriage is not allowed in any other state...YET.

I think you just kind of answered your own lack of understanding of how the USA goes about changing it's constitution. DOMA is an attempt to alter our country's constitution and as such needs a super duper majority of the states to RATIFY the proposed change. Massachusettes is able to exercise their state's right to allow marriage equality. In order for Discrimination to be codified in the form of DOMA, 75% of the states or 38 must get it on the ballet and vote for it. It will never happen. The trend as more and more people get to know gay people as their friends, neighbors, co-workers, plumbers, mechanics, veterans, and clergy. The more human people are the harder it is to treat them like poop.

Doma is not just your average bill that congress can pass and the president signs into law. It is a constitional amendment. It has not yet nor will it ever be inacted.

Doma was invented by the Republican Party as "red meat" to toss to the religious base. It fired up the radical right wing but it really did nothing more. It delayed the progression of equality but really not for long. The American public is really sick of the radical religious right attempting to make our country a theocratic state. In addition, polls of up and coming voters are indicating that like another earlier poster mentioned marriage equality is really a non-issue. They are uniformly for it. Why aren't you? You still haven't said what your objections are.

Yes, other countries have evolved to include marriage equality. They are still thriving. No plagues or pestilence. No Stay Puff Marshmellow Man destroying Manhatten. What are you afraid of? Should we do it because other countries did? Okay if you insist. But I bring it up only to use it as a comparison. It really is suprising that a country founded on the ideals of personal freedom and equality would be following rather than leading in this regard.

Where states pass their own mini-doma's they are currently being challenged one by one and making their way through the courts. It is really only a matter of time before they will be tossed into trash bin of shame like slavery, segregation, interracial marriage bans, Japanese interment camps, and sodomy laws.

Polygamy, Really this is another topic and I didn't bring it up. The only reason I point out the places that I am aware of it occuring is to point out that Gay Marriage does not cause polygamy. It has been going on for ever. Actually it is Biblical. Maybe a Bible enthusiast or yoursself would like to explain to us why they are opposed to polygamy? I'm neutral.

The defenders of so called "traditional marriage" really ought to do some research to find out that marriage really has evolved (I know you hate that concept). It changed through out history to meet the needs of the cultures and the mores of the time.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Marion, I know you mean well...

"Preference" indicates choice. Like today I think I'll be gay and tomorrow I'll be straight. Much as one might decide to wear your pair of Versace heels today but then decide to change your mind for your Dolce pumps.

Sexual Orientation is a more acurate word choice. Sexual orientation is hard wired.

kansas778 7 years, 7 months ago

gayokay, most of what you bring up has been already addressed. Ignoring it is not the same as refuting it.


Marriage hasn't been about love until recently. Marriage is a legally binding contract that says the couple will be faithful to each other and they each get half of the marital property. The the state has many reasons for recognizing and enforcing these contracts: ensuring that fathers are certain the children are theirs so they take an interest in raising them, providing property upon divorce for the spouse that has not earned income but provided for the marriage by taking care of children and the home, encouraging parents to raise and provide for children together, thus lessening the burden on the state to provide for children of single parents, and others as well.

It is not that a marriage contract between same sex couples would have no benefit at all for the state, but it redefines the purpose of marriage from the foundation of a family to something between a person and "someone they love." This leads to people not seeing marriage as the appropriate action to take when having children, and this is shown in countries where gay marriage has been enacted as more and more couples do not get married even after having multiple children together.


Comparing gay marriage to interracial marriage is misleading at best. Interracial marriage still accomplishes all the goals of the state in providing for children and for the child-raiser and so on. Interracial marriage bans were based on racism, gay marriage bans are not, as you ignorantly postulate, based on hatred of homosexuals. It is simply good policy, and you have done nothing to suggest otherwise.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Okay don't tase me bro. The tired old it's for the children argument. Total BS.

We allow equality for infertile couples. We allow it for the aged. We even allow it for the mentally ill and challenged who without assistance wouldn't be able to care for themselves let alone children. We allow it for felons in prison. This legal contract is offered to practically everyone but gay people. But since you brought up kids, many gay people are parents of either biological or adopted children. For all the reasons that you mentioned in your post about marriage being for raising kids it will apply to gay couples.

Let me head off the old kid's need a daddy and a mommy rant. Studies prove that kids do just as well in gay families (yes FAMILY) as they do in households with a male and a female parent.

Don't forget that the kids that are up for adoption or in foster care predominantly came from hetero screw ups who had their kids taken away from them.

Yes, interacial marriage bans were based on racism. Bans on marriage equality for gay people are based on what then? Fear, hatred, heterosexism, religious intolerance and ignorance? All not very good reasons to abort the American ideals of equality and personal freedom.

Okay then, to quote Tina Turner, "What's Love Got To Do With It?"

Your point that marriage until recently was not about love only further illustrates my point and history's record that marriage is not static. It has constantly changed over the centuries and will continue to do so.

I think you've got it bass ackwards. Single mother families (yes FAMILY) have been occuring and increasing world wide for a long long time before gay people started wanting a piece of the civil rights pie. Do I have to remind you that Jesus was born to Mary, an unwed mother? There are many factors to why some are chosing to not marry. Some don't ascribe to religion. Some saw their HETERO parents divorce and don't want to go through that themselves. The reasons are as probably as numbered as there are shacks to shack up in. But you can't pin the ills of the world on gay people.

But what is a FAMILY? Who gets to decide, why, and with what authority? Certainly not you thank God.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Dirty, may I have your daughter's hand in marriage? I promise to give her a loveless, sexless existence in a fabulously decorated home.

So anyway, would you please tell us why you are opposed to gay marriage?

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Tell us all something, gayokay: If the DOMA and state amendments defining marriage are unconstitutional, why haven't the federal courts struck them down?

In due time my pretty. In due time.

freeordie 7 years, 7 months ago

Gays aren't trying to redefine STRAIGHT marraige. They can call their unions whatever they want. What does it matter? Poeple need to mind their own business. I can almost garauntee that I'm more right wing than anyone commenting, which means I don't like people telling me what to do and likewise. There isn't one good reason why gay people should'nt get this right other than FEAR and HATE. Homophobic people are creepy closet gays. Just like dirty linen. The government makes new laws all the time that didn't exist before dirty, I don't see you freaking out about government communications monitoring laws-oh wait, that involves getting into someone else's business you like that.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Sorry, lets try this again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gINu_MToseU

Maybe you wouldn't be so lonely and bitter if you made some new friends. Just trying to help.

kansas778 7 years, 7 months ago

Gayokay, I don't know why you bring up Jesus to me, I could care less about the myths surrounding fictional Jewish people.

Bans on changing the defintion of marriage are just that, not based on what YOU assume they are. Try talking to the people here, and not the strawmen in your head.

A broad definition of a family would be all the members of one household, fair enough? That, however, does not at all address my statements about marriage and children. The central issue has to do with enforced monogamy. The father knows the children are likely his, and he's not out fathering other children of which the state will have to help take care. I'm sure you might say that people still cheat on their spouse, so there's no point. That is not true. If a crime prevention program lowers crime, then it is successful. If state enforced monogamy contracts (marriage) lead to more monogamy then it is successful. It is enforced by a financial penalty upon divorce. What point is there to enforcing monogamy among gay couples?

Yes, traditions are not static, cultures change over time, but how does that change the state's interests in seeing children taken care of and child-raisers compensated? Change or evolution, as you seem to prefer, is not de facto beneficial. I hope you would agree with Cicero that the change from Republic to a dictatorship was a bad move.

As for the rise in single parent families occuring without gay marriage, yes, that's true, there are other factors that contribute. This is not a vacuum, and gay marriage would be one among many factors. Do you then wish to enact policies that would worsen the economy in the midst of a recession? I hope not, and saying that marriage is not in a good state is no excuse for worsening it.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Dirty and kansas 666, Why don't you two pack a picnic basket and make a day of it. You will find some like minded friends at Godhatesfags.com

Enjoy your date

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

tp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gINu_MToseUht

Golly gee, my bad you did say that you were godless. Maybe this right wing radical group would be more your speed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gINu_MToseUht

Not that the Phelps cult is really a church or even Christian. But they at least say why they hate gay people. Round and round we've been going. You never say what the problem would be. How do you justify your bias?

So again what is your opposition to gay marriage based on? Hello, any rational thought in there?

Tychoman 7 years, 7 months ago

The arguments aren't baseless, Linen, yours are.

Neither side is going to convince the other side to switch opinions. There's no point in arguing with fools on the Internet, gayokay; they always win from experience.

I give up. I've had enough of the infantile name-calling, the bigotry--and there's bigotry here whether anyone denies it or not--I've had enough of the hypocrisy, and I've had enough being associated-albeit anonymously-with something that squanders real debate. I'm rescinding my account, you all have a nice day. I have better things to do with my life.

I joined here thinking I could participate in a real communities-wide discussion, since users from all over the country contribute. But there is no discussion, boy was I wrong.

Frederic Gutknecht IV 7 years, 7 months ago

This thread would be laughable if it wasn't so sad. One side has a rock solid argument put forward in such a way that almost anyone could understand and accept it. The other side has only rocks. Those rocks look like mere chips on their shoulders...where their head, hopefully including a brain, should be. Judging by their muffled "argument" (hah!~), I have a good idea regarding the whereabouts of the chips' missing heads. That's gotta hurt. By the way, all y'all chippie heads need to keep an ear open for some triple cock crowing, OK?~)

Erin Parmelee 7 years, 7 months ago

Tychoman (Anonymous) says:

The arguments aren't baseless, Linen, yours are.

Neither side is going to convince the other side to switch opinions. There's no point in arguing with fools on the Internet, gayokay; they always win from experience.

I give up. I've had enough of the infantile name-calling, the bigotry-and there's bigotry here whether anyone denies it or not-I've had enough of the hypocrisy, and I've had enough being associated-albeit anonymously-with something that squanders real debate. I'm rescinding my account, you all have a nice day. I have better things to do with my life.

I joined here thinking I could participate in a real communities-wide discussion, since users from all over the country contribute. But there is no discussion, boy was I wrong.

Holy moly Tycoman!! Are you reading my posts? I said the exact same thing about our dear friend Dirty Linen in the smoking ban thread!

Some of us actually do want discussion and intelligent debate. You can pretty easily siphon out the real people from the trolls by watching how quickly a discussion dissolves into name calling. I don't do that, no matter how much the other person annoys me, because I am over the age of 13. Others.....I'm not so certain. In any case--don't give up on the forum entirely. DL smacks of bitterness. It must be a personal issue. And one I don't care to get into. The other thing I have learned--he feels compelled to get in the "last word" on any issue. Do what you want with that information.

fu7il3 7 years, 7 months ago

Perhaps they should all, and I mean man-woman, man-man, woman-woman, be civil unions. Let marriage be a religious thing. If there is seperation between church and state, you can't base a civil social status on a religious union.

Erin Parmelee 7 years, 7 months ago

tsk tsk. Such a waste of emotional energy......

Erin Parmelee 7 years, 7 months ago

DirtyLinen (Anonymous) says:

HodgePodge (Erin Parmelee) says:

"tsk tsk. Such a waste of emotional energy::"

For once I agree with you, Podgey. All those advocating for same-sex marriage get so emotional about the issue, instead of looking at the objective reality.

No, I'm talking about your near obsession with me. Take a deep breath DL and let it go.

Erin Parmelee 7 years, 7 months ago

Yes, clearly I don't get under your skin at all. As evidenced by, oh, let's see.....five whole paragraphs devoted just to me. Wow. You're so easy to play it's getting tiresome.

Jason Bowers-Chaika 7 years, 7 months ago

Gay people getting married? Next they will want to vote.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.