Hilarious video. Which campaign spent more on advertising and had more funding? Now which campaign had more OUT OF STATE funding? Gee, what a coincidence!
Couldn't be prouder of my state and its voters!!
@victimofcheese I couldn't be more proud of you and the voters of Maine. I am from out of state and I will stand with Maine and all other people who believe in GOD and fight the gay perverts that are trying to FORCE their beliefs upon the rest of the world. Jan 2012 in CA elementary aged school children 4 years old to high school aged are being taught about homosexual, bisexual and transgendered history and only good stuff is allowed to be taught. This is the work of OBAMA and all democraps!
Portugal's Prime Minister, Jose Socrates, has announced that the first thing on his agenda for the new government will be marriage equality. Portugal will become the ninth nation to legalize same sex marriage! Reason to celebrate! Google: Portugal ready to legalize gay marriage
Did you hear that the reason WHY NOM won out in CA. and ME. was because the hired a PR firm, and used focus groups, to learn that by re-defining the issue they could elicit opposition based not on "civil rights", but upon "individual rights" as opposed to a tyrannical state government, instead. Oh, and the "Gay" + "education system" thing was just the coup de gras. How infuriating!
Yes, it IS infuriating. There's an interesting LA Times article about how the Prop 8 people used the "diversion" technique to sway voters. It was NEVER about schools, or even religion, but those against gay marriage made it into that. If people had just voted on gay marriage without the other stuff thrown in, who knows how the vote have gone? Google this article:
LA TImes- No on Proposition 8,
Debunking the myths used to promote the ban on same-sex marriage.
Do you know not a single newspaper in CA (except maybe the Catholic Times, or Mormon Gazette) supported Prop 8? They couldn't even get a public official to speak out in favor of it, for fear of being branded a bigot. That's actually a GOOD thing, and is a sign that their support is really only among the older voters, and those who live in the sticks and have no contact with gay people. Unfortunately, the rural voters are still the majority in both ME and CA, believe it or not...
They aren't a problem in Canada. We seem to be less swayed by groups...and more focused on social progress. Well, except Harper (Dubya's bitch) - he wants to keep sending bodies to the Middle East to fill up more body bags...but that's a completely different subject I don't care to discuss here. :-)
Being Gay is not natural. Stop acting like its normal cause its not. Natural is when a Man and woman get married and "concieve" childeren. Gays can't do that. If a wife and husband walk around a park holding hands with kids playing thats normal. Its not the same when 2 men are holding hands. People would feel weird because its just not normal. i believe it also confuses childeren. If Gays get their way the huuman race will be wiped because we will not be able to reproduce.
@kcchiefsbaby "Gays get their way the huuman race will be wiped because we will not be able to reproduce."
HAHA okay that's a load of bullshit.
I don't expect nor do I wish for anyone to be homosexual. I can't help who I am, but believe me it's not some agenda of the gay community to make everyone gay.
That's STUPID logic. I'm gay and for decades I've never heard any gay person say "Oh let's hope everyone turns gay".
If anything, many of them only want Tom Cruise (barf) to be gay.
Why is it that people can't see that homosexuality has existed since the beginning of recorded time, and in roughly the same percentage? If this isn't proof that something beyond "choice" is involved, I don't know what is... Homosexuality is as natural as the sky, and every bit as wonderful!
Is it just me, or are heterosexuals the most insecure, paranoid people on the planet? I could care less about their marriages, and yet they're all up in our business. I wish they'd mind their own boring lives, and leave us to live ours. True conservatism is about keeping the government OUT of our lives, remember? They seem to have forgotten this... FREEDOM for all to marry!
Why do gays take their agenda to courts and legaslature if they dont want to force their views on the people? Why dont gays want people to vote then? Maine and Cali shows you we dont accept gay marriage so live with it...
I guess by your definiton animals aren't natural, huh? Say WHAT? 450 species of animals mate with same sex partners FOR LIFE. Homosexuality not natural, huh? I beg to differ... And, research says that homosexuality is NECESSARY to save the species, because it prevents overpopulation. If you haven't noticed there are too many of us on this earth, and we're strangling the planet. Gays will save the world! And, we adopt children from failed hetero relationships, too.
So it sounds like if you just dont have sex with same sex but u want to have sex with animals,you guys are sick. I hope you understand why we dont agree with the gay cause, cause of sick sadistic idiots like u. So you say gays will save the world cause of overpopulation? oh please what research is this? i guess you gays are desperate for any excuse in the book. Yes I am straight and proud. I concieve childeren and raise them well with my wife. Be gay all u want its your freedom its not natural.
One reason people are freaked out when they see two men holding hands is because they haven't seen it all their lives, like we see straights EVERY day, day in day out. I, for one, am very tired and disgusted by seeing a man and woman holding hands in public. It's not natural to ME. They sure love "flaunting" their lifestyle, those straight people... But, when we do it, people get bent out of shape. My same sex spouse and I hold hands all the time in San Francisco, and nobody cares...
To me it sounds u are jelous of same sex couples. Why? cause you cant conceive childeren naturally with your gay partner? You wont walk your daughter down or son when they get married? you wont be grandparents? upset cause you cant get together at a family BBQ with your wife and kids? or go on family vacations? try and say yes you can but we both know its not true. A child is ment to have a dad and mom .not dad and tom.
So go be natural stop being a rebel and try to live normal.
Kccheifsbaby; As a matter of fact I"m MARRIED to my same sex partner, and we are welcomed at every family gathering, as a married couple. And, in case you aren't smart enough to know this, gay couples DO have children. I guess you's never heard of artificial insemination, surrogate mothers, and children from previous failed heterosexaul relationships. You IS dumb, isn't you?
It's okay. nnjhansen is just expressing his desperate clinging to tradition (which has already changed without the influence of homosexuals in society or in the legal house of marriage).
Let him fight for all the babies...because you know, by his rationale, if gay marriage becomes global, humanity will apparently become non-existent.
Somehow our discussion has gotten all jumbled up and out of order, and my patience is running thin anyway. I do sincerely say that I've enjoyed interracting with you. At least you are a gentleman, and don't start name calling. I appreciate that. I'm certain we could sit down and have a civil discussion over coffee. Or better yet, you could come to our house and you'd find out how very normal our wedded bliss is.
Hey, good to see you again. Hansen is full of it on many levels! Maybe you aren't aware that NINE states and DC, now recognize my marriage? That's right, there were only two states a year ago, and now NINE! Cool, huh? And, they think we're losing ground. Maryland is discussing allow SSM from other states to be recognized, and New York and Jersey are discussing full marriage equality! The fight is just beginning....
Frankly, the 'teaching" gay marriage in schools argument is really funny to me. I saw a Jon Stewart spoof on the Yes on 1 ads. HILARIOUS! It's trying to stir up "fear" against gays. This tactic has been historically used to marginalize minorities. Blacks were seen as a threat to white women (like they'd rape them or something). Jews were seen as a threat during the pre-Nazi days. Anita Bryant tried to (unsuccessfully) portray gays as molesters. Now we're out to "get" your school kids.
It goes back to the legilsature again for another draft which might include: "gay marriage will not be taught in schools, therefore protecting your brats from learning about gay marriage."
Wow you reap what you sew. This just in from the Equality Campaign California. Imagine the implications of this, if it were to pass!
There will be a brief filed with the case to overturn Prop 8 which will ask the court to rule that it is unconstitutional to allow a majority to take away the rights of a minority.
If this is accomplished at the Federal level, then we will NEVER again vote on civil rights issues involving minorities! THANKS guys!
Seeing as no right was taken away, I have no worries.
Even in Loving, the case you love to quote (incorrectly I might add) the Court acknowledged that "marriage is a social relation subject to the State's police power."
Possible future for gay marriage in ME: ME Supreme Court orders gay marriage (the referendum was NOT a constitutional ban) Public schools institutes "diversity" training regarding same sex families (as happened in CA post-Prop 8), therefore realizing the greatest fears of the Yes on 1 supporters. Kids learning about gay people-HORROR! Governor orders gay marriages performed in other states to be recognized (as in New York and Washington, DC)
Put bigotry on the ballot, and it will win every time. Few things are harder for people to resist than an opportunity to deprive others of what they themselves are free to take for granted.
If racial integration and women's suffrage had been left up to "the people" in previous decades, we'd still have "restricted" neighborhoods, "colored only" drinking fountains, and a nonvoting female population.
Are you really this ignorant? We do not have a process for direct elections on issues at the federal level but the constitutional amendment process is clearly one that requires enormous popular support for success. Women were given the franchise through the 19th Amendment. That required a 2/3 vote in both houses of Congress and ratification by 3/4 of state legislatures. It clearly had overwhelming popular support.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by close to 70% of Americans.
70 percent of the public supported a ban on interracial marriage at the very moment the ban was lifted by the US Supreme Court. Who's the ignorant one here? You will LOSE this fight... Did you know only two states recognized my gay marriage license just one year ago? Do you know how many states recognize it now? NINE, plus Washington, DC. Still think we're losing ground huh? What Mormon rock are you living under?
You are misreading the Gallup poll. It said 70% were opposed to interracial marriage, it did not say that many supported laws that prohibited it. Big difference.
One more time, I am not a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Please explain what the hell you are talking about. 70 percent of Americans were in favor of a ban on interracial marriage when it was overturned by the Supreme Court. Did I say they had voted on it in every state? NO! They didn't, as a matter of fact. But, the FACT that they opposed it, and the Supreme Court decided in favor of interracial marriage shows that there is a precident for the court to go against the "will" of the people.
I love it when you get desperate. There is NO difference between Loving and gay marriage. NO difference. It WILL play out in a similar fashion. Let's say I'm right, and we eventually have seven or eight states on board with gay marriage when it reaches the Supremes. Do you honestly think they will say, well the "people" don't want this, so were not going to allow it, and the bans are in effect? That's just ignoring the REALITY that some states have it and some don't.
Got to go. You are such a bore. Can I ask you something? Why do you CARE about this issue? Why is my legal marriage to my spouse a problem for you? It's really a mystery to me why a grown man would spend so much time fighting to deny rights to another citizen. Honestly, I don't get it. The same was true when people were fighting against school bussing, and women's right to vote. Did men lose something because women could vote? I don't get it.... Why are you so threatened by me?
I didn't ask YOU for a license. I asked MY government for a license. The government cares about ALL its citizens. I guess you are into the "mob" rule mentality. So, this means that any minority can be trampled on, simply because they are outnumbered. That's not "traditional" Amercian values. Shame on you...
I hope you continue your mantra of government of and by the people WHEN we get to the point of majority approval for gay marriage! If the people vote for it, then it must be accepted right? Do you know that one college town in ME voted 81percent FOR gay marriage? Doesn't bode well for you, old man... OK, I've sent your inbox the article PROVING that sexual orientation is neither a choice nor a behavior. Please read it.... Learn something for a change...
And, I could care less if you think marriage requires procreation. It's a moot point, and merely your opinion. You and I both know, stop kidding yourself, where this is going. You're trying to hold back an ocean with a sand castle. We WILL have gay marriage, and you've got to learn to live with your married gay neighbors. Contrary to your fears, we're not going to "teach" your kids to be gay. Sexual orientation is NOT a learned behavior. Otherwise, I'd be straight...
The difference is that more people agree with me than with you. That is how our system works. More people believe that a man and woman in an intimate personal relationship is more consequential to society than two men in such a relationship. That is their call.
OH, I see you can't give up the "mob' rule mentality. Just like interracial marriage. Interesting... You must certainly be aware that gay marriage gains approval with more people every year? Are you aware that gay marriage lost by 60 percent eight years ago and only by 52 percent last year. Why is that? Hummm, I wonder what's going on? And, the fact that we lost ME because of the over 65 crowd and rural voters speaks VOLUMES....
No, the most important demographic that your side needs to look at is the young voters. In EVERY state where this was voted on, the young people overwhelming support gay marriage. Know why? That's because they've grown up hearing about it, and also know personally gay people or famous gays in the media. They know Ellen is gay. Do you think they care? This isn't 1950, sorry to tell you... And, I've read that Hispanics were split 50/50 in CA on gay marriage. Where did you get your stats?
The most important thing gay people can do is to be visible. And, BOY are WE visible now. You can no longer push us under the rug, like you used to. We are in the media EVERY day! WOW! Millions of people are fighting over MY rights. It's a heady experience, to be sure. We ARE the civil rights issue of the 21st Century, and it's not just marriage, it's hate crimes bills, Don't Ask Don't Tell, and now there's ENDA, which will end discrimination in the job place. We are ON the radar screen!
OH, we've already won quite a few, sir. Do I need to remind you that NINE states now recognize my marriage, whereas a year ago it was only TWO! And, we WILL win the war. If you think those nine states will reverse themselves, I've got BIG news for you! LOL! CIVIL RIGHTS SHOULD NEVER BE UP FOR A VOTE-PERIOD!
And, Ronald Reagan said this gem (how did this bigot get to be president?): "If a landlord wants to refuse to rent to a NEGRO (his word), it is his right to do so...? Can you believe that? By the way, another interesting demographic swing in our favor was the Catholic vote. Many Catholics defied their church leaders and voted NO on 1 in ME! Good for them...
Please define (YOUR definition) of civil rights.... If this gay marriage qualify, I don't know what does... A civil right is something granted to ALL citizens regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation. You cannot single out one group and say, well people who are female can't vote, or people who are black cannot live where they'd like.... The Constitution should be used to "expand" rights not "limit" them-Coretta Scott King said that....
Civil marriage is a legislative construct. To the extent it can be considered a right it is a right subject to state regulation. The institution of marriage is open to all citizens regardless of race, sex, or anything else. There is no law on the books that says person A because he or she is a member of x group cannot be married.
In fact for many years, we did say that women cannot vote. It was only when the people decided that they should and passed the 19th Amendment that it changed.
That's funny, I don't remember my marriage license mentioned ANYTHING about behavior. In fact, society at large implies that marriage involves sexual relations. We both know full well that there are marriages that have NO sex. The "traditional" view of marriage was a deal from one father to another to give away his daughter as the "property" of the man. As far as I know, sex was not even mentioned, nor procreation...
You seem to also be ignorant of the fact of how the CA case reached the Supreme Court in the first place. My beautiful city of San Francisco started issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples, and a lower court invalidated those licenses. This led to the lawsuit to restore the legality of the marriages that took place. The citizens of Maine could do the very same thing, and I hope they do, because it might lead to another court case in our favor... ME, has no constitutional ban...
Your mayor acted outside his authority, the lower court slapped him down, the Supreme Court overstepped its authority and the people slapped them down.
On October 12, 2009, Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law The Marriage Recognition and Family Protection Act, legislation proposed by State Senator Mark Leno to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states and countries.
In the years that the legal same-sex marriages have been valid, there has been no negativity to society.
THIS is why gay marriage will eventually become legal across the country.
THIS is why gay marriage is already legal in other countries on Earth.
@nnjhansen "Are you honestly trying to measure societal impact with 5 or so years of evidence?"
~10 years on a Global scale to be more precise, and what citations(s) can you come up with that REQUIRE so-called 'generations' of time assessment to determine the changing of such law(s) and citation(s)?
By the way, nnjhansen is a procreationist, if you haven't read back through his posts. He believes that marriage does not exist without children. Tell that to my 65 year old aunt that just got married! There's NO hope there for children... Anyway, just thought you'd like to know, so you can get to the "core" reason he opposes gay marriage. It's not on religious grounds, but purely procreation...
It's a little known fact that GW Bush is responsible for MY marriage. Here's how: it was his speech where he announced he'd like a constitutional ban on SSM that prompted Gavin to return to SF and issue licenses to gay couples. He said, "we'll see about that!" And, he's a hero in my book. Don't worry, I wrote to GW and Thanked him for my marriage. I also told him that he and Laura are welcome in our home any time (I was sincere about that). He needs to learn that he has nothing to fear.
OK, so why did they make "exceptions" for elderly citizens, and those couples that are infertile? Hum... That seems like a double standard. We're issuing you a license to procreate, despite the fact that you CAN'T procreate. Sounds illogical to me. No, the truth of the matter is marriage and procreation are two DIFFERENT issues. You can procreate without a marriage license, and you can marry without procreating. They are not dependant on one another, and the public knows this too..
They set requirements that struck the proper balance between cost (in dollars and intrusiveness) and utility. Just like every other licensing scheme in existence.
And, please remember to tell the 70 percent of black mothers who have children out of wedlock that they need a marriage license next time they concieve a child...
The anti-gay marriage love to spout off non-facts, like kids are better off with heterosexual parents (this has been proven false in over 67 studies). Another fallacy they cling to is that gay marriage will lead to the end of civilization. All we're talking about here is a legal contract between TWO persons and the government. That's ALL. I now have health insurance because I'm married. And, it's the first time in my adult life to be able to see a doctor without going to the ER!
And the US Supreme Court will strick the voters down, just like they did with Prop 14. Just like they did with bussing. Just like they did in ALL important Civil rights issues... Got it...?
Whatever. I have NO time for reading Supreme Court documents. All I know is that they are CONFIDENT they will prevail. And, I might add they are from opposite sides of the political spectrum, as you know, and yet they BOTH are certain they will prevail... Can I ask why you spend so much time trying to subvert the rights of others? Why is this your mission? Don't you have something more constructive to do with your time then to try to make sure homosexuals don't have equal rights?
Well, then why do you continue to tell lies, such as gays already have the equal right to marriage? That's a LIE. If I were to walk into a courthouse in West Virginia with my partner, would we be given a marriage license? NO, and you claim we would...? How is that not a lie?
No, you would not get a marriage license if you walked into a court house (in WV, CA, ME or all but a handful of states) with another man and asked for a marriage license but (and here is the important part) neither would any other man.
Wrong, it seems to me the law is inequitable, and this is the very point of the case against Prop 8. There are now two categories of gay couples in CA, those that ARE married, and those that would like to, but can't. Do you see the logic of their case? This has created an unequal situation, and violates the 14th Amendment. Seems very clear to me. Prop 8 created this situation, and was thus a tremendous GIFT to us in the fight to gain equal rights.
I have a BETTER solution: Allow ALL adult couples who meet certain criteria (which includes same sex couples) to marry, just as they did in Canada. Problem solved. Win win situation for ALL. You still have your heterosexual marriages, nothing changes. And, we finally have OUR rights too. As of now, the system is so complicated that nobody knows what's going on. I can get married in Connecticut, and it's recognized in New York, but I can't get married in New York. It's BS, and you know it
YOU continuously MISS the point. I cannot walk into a NY courthouse and marry the person I LOVE. BIG, BIG, MONUMENTAL difference. It's like saying, well you, as a heterosexual male, can get a domestic partnership with a man, but you cannot with a woman. Did you know this is the law in CA? You MUST be a heterosexual OVER the age of 65 in order to qualify for domestic partnership. And, YES there are some straights up in arms about that, due to the tax laws...
And, if we move, as a married couple, to Ohio our legal marriage is invalidated. BS... The law WILL change, and in our favor. I have NO doubt about it. Once certain states started marrying gay couples it was a done deal. You will NOT stop this. As of now there are thousands of same sex couples that ARE legally married. Will they go away? I am not a violent person, but if someone tried to invalidate my marriage, I'd take up arms. Seriously!
See my point! We are not a violent bunch. That's the heterosexual males exclusive domain. Also, are you aware that two thirds of men who abuse BOYS are heterosexual? Need I go on...? Women's shelters are filled with victims of heterosexual men. Rapists who rape MEN are 90 percent heterosexual... Doesn't bode well for YOUR group, I"m afraid. And, why do we let these people marry?
Thanks for admitting I was right after all! I CANNOT walk into a NY courthouse and marry someone I love. I can marry someone I DON'T love, at least on a physical level (it's IMPOSSIBLE, and as equally as impossible as it would be for you to marry a man), but that's not equality, that's enforced heterocentricity...!
There are any number of reasons why a heterosexual cannot marry the person they love. So what? Does that mean everyone has an unlimited ability to marry the person the love? How does the state adjudicate who loves whom?
You said: How does the state adjudicate who loves whom? That's EXACTLY MY point! Thanks for acknowledging that the state has NO business telling us who we can and cannot love. Therefore, they CANNOT forbid me from marrying the responsible ADULT partner (who is unrelated to me). I'm making progress. You're finally starting to "get it!" Praise Jesus! I've just officially moved my "there is no god" stance to a "maybe there's a god..."!
They are not telling you who you can or cannot love. They are telling you who you can or cannot marry. You apply for a license from the state to marry, not to love.
I know it's hard for you to grasp this concept, but throughout recorded history men have love men, and women women. The only difference between biblical times and the way we were treated and now is that now our society has advanced enough to recognize that this is not a "choice" (well sophisticated people understand this), and it's not going to change by praying away the gay, or "changing our behavior." In other words, gays are FINALLY on the radar screen. Cont'd
Does this mean that there will be more gays than in the past? NO! Does it mean that gay people will finally live their lives and have their relationships openly recognized and legally protected? YES. I know it's hard for older people, such as yourself to accept this, but forbidding gay marriage will in NO way reduce the numbers of gay people, as much as you'd like that to happen. Sorry to disappoint you. This is your REAL agenda, but it's NOT going to happen. The closet is evaporating!
Who cares about limiting the number of gay people? Where do you get this stuff?
Is it that hard for you to fathom that some people simply believe that marriage serves a real and important social purpose and that your proposal will diminish if not destroy that? No one hates anyone else. No one has any ulterior motive.
YES< gay marriage most definitely serves a VERY important social purpose. That is it allows those couples, such as me and my partner, to have the SAME benefits as any other heterosexual takes for granted, and IF we decide to have kids then those kids will get the legal protections that they deserve. It's not about society deciding, well your marriage and YOUR children don't matter. Apparently, YOU think the children of gay couples don't matter, and that's disturbing.... GROW UP!
You getting goodies from the state is not a societal benefit.
I do not believe homosexuals couples should raise children. Children deserve a mother and father that love them. Two men or two women cannot provide that.l
Oh, good one. Homosexuals shouldn't raise children. I guess you're unaware of the FACT that 67 studies say gay parents are as good if not BETTER than heterosexual parents? Know why? We earn more money per capita, we have more education, we don't have unwanted or unplanned children, and we generally spend more time with our kids. There has been no proof saying that homosexuals make less good parents. Quite the opposite..
We have been through this. Social science is incapable of answering such a complex question.
The studies you refer to were found by the French Parliamentary Commission on the Family to be fatally flawed.
If we were to accept the social science, there is NO study that compares any alternative favorably to a loving stable home with a child's mother and father, NONE.
I know nothing about French study. I got my 67 studies proving homosexuals make equal or better parents from this site: webmd com It's interesting how your side TRIES to ignore science. This is very typical. Everything I said about gay couples is easily observable, and yet you deny it:
we earn more money, we have more education, we don't have unwanted or unplanned children, etc... So, how much of that are you going to deny? You're grasping at straws...
Homosexuals live their whole lives in a repressive and oppressive environment. We do not grow up with positive role models. I didn't see any homosexual images or role models until college, and yet I knew I was gay well before that. That's a TERRIBLE way to grow up. I thought something was wrong with me. Is that any way to raise a kid? So, we can deal with problems that kids have that straight parents simply don't understand. Every kid grows up with rejection issues...
I should add that times ARE changing regarding kids exposure to positive gay role models, and this is a GREAT thing. Teenagers today know at least a dozen famous people that they can look up to who are known to be gay. This was NOT the case when you and I were young. I didn't see ANY gay couples on TV. Now, kids are seeing us getting married! WOW! What a change that is...
Let's face it, it's about you not being able to accept as valid, my relationship. That's the unstated message here. It's not about procreation. If it were, you'd be out there advocating for domestic partnerships for people who can't procreate, such as the elderly. You've never said that elderly straight couples can't marry, and YET you say that marriage is about procreation-period. So, should elderly couples or infertile couples be allowed to marry? If so, WHY?
Oh, about the "limiting the numbers of gay people" comment, this is the "read between the lines" inference of the teaching in the schools issue. Ignorant parents think that their kids will somehow "decide" to be gay if they hear about at school. Isn't that what they're thinking? There are those uneducated folks, believe it or not, who actually think you can "choose" your sexual orientation. Of course you and I know this is not possible... It's immutable...
I would like to respectfully ask you to refrain from using the term "behavior" in reference to my sexual orientation. It's insulting, and tantamount to calling a black person the "n" word. This has no place in civilized discussion. You and I both know that behavior and sexual orientation are two VERY different things. Sexual orientation is immutable and not something we choose to "behave." NO, it is a part of our very make-up like our race, gender and being left handed.
And, why would a BIOLOGICAL parent who is gay be a less good parent than a straight person? It makes NO sense whatsoever. We don't have teen mothers, do we? We generally don't have abortions, do we (you say you know one, but I'm skeptical)? I'd like to add that some of those studies say that lesbian couples are better parents for the simple fact that the children are surrounded by less violence, and the mothers spend more time with their kids. Makes sense to me...
That's always a good one: "a child needs both parents" or "a child needs a mother and a father." Apparently the Mormons thought that having multiple mothers was a good thing. In fact, it WAS. Any child would be WELL cared for with more than one mom. And, the number of deadbeat dads in this world is astronomical. I know more kids that had terrible fathers than than those with great fathers. I'm afraid straight men have not done such a great job at being fathers in this country at least...
It also might be difficult to accept the fact that single parents often are great parents. Sure, it isn't Ozzie and Harriet, but those kids don't seem to do worse. I'd rather see a responsible single mother, than have an abusive alchoholic father around the child any day. I'm sure you agree with me on that...
Do you say that someone who is left handed is exhibiting "left handed behavior?" NO, we say they are left handed. The same is true of sexual orientation. We don't exhibit "behavior" we simply ARE gay. It's an unchangeable fact, and has nothing to do with behavior. You would like all homosexuals to "behave" as heterosexuals. Is that fair to us? If so, WHY? Why must I live a lie, and get into a "fake" heterosexual relationship. We're taught to "be ourselves" UNLESS we are gay!
I agree that homosexuals can and do participate in heterosexual behavior, and vice versa. But, our sexual orientation does NOT change. That's a fact. There are some who are born bisexual, and that's another issue. But, I firmly believe I was born gay, and I'm sure you're convinced you were born straight. Can I ask why it is that the gay population has remained at the same percentage (roughly) throughout time? If there's nothing biological at work, how can that be? Choice? I don't think so!
I'm sorry, but choice has EVERYTHING to do with this issue. If we do not choose our sexual orientation, and it is given to us at birth, then how is it that you want to force everyone to be YOUR orientation? By refusing certain rights to people of a different orientation, you are in essence saying: you cannot be homosexual. In order to get these rights you must be heterosexual. On the face of it, you admit your own prejudice... Blacks can't drink at OUR fountain, they must have their OWN.
I brought up the water fountain, because I was pointing out that some states (including CA) have separate but equal systems known as civil unions or domestic partnerships. While these are superior to NO protection, they are not good enough. Separate but equal never works, does it? Our shameful treatment of blacks has proven this. Isn't it interesting that South Africa, which historically oppressed the MAJORITY of their citizens, has learned their lesson, and now offers marriage equality?
And, you also seem to forget that my relationship has EQUAL value to YOUR relationship. You would like to lessen the value of my relationship, and that's very offensive. Why shouldn't I be allowed to get the health benefits from my spouse's employer, if you can get those benefits from your wive's employer? That's discrimination, and it's WRONG, and it WILL change. We got a big tax refund last year because of our marriage. It paid for our trip to Australia in Aug. Why shouldn't we have this?
You do not get to assess the value others place on your relationship. Society has decided that the man-woman relationship is more consequential than that of a man-man or woman-woman relationship. You disagree, I get it but you are not the only one with a vote.
The vote is, or SHOULD be, irrelevant. I could care less what the straight majority thinks of my relationship. This is pointless, isn't it? It's like saying, well the majority, which is white, doesn't want the minority, which is black, to drink at the same fountain, therefore it MUST be the law. The people spoke! No blacks at white fountains. This is NOT democracy. This is MOB rule...
If you don't care what the people who make up a society think, don't ask them. Asking the state for a license is giving the people of that state a say.
Don't ask for the license and no one cares what you do.
Don't mince words here. It is the government NOT the people that issue the license. I really do not care one bit what people think of my relationship. I simply want my government to provide protection for this relationship, and I want the SAME benefits that heterosexuals recieve. That's IT. We want to be left alone. I could care less what your brats learn in school. I could care less if your god tells you it's a sin. I want my benefits. That's ALL. LEGAL CONTRACT!
Fortunately, my state government already recognizes my marriage, so this is a moot point to me personally. I'm fighting for my gay brethren to have the same joy and legal benefit. And, their children MATTER, too. Funny, how you seem to overlook that every time. It's as if gay couples don't have kids... Are you still in 1950 where we're invisible? What's up with that?
I've never had any attraction toward the opposite sex.
Have you ever had any attraction toward the same sex, kcchiefsbaby? To the point where you want to spend the rest of your life together with someone of the same sex?
@kcchiefsbaby I'm asking you a question. Are you afraid to answer it?
Here it is again:
Have you ever had any attraction toward the same sex, kcchiefsbaby? To the point where you want to spend the rest of your life together with someone of the same sex?
By the way, some very old and respected dictionaries do NOT explicitely say that marriage is one man and one woman. In fact, many of them leave it open to include multiple partners.
For example: Marriage is a union of adults who enter into a legal agreement with their government. So, nobody's suggesting a "redefinition" but rather a "broader" definition that is MORE inclusive. Incidentally, the old dictionaries didn't say this either: Marriage is between people of the same race...
Need I remind you that even though homosexual relationships have existed since time immemorial, it is only recently that this has even been acknowledged as existing in the first place.... On more than one occasion I've nearly caused an old person to have a heart attack. They've asked about my wedding ring. One woman asked who my wife was. I told her I had a HUSBAND. She nearly fainted. Your generation simply cannot comprehend that our relationships have always been here. Invisible but here
And, where a child comes from matters? Why? If a gay couple has a child from a previously failed heterosexual relationship is that child LESS entitlted to the legal protections because the current parents are of the same sex? If so, WHY? Why is the child punished for something beyond it's control? It would seem to be VERY much in the state's and society's interest to PROTECT ALL children! You want to discriminate against children of same sex parents. That's un-American of you...
keep kids out of your stupid political views. thats all it is for you gays political. if it wasnt for hetrosexual couples you wouldnt have been born and their would be no childeren...You probably dont believe in god because your probably some angry little gay thats mad at the world because most people dont agree with gay marriage. but god made man and woman to reproduce. straights are not perfect manny marriages fail but it is still the natural thing to do. leave us alone biggot!
Well use all your liberal poll statistics you want, but just like you thought of Maine your wrong. You dont believe in god so don't use his name in vein. Another angry gay.
It's interesting how you blacks want the government to grant you rights, but when it comes to other people, No, they don't deserve rights. So, why haven't you learned your lesson? It's not right to discriminate. If slavery were still up for a vote, YOU might be in chains. (or your grandmother)
Could of fooled me. You talk and write like a black person. Mexican, same difference. In our state people voted away your rights just a few years ago. They don't want Mexican immigrants to have health care, so they voted AWAY your rights. Be careful, or the rightwingers might vote to deport ALL Mexicans. What would you do then? You just don't get it, do you? Voting on civil rights is NEVER the right thing to do...
I think the U.S. should deport all illegal immigrant free loaders. Even though I'm mexican no pitty from me, no free rides. Stop using you race hustleing tactics. Its not the same as your gay movement. You gays arn't repressed. I dont see a straight only restaurants or drinking fountains. i dont see no gay lynching every day. Gays can vote, gays can ride in the front of the bus. please ...your probably some liberal judge or professor or some aclu lawyer....wannabe intellectuals dont scare me
Then why did you try to get me to be "friends" with you? I have no interest in being a friend with an ignorant person like you. I AM a professor, so what? I'm also married to my same sex partner. So what? How does that affect YOUR sad life in Kansas City? You people are pathetic. The government is for ALL people, and that includes gay people, and yes, as a matter of fact gays ARE oppressed. We can still be fired for who we are in many states. Is that not oppression?
Oh, sorry, I used too many big words for you. You probably couldn't understand anything I said, since I converse in completely sentences, and don't talk like I'm an ignorant street person, like you... Get a job...!
Oh, I love it, a Republican Mexican! That's like being a Jewish Nazi, or a Gay Mormon! You are so ignorant you can't even see that your own political party hates your guts!
@lisztnut "Oh, I love it, a Republican Mexican! That's like being a Jewish Nazi, or a Gay Mormon! You are so ignorant you can't even see that your own political party hates your guts!"
Speaking of ignorant people, I'm fighting with a Mormon woman on another channel. She said that other religions that condone gay marriage are not TRUE religions. It's the most blatantly honest statement from a Mormon that I've ever seen. In other words, the Mormon cult wants EVERYONE to follow THEIR beliefs, and any other religion doesn't matter. These cult followers need to be stopped NOW! Are they a problem in Canada? They have infiltrated our society, and must be rooted out...
@lisztnut one of the main reasons why I have no ties to religion.
Monotheistic extremism causes more issues in society than gay marriage ever will.
The religious extremists are just pissed off that something their churches does is now associated with homosexuality. They're getting a bad rep with their proposed discrimination & can only pull ~3 little verses from their vast story book to pick on people who are living in LEGAL same-sex relationships in our society.
I couldn't agree with you more. Religion has created far more pain and suffering than good. It has discriminated against women, and other minorities throughout history. To say nothing of the blood spilled in "Jesus' or "Allah's" name. It disgusting. It's been proven that Atheists commit less crime, and are less violent than religious folks. All of the recent wars can be traced directly back to one source- RELIGION.
Most Republicans would like to execute Mexicans, Gays, Blacks, and anyone who supports health care for all... They stand for theocracy and the oppression of the poor. Don't be decieved. Being a Republican is Fascism, pure and simple. They want to control everyone's lives. They don't want gays to marry, they don't want the poor blacks, and Mexicans to have health care....
You are DUMB, aren't you kccheifsbaby? You don't know how to spell (no. one). Secondly, if you believe your god created everything, that means he also created homosexuals. If it exists in the animal kingdom, then your god created it. End of story.
Kcchiefsbaby. Can I use your posts a perfect example of ebonics in my college class? I've never come across someone more fluent in this tongue only used by black Americans...
Google: What's Good for Kids, by Lisa Belkin, New York Times
This article exposes the myths that same sex couples are not as good heterosexual couples at parenting. In fact, it shows some evidence why same sex couples often do BETTER...
Look, you just can't get over the fact that gay people have families. Gay people have children, and those children deserve the protection of the government. Just because YOU can't comprehend yourself being in a same sex relationship, does not mean that ALL of society needs to follow YOUR personal prejudices and inability to comprehend diversity. Following me? YES, it is emphatically in the state's interest to PROTECT children of same sex couples. YES, YES, YES!
I'd like to introduce you to several children I know who belong to families with same sex couples as parents. I'd like you to say to those children: "your family doesn't matter. Your parents don't deserve the legal protections the MY children enjoy, because YOUR parents are of the same sex." Will you do that with me? I'm serious... If you had personal contact with these kids, you'd probably change your tune.
I really should go get some work done. We keep going around in circles, and as entertaining as it is, I'm getting tired from it. I need to save my strength for Rachmaninoff! Best regards, and over and out for now...
Do you remember when you chose to be right or left handed? At what age did you make this decision? You must also be aware that left handed children have been forced in some societies to be right handed. The kids "mask" themselves as right handed, but in reality they are left handed in orientation. Isn't this the very same as sexual orientation? Some, like you, would prefer everyone "behave" as heterosexual. Is that healthy to those of us whose orientation is homosexual?
The fact that you use the term "behavior" in reference to sexual orientation shows that you are out of touch with reality, and simply have no business talking about this topic of gay marriage rights. Can you please read my article that I sent, which PROVES that sexual orientation and behavior are unrelated? PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE? Educate yourself
I need to correct you again. It is NOW possible that two women can concieve a child together without the use of sperm. This is being experimented on in Europe as we speak. Men will soon be obsolete, and I say that as a gay man. Times are changing ole man...
Hilarious video. Which campaign spent more on advertising and had more funding? Now which campaign had more OUT OF STATE funding? Gee, what a coincidence!
Couldn't be prouder of my state and its voters!!
victimofcheese 2 years ago
@victimofcheese I couldn't be more proud of you and the voters of Maine. I am from out of state and I will stand with Maine and all other people who believe in GOD and fight the gay perverts that are trying to FORCE their beliefs upon the rest of the world. Jan 2012 in CA elementary aged school children 4 years old to high school aged are being taught about homosexual, bisexual and transgendered history and only good stuff is allowed to be taught. This is the work of OBAMA and all democraps!
MrObamaisCarter 1 month ago
What was that song at the end?
bananabread119 2 years ago
@bananabread119 I think the song is called Soap On A Rope or Don't Drop the Soap if you are showering with gays!
MrObamaisCarter 1 month ago
don't know why heterosexuals are still defending an institution that has not worked over 50 percent of the time for centuries
kerry53able 2 years ago
Portugal's Prime Minister, Jose Socrates, has announced that the first thing on his agenda for the new government will be marriage equality. Portugal will become the ninth nation to legalize same sex marriage! Reason to celebrate! Google: Portugal ready to legalize gay marriage
lisztnut 2 years ago
Did you hear that the reason WHY NOM won out in CA. and ME. was because the hired a PR firm, and used focus groups, to learn that by re-defining the issue they could elicit opposition based not on "civil rights", but upon "individual rights" as opposed to a tyrannical state government, instead. Oh, and the "Gay" + "education system" thing was just the coup de gras. How infuriating!
MacMorrighan 2 years ago
Yes, it IS infuriating. There's an interesting LA Times article about how the Prop 8 people used the "diversion" technique to sway voters. It was NEVER about schools, or even religion, but those against gay marriage made it into that. If people had just voted on gay marriage without the other stuff thrown in, who knows how the vote have gone? Google this article:
LA TImes- No on Proposition 8,
Debunking the myths used to promote the ban on same-sex marriage.
lisztnut 2 years ago
Do you know not a single newspaper in CA (except maybe the Catholic Times, or Mormon Gazette) supported Prop 8? They couldn't even get a public official to speak out in favor of it, for fear of being branded a bigot. That's actually a GOOD thing, and is a sign that their support is really only among the older voters, and those who live in the sticks and have no contact with gay people. Unfortunately, the rural voters are still the majority in both ME and CA, believe it or not...
lisztnut 2 years ago
They aren't a problem in Canada. We seem to be less swayed by groups...and more focused on social progress. Well, except Harper (Dubya's bitch) - he wants to keep sending bodies to the Middle East to fill up more body bags...but that's a completely different subject I don't care to discuss here. :-)
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
@kcchiefsbaby "Well use all your liberal poll statistics you want"
NEUTRALLY-CONDUCTED. Check EVERY single conducted poll out there. Even check the republican poll statistics.
You can't deny the FACT that homosexuality is gaining respect and support compared to even 20 years ago.
I'm not angry with how society is, I've never been happier. The MAJORITY of Americans condone homosexuality, which isn't illegal.
We all live under secular Governmental law, not your storybook god's laws. ;-)
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
Being Gay is not natural. Stop acting like its normal cause its not. Natural is when a Man and woman get married and "concieve" childeren. Gays can't do that. If a wife and husband walk around a park holding hands with kids playing thats normal. Its not the same when 2 men are holding hands. People would feel weird because its just not normal. i believe it also confuses childeren. If Gays get their way the huuman race will be wiped because we will not be able to reproduce.
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
@kcchiefsbaby "Gays get their way the huuman race will be wiped because we will not be able to reproduce."
HAHA okay that's a load of bullshit.
I don't expect nor do I wish for anyone to be homosexual. I can't help who I am, but believe me it's not some agenda of the gay community to make everyone gay.
That's STUPID logic. I'm gay and for decades I've never heard any gay person say "Oh let's hope everyone turns gay".
If anything, many of them only want Tom Cruise (barf) to be gay.
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
Why is it that people can't see that homosexuality has existed since the beginning of recorded time, and in roughly the same percentage? If this isn't proof that something beyond "choice" is involved, I don't know what is... Homosexuality is as natural as the sky, and every bit as wonderful!
lisztnut 2 years ago
Is it just me, or are heterosexuals the most insecure, paranoid people on the planet? I could care less about their marriages, and yet they're all up in our business. I wish they'd mind their own boring lives, and leave us to live ours. True conservatism is about keeping the government OUT of our lives, remember? They seem to have forgotten this... FREEDOM for all to marry!
lisztnut 2 years ago
Why do gays take their agenda to courts and legaslature if they dont want to force their views on the people? Why dont gays want people to vote then? Maine and Cali shows you we dont accept gay marriage so live with it...
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
@kcchiefsbaby "Maine and Cali shows you we dont accept gay marriage so live with it..."
Sorry, but you're wrong. California legally accepts and grants benefits to ALL married couples, gay or straight. So do 7 other states in the USA.
The agenda is equality. Forcing 'views' is your issue, not ours.
We deserve equal benefits and respect; there's been no proof that gay marriage is detrimental to society.
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
I guess by your definiton animals aren't natural, huh? Say WHAT? 450 species of animals mate with same sex partners FOR LIFE. Homosexuality not natural, huh? I beg to differ... And, research says that homosexuality is NECESSARY to save the species, because it prevents overpopulation. If you haven't noticed there are too many of us on this earth, and we're strangling the planet. Gays will save the world! And, we adopt children from failed hetero relationships, too.
lisztnut 2 years ago
So it sounds like if you just dont have sex with same sex but u want to have sex with animals,you guys are sick. I hope you understand why we dont agree with the gay cause, cause of sick sadistic idiots like u. So you say gays will save the world cause of overpopulation? oh please what research is this? i guess you gays are desperate for any excuse in the book. Yes I am straight and proud. I concieve childeren and raise them well with my wife. Be gay all u want its your freedom its not natural.
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
One reason people are freaked out when they see two men holding hands is because they haven't seen it all their lives, like we see straights EVERY day, day in day out. I, for one, am very tired and disgusted by seeing a man and woman holding hands in public. It's not natural to ME. They sure love "flaunting" their lifestyle, those straight people... But, when we do it, people get bent out of shape. My same sex spouse and I hold hands all the time in San Francisco, and nobody cares...
lisztnut 2 years ago
to lisznut
To me it sounds u are jelous of same sex couples. Why? cause you cant conceive childeren naturally with your gay partner? You wont walk your daughter down or son when they get married? you wont be grandparents? upset cause you cant get together at a family BBQ with your wife and kids? or go on family vacations? try and say yes you can but we both know its not true. A child is ment to have a dad and mom .not dad and tom.
So go be natural stop being a rebel and try to live normal.
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
Kccheifsbaby; As a matter of fact I"m MARRIED to my same sex partner, and we are welcomed at every family gathering, as a married couple. And, in case you aren't smart enough to know this, gay couples DO have children. I guess you's never heard of artificial insemination, surrogate mothers, and children from previous failed heterosexaul relationships. You IS dumb, isn't you?
lisztnut 2 years ago
It's okay. nnjhansen is just expressing his desperate clinging to tradition (which has already changed without the influence of homosexuals in society or in the legal house of marriage).
Let him fight for all the babies...because you know, by his rationale, if gay marriage becomes global, humanity will apparently become non-existent.
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
Somehow our discussion has gotten all jumbled up and out of order, and my patience is running thin anyway. I do sincerely say that I've enjoyed interracting with you. At least you are a gentleman, and don't start name calling. I appreciate that. I'm certain we could sit down and have a civil discussion over coffee. Or better yet, you could come to our house and you'd find out how very normal our wedded bliss is.
lisztnut 2 years ago
"The "traditional" view of marriage was a deal from one father to another to give away his daughter as the "property" of the man."
Exactly, that's what seems to frighten a lot of people; they're losing their precious tradition to people they don't know or understand.
In due time people will realize that gay couples do no more harm to society than heterosexual couples do.
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
lisztnut, have you noticed how nnjhansen denies to mention the >1,000 Civil BENEFITS that same-sex couples are denied?
He said: "You are 0 for 31."
Just yesterday the MAJORITY of people of Washington state voted to give same-sex partners the same benefits and equalities as married couples.
The same goes for California state and 6 others that recognize same-sex marriage.
The tables are turning. Gay couples are gaining respect and equality because we deserve it!
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
Hey, good to see you again. Hansen is full of it on many levels! Maybe you aren't aware that NINE states and DC, now recognize my marriage? That's right, there were only two states a year ago, and now NINE! Cool, huh? And, they think we're losing ground. Maryland is discussing allow SSM from other states to be recognized, and New York and Jersey are discussing full marriage equality! The fight is just beginning....
lisztnut 2 years ago
Frankly, the 'teaching" gay marriage in schools argument is really funny to me. I saw a Jon Stewart spoof on the Yes on 1 ads. HILARIOUS! It's trying to stir up "fear" against gays. This tactic has been historically used to marginalize minorities. Blacks were seen as a threat to white women (like they'd rape them or something). Jews were seen as a threat during the pre-Nazi days. Anita Bryant tried to (unsuccessfully) portray gays as molesters. Now we're out to "get" your school kids.
lisztnut 2 years ago
Another scenario for gay marriage in ME:
It goes back to the legilsature again for another draft which might include: "gay marriage will not be taught in schools, therefore protecting your brats from learning about gay marriage."
lisztnut 2 years ago
Wow you reap what you sew. This just in from the Equality Campaign California. Imagine the implications of this, if it were to pass!
There will be a brief filed with the case to overturn Prop 8 which will ask the court to rule that it is unconstitutional to allow a majority to take away the rights of a minority.
If this is accomplished at the Federal level, then we will NEVER again vote on civil rights issues involving minorities! THANKS guys!
lisztnut 2 years ago
Seeing as no right was taken away, I have no worries.
Even in Loving, the case you love to quote (incorrectly I might add) the Court acknowledged that "marriage is a social relation subject to the State's police power."
Good luck with that.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Possible future for gay marriage in ME: ME Supreme Court orders gay marriage (the referendum was NOT a constitutional ban) Public schools institutes "diversity" training regarding same sex families (as happened in CA post-Prop 8), therefore realizing the greatest fears of the Yes on 1 supporters. Kids learning about gay people-HORROR! Governor orders gay marriages performed in other states to be recognized (as in New York and Washington, DC)
lisztnut 2 years ago
Put bigotry on the ballot, and it will win every time. Few things are harder for people to resist than an opportunity to deprive others of what they themselves are free to take for granted.
If racial integration and women's suffrage had been left up to "the people" in previous decades, we'd still have "restricted" neighborhoods, "colored only" drinking fountains, and a nonvoting female population.
lisztnut 2 years ago
Are you really this ignorant? We do not have a process for direct elections on issues at the federal level but the constitutional amendment process is clearly one that requires enormous popular support for success. Women were given the franchise through the 19th Amendment. That required a 2/3 vote in both houses of Congress and ratification by 3/4 of state legislatures. It clearly had overwhelming popular support.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by close to 70% of Americans.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
70 percent of the public supported a ban on interracial marriage at the very moment the ban was lifted by the US Supreme Court. Who's the ignorant one here? You will LOSE this fight... Did you know only two states recognized my gay marriage license just one year ago? Do you know how many states recognize it now? NINE, plus Washington, DC. Still think we're losing ground huh? What Mormon rock are you living under?
lisztnut 2 years ago
You are misreading the Gallup poll. It said 70% were opposed to interracial marriage, it did not say that many supported laws that prohibited it. Big difference.
One more time, I am not a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Please explain what the hell you are talking about. 70 percent of Americans were in favor of a ban on interracial marriage when it was overturned by the Supreme Court. Did I say they had voted on it in every state? NO! They didn't, as a matter of fact. But, the FACT that they opposed it, and the Supreme Court decided in favor of interracial marriage shows that there is a precident for the court to go against the "will" of the people.
lisztnut 2 years ago
No, read the poll. 70% were opposed to interracial marriage, they did not necessarily support state action to prevent it. Big difference.
The basis of the court's decision in Loving does not apply to this situation.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I love it when you get desperate. There is NO difference between Loving and gay marriage. NO difference. It WILL play out in a similar fashion. Let's say I'm right, and we eventually have seven or eight states on board with gay marriage when it reaches the Supremes. Do you honestly think they will say, well the "people" don't want this, so were not going to allow it, and the bans are in effect? That's just ignoring the REALITY that some states have it and some don't.
ie. NOT EQUAL!
lisztnut 2 years ago
Licensing schemes vary from state to state. That does not make them constitutionally suspect.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Got to go. You are such a bore. Can I ask you something? Why do you CARE about this issue? Why is my legal marriage to my spouse a problem for you? It's really a mystery to me why a grown man would spend so much time fighting to deny rights to another citizen. Honestly, I don't get it. The same was true when people were fighting against school bussing, and women's right to vote. Did men lose something because women could vote? I don't get it.... Why are you so threatened by me?
lisztnut 2 years ago
You are being denied no right. I care because the moment you ask me for a license you ask me to care.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I didn't ask YOU for a license. I asked MY government for a license. The government cares about ALL its citizens. I guess you are into the "mob" rule mentality. So, this means that any minority can be trampled on, simply because they are outnumbered. That's not "traditional" Amercian values. Shame on you...
lisztnut 2 years ago
It really is government of the people and by the people that you object to.
That is un-American.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I hope you continue your mantra of government of and by the people WHEN we get to the point of majority approval for gay marriage! If the people vote for it, then it must be accepted right? Do you know that one college town in ME voted 81percent FOR gay marriage? Doesn't bode well for you, old man... OK, I've sent your inbox the article PROVING that sexual orientation is neither a choice nor a behavior. Please read it.... Learn something for a change...
lisztnut 2 years ago
I have said from the beginning that this is a question for the people to decide. If they decide to redefine marriage, so be it.
Your assumption that people's voting patterns remain static as they age however is laughable.
I could not care less if sexual orientation is a choice or not.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
And, I could care less if you think marriage requires procreation. It's a moot point, and merely your opinion. You and I both know, stop kidding yourself, where this is going. You're trying to hold back an ocean with a sand castle. We WILL have gay marriage, and you've got to learn to live with your married gay neighbors. Contrary to your fears, we're not going to "teach" your kids to be gay. Sexual orientation is NOT a learned behavior. Otherwise, I'd be straight...
lisztnut 2 years ago
The difference is that more people agree with me than with you. That is how our system works. More people believe that a man and woman in an intimate personal relationship is more consequential to society than two men in such a relationship. That is their call.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
OH, I see you can't give up the "mob' rule mentality. Just like interracial marriage. Interesting... You must certainly be aware that gay marriage gains approval with more people every year? Are you aware that gay marriage lost by 60 percent eight years ago and only by 52 percent last year. Why is that? Hummm, I wonder what's going on? And, the fact that we lost ME because of the over 65 crowd and rural voters speaks VOLUMES....
lisztnut 2 years ago
I believe in self-government. You obviously do not.
In reality the fastest growing voting block is Hispanics. How many Hispanics support redefining marriage?
nnjhansen 2 years ago
No, the most important demographic that your side needs to look at is the young voters. In EVERY state where this was voted on, the young people overwhelming support gay marriage. Know why? That's because they've grown up hearing about it, and also know personally gay people or famous gays in the media. They know Ellen is gay. Do you think they care? This isn't 1950, sorry to tell you... And, I've read that Hispanics were split 50/50 in CA on gay marriage. Where did you get your stats?
lisztnut 2 years ago
The most important thing gay people can do is to be visible. And, BOY are WE visible now. You can no longer push us under the rug, like you used to. We are in the media EVERY day! WOW! Millions of people are fighting over MY rights. It's a heady experience, to be sure. We ARE the civil rights issue of the 21st Century, and it's not just marriage, it's hate crimes bills, Don't Ask Don't Tell, and now there's ENDA, which will end discrimination in the job place. We are ON the radar screen!
lisztnut 2 years ago
You are 0 for 31.
Let me know when you win one.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
OH, we've already won quite a few, sir. Do I need to remind you that NINE states now recognize my marriage, whereas a year ago it was only TWO! And, we WILL win the war. If you think those nine states will reverse themselves, I've got BIG news for you! LOL! CIVIL RIGHTS SHOULD NEVER BE UP FOR A VOTE-PERIOD!
lisztnut 2 years ago
This is not a question of civil rights and never will be.
You are 0 for 31.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
And, Ronald Reagan said this gem (how did this bigot get to be president?): "If a landlord wants to refuse to rent to a NEGRO (his word), it is his right to do so...? Can you believe that? By the way, another interesting demographic swing in our favor was the Catholic vote. Many Catholics defied their church leaders and voted NO on 1 in ME! Good for them...
lisztnut 2 years ago
Please define (YOUR definition) of civil rights.... If this gay marriage qualify, I don't know what does... A civil right is something granted to ALL citizens regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation. You cannot single out one group and say, well people who are female can't vote, or people who are black cannot live where they'd like.... The Constitution should be used to "expand" rights not "limit" them-Coretta Scott King said that....
lisztnut 2 years ago
Civil marriage is a legislative construct. To the extent it can be considered a right it is a right subject to state regulation. The institution of marriage is open to all citizens regardless of race, sex, or anything else. There is no law on the books that says person A because he or she is a member of x group cannot be married.
In fact for many years, we did say that women cannot vote. It was only when the people decided that they should and passed the 19th Amendment that it changed.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
That's funny, I don't remember my marriage license mentioned ANYTHING about behavior. In fact, society at large implies that marriage involves sexual relations. We both know full well that there are marriages that have NO sex. The "traditional" view of marriage was a deal from one father to another to give away his daughter as the "property" of the man. As far as I know, sex was not even mentioned, nor procreation...
lisztnut 2 years ago
You seem to also be ignorant of the fact of how the CA case reached the Supreme Court in the first place. My beautiful city of San Francisco started issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples, and a lower court invalidated those licenses. This led to the lawsuit to restore the legality of the marriages that took place. The citizens of Maine could do the very same thing, and I hope they do, because it might lead to another court case in our favor... ME, has no constitutional ban...
lisztnut 2 years ago
Your mayor acted outside his authority, the lower court slapped him down, the Supreme Court overstepped its authority and the people slapped them down.
I got it.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
@nnjhansen
On October 12, 2009, Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law The Marriage Recognition and Family Protection Act, legislation proposed by State Senator Mark Leno to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states and countries.
In the years that the legal same-sex marriages have been valid, there has been no negativity to society.
THIS is why gay marriage will eventually become legal across the country.
THIS is why gay marriage is already legal in other countries on Earth.
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
Are you honestly trying to measure societal impact with 5 or so years of evidence?
Determinations like this requires generations.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
@nnjhansen "Are you honestly trying to measure societal impact with 5 or so years of evidence?"
~10 years on a Global scale to be more precise, and what citations(s) can you come up with that REQUIRE so-called 'generations' of time assessment to determine the changing of such law(s) and citation(s)?
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
By the way, nnjhansen is a procreationist, if you haven't read back through his posts. He believes that marriage does not exist without children. Tell that to my 65 year old aunt that just got married! There's NO hope there for children... Anyway, just thought you'd like to know, so you can get to the "core" reason he opposes gay marriage. It's not on religious grounds, but purely procreation...
lisztnut 2 years ago
Yes, I and courts going back to the founding of this country agree that marriage is inextricably linked to procreation.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
It's a little known fact that GW Bush is responsible for MY marriage. Here's how: it was his speech where he announced he'd like a constitutional ban on SSM that prompted Gavin to return to SF and issue licenses to gay couples. He said, "we'll see about that!" And, he's a hero in my book. Don't worry, I wrote to GW and Thanked him for my marriage. I also told him that he and Laura are welcome in our home any time (I was sincere about that). He needs to learn that he has nothing to fear.
lisztnut 2 years ago
OK, so why did they make "exceptions" for elderly citizens, and those couples that are infertile? Hum... That seems like a double standard. We're issuing you a license to procreate, despite the fact that you CAN'T procreate. Sounds illogical to me. No, the truth of the matter is marriage and procreation are two DIFFERENT issues. You can procreate without a marriage license, and you can marry without procreating. They are not dependant on one another, and the public knows this too..
lisztnut 2 years ago
They set requirements that struck the proper balance between cost (in dollars and intrusiveness) and utility. Just like every other licensing scheme in existence.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
And, please remember to tell the 70 percent of black mothers who have children out of wedlock that they need a marriage license next time they concieve a child...
lisztnut 2 years ago
The anti-gay marriage love to spout off non-facts, like kids are better off with heterosexual parents (this has been proven false in over 67 studies). Another fallacy they cling to is that gay marriage will lead to the end of civilization. All we're talking about here is a legal contract between TWO persons and the government. That's ALL. I now have health insurance because I'm married. And, it's the first time in my adult life to be able to see a doctor without going to the ER!
lisztnut 2 years ago
And the US Supreme Court will strick the voters down, just like they did with Prop 14. Just like they did with bussing. Just like they did in ALL important Civil rights issues... Got it...?
lisztnut 2 years ago
Read Baker v Nelson. The US Supreme Court has already dismissed as meritless a constitutional challenge exactly like the Boies/Olson challenge.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Whatever. I have NO time for reading Supreme Court documents. All I know is that they are CONFIDENT they will prevail. And, I might add they are from opposite sides of the political spectrum, as you know, and yet they BOTH are certain they will prevail... Can I ask why you spend so much time trying to subvert the rights of others? Why is this your mission? Don't you have something more constructive to do with your time then to try to make sure homosexuals don't have equal rights?
lisztnut 2 years ago
Do you believe that any lawyer publicly states he does not believe the case he is making?
Homosexuals DO have equal rights.
I spend my time fighting against lies and the liars who tell them.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Well, then why do you continue to tell lies, such as gays already have the equal right to marriage? That's a LIE. If I were to walk into a courthouse in West Virginia with my partner, would we be given a marriage license? NO, and you claim we would...? How is that not a lie?
lisztnut 2 years ago
No, you would not get a marriage license if you walked into a court house (in WV, CA, ME or all but a handful of states) with another man and asked for a marriage license but (and here is the important part) neither would any other man.
See, that means the law is treating you equally.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Wrong, it seems to me the law is inequitable, and this is the very point of the case against Prop 8. There are now two categories of gay couples in CA, those that ARE married, and those that would like to, but can't. Do you see the logic of their case? This has created an unequal situation, and violates the 14th Amendment. Seems very clear to me. Prop 8 created this situation, and was thus a tremendous GIFT to us in the fight to gain equal rights.
lisztnut 2 years ago
Then the solution is simple. Revoke the existing marriage licenses of those who do not meet the conditions for one.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I have a BETTER solution: Allow ALL adult couples who meet certain criteria (which includes same sex couples) to marry, just as they did in Canada. Problem solved. Win win situation for ALL. You still have your heterosexual marriages, nothing changes. And, we finally have OUR rights too. As of now, the system is so complicated that nobody knows what's going on. I can get married in Connecticut, and it's recognized in New York, but I can't get married in New York. It's BS, and you know it
lisztnut 2 years ago
You can get married in NY, that is the point you continually miss.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
YOU continuously MISS the point. I cannot walk into a NY courthouse and marry the person I LOVE. BIG, BIG, MONUMENTAL difference. It's like saying, well you, as a heterosexual male, can get a domestic partnership with a man, but you cannot with a woman. Did you know this is the law in CA? You MUST be a heterosexual OVER the age of 65 in order to qualify for domestic partnership. And, YES there are some straights up in arms about that, due to the tax laws...
lisztnut 2 years ago
And, if we move, as a married couple, to Ohio our legal marriage is invalidated. BS... The law WILL change, and in our favor. I have NO doubt about it. Once certain states started marrying gay couples it was a done deal. You will NOT stop this. As of now there are thousands of same sex couples that ARE legally married. Will they go away? I am not a violent person, but if someone tried to invalidate my marriage, I'd take up arms. Seriously!
lisztnut 2 years ago
There is something to fear. A bunch of armed homosexuals... NOT.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
See my point! We are not a violent bunch. That's the heterosexual males exclusive domain. Also, are you aware that two thirds of men who abuse BOYS are heterosexual? Need I go on...? Women's shelters are filled with victims of heterosexual men. Rapists who rape MEN are 90 percent heterosexual... Doesn't bode well for YOUR group, I"m afraid. And, why do we let these people marry?
lisztnut 2 years ago
Because they meet the conditions... you chose not to.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Thanks for admitting I was right after all! I CANNOT walk into a NY courthouse and marry someone I love. I can marry someone I DON'T love, at least on a physical level (it's IMPOSSIBLE, and as equally as impossible as it would be for you to marry a man), but that's not equality, that's enforced heterocentricity...!
lisztnut 2 years ago
There are any number of reasons why a heterosexual cannot marry the person they love. So what? Does that mean everyone has an unlimited ability to marry the person the love? How does the state adjudicate who loves whom?
nnjhansen 2 years ago
You said: How does the state adjudicate who loves whom? That's EXACTLY MY point! Thanks for acknowledging that the state has NO business telling us who we can and cannot love. Therefore, they CANNOT forbid me from marrying the responsible ADULT partner (who is unrelated to me). I'm making progress. You're finally starting to "get it!" Praise Jesus! I've just officially moved my "there is no god" stance to a "maybe there's a god..."!
lisztnut 2 years ago
Comment removed
nnjhansen 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
They are not telling you who you can or cannot love. They are telling you who you can or cannot marry. You apply for a license from the state to marry, not to love.
Who you love is your own business.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I know it's hard for you to grasp this concept, but throughout recorded history men have love men, and women women. The only difference between biblical times and the way we were treated and now is that now our society has advanced enough to recognize that this is not a "choice" (well sophisticated people understand this), and it's not going to change by praying away the gay, or "changing our behavior." In other words, gays are FINALLY on the radar screen. Cont'd
lisztnut 2 years ago
Does this mean that there will be more gays than in the past? NO! Does it mean that gay people will finally live their lives and have their relationships openly recognized and legally protected? YES. I know it's hard for older people, such as yourself to accept this, but forbidding gay marriage will in NO way reduce the numbers of gay people, as much as you'd like that to happen. Sorry to disappoint you. This is your REAL agenda, but it's NOT going to happen. The closet is evaporating!
lisztnut 2 years ago
Who cares about limiting the number of gay people? Where do you get this stuff?
Is it that hard for you to fathom that some people simply believe that marriage serves a real and important social purpose and that your proposal will diminish if not destroy that? No one hates anyone else. No one has any ulterior motive.
GROW UP!
nnjhansen 2 years ago
YES< gay marriage most definitely serves a VERY important social purpose. That is it allows those couples, such as me and my partner, to have the SAME benefits as any other heterosexual takes for granted, and IF we decide to have kids then those kids will get the legal protections that they deserve. It's not about society deciding, well your marriage and YOUR children don't matter. Apparently, YOU think the children of gay couples don't matter, and that's disturbing.... GROW UP!
lisztnut 2 years ago
You getting goodies from the state is not a societal benefit.
I do not believe homosexuals couples should raise children. Children deserve a mother and father that love them. Two men or two women cannot provide that.l
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Oh, good one. Homosexuals shouldn't raise children. I guess you're unaware of the FACT that 67 studies say gay parents are as good if not BETTER than heterosexual parents? Know why? We earn more money per capita, we have more education, we don't have unwanted or unplanned children, and we generally spend more time with our kids. There has been no proof saying that homosexuals make less good parents. Quite the opposite..
lisztnut 2 years ago
We have been through this. Social science is incapable of answering such a complex question.
The studies you refer to were found by the French Parliamentary Commission on the Family to be fatally flawed.
If we were to accept the social science, there is NO study that compares any alternative favorably to a loving stable home with a child's mother and father, NONE.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I know nothing about French study. I got my 67 studies proving homosexuals make equal or better parents from this site: webmd com It's interesting how your side TRIES to ignore science. This is very typical. Everything I said about gay couples is easily observable, and yet you deny it:
we earn more money, we have more education, we don't have unwanted or unplanned children, etc... So, how much of that are you going to deny? You're grasping at straws...
lisztnut 2 years ago
Well if you read it on the internet it must be true.
If you want to deal with science, you have to understand that any reputable study would have to norm for variables such as income, education, etc...
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Homosexuals live their whole lives in a repressive and oppressive environment. We do not grow up with positive role models. I didn't see any homosexual images or role models until college, and yet I knew I was gay well before that. That's a TERRIBLE way to grow up. I thought something was wrong with me. Is that any way to raise a kid? So, we can deal with problems that kids have that straight parents simply don't understand. Every kid grows up with rejection issues...
lisztnut 2 years ago
I should add that times ARE changing regarding kids exposure to positive gay role models, and this is a GREAT thing. Teenagers today know at least a dozen famous people that they can look up to who are known to be gay. This was NOT the case when you and I were young. I didn't see ANY gay couples on TV. Now, kids are seeing us getting married! WOW! What a change that is...
lisztnut 2 years ago
Let's face it, it's about you not being able to accept as valid, my relationship. That's the unstated message here. It's not about procreation. If it were, you'd be out there advocating for domestic partnerships for people who can't procreate, such as the elderly. You've never said that elderly straight couples can't marry, and YET you say that marriage is about procreation-period. So, should elderly couples or infertile couples be allowed to marry? If so, WHY?
lisztnut 2 years ago
Oh, about the "limiting the numbers of gay people" comment, this is the "read between the lines" inference of the teaching in the schools issue. Ignorant parents think that their kids will somehow "decide" to be gay if they hear about at school. Isn't that what they're thinking? There are those uneducated folks, believe it or not, who actually think you can "choose" your sexual orientation. Of course you and I know this is not possible... It's immutable...
lisztnut 2 years ago
What they do not want is their children being taught that homosexual BEHAVIOR is acceptable when their moral code says it is not.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I would like to respectfully ask you to refrain from using the term "behavior" in reference to my sexual orientation. It's insulting, and tantamount to calling a black person the "n" word. This has no place in civilized discussion. You and I both know that behavior and sexual orientation are two VERY different things. Sexual orientation is immutable and not something we choose to "behave." NO, it is a part of our very make-up like our race, gender and being left handed.
lisztnut 2 years ago
Orientation and behavior are two different things. I am capable of distinguishing between the two.
I will use the word behavior when I am speaking of actions or activities.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
And, why would a BIOLOGICAL parent who is gay be a less good parent than a straight person? It makes NO sense whatsoever. We don't have teen mothers, do we? We generally don't have abortions, do we (you say you know one, but I'm skeptical)? I'd like to add that some of those studies say that lesbian couples are better parents for the simple fact that the children are surrounded by less violence, and the mothers spend more time with their kids. Makes sense to me...
lisztnut 2 years ago
A homosexual biological parent is no worse than a heterosexual one. The problem is when the child is deprived of the other parent.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
That's always a good one: "a child needs both parents" or "a child needs a mother and a father." Apparently the Mormons thought that having multiple mothers was a good thing. In fact, it WAS. Any child would be WELL cared for with more than one mom. And, the number of deadbeat dads in this world is astronomical. I know more kids that had terrible fathers than than those with great fathers. I'm afraid straight men have not done such a great job at being fathers in this country at least...
lisztnut 2 years ago
It also might be difficult to accept the fact that single parents often are great parents. Sure, it isn't Ozzie and Harriet, but those kids don't seem to do worse. I'd rather see a responsible single mother, than have an abusive alchoholic father around the child any day. I'm sure you agree with me on that...
lisztnut 2 years ago
Do you say that someone who is left handed is exhibiting "left handed behavior?" NO, we say they are left handed. The same is true of sexual orientation. We don't exhibit "behavior" we simply ARE gay. It's an unchangeable fact, and has nothing to do with behavior. You would like all homosexuals to "behave" as heterosexuals. Is that fair to us? If so, WHY? Why must I live a lie, and get into a "fake" heterosexual relationship. We're taught to "be ourselves" UNLESS we are gay!
lisztnut 2 years ago
Yes, when someone throws a baseball with their left hand, that is left handed behavior.
Sometimes heterosexuals behave like homosexuals. Sometimes homosexuals engage in heterosexual behavior.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I agree that homosexuals can and do participate in heterosexual behavior, and vice versa. But, our sexual orientation does NOT change. That's a fact. There are some who are born bisexual, and that's another issue. But, I firmly believe I was born gay, and I'm sure you're convinced you were born straight. Can I ask why it is that the gay population has remained at the same percentage (roughly) throughout time? If there's nothing biological at work, how can that be? Choice? I don't think so!
lisztnut 2 years ago
Choice or not, I don't care. It makes no difference to the issue at hand.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I'm sorry, but choice has EVERYTHING to do with this issue. If we do not choose our sexual orientation, and it is given to us at birth, then how is it that you want to force everyone to be YOUR orientation? By refusing certain rights to people of a different orientation, you are in essence saying: you cannot be homosexual. In order to get these rights you must be heterosexual. On the face of it, you admit your own prejudice... Blacks can't drink at OUR fountain, they must have their OWN.
lisztnut 2 years ago
I have no desire to force anyone to do anything.
No one is being denied anything that has been recognized as a right.
I do not expect you to drink from a separate water fountain.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I brought up the water fountain, because I was pointing out that some states (including CA) have separate but equal systems known as civil unions or domestic partnerships. While these are superior to NO protection, they are not good enough. Separate but equal never works, does it? Our shameful treatment of blacks has proven this. Isn't it interesting that South Africa, which historically oppressed the MAJORITY of their citizens, has learned their lesson, and now offers marriage equality?
lisztnut 2 years ago
The are separate because they are not equal. One serves a specific societal interest, the others serve no purpose that I can tell.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
And, you also seem to forget that my relationship has EQUAL value to YOUR relationship. You would like to lessen the value of my relationship, and that's very offensive. Why shouldn't I be allowed to get the health benefits from my spouse's employer, if you can get those benefits from your wive's employer? That's discrimination, and it's WRONG, and it WILL change. We got a big tax refund last year because of our marriage. It paid for our trip to Australia in Aug. Why shouldn't we have this?
lisztnut 2 years ago
You do not get to assess the value others place on your relationship. Society has decided that the man-woman relationship is more consequential than that of a man-man or woman-woman relationship. You disagree, I get it but you are not the only one with a vote.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
The vote is, or SHOULD be, irrelevant. I could care less what the straight majority thinks of my relationship. This is pointless, isn't it? It's like saying, well the majority, which is white, doesn't want the minority, which is black, to drink at the same fountain, therefore it MUST be the law. The people spoke! No blacks at white fountains. This is NOT democracy. This is MOB rule...
lisztnut 2 years ago
If you don't care what the people who make up a society think, don't ask them. Asking the state for a license is giving the people of that state a say.
Don't ask for the license and no one cares what you do.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Don't mince words here. It is the government NOT the people that issue the license. I really do not care one bit what people think of my relationship. I simply want my government to provide protection for this relationship, and I want the SAME benefits that heterosexuals recieve. That's IT. We want to be left alone. I could care less what your brats learn in school. I could care less if your god tells you it's a sin. I want my benefits. That's ALL. LEGAL CONTRACT!
lisztnut 2 years ago
In this country the people are the government.
The benefits of marriage accrue to those that meet the conditions the people have set for marriage, no one else.
If you want to be left alone, the choice is yours.
nnjhansen 2 years ago
Fortunately, my state government already recognizes my marriage, so this is a moot point to me personally. I'm fighting for my gay brethren to have the same joy and legal benefit. And, their children MATTER, too. Funny, how you seem to overlook that every time. It's as if gay couples don't have kids... Are you still in 1950 where we're invisible? What's up with that?
lisztnut 2 years ago
So if some gays have kids, then they became gays later in life? so what is it ?are you born gay or become gay?
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
@kcchiefsbaby "are you born gay or become gay?"
I've never had any attraction toward the opposite sex.
Have you ever had any attraction toward the same sex, kcchiefsbaby? To the point where you want to spend the rest of your life together with someone of the same sex?
Yes or no?
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
what are you talking about?
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
@kcchiefsbaby I'm asking you a question. Are you afraid to answer it?
Here it is again:
Have you ever had any attraction toward the same sex, kcchiefsbaby? To the point where you want to spend the rest of your life together with someone of the same sex?
Yes or no?
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
By the way, some very old and respected dictionaries do NOT explicitely say that marriage is one man and one woman. In fact, many of them leave it open to include multiple partners.
For example: Marriage is a union of adults who enter into a legal agreement with their government. So, nobody's suggesting a "redefinition" but rather a "broader" definition that is MORE inclusive. Incidentally, the old dictionaries didn't say this either: Marriage is between people of the same race...
lisztnut 2 years ago
So you gays want a LEGAL CONTRACT AND SAME BENEFITS? want a TAx Cut cool ill vote for that.
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
Need I remind you that even though homosexual relationships have existed since time immemorial, it is only recently that this has even been acknowledged as existing in the first place.... On more than one occasion I've nearly caused an old person to have a heart attack. They've asked about my wedding ring. One woman asked who my wife was. I told her I had a HUSBAND. She nearly fainted. Your generation simply cannot comprehend that our relationships have always been here. Invisible but here
lisztnut 2 years ago
And any of this matters because??
nnjhansen 2 years ago
And, where a child comes from matters? Why? If a gay couple has a child from a previously failed heterosexual relationship is that child LESS entitlted to the legal protections because the current parents are of the same sex? If so, WHY? Why is the child punished for something beyond it's control? It would seem to be VERY much in the state's and society's interest to PROTECT ALL children! You want to discriminate against children of same sex parents. That's un-American of you...
lisztnut 2 years ago
to lisztnut
keep kids out of your stupid political views. thats all it is for you gays political. if it wasnt for hetrosexual couples you wouldnt have been born and their would be no childeren...You probably dont believe in god because your probably some angry little gay thats mad at the world because most people dont agree with gay marriage. but god made man and woman to reproduce. straights are not perfect manny marriages fail but it is still the natural thing to do. leave us alone biggot!
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
@kcchiefsbaby "because most people dont agree with gay marriage."
The statistics show that the percentage voting to SUPPORT gay marriage is increasing with every passing year.
There's no reason for us "little gay that's mad at the world" because we just have to be patient.
ps - Which god? There are so many, depending on which one a HUMAN introduced you to. The god of the Koran? The god of the Torah? The god of the Vedas?
Keep your personal god to yourself; it has NO BEARING in gov't law.
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
To thecommercialedge
Well use all your liberal poll statistics you want, but just like you thought of Maine your wrong. You dont believe in god so don't use his name in vein. Another angry gay.
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
It's interesting how you blacks want the government to grant you rights, but when it comes to other people, No, they don't deserve rights. So, why haven't you learned your lesson? It's not right to discriminate. If slavery were still up for a vote, YOU might be in chains. (or your grandmother)
lisztnut 2 years ago
hahahahaha your fuckin dumb im not even black i guess you also stereotype, guilty!!!! im mexican
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
Could of fooled me. You talk and write like a black person. Mexican, same difference. In our state people voted away your rights just a few years ago. They don't want Mexican immigrants to have health care, so they voted AWAY your rights. Be careful, or the rightwingers might vote to deport ALL Mexicans. What would you do then? You just don't get it, do you? Voting on civil rights is NEVER the right thing to do...
lisztnut 2 years ago
I think the U.S. should deport all illegal immigrant free loaders. Even though I'm mexican no pitty from me, no free rides. Stop using you race hustleing tactics. Its not the same as your gay movement. You gays arn't repressed. I dont see a straight only restaurants or drinking fountains. i dont see no gay lynching every day. Gays can vote, gays can ride in the front of the bus. please ...your probably some liberal judge or professor or some aclu lawyer....wannabe intellectuals dont scare me
kcchiefsbaby 2 years ago
Then why did you try to get me to be "friends" with you? I have no interest in being a friend with an ignorant person like you. I AM a professor, so what? I'm also married to my same sex partner. So what? How does that affect YOUR sad life in Kansas City? You people are pathetic. The government is for ALL people, and that includes gay people, and yes, as a matter of fact gays ARE oppressed. We can still be fired for who we are in many states. Is that not oppression?
lisztnut 2 years ago
Oh, sorry, I used too many big words for you. You probably couldn't understand anything I said, since I converse in completely sentences, and don't talk like I'm an ignorant street person, like you... Get a job...!
lisztnut 2 years ago
Glad you're happy that some Americans would like to send ALL Mexicans, including YOU, back to Mexico. Enjoy the ride home!
lisztnut 2 years ago
Oh, I love it, a Republican Mexican! That's like being a Jewish Nazi, or a Gay Mormon! You are so ignorant you can't even see that your own political party hates your guts!
lisztnut 2 years ago
@lisztnut "Oh, I love it, a Republican Mexican! That's like being a Jewish Nazi, or a Gay Mormon! You are so ignorant you can't even see that your own political party hates your guts!"
*snickers*
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
Speaking of ignorant people, I'm fighting with a Mormon woman on another channel. She said that other religions that condone gay marriage are not TRUE religions. It's the most blatantly honest statement from a Mormon that I've ever seen. In other words, the Mormon cult wants EVERYONE to follow THEIR beliefs, and any other religion doesn't matter. These cult followers need to be stopped NOW! Are they a problem in Canada? They have infiltrated our society, and must be rooted out...
lisztnut 2 years ago
@lisztnut one of the main reasons why I have no ties to religion.
Monotheistic extremism causes more issues in society than gay marriage ever will.
The religious extremists are just pissed off that something their churches does is now associated with homosexuality. They're getting a bad rep with their proposed discrimination & can only pull ~3 little verses from their vast story book to pick on people who are living in LEGAL same-sex relationships in our society.
It's f'ing hiarious.
thecommercialedge 2 years ago
I couldn't agree with you more. Religion has created far more pain and suffering than good. It has discriminated against women, and other minorities throughout history. To say nothing of the blood spilled in "Jesus' or "Allah's" name. It disgusting. It's been proven that Atheists commit less crime, and are less violent than religious folks. All of the recent wars can be traced directly back to one source- RELIGION.
lisztnut 2 years ago
Most Republicans would like to execute Mexicans, Gays, Blacks, and anyone who supports health care for all... They stand for theocracy and the oppression of the poor. Don't be decieved. Being a Republican is Fascism, pure and simple. They want to control everyone's lives. They don't want gays to marry, they don't want the poor blacks, and Mexicans to have health care....
lisztnut 2 years ago
You don't think a lot of Californians would vote against your civil rights? Prop 9-- Deports all Mexicans regardless of where they were born...
lisztnut 2 years ago
You are DUMB, aren't you kccheifsbaby? You don't know how to spell (no. one). Secondly, if you believe your god created everything, that means he also created homosexuals. If it exists in the animal kingdom, then your god created it. End of story.
lisztnut 2 years ago
Kcchiefsbaby. Can I use your posts a perfect example of ebonics in my college class? I've never come across someone more fluent in this tongue only used by black Americans...
lisztnut 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Google: What's Good for Kids, by Lisa Belkin, New York Times
This article exposes the myths that same sex couples are not as good heterosexual couples at parenting. In fact, it shows some evidence why same sex couples often do BETTER...
lisztnut 2 years ago
Look, you just can't get over the fact that gay people have families. Gay people have children, and those children deserve the protection of the government. Just because YOU can't comprehend yourself being in a same sex relationship, does not mean that ALL of society needs to follow YOUR personal prejudices and inability to comprehend diversity. Following me? YES, it is emphatically in the state's interest to PROTECT children of same sex couples. YES, YES, YES!
lisztnut 2 years ago
I'd like to introduce you to several children I know who belong to families with same sex couples as parents. I'd like you to say to those children: "your family doesn't matter. Your parents don't deserve the legal protections the MY children enjoy, because YOUR parents are of the same sex." Will you do that with me? I'm serious... If you had personal contact with these kids, you'd probably change your tune.
lisztnut 2 years ago
I really should go get some work done. We keep going around in circles, and as entertaining as it is, I'm getting tired from it. I need to save my strength for Rachmaninoff! Best regards, and over and out for now...
lisztnut 2 years ago
Do you remember when you chose to be right or left handed? At what age did you make this decision? You must also be aware that left handed children have been forced in some societies to be right handed. The kids "mask" themselves as right handed, but in reality they are left handed in orientation. Isn't this the very same as sexual orientation? Some, like you, would prefer everyone "behave" as heterosexual. Is that healthy to those of us whose orientation is homosexual?
lisztnut 2 years ago
The fact that you use the term "behavior" in reference to sexual orientation shows that you are out of touch with reality, and simply have no business talking about this topic of gay marriage rights. Can you please read my article that I sent, which PROVES that sexual orientation and behavior are unrelated? PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE? Educate yourself
lisztnut 2 years ago
And you continuously ignore the FACT that gay couples have kids, and many of them are biological kids. Why is that?
lisztnut 2 years ago
There is not a single same sex couple that has biological children. ZERO
nnjhansen 2 years ago
I need to correct you again. It is NOW possible that two women can concieve a child together without the use of sperm. This is being experimented on in Europe as we speak. Men will soon be obsolete, and I say that as a gay man. Times are changing ole man...
lisztnut 2 years ago