Gay Marriage Debate heats up on hot day in Trenton

[butlerty27]

I don't care who wants to justify being gay is right, it is wrong. Now their is some twisted kids that are gonna be raised up in society thinking it is ok to have to dads! I guess everybody thinks God must have fell asleep or something or perhaps a lightening bolt struck his eye right? I'm not saying I hate gays, but I'm not gonna support a corrupt morale group that wants to lead it followers to a lake of fire for eternity all in the name of enjoying A MOMENT OF PLEASURE! Weigh eternity???

[xxcafe]

Right so if he repeats behavioral patterns does that mean that he will be gay like his parents?

[katehk0889]

If god created the heavens and the earth, and then created man in his image doesn't that mean that god is at the very least bisexual since there are gay men? How could being gay be an abomination in gods eyes for all those who believe god created us? And for those who don't believe in god, being homosexual does not make you any less of a human being, scientifically speaking, and since this is America, and assuming they are citizens, doesn't that mean they should be afforded the same rights?

[xxcafe]

That gay relationship obviously affected that boy.. he kissed his parent on the lips TWICE!! That is not right.

[OneDollarMercenary]

@xxcafe you do realise that he has a mental disability?

HURDUR IF GAY MEN RAISE BOYS THEY'LL ABUSE THEM DURHUR.

-_-

[xxcafe]

@OneDollarMercenary I could see that he was probably suffering a mental disability. Being mentally disabled does not necessarily cause a person to do what he did. He did what he did I assume because he saw his two male parents kissing while growing up and felt that this display of affection between two men was natural. I didn't mean to imply that his parents abused him in any way. The effect on this child is evident.

[OneDollarMercenary]

@xxcafe here's a real funny thing; affection between two men SHOULD be just as normal as between a man and a woman.

[xxcafe]

@OneDollarMercenary It is natural to those that believe it is natural. That boy grew up in that enviornment and because he did, it affected him. He will probably continue feeling it is natural.

[hephep2007]

@xxcafe There are many ethnic groups in the US. For your information, they are Italians.

And not all Italians are gay.

[a01087483]

@xxcafe I personally agree that is weird... altho I´ve seen that often in straight families so... its just something weird that happens and not necessarily related to them being gay, it does look stranger cause they are gay but thats all, not that they affected the kid

[blognewb]

@xxcafe HE IS AUTISTIC. My goodness THEY REPEAT BEHAVIORAL PATTERNS. GO READ A BOOK.

[Nakdimon316]

Sorry but this clip totally misses the mark. The question is not so much if gay "marriage" is a threat to normal marriage, but WHY does marriage have to be redefined. Are you in favor of two male siblings having a romantic relationship and getting married? or incest? or paedophelia? if not then why, since these relationships are not since they are no threat to your own relationships. Children can be raised in loving incestuous, paedophelic relations. So whats wrong those relations?

[hardinmichael1981]

@Nakdimon316 The laws of consent would not change by granting same sex couples the right to marry. Nor would the Constitutional Freedom of Religion. Sure gays could "TRY" to force religious organizations to change but they wouldn't get any where. The ONLY question we as a Society have to answer is : Should GLBT people have the SAME EQUAL RIGHTS as heterosexual people? That's ALL!

Gay people are PEOPLE TOO, JUST like YOU.

How would you feel if YOU were in the minority asking for equal rights?

[Nakdimon316]

@hardinmichael1981 yes gays are people too, so are paedophiles and necropheliacs and practitioners of incest and the polyamourou. why dont you grant them the right to be with whoever they want, since the Constitutional Freedom of Religion would not change if you would grant them their wishes to have relation with whoever they want, right? As a minority you wouldnt have to redifine marriage to let me marry someone from another race, while that is the case with gay "marriage". We dont want that.

[hardinmichael1981]

@Nakdimon316 pedophilia is a completely different issue that is addressed by LAWS of CONSENT [as I've mentioned]. It's a non sequitur. Any way, just to play devil's advocate, for debate's sake:

1) What's wrong with CONSENTING ADULTS living their lives the way they want? What makes it YOUR business?

2) Even IF it was "redefining" 'marriage' [which i don't think it is], what would be wrong with "redefining" 'marriage'? Words and meanings change throughout history. What would be the problem?

[Nakdimon316]

@hardinmichael1981 Pedophelia is the same discussion, bc they use the exact same excuses as the gay community to have their sick sexual preferences honored. Children can also consent to sexual acts with an adult and, to use ur rhetoric, CHILDREN ARE PEOPLE TOO. to answer ur questions:

1) If you think we shud just let adults do whatever they want and imposing their sick sexual preferences to society, then do u have to accept incestuous relations

2) It would call something marriage when its not.

[hardinmichael1981]

@Nakdimon316 what part of "Consent Law" do you not understand?

[kmelfina]

I'll never understand some arguments. If those against same-sex marriage say that 2-3% of people in the world are gay, then how on earth will the future generations suffer if the 97% are heterosexual (like we need more people on the earth xD)???

[hardinmichael1981]

The very worst worst haters are those that do not even realize they are haters. It's like the KKK who (these days) always say that they do not hate black people - they just love white people. Allowing gay people to marry does not threaten future generations. Where do these people think gay people come from? People are born gay - they do not choose to be outcast and discriminated against and hated. Look at the way gay people are treated. Why would anyone choose to be gay?

[1912wsl]

Great video, Jay! Thanks for sharing!

[jhaze918]

WHAT MAKES GAY PEOPLE WANT TO GET MARRIED SOOO BAD?? WHAT DOES IT CHANGE?? YOU HAVE YOUR KIDS, A HOUSE, AND YOU LOVE EACHOTHER...WHAT MORE DO YOU NEED??? ROCK ON TO THAT KID AT THE END, HE IS AWSOME FOR VERY ODD REASONS....

[hardinmichael1981]

@jhaze918 it's about EQUAL RIGHTS. Married people have MORE Civil Rights than people who are not married. That is what the EQUALITY part means in "Marriage Equality". Remember we're talking about CIVIL marriages performed & recognized BY THE STATE. Marriage Equality will NOT force Religious organizations to perform or recognize same-sex marriages. THAT would be a violation of Religious Freedom guaranteed by the Constitution. It's about EQUAL TREATMENT BY THE STATE.

[Nakdimon316]

@hardinmichael1981 Yes the endorsing of gay "marriage" will absolutely force Religious organizations to perform or recognize them, bc gays will vilify, sue, prosecute and accuse every religious institution that wont recognize gay "marriage" as proper marriage. Which it isnt in the first place. If you want equal treatment for gay couples to get "married" then you have to recognize every romantic relationship accross the spectrum, no matter how repulsive those forms are. U willing to go there?

[paulahare2]

MTN.ORG MINNEAPOLIS,MN. RAINBOW FLAG TV. SHOW Land of the free, Home of the Brave!!!! Not land of the some and those who agree with my religion!!!!!

[stuntbaby63]

This video misrepresents the views of people like me who oppose the redefining of marriage. First, we are not "haters". We are decent people who simply want to protect the core traditional values of Western Civilization. (If we oppose brothers and sisters marrying, does that mean we hate our own siblings?) Second, we don't see same-sex marriage as a micro-issue that threatens us personally. We see it as a macro-issue that threatens future generations. The unintended consequences are huge.

[jrlassiter]

@stuntbaby63 the only person who's a threat to your marriage is your husband or your wife. the only REAL threat to future generations is the intractable stupidity espoused by your side.

sorry. God doesn't like haters and neither do I.

[stuntbaby63]

@jrlassiter Same-sex marriage is a macro-issue that threatens future societies. It's NOT a micro-issue that threatens present individuals. You either misunderstood or misrepresented my point by egregiously setting up the exact same strawman I cited. So, you and God don't like haters? Do you and God like dislikers? Why is it OK for you to dislike people but it's NOT okay for others to hate people? At what point does dislike become hatred? Am I a hater? If so, how do you know?

[stuntbaby63]

@jrlassiter accused me of "intractable stupidity". If you can make a persuasive case that a radical departure from our ancient societal and moral traditions is a positive step, then I will retract my views. As for the charge of stupidity, my views are based on thought, not emotion. They consider the realities of human/male/female nature, the broader impact on the psychosexual development of children, and the future stablity of the family unit. Also, they don't demonize proponents of S.S.M.

[TeamAnDmoto]

@jrlassiter Ok i see so now your puting the blame on heterosexuals, ok well your heterophobic, you Gays throw it around like its bailout money. "Well he doesnt agree with us so he's probally homophobic". A phobia is a deathly fear of something, I slightly fear the path this country is taking, I do not fear you becuase you have no more power then me, and im probally like 20 years younger then you. I dont like drug dealers, that make me drugaphobic?? Theres not such things as homophobic really.

[Nakdimon316]

@jrlassiter how do you know God doesnt like haters? How do you know that God doesnt oppose homosexuality, let alone gay "marriage"?

[hardinmichael1981]

@Nakdimon316 who cares what "god " thinks? "god" doesn't even exist! you might as well argue @ what Scooby-Doo thinks.

If "god" actually exists, then let this "god" speak for itself!....

Oh, it can't??....

Case-Fucking-Closed!

[Nakdimon316]

@hardinmichael1981 dude why dont you take a hike, quickly. jrlassiter made an appeal to God, I'm challenging him on that. Leave the grown people to speak.

[OneDollarMercenary]

@hardinmichael1981 yea, leave the grown people to discuss their imaginairy friend.

[jrlassiter]

@stuntbaby63 yawn... we're going in circles.  but thanks for giving me web traffic. i love that part.

[blognewb]

@stuntbaby63 So why don't you BAN DIVORCE?! That IS AGAINST THE BIBLE! That is the number one threat to the FUTURE of heterosexual marriage. GET REAL.

[mgunslinger17]

It weirds me out seeing kids kiss their parents on the lips...gay or straight.

[1912wsl]

Exactly who are you "newjerseyequality"? Is your username supposed to be a joke? Clearly you're not on the side of equal rights for gay and lesbian couples.

[yaoiking16]

awwww so cute...im only 20 and i want to start a family lol talk about breaking the gay sterotype lol

[bluegirlbb]

Oh, wow, I remember reading about Madison and Adam, who were speaking there on behalf of their dads. "An American Family" is the book written by those two fathers about their journey of making a family- so inspiring. I recognized them from pictures in the book, but they're nearly grown now- and passionnate speakers- amazing!

[newjerseyequality]

jrlassiter, why do you call other people homosexuals if they do not agree with you and at the same time call them goons and hateful.

That totally undermines your video.

[joethemoproductions]

@kenballer00

This is quite simple. Marriage at one time needed to be promoted and enforced to ensure two things: female subservience to men and to replenish the population.

By the time of the women's rights movement happened in the early 20th c., women were done being property. Complementarily, attitudes about marriage had changed: by the 20th c., most were marrying out of love--a tremendous departure from previous reasons.

As to population, we're over-populated.

No need for old reasons

[kenballer00]

@joethem

its not about creating more children because we don't need encouragement to do something that is already naturally encouraged or have more people. its about responsible procreation and rearing them into society to have a country thats as functional as it can possibly be. this is achieved by encouraging its citizens using the term "marriage" to channel those natural urges to procreate in a responsible, productive, and safer manner within the stable environments

[joethemoproductions]

@kenballer00

Studies show that gays make as good as parents, if not better, than straights. I've encountered you before and at the heart of your argument is that you don't like gay people.

We need fewer children and those that are born need good parents. Marriage allows gay people the same financial and social benefits so that if they choose to raise children, their children have all of the protections that come from marriage.

The world is changing and this scares you.

[rg0057]

@kenballer00 , we've seen this new "channeling" argument before, when it magically appeared out of nowhere, in the Prop 8 trial closing arguments -- the same arguments where the Prop 8 lawyer stunned the judge and most observers by claiming he didn't need any evidence. It's utter nonsense.

[punkzanyj]

@kenballer00 marriage has nothing to do with responsible procreation. A man doesn't get down on one knee and ask his girlfriend to make babies, he asks her to be his wife. Nothing in the law, the ceremony or the license says anything about responsible procreation. You're making up a definition to exclude gay people.

[CTR5000]

Thank you! Especially to these wonderful kids of yours! THEY will be the leaders of tomorrow. They're already leading the way! Kudos to their parents for doing an excellent job raising them!

[CTR5000]

Thank you! Especially to these wonderful kids of yours! THEY will be the leaders of tomorrow. They're already leading the way! Kudos to their parents for doing an excellent job raising them!

[mandjon]

Thanks Jay, excellent job! The Galluccios

[davenaugle]

Thank you Jay for giving me a slogan for the protest against NOM here in St. Paul on July 29th:

"If I'm really a threat to your heterosexual marriage, you're probably not [really] a heterosexual."

[warren52nz]

Gays shouldn't bring God into the discussion. It's belief in God that leads to this homophobic bigotry in the first place! Especially in the USA.

LEV 20:13 If a man lies with a male, as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Christians are so out of touch with reality that it's simply sickening!

[joethemoproductions]

@evaku2

CBS did an interesting poll about gays in the military or homosexuals in the military: all words were the same except for gay and homosexual. There was a 10 point difference in favor of gays in the military over homosexuals in the military. It seems that the public responds better to gay than homosexual.

It seems to me that using marriage equality is rather vague. We are working for gay marriage; I think stating so would be useful.

[joethemoproductions]

Great work. Love the part about if gay marriage threatens your straight marriage then your probably not straight.

However, I don't understand why we use the words marriage equality rather than gay marriage. There is strong evidence that using the word gay has a more positive effect on the listener.

Thanks for the great work,

Joe

[BetterABleedingHeart]

@joethemoproductions

We use "marriage equality" rather than "gay marriage" because we want equal marriage rights. "Gay marriage" suggests we want something separate, or different. The term is also often used disparagingly by the anti-gay factions. Marriage Equality reinforces the fact that we seek *equal* rights, not the so-called "special" rights they claim we want. That's why we use it.

[joethemoproductions]

@BetterABleedingHeart

I understand the argument. However, using vague words in the 2008 Prop 8 campaign did not get us gay marriage. In the 1978 Briggs initiative that would have made it illegal for gays to be public school teachers, the literature used gay a lot and did not deviate from the fact that it is a gay issue. We won that one solidly; I believe it was the last time we won at the ballot boxes. Sorry, I think we one once in AZ, but lost it again.

[kenballer00]

@BetterABleedingHeart

gays and lesbians have always been allowed to marry someone of the opposite-sex for the purpose of procreation and rearing of children according to federal constitutional law. what your proposing we do is create extra special rights that exist outside the constitution and common sense

[HenhousetheRed]

@kenballer00 Because marriage is all about making babies, right? That's why it's illegal for couples to marry if they refuse to have children. And it's illegal for elder or disabled people who can't physically procreate to get married.

Wait, what's that? It's legal for them to marry even when they can't or refuse to have kids?

Then I guess common sense says same sex marriage is no different. There is nothing special about it and there is no logical base to exclude gays from marriage.

[kenballer00]

@Henhou

The state's purpose is not just procreation, but its to PROMOTE and MENTALLY encourage citizens to focus their natural feelings to procreate in a responsible, productive, and safer way within stable relationships using the culturally understood term "marriage" and rear them in the best place, which means allowing the infertile to marry doesn't infringe on these objectives because these examples don't change the definition or the fact that a man and a woman can achieve this

[punkzanyj]

@kenballer00 that's not true, as our marriage laws do not reflect this purpose. You cannot asign a purpose to an institution that doesn't exist. The law, the license, the marriage proposal itself is about the couple, not the kids.

[rjs0416]

@kenballer00 Here you are again, Ken, copying and pasting across... what is this now... four videos? /golf clap

[BetterABleedingHeart]

@kenballer00

There is no federal constitutional requirement to procreate. Marriage licenses don't require proof of fertility or intent to procreate. This "marriage is for procreation" is so much BS made up by the antigays.

I don't want to marry someone of the opposite sex and live a lie. I've never wanted children. I'm quite happy with my wife. What you want is for me to live in slavery to your values, without love or intimacy. That's cruel and against common sense.

[jrlassiter]

@joethemoproductions I prefer the term "gay marriage equality" just to cover my bases. it's a little clunky linguistically but marriage equality lacks a certain something. But the "equality" part of the equation is non-negotiable. i am more about the Equality than the marriage, personally.

[punkzanyj]

@joethemoproductions "marriage equality" is more accurate. "Gay Marriage" buys into the whole right wing idea that we're trying to make up a new right, when in fact all we want is our relationships recognized equally.

[Gaygregator]

Keep fighting! gaygregator[dot]com

[jrlassiter]

@auntiesanity thanks, Auntie. we're working on it:)