Major Blow to Homophobes: SCOTUS Refuses to Block Gay Marriage in DC

[Susita 175]

How about YOU (or you and your church in some cases) recognize your marriage and YOU make the decisions for your life based on YOUR wishes with another individual and leave government out of it.

I agree. That's what I was trying to say in my posts.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

is this seriously becoming a debate in which that should not be a debate.

Party A: I want government to recognize gay marriage

Party B: I don't want government to recognize gay marriage

Damn.....

How about YOU (or you and your church in some cases) recognize your marriage and YOU make the decisions for your life based on YOUR wishes with another individual and leave government out of it.

The whole argument is ridiculous from both sides.....

You do realize marijuana isn't illegal because of 'family interests' but because of racism....... please learn your history.

How is this ridiculous when we live as a collective group in a society and not as individuals? Or, have you forgotten that and only think that there is YOU and no WE?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Interracial marriage and gay marriage is not analygous, no matter how often you cite them as so. You insult man/woman marriage by equating gay marriage to it. The reason why judges and legislatures have taken it upon themselves to force ** marriage on society is because society rejects it. And, the number of people who resent things they do not accept being forced on them is growing. What is legal now does not always have to be, and there is more energy against it than for it.

Interracial and gay marriage are two different things for sure but they have a lot in common when it comes to one of the often cited reasons as to why same sex marriage needs to be banned - the violation of cultural norms. Interracial marriage was banned for precisely that reason. You actually cited that particular reason yourself earlier so you created the very parallel between the two that you're now complaining about.

Not sure what insult you're talking about - I can assure you that my marriage to my wife is not in the least affected by whether homosexuals are granted the right to marry the person they love and want to commit to. I don't see how that would change anything in my marriage.

As for the public sentiment, you know, maybe we ought to just put away with parts of the Constitution that are bothersome to live up to. I'll just put a little paragraph into the post but do encourage you to read The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage - a very good argument put forth by Ted Olson who has partnered with David Boies to persuade federal courts to invalidate California's Prop 8 which I am sure you're aware is one of the products of this seemingly unconstitutional public sentiment which appears to favor the discrimination against some of our neighbors, co-workers, teachers, soldiers and friends.

I understand, but reject, certain religious teachings that denounce homosexuality as morally wrong, illegitimate, or unnatural; and I take strong exception to those who argue that same-sex relationships should be discouraged by society and law. Science has taught us, even if history has not, that gays and lesbians do not choose to be homosexual any more than the rest of us choose to be heterosexual. To a very large extent, these characteristics are immutable, like being left-handed. And, while our Constitution guarantees the freedom to exercise our individual religious convictions, it equally prohibits us from forcing our beliefs on others. I do not believe that our society can ever live up to the promise of equality, and the fundamental rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, until we stop invidious discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

[Dan J 277]

Why do you believe that your support of gay marriage should be imposed on me? It does impose on my rights, whether you see that or not.

Think of the things you would object to in society (if there are any). Would you appreciate them being forced on you?

Bigotry is not a protected right, except in speech.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Interracial and gay marriage are two different things for sure but they have a lot in common when it comes to one of the often cited reasons as to why same sex marriage needs to be banned - the violation of cultural norms. Interracial marriage was banned for precisely that reason. You actually cited that particular reason yourself earlier so you created the very parallel between the two that you're now complaining about.

Not sure what insult you're talking about - I can assure you that my marriage to my wife is not in the least affected by whether homosexuals are granted the right to marry the person they love and want to commit to. I don't see how that would change anything in my marriage.

As for the public sentiment, you know, maybe we ought to just put away with parts of the Constitution that are bothersome to live up to. I'll just put a little paragraph into the post but do encourage you to read The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage - a very good argument put forth by Ted Olson who has partnered with David Boies to persuade federal courts to invalidate California's Prop 8 which I am sure you're aware is one of the products of this seemingly unconstitutional public sentiment which appears to favor the discrimination against some of our neighbors, co-workers, teachers, soldiers and friends.

Here's what I see in the arguments for gay marriage - It's all about me and it doesn't affect me.

Yet, if someone says It's all about me and it does affect me, you say they have no argument.

Well, if that's so, then neither do you.

[Dan J 277]

How is this ridiculous when we live as a collective group in a society and not as individuals? Or, have you forgotten that and only think that there is YOU and no WE?

WE made up of many different individuals with a wide variance of values. We is not made up of only people like you.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Bigotry is not a protected right, except in speech.

Liberalism is not a protected right, except in speech.

[Danno 1,228]

A society allowing gay marriage does not impose on your rights or the rights of gay couples. You can continue to feel disgusted by it. Just like others might feel disgusted by your judgement of them.

Right now in some areas, public schools are indoctrinating (no other word for it) children to embrace even celebrate views on Homosexuality which their parents and their churches oppose.

This will most certainly be the norm everywhere in Public schools should ** sexual Relationship be legitimized by the state via Marriage.

I would not impose that these topics even be raised in School, there is too much other work to be done there..... but the Gay crowd knows the school is their best tool (And heck, they get paid for it too)

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There are a number of arguments against Homosexual marriage.

The first being the same reason Drugs are illegal, the State has a vested interest in maintaining the family unit.

Allowing same sex partners to marry would increase the number of stable, recognized family units not decrease it. I suggest you consume Ted Olson's argument as well. It's a convincing conservative argument in support of same sex marriage.

It [gay marriage] does impose on my rights, whether you see that or not.

How?

Edited March 3, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog

[Danno 1,228]

WE made up of many different individuals with a wide variance of values. We is not made up of only people like you.

So your point is... these changes should be made by popular consent only?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

WE made up of many different individuals with a wide variance of values. We is not made up of only people like you.

And, we are not only made up of people like you, so I can and do object to government forcing things on me that you may accept, but I don't. I imagine that when the government forces things on you that I accept and you don't, you understand that juxtiposition better.

[Susita 175]

Right now in some areas, public schools are indoctrinating (no other word for it) children to embrace even celebrate views on Homosexuality which their parents and their churches oppose.

This will most certainly be the norm everywhere in Public schools should ** sexual Relationship be legitimized by the state via Marriage.

I would not impose that these topics even be raised in School, there is too much other work to be done there..... but the Gay crowd knows the school is their best tool (And heck, they get paid for it too)

I disagree. I know some children in school with my boys are removed during activities or lessons that conflict with their religious beliefs. The teachers are quite accommodating with it as well.

However, it is up to the parent to be involved and aware of what is going on in their child's classroom, and to interact with the teacher. I don't think there's any type of 'indoctrination' going on. There are also a lot of private schools which cater to specific religious beliefs that is another option.

And, we are not only made up of people like you, so I can and do object to government forcing things on me that you may accept, but I don't. I imagine that when the government forces things on you that I accept and you don't, you understand that juxtiposition better.

I don't believe any regular citizen should legally be able to own a firearm. However, it's legal. I wish it weren't. So I understand this concept.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Allowing same sex partners to marry would increase the number of stable, recognized family units not decrease it. I suggest you consume Ted Olson's argument as well. It's a convincing conservative argument in support of same sex marriage.

How?

Because it tries to change my societie's definition of marriage from that between a man and a woman to a meaningless nothing. I don't accept that definition, and because I don't, it alllows pro-gay marriage supporters to feel superior to those who don't and to call us bigots. That marginalizes me because I haven't allowed myself to be brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing that gay marriage is analygous to interracial marriage.

Ted is a paid mouthpiece. I don't consider a lawyer to be a conservative. They are what they get paid to be.

Edited March 3, 2010 by Sofiyya

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

yawn. who cares?

[Danno 1,228]

Allowing same sex partners to marry would increase the number of stable, recognized family units not decrease it. I suggest you consume Ted Olson's argument as well. It's a convincing conservative argument in support of same sex marriage.

When you speak of stable gay life you must have Rosie in mind?

After her and her girl-toy grafted all those children into their circus like family,,, and filmed the show to "teach america about Gay families".... the called it quits for greener pastures.

Who is Ted Olson that we should care what he thinks?