|
||||||
|
Title: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by BarbaraD on Jun 5th, 2006, 6:03pm Bush made a speech wanting to make a Constitutional Amemenment to ban gay marriages..... To me this is ludicrious What's next [smiley=huh.gif] An amendment to Arrange Marriages so the govt can control our lives totally. After all they'd know who's suited to be mated with who. I don't think this is what our founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the constitution. I really don't think it was intended to get in our bedrooms, but looks like the powers that be don't understand that. Unless we get some of those "career" politicians out of office and soon, BIG BROTHER will completely control our lives. I mean, isn't there enough problems in our country that the "powers that be" could be tending to right now (hunger, medical care, war???) instead of worrying about what the Bible means and spending time (and money) on things that won't amount to a hill of beans. On the other hand - It's MONDAY and I'm in a pissy mood! Hugs BD |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by medic1852 on Jun 5th, 2006, 6:10pm on 06/05/06 at 18:03:48, BarbaraD wrote:
I have been saying for years that the career politicians need to go. Most Americans vote by name recognition and so those they know get the vote. Not always the best man or woman for the job! Rodger PS Pissy = Grump so take a look at the Monday Grump thread thank you and have a good day. ;;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Linda_Howell on Jun 5th, 2006, 6:36pm Quote:
Tomorrow I will vote for a new Govenor for California. It will not be Arnold Schwarzenegger who has probably got the biggest name recognition of any other Govenor in the US. Linda |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Jonny on Jun 5th, 2006, 6:51pm Salute!!.....LOL ;;D http://www.consumptionjunction.com/downloadsnew/cj_57568.wmv |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by kcopelin on Jun 5th, 2006, 7:11pm Linda, Are you going to vote for Gary Coleman, the hooker or the marijuana plantation owner? ::) I love California!!!!! ;;D kathy, who also gets to vote tomorrow. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Charlie on Jun 5th, 2006, 7:49pm It's pure Karl Rove. The Bush team is in the dumper and one way to dig itself out is to make sure the wacko far right comes out to vote. They are not all that happy with Bush at the moment. Rove and his ilk know that it's safe to bring up this stupid ammendment as they can't lose. It will never get 67 votes and would take a decade to run through all the state legislatures. All the stupid the crap it would bring about would only hurt liberals and or gay rights groups. The only sensible thing for Democrats and others to do is say absolutely nothing about it, refuse join panel discussions or make silly speeches. ANYWHERE. That way only wacko neo-cons and pulpit pounders would be banging away, wasting time, spending tons-o-cash and sounding like a Pat Roberston clone in this attempt shift debate away from serious things. http://www.kolobok.wrg.ru/smiles/standart/scare.gif?SSImageQuality=Full If only they would do as I suggest. Wait until after the election, then return the serve. http://www.kolobok.wrg.ru/smiles/standart/punish2.gif?SSImageQuality=Full Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Jonny on Jun 5th, 2006, 8:38pm "Kennedy was released from the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., on Friday. He also had been treated at the clinic over the Christmas holidays." Do we REALLY NEED/WANT someone like this in that position? http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2041110 |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Donna_D. on Jun 5th, 2006, 8:44pm Amazing how this announcement comes out on the 75th anniversary of the AIDS pandemic. http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2032800&page=1 Only one thing I hate more than politics and that is politicians. DD |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Paul98 on Jun 5th, 2006, 8:47pm Hmmm If you think about it, all the laws and "protection" our government force on us causes a dumbing down of society, I think. Seems like a politicians wet dream. Dumb voters that can no longer think for them selves. Job security. Throw All the bums out and have strict term limits. -P. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by stevegeebe on Jun 5th, 2006, 9:01pm Social engineering. Continue the tax base. Steve G |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by JeffB on Jun 6th, 2006, 11:17am California sucks and the people of this state are as bright as a bag of hammers. Never have I seen so many people raise there hands (or ballots) and say " YES, RAISE MY TAXES AND SPEND, SPEND SPEND". And just look at the democrats running, Westly and Angelides, two pencil necked geeks who both have such a checkered pasts. Sorry, I'll take an Austrian actor to run my state any day. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Linda_Howell on Jun 6th, 2006, 11:25am Quote:
Really? I was going to ask what state YOU lived in and I went and checked and lo and behold.......The state of Sacramento.......LMAO!!!!!!!!! ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by ShadowLord on Jun 6th, 2006, 11:26am on 06/06/06 at 11:17:28, JeffB wrote:
Have fun in Austria! Don't forget to write! PFDAN......................................... ShadowLord |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by lashultz on Jun 6th, 2006, 3:55pm Mr. Bush is just trying to divert attention from the real issues facing the country. He has caused the mess we are now into. Personnally I could care less if gays marry or not. There is already a federal law that states a marriage is between a man and a woman. I long for the days of Bill. lashultz |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by vietvet2tours on Jun 6th, 2006, 4:04pm "Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?" "Um... I think so, Brain, but what if the chicken won't wear the nylons?" |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by JeffB on Jun 6th, 2006, 4:09pm Hey, it's your hard earned money those pinheads can't budget. They'll just keep on taking and you'll just keep on smiling and say "Thank you sir may I have another". Just don't get liberals anymore. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Bob P on Jun 6th, 2006, 4:30pm He's just playing to the majority ( the majority of US citizens don't want gay marriage). Keep Gov out of the bedroom and unemployment and medical and employment rights and guys only clubs (like CH). Now you're talkin'!!!!!!!!! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by floridian on Jun 6th, 2006, 6:43pm on 06/06/06 at 16:09:38, JeffB wrote:
Me either. Last time we had a liberal president, the size of the federal government was shrinking and the national debt was being paid off. Now that we have a 'conservative' president, house, and senate, and the defict is sky-rocketing? What in the world is happening when the 'conservatives' are spend-thrifts and the 'liberals' are really conservative? It boggles the mind. Congress has 45 working days between now and the elections. So the conservative leaders decide to tackle the most pressing issues: gay marriage, flag burning, and tax cuts for Paris Hilton. Fuggedabouut the deficit, Iraq, health care, energy prices, or education. Its time to mobilize the base and put money into the pockets of the rich. How many American's even know that people who live off of investment income (stocks, bonds, etc) now pay a lower tax rate (10%) on their dividends than the working man or woman pays on their wages?? And still they vote Republican, on the bizzare belief that the Repubs want to lower their taxes just as much as they want to lower the taxes of the leisure class. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by JeffB on Jun 6th, 2006, 7:11pm For 40 years the Dems had the majority and look what they did, it took a Republican majority to do what you described. I'll admit that the fool in the white house has undone just about everything that was accomplished and has pulled out that check book way too much. My point is the legislature in the great state of California are doing the same thing as Washington. My other point is Californians ARE idiots and DO vote for just about every tax increase that is proposed. We had 4 intiatives last year that were struck down by these fools, as it stands, my 15 -16 year old daughters can just walk into an abortion clinic without me ever knowing. Now I'm pro-choice so don't get me wrong, but how can a minor get a procedure like that without my knowledge or consent? And I agree with just about everyone that this government including the brother of the governor of Florida is a tool and pretty much a lame duck, but look at both sides of the isle. Term limits should be mandatory, Jesus Christ look at the 2 old bats we have, Feinstien and Boxer, they've been in the Senate for years and WTF do they do for us.....squat! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by kcopelin on Jun 6th, 2006, 7:42pm I have a plan for fixin' this mess-particularly career politicians. 1. All elected offices will be filled by lottery-much like the old draft, but way better. The age and residency requirements would be the same. All registered voters would be fair game. 2. Terms would be for 3 years-no more-no less. Salaries would be capped at $75,000 a year. For some that would be an improvement-for others it would be a hardship-they'd get over it. 3. Mental illness, terminal diseases or an IQ of lower than 50 would be the disqualifiers. No other excuses. 4. So, essentially, you could go to your mail box one day and find that you have been appointed Vice-president and that your term will begin in 6 months. This gives you time to get your affairs in order. 5. Any meeting that involves discussion of war-starting one, finishing one, getting in the middle of one-must be conducted with all members holding sleeping infants. there's more to the plan, but this is the main jist of it. ::) whadya think? kathy (who is not totally serious) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Charlie on Jun 6th, 2006, 8:13pm Quote:
Thats right. At last count 51% of the country doesn't want gay marriage and 70% don't want George Bush. It's the GOP that are the tax and spenders. They are ones digging into our pockets. It's the Republicans that have enlarged the Federal government to a size comparable to WWII. They are the ones that have mortgaged us to the Communist Chinese; not the Democrats. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Linda_Howell on Jun 6th, 2006, 8:30pm Quote:
I think that sounds too logical. :-/ (Logic and polititians are at odds. Always.) Linda |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Bob P on Jun 7th, 2006, 10:02am Quote:
Quote:
Thank goodness even liberal California voted down Rob Rhiners measure to tax people who make over $400k to pay for preschool for everyone else. The normal neo-lib attitude of, someone else is more successful than me so they should pay my way. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by clarence on Jun 7th, 2006, 10:39am Rumsfeld is reporting to the President and the Cabinet. He says, "Three Brazilian soldiers were killed today in Iraq." The President says, "Oh, my God!" and he buries his head in his hands. The entire Cabinet is stunned. Usually Bush shows no reaction whatsoever to these reports. Just then, Bush looks up and says, "How many is a brazilian?? My mom sent me that one! Casey - who likes Bush when compared with the other choice we had. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by ABarham on Jun 7th, 2006, 11:18am TERM LIMITS - SAY IT - SPELL IT - VOTE FOR IT I worked for the South Carolina Legislature both as a legislative aide and a lobbyist. Term limits is the only answer. Once they get their heels dug in, and get hooked up with the "good ole' boy" system and the lobbyist find ways around the ethics laws, no one stands a prayer of getting them to do anything that the "BIG BOYS" aren't telling them to do. We might as well have hand puppets. SC has one of the longest sessions of any state and yet this year they couldn't finish by the dedicated final day of session. Therefore, they are coming back for a special session at the cost of $46,000 per day. This is not budgeted money, I guess they just go to the money tree, and pick what they need. Wish they would give me one of those. By the way, I am no longer a lobbyist. I was very successful without having the longevity and power of most, but I knew my way around the system. However, I HATE LOBBYIST WITH A PASSION. There should be term limits for lobbyist too. Wow - new legislators and new lobbyist, who knows how much better that would be. Washington is no different. It all needs to change there too. Kathy, I like your plan. Having real people taking care of the country. What a concept. Okay - rant over Mama Weezer |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Mattrf on Jun 7th, 2006, 12:08pm I agree that gay marriage should not be ok a gay union is fine with me with all the rights and benefits of marriage but it seems that the gay agenda does not want the rights of marriage but the title of marriage and that is something that is just not ok with me. Marriage is something sanctified by god and god did not intend it to be between same sex couples it is to be between a man and a woman. I don’t want anyone to think I am gay bashing, I am not and I feel you have the right to live your life how ever you want and if that includes having a same sex partner and that is what makes you happy more power to you just leave marriage alone and except a union with all the rights of marriage as good enough and we will all be happy. This reminds me of years ago when gays wanted to be treated and have the rights of minorities, that pissed me off as well, sexual preference had no place in the work place and no one should get a job over someone else due to there sexual preference. I know I am going to get crap over my belief but I feel I am also part of the majority in my belief and I am sick of the minority getting there way over the majority, we have just become to PC for our own good. As far as politics are concerned I am from CA and I am a republican, I am also sick of most politicians on both sides, I am tired of hearing nothing but what the other guy did instead of what they will do for us if elected, the mud slinging is just out of control. I can not remember the last time I voted for someone because I liked them and thought they would do a good job, instead I find myself voting for the people I dislike the least and that is a sad state of affairs for all of us. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Bob P on Jun 7th, 2006, 1:09pm Geez, another Californian Republican. I knew I liked you! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Mattrf on Jun 7th, 2006, 2:17pm Thanks Bob, I figured the first responce would be to slam me. [smiley=laugh.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by seasonalboomer on Jun 7th, 2006, 2:32pm on 06/07/06 at 12:08:30, Mattrf wrote:
Okay, if you want to use this line of argument for your "non-bashing" then let's have the government outlaw divorce.... after all if marriage is sanctified by G-O-D, then how can any of us be allowed to break our "covenant" with G-O-D. I would be careful with how much we use god's sanctification for government policy. If you just don't like the idea of homesexual's "doin' it" then go with that argument, but unless you want government mandates on all god sanctified proclamations then you head up the road where the Taliban live today. My 2 cents today. Scott |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Bob P on Jun 7th, 2006, 2:45pm Quote:
because God also gives us the freedom to choose whether to follow or not (He also provides the consequences for the not choice). "1 Corinthians 6:9: Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, " |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by rickyshot on Jun 7th, 2006, 3:21pm I agree with Matt |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Mattrf on Jun 7th, 2006, 3:44pm Everyone has the right to choose, if you choose homosexuality that is your choice and I do not have a problem with your choice. But marriage has always been between a man and a woman and for a very small minority to tell the rest of us that it should change is just wrong. If they truly only want the rights of a married couple then fine call it a union and get it over with, but what I feel they want is to force there way of life down our throats and put it in our faces and that is what bothers me. I have a guy that lives down the street and he has been flying a rainbow flag in front of his house for over a year now, so should I fly a heterosexual flag in front of mine? And for that matter how about a heterosexual sticker on my car or wrist band? Sorry but it really bugs me that they feel they have to advertise and shove it down everyone else’s throat. I don’t want anyone to think I am homophobic, I am not and have had co-workers that where gay and have never had a problem working with them but the agenda drives me crazy and I hate it that we bend to the minority instead of listening to the majority. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by john_d on Jun 7th, 2006, 3:48pm on 06/07/06 at 14:45:55, Bob P wrote:
some versions changed 'effeminate' to 'boy prostitutes', I guess so the feminine straight guys get in the door. I think in earlier protestant times they interpreted this verse to include masturbation as well. Blind and going to hell, the guilt of the protestant teenage male of the 19th century must have been insane. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by seasonalboomer on Jun 7th, 2006, 3:54pm on 06/07/06 at 15:48:11, john_d wrote:
and then in the 70's Jimmy Carter included "lusting in one's heart"..... damn, is there no fun left. ;;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by seasonalboomer on Jun 7th, 2006, 4:01pm on 06/07/06 at 15:44:34, Mattrf wrote:
Matt, everything you write on this subject sounds like a giant "not that there's anything wrong with that." When in reality, everything you've said indicates a high level of discomfort with homesexuals. Don't you think that our society extolls the virtues of heterosexuality in almost everything you see - marketing, movies, advertsiing, TV, books, etc.... Don't you think that gay's feel as though we're jamming heterosexuality down their throats. C'mon, you're going to take offense to a rainbow flag as his "fag freak flag"? I'm a married man, and hetero, but I do believe that many hetero's with views such as yours should spend more time focused on being hetero than worrying about what the gay's are doing down the street. They don't want you. They're not gonna grab you when you go by. Relax. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by BobG on Jun 7th, 2006, 4:13pm This whole thread is a non-issue now. It's been vote down. Changing the U.S. Constitution should never have been even considered for gay marriage. The Constitution is a much too important paper to have it include such a trivial item. If it is to be voted on it should be at the state level, not federal. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Sandy_C on Jun 7th, 2006, 4:19pm OK, here's my two cents, unasked. The key word here is "marriage". If Mary and Joe get married by the local judge, it's considered to be a civil union. If Mary and Joe get married by a minister or priest in a church, it's considered to be a "marriage". I know, before you all jump on me with the legal definitions between marriage and civil union, that does not matter - it is PUBLIC PERCEPTION. Civil unions are legal in all states, to my knowledge. Otherwise, I'm a bastard child . So, Mary and Joe of the church ceremony have all the rights of inheritance, making final decisions for the spouse on his/her deathbead, tax status, etc. Mary and Joe of the civil union (not in a church) are still accorded those same rights. Why cannot Mary and Mary, or Joe and Joe, united in a civil ceremony before a judge or justice of the peace be accorded these same rights? If any two consulting adults, whether male/female, male/male, or female/female decied to enter into a monogamous lifetime relationship with one another, they should all be accorded the same rights. It's our politicians and their holier than thou contisutants who are placing the biblical term "marriage" into this scenario, in my opinion. A union between to people, no matter who those two people might be, should be legal. Off soapbox now,. Sandy |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by clarence on Jun 7th, 2006, 4:23pm I am actually surprised the God didn't come into this conversation until page 2! Does anybody besides me think that it detracts from the unique individuality of the homosexual person when he or she desires those things traditionally (marriage) and biologically (children) that are inherently a part of a heterosexual relationship? In other words, I guess I don't understand why homosexuals, who are proud of their differences and individuality, desire those things which their differences and individuality prevent (especially the issue of children). It seems to me that an embrace of individuality and difference would lead one to also embrace any limitations which came along with that. granted - marriage is a tradition that can be changed. The children issue is another story. Then again, I love my female wife, so, maybe, as Scott inferred, I am just afraid. Casey |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Mattrf on Jun 7th, 2006, 4:25pm I think you are missing the point or at least my point. What you do in the privacy of your own bedroom should stay in the bedroom. This would be a non issue if the minority would just stop trying to change everything in there favor and ignoring what the majority wants. I would feel the same way about any other group that was trying to get there own agenda passed even though the majority does not want it. I do not feel any group should be discriminated against but changing the laws to suet them is not the way to get respect or acceptance, there was a local town here that got sued by gay high school students because they would not let them have a gay pride parade down main street. Come on! This is what I am talking about trying to cram it down the rest of our throats, do you really think the majority of the city wanted to see a bunch of gay students marching down the street oh and yes paying for the police over time to make sure it was peaceful, and yes they did get to have there parade. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by clarence on Jun 7th, 2006, 4:30pm on 06/07/06 at 16:19:55, Sandy_C wrote:
I think you touch on something here that I have been concerned about. As a minister, it bothers me little if we have same-sex unions, performed and sanctioned by the state. And, there will be churches willing to perform these as well. What worries me is when the state comes to me as a minister, who because of religious belief does not feel comfortable marrying two same-sex people, and says that I must, or I am being discriminatory. I can envision a scenerio quite easily where I or my church is held in violation of a discrimination law, and is forced, against religious conviction, to perform same-sex ceremonies (not that anyone would want a ceremony from a reluctant minister). Just something I've wondered about. Quote:
Hey, why stop at monogamous? If we are going to step down this slope, let's be willing to go all the way! Take that dude from Utah off the FBI's most wanted list. Casey |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by JeffB on Jun 7th, 2006, 4:32pm I agree with Matt. I hope no one has a problem with gays, but I do have a problem with it being shoved in my face every time I turn around. It's becoming like a bad South Park episode. And now the educators are teaching what sexual prefrences some of the greats in history are, I mean come on with this crap. I turned on the tv and flipped by VH-1 and it was about which girl was going to get picked for a date with another girl. I'm sorry but this is conditioning if you ask me. I't like I'm being told not only to accept but to embrace it. I lived in San Jose for most of my life and have 2 very good gay friends, I hung out with them daily and golfed with these dudes, they didn't make it a point to "hey, I'm gay, what do think about that". But most gays and libs feel it's their duty to do that. WTF has happened to values and morals? Lets not forget about Marvel and the new lesbian bat woman....I mean come on, enough already. We are turning into europe, even worse....France. Now go out and buy a Sirius radio and get on the with hot chicks on sybians! Respectfully, Beetlejuice! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by seasonalboomer on Jun 7th, 2006, 4:35pm they aren't trying to change it into "their favor" - they're trying to change it so it is at least not against them, everywhere they turn. I'm not missing your point. You make your point clear. A boy and girl walk down the street holding hands. Okay by you. Two boys walk down the same street doing the exact same thing, you're uncomfortable that they're jamming their gayness down your throat. What's the difference? The difference is in your head. Using your example. A group of students want to have a march extolling the virtues of heterosexual marriage, let's call it the "homecoming parade" with its "King and Queen". Okay by you. But, if another group wants to have a march to let people know that being gay is something you can live a life and come to peace with, hmmmmmm.... we're a little uncomfortable with them jamming their alternative lifestyle down our throats. It would be easier for you to come to terms that you're homophobic than for me to try and explain it further. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by clarence on Jun 7th, 2006, 4:53pm on 06/07/06 at 16:35:05, seasonalboomer wrote:
What is the deal with the term "homophobic" anyway? Is anyone really "afraid" of homosexuals. When a "homophob" sees a gay couple kissing, do they run away screaming in terror, much the way my wife does from a spider in the bathroom? That word just doesn't make sense to me. Casey |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Sandy_C on Jun 7th, 2006, 4:59pm Casey Nowhere in my post did I say that churches should be forced to permorm marriage ceremonies between gay people. Each deomonitation, each church, should decide on their own whether to perform, or even acknowledge the existance of a gay marriage. I do not advocate that every church of every or any demonitation be FORCED in to sancifying a gay marriage. I DO advocate that every person be given the same rights as any other person in this country as to life, as to liberty, as to freedom, as to taxation, as to the right to have final decision for their partner's last wishes. If two consenting people of the same gender who have commited their lives to each other are not given these same rights, they are not given the same equality as you or I. They are being discriminated against. I'm sorry, as a minister of the church, this must be very hard for you. But, in my opinon, it's a matter of civil rights to all Americans. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by zwibbs/Scott on Jun 7th, 2006, 5:02pm on 06/06/06 at 11:25:32, Linda_Howell wrote:
|
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by zwibbs/Scott on Jun 7th, 2006, 5:05pm on 06/05/06 at 20:38:04, Jonny wrote:
|
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by john_d on Jun 7th, 2006, 5:16pm on 06/07/06 at 16:23:25, clarence wrote:
It's only a real limitation if there is no way to do it. Homosexuals fall in love too I think, that alone explains most of it. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Jonny on Jun 7th, 2006, 5:35pm on 06/07/06 at 16:32:31, JeffB wrote:
I was getting bored reading this untill I saw the above....LMMFAO!!!! [smiley=laugh.gif] In Boston they wont let the gays march in the ST Patricks parade....why?, cause when they did there were guys having sex on the gay floats...hell one guy was roller blading in a leather thong with his sack hanging out of it. Thats not cool for the kids ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by john_d on Jun 7th, 2006, 5:45pm on 06/07/06 at 17:35:38, Jonny wrote:
LOL, then there's that side of the story. ;;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by floridian on Jun 7th, 2006, 6:56pm My religion considers last rites a sacrament, and a proper burial to be very important, with particular do's and don'ts. Does that mean that me and my God-buddies should pass a law to require every one to comply with our views on what God said people should do? No more cremation, prepare the body in a particular way, say this prayer before burial, that one when filling in the grave, etc. etc.? Or maybe it is enough to give each church the freedom to follow their own interpretation, and use the law only to advance common interests, like sanitation and preservation of graveyards. Churches consider marriage to be another sacrament, and each church wants it done their way. Fine - let each church do it their way. If they don't want to perform a ceremony unless the couple has undergone counseling and prayer preparation, fine. If they require that a couple have the permission of all living parents, fine. Those are religious beliefs that churches can and do teach and enforce. But membership in a church is voluntary in this country, and if a person leaves a church, they are no longer bound by those religious laws. The government has no business enforcing doctrine. The civil ceremonies that are performed by judges, justices of the peace, and ship captains at sea are not civil unions - they are secular marriages and confer greater legal rights than civil unions. Quite apart from any religious beliefs, the law recognizes the marriage contract as the formation of a household corporation. In most places, heteros can obtain the legal protections of marriage merely by shacking up for 7 years. What does that say about the 'sacrament' of marriage? That the sacred is up to the individual and church ... the governments role in recognizing marriage contracts is not about the sacred. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Jonny on Jun 7th, 2006, 7:04pm on 06/07/06 at 18:56:52, floridian wrote:
DAMN!!!....And here I was thinking I could get out of this 16 years of hell with all my shit.....LMAO ;;D Your only the messenger, Flo.....so I guess I cant shoot ya....LOL ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by floridian on Jun 7th, 2006, 7:06pm on 06/07/06 at 19:04:12, Jonny wrote:
I know some excellent lawyers, Jonny. :D Unfortunately, most of your worldly goods would end up going to them instead. :( ;;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Jonny on Jun 7th, 2006, 7:31pm on 06/07/06 at 19:06:25, floridian wrote:
Gee thanks, but I would still buy you a beer (If I had enough money left)....LOL ;;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by tanner on Jun 7th, 2006, 7:42pm This thread has gone on long enough! Why can't gay people be allowed to be just as miserable as the rest of us ? ;;D Linda has left the building ;)........Tim |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by deltadarlin on Jun 7th, 2006, 7:52pm 9545028;start=5 on 06/07/06 at 15:44:34, Mattrf wrote:
Choose? Why in the hell would anyone choose a lifestyle that in a lot of places in this country would bring them nothing but hurt and heartache, to be ostracized, and in some extreme instances, be threatened? One doesn't choose to be homosexual any more than one chooses to be born with blue eyes. Did you choose to be heterosexual or was it something that you knew from an early age? on 06/07/06 at 16:23:25, clarence wrote:
What does being gay/lesbian/whatever have to do with wanting a family? Before we get too much into that issue, we probably need to look at the divorce rate before we go telling gays that they don't need to be married or have children. In 2002, the divorce rate was 32%, so much for the sanctity of marriage. on 06/07/06 at 18:56:52, floridian wrote:
Maybe in your state, but not in most states (actually, not in your state either). There are only 15 states that still recognize common-law-marriages and there are restrictions on those in several of those states. Alabama Colorado District of Columbia Georgia (if created before 1/97) Idaho (if created before 1/96) Iowa Kansas Montana New Hampshire (for inheritance purposes only) Ohio (if created before 10/91) Oklahoma (possibly only if created before 11/1/98. Oklahoma's laws and court decisions may be in conflict about whether common law marriages formed in that state after 11/1/98 will be recognized.) Pennsylvania (if created before 9/03) Rhode Island South Carolina Texas Utah 'darlin |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by clarence on Jun 7th, 2006, 7:54pm on 06/07/06 at 16:59:42, Sandy_C wrote:
No, I know you didn't. Sorry for miscommunicating. I merely meant that your comments made me think about this. I am sorry if I misconstrued you. Casey |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by clarence on Jun 7th, 2006, 8:01pm on 06/07/06 at 19:52:01, deltadarlin wrote:
I didn't say that homosexuals don't need to be married or have children. I said that it seems to me to be somewhat contradictory that a group which literally *prides* itself on its individuality/identity, would want to emulate others. I made no judgement on whetehr this was good or bad, whether I agree or disagree. I merely threw it out there that it is confusing to me. Sorry if I offended, but I didn't mean to. I'm just trying to work through this issue, as completely and comprehensively, as everyone else. Casey |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Charlie on Jun 7th, 2006, 10:23pm What fuckin' waste of energy. Same-sex marriage is far less scary than the 17 severed heads recently found in a village northeast of Baghdad, or the terror suspect accused of conspiring to bring the Canadian prime minister's head home in a basket. Wrestling with Iraq and Iran have worn down W., and he knows, as we do, that a couple of middle-aged guys who want to tie the knot in Provincetown is not the worst threat America faces. I know things are tough in D. C. but does it make sense to use gay love to hatemonger over here when we have so much real hate coming at us from abroad? For me, nothing was so stupid as gay people making the thing an issue some years ago. Seriously, they did as much to almost elect W. as did Katherine Harris and Ralph Nader. How dumb can you get? All it does is make sure more throwbacks occupy the White House and divert attention. Civil Union--bleaugh--(horrible thing to call anything) works for me. I never liked the gay marriage thing but I like even less trying to make it some kind of Constitutional crisis fueled by pulpit pounding Homer Simpsons. It's just what they did in 2004. Republicans are supposed to be the watchers of purse strings but it will cost millions upon millions to waste time on this silly shit...and on both sides. How about spending the money to save some kids from desperate situations and make sure they get three squares a day rather than blow it ranting about how dad and dad are toppling the evidently shaky pillars on the right side of the aisle. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Tom K on Jun 7th, 2006, 10:48pm on 06/07/06 at 22:23:12, Charlie wrote:
WTF? Everything is a conspiricy, Karl Rove...ooohhh...look I just made your blood run cold! ;;D The sky isn't falling, really. If you look at another man's hairy ass and find love, then have at it. This whole thing was to make sure that "Domestic Partners" can be claimed on insurance coverage and have the same rights as a realy marriage. Well, with most companies covering DP's (ha, sick child like humor), the wind has been taken out of their sails. If the gay community wants the same right to marry as the rest of the straight world, then what the hell...let them. Thought the divorce rate was high before? Yes, I know there are plenty of gay couples that stay together. There are also a ton that don't. Even the gay people I know don't want gay marriage. At this point, screw it. Let anyone marry anyone they want. My father isn't covered by insurance anymore, so guess what...I'm going to marry him. Why not? Let's see...I think I need more than one wife, let's make that legal too, while we're at it. Someone else wants to marry a corn dog...there you go, there's your license. ::) Keep up that pace and there will be no line drawn. You have to draw the line somewhere and one group is going to be pissed because of it. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by maffumatt on Jun 7th, 2006, 11:23pm this thread sucks monkey balls |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by rickyshot on Jun 8th, 2006, 7:59am Right again Tom. NO one is allowed to call anything right or wrong anymore. There is just a humanistic blur of relativeism. You can see where that is going and how wonderful our society is today. IT is just plain WRONG. The parts don't fit. Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. Mark my words we won't live to see it but people will be having legal sex and marrying children. Lines better be drawn. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by seasonalboomer on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:31am on 06/08/06 at 07:59:28, rickyshot wrote:
No, that's not true. You can call something right or wrong all you wish. But, own the reasons you feel that way along with the potential dogma that the extremist position may hold. "Not that there's anything wrong with that" is a position most people feel comfortable taking because it is safe. If you have a real problem with homosexuality, own it. On the other hand, if you have a real problem with George W. and your income is based on selling records to country music fans, accept that the position you take may affect your income stream. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Bob P on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:50am Quote:
So do gay male monkeys! Natural - that which functions in the way it was intended. That would make homosexuality an un-natural act. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by BobG on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:54am Quote:
For a gay male monkey, no. For a straight male monkey, maybe no, maybe yes. Depends on how drunk he is. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by unsolved1 on Jun 8th, 2006, 10:25am A little (true) story I want to share: When I went to IU (2000-2003), I lived with my girlfriend of 2.5 years. I was informed by the school that they offered insurance to students. I could get insurance on me but not her. ( I expected that ) BUT .... If I were gay and lived with my 'partner' for at least 6 months ... they would've insured him too. WTF is that ?? I couldn't get insurance on my significant other because I was straight !! [smiley=huh.gif] UNsolved |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by seasonalboomer on Jun 8th, 2006, 10:47am on 06/08/06 at 10:25:31, unsolved1 wrote:
I don't know if that truly was the case then but if you look at the present Health Insurance arrangements for student plans at IU you will find in the FAQ's: "Q. Can I add my family members (spouse and dependents) to my policy? A. The Student Select plan is designed for individual college students only and does not cover spouses and/or dependents. Student Select does, however, comply with any state requirements for newborn coverage." Maybe that was the case back then too? A little misinformation can go a long way on a college campus. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by clarence on Jun 8th, 2006, 10:48am on 06/08/06 at 10:05:10, KingOfPain wrote:
I'm glad somebody got it! Casey |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Melissa on Jun 8th, 2006, 10:48am on 06/07/06 at 22:48:50, Tom K wrote:
[smiley=biggrin.gif] [smiley=sayyes.gif] [smiley=headbanger.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by Mattrf on Jun 9th, 2006, 1:36am A little (true) story I want to share: When I went to IU (2000-2003), I lived with my girlfriend of 2.5 years. I was informed by the school that they offered insurance to students. I could get insurance on me but not her. ( I expected that ) BUT .... If I were gay and lived with my 'partner' for at least 6 months ... they would've insured him too. WTF is that ?? I couldn't get insurance on my significant other because I was straight !! UNsolved ___________________________ Actually, this is Mattrf’s wife, and not Matt himself. I tend to agree with the idea of if they’re going to re-set a standard of society that has been set by nearly every single society in the history of human kind, the we might as well just get rid of any lines whatsoever and let people marry their sofas, corndogs or whatever inanimate object is their particular fascination. However, in many states (i.e., The California Domestic Partner registration) gay couples can register to have ALL the privileges of being married. That includes any death benefits, taxes, health insurance, etc etc etc. So, remind me again why it must be called “marriage” if it’s about rights they already have. Oh, I remember, because they want us (like every other lobbiest out there who has a job) to believe, pay for and support their particular agenda. And I call “bullshit”on it all! You are lobbying and spending all this damned money to doink around with societies that have flourished for thousands upon thousands of years revolving around traditional marriage and children. What went wrong? Well, it started many years ago with “no fault” divorce and it just has taken off from there. Well I say let’s DO a Federal Marriage Amendment and be done with it. If it takes a lot of money (remember all those lobbyists that SOMEBODY’s paying to push the gay agenda) to leave marriage alone since it appears to have worked fairly well until we started dickin’ with it, then let’s do it and get it the hell over with and move on to more productive things. Like the $80 it costs to fill my gas tank, and why my white children can’t get a decent public education in California because the schools are too busy teaching to the “median” as they always do, which median is now made up of “ESL” (English as a Second Language) kids because we don’t enforce our borders! Seems our childrens’ futures are way more important to me than some lobbyist for the Gay Rights Movement shoving the word “marriage” down my throat every time I turn around. And by the way, Matt and I lived together for 3 months before we married. We could NOT, through the government or through my employer, have him put on my insurance as my “domestic partner” because we were NOT gay. You wanna talk about discrimination? What else would you call that? Seems to me gays and lesbians have more rights in this state than I do as a heterosexual. And yes, I have plenty gay friends (I adore them – they call me a “fag hag” and they love me and we go clubbin together and have a blast, so no, I’m not a bigot and they’d be the first to tell you in fact that most of them believe the same thing I do). Although they’re in committed relationships, they see no need to put the label of “marriage” on it as they’ve already gotten all the rights they wanted and/or needed. Some of my gay friends have adopted kids into their “domestic partnerships,” however, I don’t feel some deep-seated bizaare donkey-honkin’ need to comment on that at this time, as it’ll take us down yet another road of dissent. Rant done. Go sign up for Domestic Partnerships with your step-son’s, grandfather’s, illegitimate, pre-pubescent goat for all I care. Just don’t call it “marriage” or you’ll really piss me off, and as my poor, long-suffering, wonderful husband will tell you – ya don’t wanna piss off a redhead with a chip on her shoulder! ~Matt's wife ...not his pre-pubescent goat" |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by chewy on Jun 9th, 2006, 6:35am Hot Damn! Gonna make a fortune on this thread! http://www.gourmetvendor.com/photos/partycarts03.jpg |
||||||
|
Title: Re: Has anyone seen the news today??? Post by rickyshot on Jun 9th, 2006, 7:55am You SAID It matt's wife. You go girl............... |
||||||
|
Clusterheadaches.com Message Board » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1! YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved. |