Discussion: Gay Rights II

[Charlie No-One]

I don't think that's fair. I just don't understand why. They aren't harming anyone. They are expressing themselves and being who they are.

[Marx]

I don't think that's fair. I just don't understand why. They aren't harming anyone. They are expressing themselves and being who they are.

When it comes to overly sexed pride festivals, I think it's easy to see how that can turn off alot of people. I am not a prude by any means, but I don't see how sexing everything up so much can be seen as a good way to gain acceptance. I know it's all about being proud of who you are, but it's also the only thing that some people see.

[spideyboy_1111]

God thats a good spideyboy. You know you want whats best for your child and to be honest I would never want hurt my child but I believe that he and his spouse should uh just get a civil union. But this is long time away and with you guys you've change my mind a little bit but not at this moment.

hey, any change into better understanding and tolerance is a good thing. I know it's not exactly easy for you, but just remember... most people fear or don't like what they don't understand. Sometimes all it takes is knowing someone and truly caring about someone who is in that box you fear... and that one person can make soooo much of a difference. For instance... I've been battling my own issues in the gay community with ageism. I struggle with the fact I'm an agist (i have a hard time wanting to befriend anyone above 35) because essentially i have some father issues... and kinda weirds me out to have friends who are pretty much at the age where they could (in theory) be a father to someone my age. But I met a friend who's turning 39 in a month... and were close. I just had to channel it a bit dif... he's honestly like my older brother now (that i've never had) and all it took for me to begin accepting older gay guys as friends to me was knowing one. Acceptance to what you're not use to can definately be tough, but it becomes very easy once you realize how much you care for the person.

take for instance as well... my aunt and uncle. They're moderately conservative republicans, my uncle is a buisness owner, my aunt is a controlling housewife who get's bored and will go into my uncles office as a boss time to time to control the office... (she's got a power complex), anywho... my aunt takes this extreme control into her childrens lives as well... hell one boyfriend my cousin had she pretty much forced her to date for several years... pressuring her to get engaged to him... and my uncle once said to my dad, that if any of his kids turned out to be gay, he'd disown them. Welp, they both essentially got what they asked for... my cousin jenn came out as a lesbian. And she's been in a very very happy relationship with a girl 7-8 years older then her and honestly she couldn't be happier. It was a shock naturally to both her parents.. but she's always been her daddy's little princess and he at least on the outside didn't change a bit. Sure he might of kept it in.. but you know.. he loves my cousin's girlfriend now.. and he's grown extremely accepting and been very polite and respectful to them both. HELL, last christmas my aunt and uncle allowed my cousin's gf to come home with her for X-mas. My aunt on the other hand... took it alot harder, and it's been a deep personal struggle for her due to her essentially wanting her kids to only fit into this box she created for them so long ago... Well reality is that that just doesn't happen. And my aunt has come along way and like I said, was able to have my cousin and her girlfriend home at a family event together for x-mas, and it was truly touching.

[Charlie No-One]

That kind of activity isn't exclusively gay. You can turn on any TV or pick up any magazine and see that stuff happen straight or gay.

[spideyboy_1111]

After reading some of this thread, what really blows my mind is the whole categorization of different "types" of gay people. I see it from homophobic and homosexuals people alike. The homosexuals who say that "flamers" are a disgrace to the community especially sicken me.

People are people. Let them live their life. I probably would fall into the stereotype most people have for gay people. I like pop/electronic music, I am not hugely into sports, I do theatre, etc. But all that stuff is just superficial to what really matters. Stereotypes mean nothing. To say that I am what is holding the gay rights movement back is disgusting and I commonly see that brought up in this thread in the past and present.

Sorry if this seems like it comes from the middle of nowhere but it has been bothering me for a while.


i'm glad to see you're input, and agree whole hartidly. But alas, it's human nature to put things into boxes... its a odd way most people try to understand things. I know i've been guilty of it. And I try very hard to be accepting of everyone in our group, but even I can't handle some "types"... the largest of which do tend to be flaming ken dolls.. and by ken doll... i mean label whore'd so flawlessly skinned/tanned that there skin litterally looks plastic, circuit partying, stuck up, guys that are in all honestly completely fake... thats really the only type I personally can't stand... but there just the gay equivalent of the "douche bag" so... i don't really have a problem labeling them....

[spideyboy_1111]

I don't think that's fair. I just don't understand why. They aren't harming anyone. They are expressing themselves and being who they are.

I think there is a limit to that... I'm all for pride festivals.. but i don't think there should be a sexual fetish float.. or public nudity/sex (which i have come across) yes... its not out in the open, but I don't really find that "prideful" If you feel proud enough to do it in the open.. you shouldn't be ashamed to do it infront of your parents either... so I just find that a bit shameful is all. Plus I've run into a mix of people... some people, i can truly say flamboyance is honestly who they are... but others.. it comes off as if there trying very hard for attention.. and attention whores have a hard time getting respect for me.

[Marx]

I think there is a limit to that... I'm all for pride festivals.. but i don't think there should be a sexual fetish float.. or public nudity/sex (which i have come across) yes... its not out in the open, but I don't really find that "prideful" If you feel proud enough to do it in the open.. you shouldn't be ashamed to do it infront of your parents either... so I just find that a bit shameful is all. Plus I've run into a mix of people... some people, i can truly say flamboyance is honestly who they are... but others.. it comes off as if there trying very hard for attention.. and attention whores have a hard time getting respect for me.

Exactly.

[spideyboy_1111]

When it comes to overly sexed pride festivals, I think it's easy to see how that can turn off alot of people. I am not a prude by any means, but I don't see how sexing everything up so much can be seen as a good way to gain acceptance. I know it's all about being proud of who you are, but it's also the only thing that some people see.

and to be fair.. the majority of a pride festival isnt like that... but sadly those are the parts that get focused on the most. (yes we do have guys with shirts off and sometimes in only underwear... but that is something we hold with us.. and to me its nothing more then seeing a girl in a barely there bikini on tv or at the beach (which is extremely easy to walk outside and find) but the lewd public acts (which are few and far between, pride is def not one big orgy in the streets), are the things the people who are against us focus on.. and are the things that hurt us as a whole. So I get very torn on the subject. I say let drag queens (i better be allowed to say it in there offcial title lightening lol) be drag queens, and let leather dads be leather dads.. but we don't need to see your junk in public, nor do we need to see public sex acts or exposure.

[spideyboy_1111]

That kind of activity isn't exclusively gay. You can turn on any TV or pick up any magazine and see that stuff happen straight or gay.

for stuff that truly fits that definition... i agree. But you don't go to many public street fairs or a thanksgiving day parade and see public sex acts or men and wearing nothing but thongs or stripping in public. which is my point.

yes some events can call for that (ive heard of music festivals where woman can roam topless, nudist colonies, burning man, etc...) but these arn't wide spread public events centered around family and acceptance.

[Marx]

and to be fair.. the majority of a pride festival isnt like that... but sadly those are the parts that get focused on the most. (yes we do have guys with shirts off and sometimes in only underwear... but that is something we hold with us.. and to me its nothing more then seeing a girl in a barely there bikini on tv or at the beach (which is extremely easy to walk outside and find) but the lewd public acts (which are few and far between, pride is def not one big orgy in the streets), are the things the people who are against us focus on.. and are the things that hurt us as a whole. So I get very torn on the subject. I say let drag queens (i better be allowed to say it in there offcial title lightening lol) be drag queens, and let leather dads be leather dads.. but we don't need to see your junk in public, nor do we need to see public sex acts or exposure.

I know that it isn't the entirety of the parade, but it is what gets the most attention. I'm all for people being who they are, but the public nudity and things such as that shouldn't really be celebrated in a parade meant to inspire pride and awareness.

As for the drag queen term, that isn't what Lightning was referring to. He was referring to people using 'queen' as a derogatory slur for gay people.

[spideyboy_1111]

I know that it isn't the entirety of the parade, but it is what gets the most attention. I'm all for people being who they are, but the public nudity and things such as that shouldn't really be celebrated in a parade meant to inspire pride and awareness.

i agree, which is why im all for it being kept in the private tented areas (which cost money to enter and i believe have an age limit) but that's not always the case... honestly the only thing that bothered me in the LA pride parade this summer was a float for the store 665 (one number away from hell) which is a leather/s&m store.. and they had guys in leather, with a boy in leather tied down on a table, and he was getting spanked (there was no nudity, but i found that a bit tasteless since kids are there). Everything else i saw, the drag, the go go boys, the dykes on bikes (thats there official name), many activists groups, gay scuba divers, gay horseback riders... etc... etc... etc... all that stuff was perfectly ok with me. And I felt it showed us all very well and in good light. And in all honesty, i'm fine with the leather daddies and such being in a parde... but no assless chaps, and no simulation of what goes on to get one off in public at a family attire.

[spideyboy_1111]

and for those just coming in and reading... please don't assume that that is what a gay pride festival is about... trust me.. i'm 23 and this past year finally went to my first one... after years of going "egh... i really don't wanna go to that tacky, debauchery" but I had alot of fun with my friends, and really felt like a part of the community. And it truly was a good experience.

[Dude101]

To be honest when say gays shouldn't be married, im referring to my communtie where it feels to imo that they are just fake and want attention. I think I could hang out with a Neil Patrick Harris type gay person. But to me the black gay people they are probably gay but exaggerating their gayness to annoying levels.

[spideyboy_1111]

To be honest when say gays shouldn't be married, im referring to my communtie where it feels to imo that they are just fake and want attention. I think I could hang out with a Neil Patrick Harris type gay person. But to me the black gay people they are probably gay but exaggerating their gayness to annoying levels.

you can't differentiate that though. everyone is diff.. some gay guys just want attention as much as some girls and some other guys do..

look at it this way.. most gay guys don't want to get married just for attention, so you don't have to worry about any of that :)

[Marx]

i agree, which is why im all for it being kept in the private tented areas (which cost money to enter and i believe have an age limit) but that's not always the case... honestly the only thing that bothered me in the LA pride parade this summer was a float for the store 665 (one number away from hell) which is a leather/s&m store.. and they had guys in leather, with a boy in leather tied down on a table, and he was getting spanked (there was no nudity, but i found that a bit tasteless since kids are there). Everything else i saw, the drag, the go go boys, the dykes on bikes (thats there official name), many activists groups, gay scuba divers, gay horseback riders... etc... etc... etc... all that stuff was perfectly ok with me. And I felt it showed us all very well and in good light. And in all honesty, i'm fine with the leather daddies and such being in a parde... but no assless chaps, and no simulation of what goes on to get one off in public at a family attire.

I don't see a problem with keeping all of the sex/nudity behind closed doors...it's actually putting it into the parade that I see as a problem.

[spideyboy_1111]

I don't see a problem with keeping all of the sex/nudity behind closed doors...it's actually putting it into the parade that I see as a problem.

parade usually doesnt from what i understand.. but maybe assless chaps but other then that nothing. the nudity in which i speak usually comes from the alley's, shady doorways, the bars, and if its a crowded partying street. which in it's defense isn't really the "family" portions.

[Kelly]

There have been some questionable floats in the Gay Pride Parades, and even the Car Art Parades that we have had here in Houston. They don't necessarily cross the line with nudity, but they are far, far, far from the mainstream, and I don't think it helps the Gay Rights cause....

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Do you think it hurts they're cause?

Because certainly, like the "Tea Parties" and this "9/12" thing, it'll probably boost morale for said base.

Then again, it's a festive thing. Comparable to the Puerto Rican Day Parade or something.

Which, I suppose, for said base is a good thing since they're feeing better about what can be done for whatever cause they believe in. Or just feeling better about being proud of who they are.

[Marx]

Do you think it hurts they're cause?

Because certainly, like the "Tea Parties" and this "9/12" thing, it'll probably boost morale for said base.

Then again, it's a festive thing. Comparable to the Puerto Rican Day Parade or something.

Which, I suppose, for said base is a good thing since they're feeing better about what can be done for whatever cause they believe in. Or just feeling better about being proud of who they are.

Honestly, I think it does.

[wiegeabo]

Honestly, I think it does.


To some degree, I agree. Probably a majority (or at least a significant number of) people in this country would have issue with very sexual or risque behavior from straight people in parades and festivals. So they're going to have at least the reaction to the same behavior from homosexuals. With all our talk about freedom, compared to the rest of the world, the US is rather puritanical when it comes to sex.

It may boost morale within the homosexual community to see such things (or not), but it's likely not going to help get people on their side in issues of gay marriage.

[spideyboy_1111]

Honestly, I think it does.

odd thing is.. there can be similar floats in the much more public mardis gras pardades in new orleans. yet those are deemed ok and forgotten about... Pride just doesnt represent acceptance... but also celebration of what we've conquered. So you're always gonna get both sides of the coin.

[Marx]

odd thing is.. there can be similar floats in the much more public mardis gras pardades in new orleans. yet those are deemed ok and forgotten about... Pride just doesnt represent acceptance... but also celebration of what we've conquered. So you're always gonna get both sides of the coin.

I can understand that spidey. To be fair though, Mardi Gras isn't meant to be about acceptance and awareness. It's just a partay! :oldrazz::cwink:

[spideyboy_1111]

I can understand that spidey. To be fair though, Mardi Gras isn't meant to be about acceptance and awareness. It's just a partay! :oldrazz::cwink:

but... like i said.. Pride is very much a party/celebration too. its 50% of bother celebration and 50% acceptance. And its going to mean one of those more then the other to everyone.

[Marx]

Yeah...it's kind of a double standard.

[spideyboy_1111]

as well as a double edged sword... and honestly i learned this year, in one of the most famous gay areas for that matter (West Hollywood), Pride was a nice mix of both, and was not nearly as deboucherous as I thought it'd be.

[Marx]

I agree with your idea of keeping the nudity/sex promotions in a tented area or something like that with an age requirement. If it were kept out of direct sight, it probably wouldn't be an issue at all. You know?

[spideyboy_1111]

problem is it usually is... and in all honesty the only things that even usually make the news are guys in undies and drag queens.. and that's just very much a part of the gay community as it is girls in bikinis among the straight. And that's just peoples uncomfortableness right there showing, which that's there problem. not ours.

[Marx]

problem is it usually is... and in all honesty the only things that even usually make the news are guys in undies and drag queens.. and that's just very much a part of the gay community as it is girls in bikinis among the straight. And that's just peoples uncomfortableness right there showing, which that's there problem. not ours.

That's true.

[wiegeabo]

Unfortunately, their problem becomes your problem because those who are vocally against seeing such things (the double standard is beyond them) tend to influence public opinion against equal rights the most. Which is why they use those images against the gay population.

So the more 'unseemly' elements of pride parades/festivals will probably continue to hinder progress. Ironically, by not being so prideful (or at least not in those ways), the opposition would have less ammunition. Is it fair? Far, far from it. But life is anything but fair. It's just the reality of this sad situation.

[spideyboy_1111]

Unfortunately, their problem becomes your problem because those who are vocally against seeing such things (the double standard is beyond them) tend to influence public opinion against equal rights the most. Which is why they use those images against the gay population.

So the more 'unseemly' elements of pride parades/festivals will probably continue to hinder progress. Ironically, by not being so prideful (or at least not in those ways), the opposition would have less ammunition. Is it fair? Far, far from it. But life is anything but fair. It's just the reality of this sad situation.

well drag queens and guys in undies... have been there since the begining. there not going anywhere, and our progression has still been going forward with that stigma. may delay it... but i don't believe in censorship at all.. let alone applying one to a culture.

[Marx]

I think the real issue to some is with the bondage scenes and leather guys. (Which we all agree should be kept in private areas.)

[spideyboy_1111]

I can agree that fetishes shouldn't be publicly displayed or referenced.

[Dude101]

In reference to the mardi Gras thing tho, Straight is cool and gays taboo thats why it is accepted.

[Dude101]

edit

[spideyboy_1111]

In reference to the mardi Gras thing tho, Straight is cool and gays taboo thats why it is accepted.

:whatever:, trust me.. there's plenty of gays in mardis gras too

[CaptainClown]

In Rio (I think) they have a parade where the men dress up in drag and it is just cultural. I can't really specify where specifically but somewhere in South America.

Greeks had homosexuality practiced as well as The Edo period in Japan I believe..

However there is that whole NAMBLA situation which hurts peoples views on homosexuality as that is what they think it is.

[spideyboy_1111]

In Rio (I think) they have a parade where the men dress up in drag and it is just cultural. I can't really specify where specifically but somewhere in South America.

Greeks had homosexuality practiced as well as The Edo period in Japan I believe..

However there is that whole NAMBLA situation which hurts peoples views on homosexuality as that is what they think it is.

i honestly don't here many associations with NAMBLA being said as what all gays are.. or anything like that. sure theres some people thinking gay = pedo, but its not a major thing you hear... you hear more about marrying animals and being promiscuous then pedos

[Marx]

ELTON JOHN DENIED ADOPTION OF 14 MONTH OLD UKRAINIAN BOY
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/14/elton-john-deemed-too-old_n_285667.html

He was denied because of his age and the fact that he isn't traditionally married?

:facepalm:

[wiegeabo]

ELTON JOHN DENIED ADOPTION OF 14 MONTH OLD UKRAINIAN BOY
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/14/elton-john-deemed-too-old_n_285667.html

He was denied because of his age and the fact that he isn't traditionally married?

:facepalm:


I could actually see this being valid depending on the legal rights granted by civil marriages in Britain.

Age can be a valid excuse. You want to be sure the adoptive parents will have steady income (certainly not a problem in Elton's case) and that they'll live long enough for the child to become an adult. And they want to avoid having to take the child from his home and put him with another family, or worse, back into the system.

So, if Britain's laws don't guarantee the partner of an adoptive parent legal rights over the child, and if Elton died while the child was still a minor, his partner might not be allowed to care for the boy.

[Mister Sinister]

Jerrold Nadler introduces Respect for Marriage Act to repeal DOMA

9_SXshoMuIo

Interesting thing is it's supported by DOMA co-sponsor Bob Barr. Let's hope it passes.

[Marx]

PREJEAN: 'GOD CHOSE ME TO OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE'
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27317.html

...

[Kurosawa]

PREJEAN: 'GOD CHOSE ME TO OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE'
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27317.html

...

Outer beauty covers up inner ugliness, hatred and bigotry. Unfortunate but that's the way it is. Maybe she'll grow up and get a more open view of reality someday.

[Red Mask]

PREJEAN: 'GOD CHOSE ME TO OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE'
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27317.html

...

She lost me at 'God'...:whatever:

[Kurosawa]

Yeah, pretty arrogant and presumptuous of her, ain't it?

[CaptainClown]

God told me to fight against people like her with the beauty which is called interpretive dance.

[Schlosser85]

The arrogance required to claim that God chose you as His voice is downright blasphemous, and no real Christian would be presumptuous enough to claim such a thing.

Carrie's Christianity is as fake as her boobs.

[MaskedManJRK]

The arrogance required to claim that God chose you as His voice is downright blasphemous, and no real Christian would be presumptuous enough to claim such a thing.

Carrie's Christianity is as fake as her boobs.

Basically. And if God actually chose her to fight gay marriage, then He's going to lose. Hard. :doh:

[Ion Kenshin]

God didn't choose anyone to fight gay marriage because there is nothing wrong with gay marriage. I love the people that "god chose" to do something. Mind you if someone sat next to these devout religious people and said "I am god and have come back to Earth and you are the first I have revealed myself to" those people would move to another seat or try to have that person sent to a mental hospital.

[Mister Sinister]

Bill Maher said "If God really cares about beauty pageants, he IS gay".

Besides, didn't the 9/11 pilots believe their God chose them?

[Mister Sinister]

Edit

[Red Mask]

The arrogance required to claim that God chose you as His voice is downright blasphemous, and no real Christian would be presumptuous enough to claim such a thing.

Carrie's Christianity is as fake as her boobs.

However, I don't think fake boobs disqualifies you from beauty pageants. The judges have to look deeper.

[hippie_hunter]

The judges have to look deeper.

That statement makes me feel dirty :csad:

[Marx]

OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF IOWANS SAY THAT 'GAY MARRIAGE' HAS NOT IMPACTED THEIR LIVES
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/21/poll-92-of-iowans-believe_n_293539.html

[metr0man]

I've said this some time ago, but regarding hardcore opposition to gay marriag,e I've never seen a group fight so hard for something so futile. It's so clear that year by year attitudes are softening. MOre and more people have moved into the "Grossly obese Fat chicks in super tight clothing" territory.

(what I mean by that is, many people think gigantic obese chicks in tight clothes, with their bellies hanging out, is kind of disgusting. Yet nobody gives a **** enough to be outraged by it, and if some politician seriously fought against it, people would stare at him like he's a lunatic. Crude example, but I think its sort of accurate. While not loving 'gayness' mostly people just don't give a ****, and even to them, it just seems ugly and unseemly to be seriously targeting these people).

It's so obviously happening.

It must be frightening for the uber-religious.
You might get GAY COOTIES!

[Schlosser85]

It must be frightening for the uber-religious.
You might get GAY COOTIES!

That's about their maturity/intelligence level.

Teh ghey are icky wicky!:wow:

[StorminNorman]

I stepped in the gay once. It was rather sticky :(

[Marx]

:hehe:

[Ion Kenshin]

No worries. It will come right off with some ice water :awesome:

[spideyboy_1111]

yay... only like 2-3 weeks till im in DC :D

[Marx]

yay... only like 2-3 weeks till im in DC :D

:yay:http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[wiegeabo]

I don't really like her, but I liked what she had to say.

Joy Behar on gay adoption (http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/09/23/behar.gay.adoption/index.html)


NEW YORK (CNN) -- On a recent tour of a Ukrainian orphanage, Elton John and his partner met Lev, a 14-month old HIV-positive boy.

They immediately fell in love with the child, but their possible bid to adopt the adorable tiny dancer was rejected by Yuriy Pavlenko, Ukraine's Family, Youth and Sports Minister.

Mr. Pavlenko, here are some tips about family, youth and sports. Family doesn't mean a huddle of orphans sharing a few soiled mattresses, it's not youth if you die of AIDS before you reach kindergarten, and wrestling over dinner scraps is not a sport.

But that could be Lev's fate now, because the Ukrainian government said Elton and his beau David Furnish are too old to adopt the boy. It sounds like the real reason is they're too gay.

John and Furnish tied the knot in 2005, becoming one of Britain's first gay civil unions, but Ukraine doesn't recognize gay unions.

Ukrainian Orthodox Church spokesman Father Georgy Gulyaev called Elton John a sinner and said, "thank God it's impossible under Ukrainian law for [him] to adopt a child." Apparently in the Ukraine, God's No. 1 priority is preventing gay couples from giving sick kids a better life. God would never want something like that to happen.

Father Gulyaev said homosexuality "represents the dead end of human development." That's odd, I thought the dead end of human development was represented by 14th century thinking like his. This guy's head is stuck in the Dark Ages. He hasn't even progressed to the Middle Ages yet.

Some conservative religious leaders like to harp about the "damage" to families done by gay marriage, as if traditional marriage is so perfect. Since many of them have taken vows of celibacy, they've never witnessed firsthand the damage dinner with the in-laws can cause (one of the few advantages of the celibate life, I guess).

There are even a few married Bible-thumpers spending their time trying to keep sex out of our lives -- yet they talk about sex more than anyone! Sex is usually the first and only factor they consider when judging -- I mean, when "dispensing enlightenment upon" -- others.

Sure, Elton John may be gay, but he's also a renowned musician, a celebrated humanitarian, and has been knighted by the Queen of England. In fact, for some people he is the Queen of England.

Plus, there's no downside to gay adoption. In the United States, organizations like the National Adoption Center, the American Psychological Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics all agree that having homosexual parents does not negatively affect children.

But you know what does negatively affect children? Growing up with no parents. So now 14-month-old Lev is stuck in some depressing orphanage that makes Guantanamo Bay look like the presidential suite at the Waldorf.

He'll likely end up in foster homes and -- if he lives long enough -- maybe he can turn into a bitter, vodka-swilling drunk. All because the Ukrainian government won't let him be adopted by two loving gay parents who are fabulously rich and want to give him a home with the best healthcare available, dressed in Versace jammies and cashmere Huggies. Not to mention all the play dates with Brangelina's kids.

Let's hope Sir Elton finds a different, more tolerant country willing to let him be a poor child's loving father.

[Marx]

Behar is getting her own show on HLN.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/23/steve-king-same-sex-marri_n_297569.html



GOP Congressman Steve King (Iowa): Gay Marriage Is "Socialism"



Steve King: "Jackass".

[wiegeabo]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/23/steve-king-same-sex-marri_n_297569.html




Steve King: "Jackass".


Um...by his logic, marriage itself is a socialist concept. If gay marriage leads to socialist pooling of resources, and straight marriage leads to gay marriage, then straight marriage leads to socialist pooling of resources.

So he either just argued against the thing he wants to 'protect', or his argument is invalid. Why is it wrong for public funds and resources to be spent on gay marriage, but not wrong for them to go to straight marriages?

[Marx]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/23/steve-king-same-sex-marri_n_297569.html




Steve King: "Jackass".

:facepalm:

Some people need a little common sense.

[Mister Sinister]

Dick Cheney and Ted Olson are socialists, you heard it here first.

[Ring Deacon]

Althought I have no problem with gay marriage, I don't think it will be made legal on a national level. The main reason for this even though the President and quite a few Senators may be for it, many of the people who elect them are not. So if these political leaders were to pass a law for it, they would not be re-elected. It sucks that they are just worried about votes and not what they truely believe in, but that is the life of a law maker.

[Schlosser85]

GOP Congressman Steve King (Iowa): Gay Marriage Is "Socialism"




Eh?

[Marx]

BILL CLINTON SPEAKS OUT ON DECISION TO SUPPORT SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/25/clinton-speaks-out-on-decision-to-support-same-sex-marriage/

[Kelly]

Althought I have no problem with gay marriage, I don't think it will be made legal on a national level. The main reason for this even though the President and quite a few Senators may be for it, many of the people who elect them are not. So if these political leaders were to pass a law for it, they would not be re-elected. It sucks that they are just worried about votes and not what they truely believe in, but that is the life of a law maker.

Obama is for Civil Marriage, not Same Sex Marriage.....


It would be a partisan vote, but if you think that that Democrat Congressmen would not be voted back into office because of this? IMO, you are wrong.

The real problem for Same Sex Marriage legislation is not a vote, but the fact that right now it is way down the page on Congress' "Things To Do List".....and those same Congressmen may not be voted back in office for other reasons that are coming up, not the fact that they are for Same Sex Marriage.

[Marx]

Wow! We've reached over 6,000 posts in this thread! http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[Marx]

GAY OBAMA AIDE IS NEW TARGET OF FOX NEWS
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/01/kevin-jennings-obama-aide_n_306950.html

:facepalm:

[Ion Kenshin]

I stopped readin at promote homesexuality and drug use/abuse to kids. Cause all gay be people do is get drunk and rape babies:whatever::whatever:. I can't wait till these naive, ignorant, old world jackasses die off.

[Marx]

I stopped readin at promote homesexuality and drug use/abuse to kids. Cause all gay be people do is get drunk and rape babies:whatever::whatever:. I can't wait till these naive, ignorant, old world jackasses die off.

It's pretty pathetic Kenshin.

[Great1]

GAY OBAMA AIDE IS NEW TARGET OF FOX NEWS
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/01/kevin-jennings-obama-aide_n_306950.html

:facepalm:

Honestly, I couldn't care less about what Fox News does anymore.

[Ion Kenshin]

It's pretty pathetic Kenshin.
It really is. And where did the pedo/gay thing come from. I swear when a pedophile is arrested and jailed I never here anyone calling him or her gay. Yet being gay makes you and insta-pedo WTF!!!!

[Pink Ranger]

It really is. And where did the pedo/gay thing come from. I swear when a pedophile is arrested and jailed I never here anyone calling him or her gay. Yet being gay makes you and insta-pedo WTF!!!!

Because being a pederast who goes after girls is considered less wrong than being one who goes after little boys (both should be equally wrong, IMO).

Look at how much sympathy Roman Poanski gets from the arts community.

Look at how casually we use jail-bait images of girls in sexual marketing.

Look at how much tolerance there is for child marriages involving underage girls and older men in those backwards religious communities. I know these guys have been arrested, but only after a long, protracted operation and legal process. If there was a religious community out there where 44 year old men were having 13-14 YO boys being sexually subservient to them, the government would send in the Navy SEALs to break that crap up.

[Schlosser85]

The names of these organizations annoy me....The Family Research Council...yet they actively set out to destroy any family that isn't like theirs.

[Marx]

OBAMA TO BE KEYNOTE SPEAKER AT HRC DINNER
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/05/obama-to-be-keynote-speaker-at-hrc-dinner/

[Bathead]

The names of these organizations annoy me....The Family Research Council...yet they actively set out to destroy any family that isn't like theirs.

And those types of organizations always claim gay marriage will ruin the family, like heterosexuals have such a spotless record on that. If heteros haven't killed off the family by now with their antics, nothing will.

[Schlosser85]

And those types of organizations always claim gay marriage will ruin the family, like heterosexuals have such a spotless record on that.


Like parents disowning their children for being gay doesn't ruin the family...but then that's the child's fault....he just shouldn't have been gay...

[BlackLantern]

so I go to visit my dad in Maine this weekend and learned that a Proposition 1 is on the ballet for this election cycle.....similar to prop 8 and looking to push gay marriage out of Maine.....all the anti-1 commericals Ive seen have led me to believe it will pass because I dont think anyone outside of the Augusta or Portland areas support it

[BillyZaned]

Well, Cheney came out for Gay Marriage, something about Gitmo staying open, and they can all live there, minus his daughter....

[Marx]

And those types of organizations always claim gay marriage will ruin the family, like heterosexuals have such a spotless record on that. If heteros haven't killed off the family by now with their antics, nothing will.

Exactly. Heterosexual people have done more than enough damage to the institution of marriage.

Like parents disowning their children for being gay doesn't ruin the family...but then that's the child's fault....he just shouldn't have been gay...

Parents who do that make me sick.

so I go to visit my dad in Maine this weekend and learned that a Proposition 1 is on the ballet for this election cycle.....similar to prop 8 and looking to push gay marriage out of Maine.....all the anti-1 commericals Ive seen have led me to believe it will pass because I dont think anyone outside of the Augusta or Portland areas support it

Are these the same people that led the fight in California? I know they were heading to Maine and other areas that supported marriage equality.

[BlackLantern]

actually the same people who supported 8 in California are working with the supporters of it Maine....

its a very rustic state...these are people who still have an issue with women and minorities having equal rights....

[Marx]

actually the same people who supported 8 in California are working with the supporters of it Maine....

its a very rustic state...these are people who still have an issue with women and minorities having equal rights....

For some reason...I thought that Maine was more progressive than that.

[BlackLantern]

maybe Portland and Augusta...the county where my dad lives is all small towns and such...and that's what most of Maine is

[Dude101]

Eh Maine will take it off, and if thats what they want good for them.

[Marx]

I still think it's wrong for the majority to decide the rights of the minority.

[Lightning Strykez!]

GAY OBAMA AIDE IS NEW TARGET OF FOX NEWS
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/01/kevin-jennings-obama-aide_n_306950.html

:facepalm:

The unmitigated gall of these people....first they attack minorities. Now they've turned their attention against the gays. I'm so sick of the right...they are dripping with hypocrisy.

[Kurosawa]

The unmitigated gall of these people....first they attack minorities. Now they've turned their attention against the gays. I'm so sick of the right...they are dripping with hypocrisy.

It's a philosophy based in assumed superiority and cruelty, so it never surprises me.

[wiegeabo]

Besides, with the economy the way it is, if the right didn't have their hypocrisy, what would they have left?

[BlackLantern]

I still think it's wrong for the majority to decide the rights of the minority.

isn't having the courts decide everything a bit off as well??

[Marx]

isn't having the courts decide everything a bit off as well??

When it comes to a case of equal rights, I believe that a court decision is appropriate. I have a hard time believing that it should be acceptable for a majority to decide the rights of the minority.

[wiegeabo]

isn't having the courts decide everything a bit off as well??

That's different. The courts aren't making law. They're throwing out laws that are unconstitutional. Yes, this sets a precedent, but as we saw in California,if you change the constitution, the courts can't really do anything.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

When it comes to a case of equal rights, I believe that a court decision is appropriate. I have a hard time believing that it should be acceptable for a majority to decide the rights of the minority.

Agreed.

It's strange enough as it is that people get to "vote" on people having rights.

[BlackLantern]

Agreed.

It's strange enough as it is that people get to "vote" on people having rights.

I agree as well....to get a proposition on a ballot you need petitions and official support....the issue here is that on most state constitutions it does NOT explicitly state that marriage is between a man and a woman....its a matter of language and a loophole being exploited

[wiegeabo]

I agree as well....to get a proposition on a ballot you need petitions and official support....the issue here is that on most state constitutions it does NOT explicitly state that marriage is between a man and a woman....its a matter of language and a loophole being exploited

But the same thing happened with Brown vs. Board of Education. The US Constitution didn't specifically say that segregation was illegal, so local laws were passed saying so. But the Supreme Court agreed that separate but equal isn't actually equal, and violates the equal protection under the law clause of the 14th Amendment.

California was similar. A law was passed that defined marriage as only between a man and woman. But the court threw it out because it violated the equal protection under the law clause of California's constitution. So the opponents of same sex marriage had to use Prop 8 to change the state constitution so the courts couldn't overturn it again.

[BlackLantern]

and now it looks like the same thing will happen in Maine

[Marx]

Let's hope not.

[wiegeabo]

If it gets added to their constitution, then yeah, it'll be just like California.

A number of states, like Iowa, don't allow their constitutions to be changed by the public like California. So what we'll probably see are state like California against gay marriage preventing it in their constitutions. The remaining states allowing it (either through law, or the court throwing it out), and eventually going to the US Supreme Court for a final decision.

[BlackLantern]

from what I saw and heard over the weekend, it looks like its going to....the support for Proposition 1 is being spearheaded by the same group that pushed Prop 8 in CA....they are outgunning the opposition

[Marx]

DC GAY MARRIAGE BILL UNSTOPPABLE?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/07/gay-marriage-dc-samesex-m_n_312276.html

[BlackLantern]

take the victories where you can get them.....Iowa is the prime example that this can be passed in the most unlikely of places

[Marx]

The passing in Iowa was shocking!

[Marx]

STEWART TAKES ON OBAMA OVER 'DADT'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/07/stewart-pummels-obama-for_n_312235.html

[metr0man]

GAY OBAMA AIDE IS NEW TARGET OF FOX NEWS
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/01/kevin-jennings-obama-aide_n_306950.html

:facepalm:

I'm so tired of social conservatism.

What's especially galling is we all know over the past 50 years we've been trending towards more acceptance, not less, of gays.

Does ANYONE really think we're going to do a u-turn here and go backwards on gay acceptance? We ALL know whether we admit it or not, that 50 years from now, gays are going to be even less of a big deal then they are now.

I've never seen people fight so hard for something so obviously futile.

[BlackLantern]

STEWART TAKES ON OBAMA OVER 'DADT'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/07/stewart-pummels-obama-for_n_312235.html

He had the Secretary of the Navy on last night...and SecNav put it very well...."we follow orders, if we're given a mission we get it done"...repealing DADT would take a ****load of political capital

[Marx]

'PROTECT MARRIAGE WASHINGTON' RELEASES 'SACRED GROUND' AD
http://vimeo.com/6853620

:facepalm:

[Paradoxium]

If they want to be consistent they should abolish divorces as well. Just saying.

[spideyboy_1111]

heading to DC in less then 48 hours :)

[Marx]

OBAMA NOMINATES FIRST OPENLY GAY AMBASSADOR
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/07/david-huebner-obamas-firs_n_313267.html

[Paradoxium]

Ambassador to Uruguay. How uh... underwhelming :dry:

[Marx]

I'm waiting to see if he will actually address 'DADT' at his speech this weekend, or dodge it entirely.

[BlackLantern]

Ambassador to Uruguay. How uh... underwhelming :dry:

baby steps, man

[Marx]

Mary Cheney is pregnant again.

[Superman]

Rep. Gohmert - Compares Gays To Beastiality and Necrophilia!!!

vsft5uQP66c

Beastiality? Necrophilia?? Are you Fu***** kidding me!!? :doh::cmad:

This is not some fringe commentator on Fox News, This is an elected Republican official that has real power.

I am so sick of people on the Right saying that the "Hate Talk" just comes from people on the fringe that have nothing to do with the GOP when time and time again we've seen crap like this coming from Elected Republicans.

It's not just the "Fringe" that is pushing this crap, It's the GOP it's self. :whatever:

[Schlosser85]

:doh:

[Sloth7d]

5 points. I honestly think he logics almost as good as Miss South Carolina.

[Marx]

Rep. Gohmert - Compares Gays To Beastiality and Necrophilia!!!

vsft5uQP66c

Beastiality? Necrophilia?? Are you Fu***** kidding me!!? :doh::cmad:

This is not some fringe commentator on Fox News, This is an elected Republican official that has real power.

I am so sick of people on the Right saying that the "Hate Talk" just comes from people on the fringe that have nothing to do with the GOP when time and time again we've seen crap like this coming from Elected Republicans.

It's not just the "Fringe" that is pushing this crap, It's the GOP it's self. :whatever:

:facepalm:

I have no words...

[Dude101]

Two things.

1.What is wrong dadt. Nobody gives a **** about your orientation.

2. Secondly if the majority of people don't want something, then don't do it. If people dont want gays to get married then gays shouldn't get married. Your not gonna change peoples mind.

[Dude101]

double posy

[BlackLantern]

every tax paying American citizen should have the same rights as every other tax paying American citizen, regardless of race, religion, or sexual orientation

[Marx]

Two things.

1.What is wrong dadt. Nobody gives a **** about your orientation.

2. Secondly if the majority of people don't want something, then don't do it. If people dont want gays to get married then gays shouldn't get married. Your not gonna change peoples mind.

1. DADT forces you to hide a part of yourself. If you actually disclose your orientation to another serviceman or woman, and they report you, you will most likely be booted from the armed forces. Fair?

2. You should never leave the rights of the minority in the hands of the majority.

[Dude101]

1. Eh some people might feel uncomfortable with that person and in combat that just cant happen. I mean I don't want to your gay, so who cares if you tell kick your ass out and I thats very fair.
2. On some issues like this one the majority should be able to make decisions. I mean why just don't put it on a national poll and be done it with it, it would never pass tho but majority would get their way.

[Franklin Richards]

What if I'm uncomfortable with black people being in the army? I mean their lazy and never do their fair share of work. Plus they always want our women. I can't be around those people and efficiently kill brown people. Or Muslims for that matter. I can't be comfortable around them.


And yeah... let's just take a poll and see if we can kick out muslims and atheists from the army. The majority would rule of course.


Without gays, sand *******, *******, and heathens, we'll have the most powerful military in the world.


End Sarcasm.


:thing: :doom: :thing:

[Franklin Richards]

Double post. And to be honest I thought the N word was censored out. What gives? I nearly banned myself.


:thing: :doom: :thing:

[Schlosser85]

1.What is wrong dadt. Nobody gives a **** about your orientation.


If no one gives a **** about your orientation, why should you be kicked out if they find out what it is? Why should it be of any relevance what your orientation is?


2. Secondly if the majority of people don't want something, then don't do it. If people dont want gays to get married then gays shouldn't get married. Your not gonna change peoples mind.


What a wonderful little moral lesson....conform. If the majority of people don't like something, then don't do it. There was a time when the majority of people didn't want slavery abolished or blacks or women to have the vote, does that mean they shouldn't have happened? It is none of your business if gays get married or not. And yes, society's collective mind is gradually shifting on this issue.


1. Eh some people might feel uncomfortable with that person and in combat that just cant happen. I mean I don't want to your gay, so who cares if you tell kick your ass out and I thats very fair.


I think someone in combat is going to have more relevant things to be thinking about than who a member of his unit is sleeping with.

If gays were the majority, and people that they were uncomfortable around, like you, could just get kicked out because the gays didn't want you around, would you think that was fair? After all, the majority's word goes no matter what, apparently, according to you, no matter how wrong the majority might be.

2. On some issues like this one the majority should be able to make decisions. I mean why just don't put it on a national poll and be done it with it, it would never pass tho but majority would get their way.

I think it's very disturbing that you think people's civil rights should be left up to a national poll. If I want to get married, you can **** off and mind your own business.

[Dude101]

See there you guys go bring slavery and racism in the discussion when in reality you cant compare.
The majority on social issues like this can be settle by a poll but not a simple thing like segregation and slavery. I just think that simple battles like this can end in a poll, when were talking hundreds of people not being able to go to same schools,not to read,learn, to pretty much do anything that unfair equality is way worse than gays getting married.

Im mean we had oppression for 200 years. The things that happened to us just to do simple things, were talking about a whole race and many issues.
Im just talking about marriage and I don't believe gays should get married and I dont wont them to.
It maybe none of my business who gets married cause it isn't and doesn't affect me but alot of things doesn't effect us and we still want it stop.
I mean I have nothing against gays. I now have a gay person in my class and never do anything bad to him. Im not homophobic, I just believe fundamentally marriage is between a man and a women.

[BlackLantern]

Dude...we are all going to vote you out of this thread now...since its a majority rule you want...get out and don't post here anymore...

all in favor...say aye

Aye

[Dude101]

About the dadt. I believe that it is the right policy and in service to your country sexual orentation is not something anybody should want to know or care for so just don't tell.

[Dude101]

Haha oh come all you guys do is bash gay haters and talk about gays should marry. There is no discussion for the other side of the coin here and I just wanna express my views like each and every one of you. To stop me talking is hypocritical of your own views kinda actually.

[BlackLantern]

the other side of the coin, as you put it, promotes inequality, intolerance, and ignorance...the world is changing...you can either adapt or move aside

you can't make something go away simply because you don't like it

[Dude101]

Adapt or move along, is their a third option because Cali kinda chose that one. And they kinda did that other thing to.

[Schlosser85]

Time is on our side, not yours. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[BlackLantern]

and in time...another proposition to change the state constitution will come along and the pendulum will swing the other way

I live in Connecticut....a relatively conservative state that has had a Republican governor for the past 10+ years....yet we have same sex marriage....

I repeat "Every tax paying American citizen deserves the same right as every other tax paying American citizen"....to deny rights from our citizens is a smack in the face to the spirit of this country...if we followed the herd, as you say, we wouldn't have told the British to **** off

[Dude101]

Time is but its gonna be loooooooooooooooooooooog time. Also my opinion does not promote intolerance,ignorance, maybe inequality. I just dont believe gays should get married but they probably will but it will take atleast 50 years and by then who knows.

[danoyse]

About the dadt. I believe that it is the right policy and in service to your country sexual orentation is not something anybody should want to know or care for so just don't tell.

Then why should you care if they get married or not? You're being awfully hypocritcal here.

[Schlosser85]

At least 50 years? I seriously doubt that, considering the steady series of individual states that have legalized same-sex marriage just in the last couple years.

[Marx]

1. Eh some people might feel uncomfortable with that person and in combat that just cant happen. I mean I don't want to your gay, so who cares if you tell kick your ass out and I thats very fair.
2. On some issues like this one the majority should be able to make decisions. I mean why just don't put it on a national poll and be done it with it, it would never pass tho but majority would get their way.

1. If a person is willing to sacrifice their own life while fighting beside you or for you, it shouldn't matter. I'm sick and tired of this mentality that just because someone is gay they want to jump you in the middle of the night. It's ridiculous. People who think like that need to get over themselves.

2. On issues like this the majority should NEVER be able to make decisions.

[danoyse]

Time is but its gonna be loooooooooooooooooooooog time. Also my opinion does not promote intolerance,ignorance, maybe inequality. I just dont believe gays should get married but they probably will but it will take atleast 50 years and by then who knows.

Promoting inequality = ignorance & intolerance. :cwink:

[BlackLantern]

1. If a person is willing to sacrifice their own life while fighting beside you or for you, it shouldn't matter. I'm sick and tired of this mentality that just because someone is gay they want to jump you in the middle of the night. It's ridiculous.

I get that from both men and women

it's a curse but I live with it:oldrazz:

[Dude101]

Southern states are gonna take forever. Texas is one seriously.

The dadt question. Thats policy tho nobody cares so dont tell or ask. Its simple and plain.

[BlackLantern]

if nobody cares, then the DADT policy is a bit useless

[Schlosser85]

If nobody cares, why get kicked out if anyone finds out about it?

And if you want gay people to keep their sexuality to themselves, then straight people can keep their mouths shut about their own.

[Dude101]

1. If a person is willing to sacrifice their own life while fighting beside you or for you, it shouldn't matter. I'm sick and tired of this mentality that just because someone is gay they want to jump you in the middle of the night. It's ridiculous. People who think like that need to get over themselves.

2. On issues like this the majority should NEVER be able to make decisions.
But thats my point tho, that mentality is alive and well and isn't worth risking lives just to try out a new one just leave the policy as be.

[BlackLantern]

But thats my point tho, that mentality is alive and well and isn't worth risking lives just to try out a new one just leave the policy as be.

how's that happen?? does a weapon jam because it's user is gay or straight?? does a plane not fly unless its pilot is heterosexual??

[danoyse]

But thats my point tho, that mentality is alive and well and isn't worth risking lives just to try out a new one just leave the policy as be.

That would have been a great attitude during the Civil Rights riots. :whatever:

No lives are at risk by repealing DADT. That's ludicrous.

[Marx]

But thats my point tho, that mentality is alive and well and isn't worth risking lives just to try out a new one just leave the policy as be.

I read a study earlier this week (can't remember where) that said HALF the armed forces know someone in the force that is gay and they have no problem with it whatsoever.

I'll say it again, if you are more concerned about a gay person (who is fighting for you or beside you) jumping you in the middle of the night than combat, I question your ability to be a successful serviceman or woman.

[danoyse]

I'll say it again, if you are more concerned about a gay person (who is fighting for you or beside you) jumping you in the middle of the night than combat, I question your ability to be a successful serviceman or woman.

Well said. :up:

[BlackLantern]

spent 4 years in the USN on 2 aircraft carriers, I knew gay people on board, and no one cared as long as they did their jobs

[BMM]

how's that happen?? does a weapon jam because it's user is gay or straight?? does a plane not fly unless its pilot is heterosexual??

Clearly, US soldiers will be so concerned with the potential threat of their homosexual peers, and not the fact that they're in the middle of a war, that they won't be able to function.

[Dude101]

Whatever the policy is fine in my books.

[El_Citrus]

I'm not sure whether I'm amused or annoyed by this debate.

[Dude101]

I hope I didn't come off as homophobic cause im not.

[Marx]

I hope I didn't come off as homophobic cause im not.

Suggesting that a gay soldier isn't capable of anything other than jumping a fellow soldier...yeah, that is a bit homophobic.

[wiegeabo]

Haha oh come all you guys do is bash gay haters and talk about gays should marry. There is no discussion for the other side of the coin here and I just wanna express my views like each and every one of you. To stop me talking is hypocritical of your own views kinda actually.

There would be a discussion if the opponents of gay marriage used logical arguments instead of statements that don't boil down to "I don't like gays" "Or teh gay is gross."

We're talking about denying equal protection under the law to people who pay taxes to support our infrastructure and government, and put their lives on the line serving in our military to protect our country.

If it's something that's none of anyone else's business, and doesn't hurt anyone, then why the hell have laws against it?

[Dude101]

Suggesting that a gay soldier isn't capable of anything other than jumping a fellow soldier...yeah, that is a bit homophobic.
I never said that or implied that. I just meant that soldiers might feel uncomfortable.

[BlackLantern]

then theyll adapt and overcome...thats what soldiers are trained to do

[Thundercrack85]

Delete post.

[Dude101]

Yes but it might take time. Even a second can have somebody killed in war. You show statistics for that half but what about the other half, I mean I have would have no qualms about having a gay soldiers as my combat partner but it might take time to forged at least a bond or partnership.

[danoyse]

Yes but it might take time. Even a second can have somebody killed in war.

And that has what to do with gay people, exactly?

You show statistics for that half but what about the other half, I mean I have would have no qualms about having a gay soldiers as my combat partner but it might take time to forged at least a bond or partnership.

I think BL has refuted that point nicely.

[Dude101]

Ugh forget it, lets move on because we will never agree.

[Bathead]

I never said that or implied that. I just meant that soldiers might feel uncomfortable.

If you mean hetero soldiers would feel uncmofortable, you're wrong. Every story I've ever heard about military units with gay members who have come out, the hetero members of said units all say the same thing - they don't care.They know that their gay compatriots would risk their lives for their fellow soldiers, and they would be willing to risk their lives for them. The only ones who have a problem with it are a bunch of old-school military hardhead desk jockeys. The majority of people on the front-line don't.

[shadowforce420]

If you mean hetero soldiers would feel uncmofortable, you're wrong. Every story I've ever heard about military units with gay members who have come out, the hetero members of said units all say the same thing - they don't care.They know that their gay compatriots would risk their lives for their fellow soldiers, and they would be willing to risk their lives for them. The only ones who have a problem with it are a bunch of old-school military hardhead desk jockeys. The majority of people on the front-line don't.

I've known alot of soldiers in the last few years and they've all said the same thing. When you're on the battlefield gay or straight doesn't matter.

[wiegeabo]

I never said that or implied that. I just meant that soldiers might feel uncomfortable.

They felt uncomfortable when Truman desegregated the troops. Does that mean he was wrong to do so? That it shouldn't have been done?

No. It meant that, at least in the field, the soldiers put those feelings aside because their lives depended on those desegregated troops, or risked getting themselves killed. It also meant the armed forces benefited from a fresh influx of young, healthy soldiers ready and willing to serve.

Will it be painless? No. But it shouldn't be nearly as disruptive as desegregation was. An argument could be made for avoiding such a disruption during war time. But an argument could be made this is the perfect time to do it because the military is desperately short of able-bodied soldiers.

[wiegeabo]

If you mean hetero soldiers would feel uncmofortable, you're wrong. Every story I've ever heard about military units with gay members who have come out, the hetero members of said units all say the same thing - they don't care.They know that their gay compatriots would risk their lives for their fellow soldiers, and they would be willing to risk their lives for them. The only ones who have a problem with it are a bunch of old-school military hardhead desk jockeys. The majority of people on the front-line don't.

Who was that medal winning (I think he won a medal) gay soldier who was recently forcibly discharged despite the soldiers in his unit arguing against the discharge?

[BlackLantern]

I believe that soldier was awarded either a Silver Star or something to that effect...his entire unit showed up at the ceremony to support him staying in the service

[Dude101]

Im changing my tune I now believe that gay marriage should be on state level and that states shouldn't have to recognize other states gay marriages. This doesn't bother since I live in a very conservative Louisiana state.

[Marx]

OBAMA: 'WE SHOULD NOT BE PUNISHING GAYS IN THE MILITARY'
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/10/obama-we-should-not-be-punishing-gays-in-the-military/

...so he repeats his campaign promise of repealing 'DADT' but gave no timeline or specifics on when he actually plans to do it?

:dry:

[Wylie Times]

OBAMA: 'WE SHOULD NOT BE PUNISHING GAYS IN THE MILITARY'
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/10/obama-we-should-not-be-punishing-gays-in-the-military/

...so he repeats his campaign promise of repealing 'DADT' but gave no timeline or specifics on when he actually plans to do it?

:dry:

I understand the anger but I don't get the impatience...As President he should prioritize..and repealing DADT isn't and shouldn't be at the top of his list....though it should be ahead of lobbying for the Olympics and drinking beer with two grown men who act like children.

[Marx]

I understand the anger but I don't get the impatience...As President he should prioritize..and repealing DADT isn't and shouldn't be at the top of his list....though it should be ahead of lobbying for the Olympics and drinking beer with two grown men who act like children.

I agree that it shouldn't be a top issue for him (especially with two wars, Gitmo, health care reform, etc.) but he continually avoids specifics. All he keeps saying is 'yeah, I plan on doing that'. I think he's going to keep saying 'yeah, I plan on doing that', but never give any specifics all the way through the 2012 election cycle. If you catch my drift.

[wiegeabo]

I agree that it shouldn't be a top issue for him (especially with two wars, Gitmo, health care reform, etc.) but he continually avoids specifics. All he keeps saying is 'yeah, I plan on doing that'. I think he's going to keep saying 'yeah, I plan on doing that', but never give any specifics all the way through the 2012 election cycle. If you catch my drift.

The one advantage to doing that is, if he gets elected again, he can do whatever the hell he wants. It's not like he has to worry about running for a third term.

[Wylie Times]

I agree that it shouldn't be a top issue for him (especially with two wars, Gitmo, health care reform, etc.) but he continually avoids specifics. All he keeps saying is 'yeah, I plan on doing that'. I think he's going to keep saying 'yeah, I plan on doing that', but never give any specifics all the way through the 2012 election cycle. If you catch my drift.

I REALLY hope that's not the case. I also hope people understand that DADT isn't something that will be easily done. Just because gay and lesbian folks are allowed to be out and serve doesn't mean it'll be safe for them took. Just like the voting rights act of 1965 didn't instantly make it safe for blacks everywhere to vote.

[bell110]

Im changing my tune I now believe that gay marriage should be on state level and that states shouldn't have to recognize other states gay marriages. This doesn't bother since I live in a very conservative Louisiana state.

Why?

[Marx]

The one advantage to doing that is, if he gets elected again, he can do whatever the hell he wants. It's not like he has to worry about running for a third term.

That's true...

I REALLY hope that's not the case. I also hope people understand that DADT isn't something that will be easily done. Just because gay and lesbian folks are allowed to be out and serve doesn't mean it'll be safe for them took. Just like the voting rights act of 1965 didn't instantly make it safe for blacks everywhere to vote.

I hope it's not either...but it wouldn't be the first time that a politician said something just to get elected.

[bell110]

Im changing my tune I now believe that gay marriage should be on state level and that states shouldn't have to recognize other states gay marriages. This doesn't bother since I live in a very conservative Louisiana state.

Why?

[Marx]

DEMOCRATIC SENATORS HAVE MIXED FEELINGS ON GAY RIGHTS ISSUES
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/11/dem-senators-mixed-on-gay-rights-issues/

[Dude101]

Why?Because if a state bans gay marriage that shouldn't have to recognized some other state laws.

[wiegeabo]

A state has the right not to recognize the laws of another state unless the Federal Government says otherwise.

I think California doesn't recognize gay marriages, except for those performed before Prop 8 passed.

[Dude101]

That is what im saying so they should just leave it to the states. And they gays can go there if they want to get married. Everybody is happy now.

[Marx]

That is what im saying so they should just leave it to the states. And they gays can go there if they want to get married. Everybody is happy now.

Not true.

[Wylie Times]

That is what im saying so they should just leave it to the states. And they gays can go there if they want to get married. Everybody is happy now.

replace the word "gays" with "blacks" or "jews" and tell me if you still think that's a good idea...

[Dude101]

I not gonna respond to times.

I just dont believe that every state should have to have gay marriage. If you want to get married just go and leave and go to that state. If a state like Texas doesn't want gay marriage why should it have to recognize it.

[Marx]

I not gonna respond to times.

I just dont believe that every state should have to have gay marriage. If you want to get married just go and leave and go to that state. If a state like Texas doesn't want gay marriage why should it have to recognize it.

It's a legitimate question, and your refusal to answer it is pretty telling.

[Dude101]

I have said multiple times in this thread that you cant compare race to gay marriage. So im not gonna dignify it with a response.

[BMM]

The comparison isn’t between race and gay marriage. The comparison is between race and sexual orientation or any other inborn characteristic, such as sex, that shouldn’t be the basis for discrimination.

[Dude101]

I dont think its discrimination. I just believe that marriage is between a man and woman.

[BlackLantern]

you can't use personal/religious beliefs as a basis for laws....that's not how it works...you make law and policy for the welfare of the people....the taxpaying American citizens

[Dude101]

Most laws are made from personal believes tho.

[Dude101]

Now to be honest they will never ever be a law banning gay marriage and they will never law for it. It gonna be up to the states and the majority of states will not pass same-sex marriage. Just let it be.

[wiegeabo]

Um...California just passed a law that bans same-sex marriage.

And denying someone equal protection under the laws based on a factor of their birth is discrimination. It's illegal to discriminate against some one based on nationality or ethnicity. It's illegal to discriminate against someone if they were born with a missing limb or other disability (or even acquired the disability later in life). So why is it ok to discriminate against someone born gay?

Hell, it's illegal to discriminate against someone based on their choice of religion. So, even if, for the sake of argument, we assume that being gay is a choice, why is it ok to discriminate against them?

[Wylie Times]

I have said multiple times in this thread that you cant compare race to gay marriage. So im not gonna dignify it with a response.

Yes you can..This is no different than miscegenation laws that prevented interracial marriage. Many of the same arguments made against interracial marriage are now used against gay marriage.

I dont think its discrimination. I just believe that marriage is between a man and woman.

And once upon a time MANY people felt marriage should only be between people of the same race and they had laws banning it which were a form of discrimination.

Now to be honest they will never ever be a law banning gay marriage and they will never law for it. It gonna be up to the states and the majority of states will not pass same-sex marriage. Just let it be.

History has shown that there are times when the majority should be ignored. I people didn't go against the majority opinion segregation would still have a death grip in the South.

[BMM]

I dont think its discrimination. I just believe that marriage is between a man and woman.

No, it is.

[Marx]

THOUSANDS MARCH FOR GAY RIGHTS IN DC
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/11/U.S.gay.rights.rally/index.html

That's pretty cool that Judy Shephard spoke. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[Red Mask]

You don't have to be straight to shoot. You just have to shoot straight.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I dont think its discrimination. I just believe that marriage is between a man and woman.


It is discrimination.

Not all forms of it means violence, mind you, but simply treating certain Americans like foreigners. And not like Americans. Hell, foreigners don't have this right revoked.

It is is discrimination. I think if everyone looks at it at a neutral, unbiased point of view...it's still be as clear to see that much.

[Marx]

SCHWARZENEGGER SIGNS TWO GAY RIGHTS BILLS
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/12/harvey.milk/index.html

The first honoring Harvey Milk, the second recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states.

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[JP]

THOUSANDS MARCH FOR GAY RIGHTS IN DC
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/11/U.S.gay.rights.rally/index.html

That's pretty cool that Judy Shephard spoke. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif


I was there. It was amazing.
FnSWyvyDjkk

[Marx]

I'm that you were able to go JP! That's great! http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[wiegeabo]

SCHWARZENEGGER SIGNS TWO GAY RIGHTS BILLS
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/12/harvey.milk/index.html

The first honoring Harvey Milk, the second recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states.

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

I didn't see anything in the article about recognizing same-sex marriages. But, HAHAHA. **** you Prop 8. They got it so gays can't marry in the state. So, instead, they fly out to Iowa, get married, and come back as fully recognized partners with all the legal rights.

Way to blow that tax money Prop 8 in the name of 'traditional marriage'.

[Marx]

I didn't see anything in the article about recognizing same-sex marriages. But, HAHAHA. **** you Prop 8. They got it so gays can't marry in the state. So, instead, they fly out to Iowa, get married, and come back as fully recognized partners with all the legal rights.

Way to blow that tax money Prop 8 in the name of 'traditional marriage'.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/12/schwarzenegger-signs-two-gay-rights-bills/

[wiegeabo]

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/12/schwarzenegger-signs-two-gay-rights-bills/

:up:

Again, a nice way around Prop 8. Assuming it still covers Californian citizens who marry outside the state (which it should since straight couples do that all the time).

[BlackLantern]

pop over to Nevada, get hitched, come back....thats a weekend

[wiegeabo]

pop over to Nevada, get hitched, come back....thats a weekend

It no longer stays in Vegas. :p

[Marx]

:up:

Again, a nice way around Prop 8. Assuming it still covers Californian citizens who marry outside the state (which it should since straight couples do that all the time).

It's definitely a way around Prop 8. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

I wonder how many more states will do a similar measure like this one...

[wiegeabo]

Hopefully the courts won't throw out the law because they see it as violating Prop 8. Yes, the courts now have to protect Prop 8 because it's part of our constitution. And the full text of it reads "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

I have a sad feeling they'll strike down Arnold's law.

[Dude101]

That law wont stand long.

[Marx]

Hopefully the courts won't throw out the law because they see it as violating Prop 8. Yes, the courts now have to protect Prop 8 because it's part of our constitution. And the full text of it reads "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

I have a sad feeling they'll strike down Arnold's law.

Unless they consider the law that Schwarzengger signed into law as an amendment to Prop 8..?

[wiegeabo]

Unless they consider the law that Schwarzengger signed into law as an amendment to Prop 8..?

It's not. The governor has no say in the passage of amendments.

[Marx]

Hmm...

[danoyse]

I was there. It was amazing.
FnSWyvyDjkk

Awesome - and great use of the Hair cast album. I love that they cancelled their show yesterday to go to the rally. :up:

[Bathead]

I dont think its discrimination. I just believe that marriage is between a man and woman.

Why?

[Dude101]

Because I believe that homosexuality is wrong first of all. Second in the united states it has always been between man and women(even minor variations still had that tho.).

[JP]

Why do you believe it is wrong?

[Dude101]

Im gonna give you a long detailed answer tommorow but I got to gets my sleep.

[Wylie Times]

Because I believe that homosexuality is wrong first of all. Second in the united states it has always been between man and women(even minor variations still had that tho.).

Just because it's always been that way doesn't mean it should remain that way. If it did anyone who wasn't a straight white Christian male of English descent would be screwed right now.

[hippie_hunter]

I just don't see a problem with it. I'm not affected by someone being gay, just like I'm not affected by someone being straight, so why be bothered by it.

And this is the United States where egalitarianism is one of our ideals.

[hippie_hunter]

Just because it's always been that way doesn't mean it should remain that way. If it did anyone who wasn't a straight white Christian male of English descent would be screwed right now.

Not really because the colonies were filled with Irish, Germans, Dutch, Swedish, Irish, Scotish, French, Jews, Welsh, and free Africans.

[Wylie Times]

Not really because the colonies were filled with Irish, Germans, Dutch, Swedish, Irish, Scotish, French, Jews, Welsh, and free Africans.

All those groups faced discrimination in some form of another though, and it was all perfectly legal under the law.

[Marx]

Just because it's always been that way doesn't mean it should remain that way. If it did anyone who wasn't a straight white Christian male of English descent would be screwed right now.

Exactly.

[BillyZaned]

I just don't see a problem with it. I'm not affected by someone being gay, just like I'm not affected by someone being straight, so why be bothered by it.

And this is the United States where egalitarianism is one of our ideals.


lol... you do realize what country this is... where people hold on to this book, that long ago, should have been filed in the fiction section, and follow the context inside to their death beds...

untill the people wake up, and realize that the bible is crap, Gays will have NO RIGHTS... it's as simple as that.... but don't count on that happening for a long long time....

[wiegeabo]

Well, that's a bit of an exaggeration.

Gays are getting rights, and there are a number of churches (using that very same book) that are accepting of them.

And the Bible isn't crap. It's taken far too literally, especially for a book that's been translated who knows how many times. But, fiction or not, the lessons and teachings do have value.

What's crap are the people who narrowly interpret those teachings, even to the point of pulling single lines out of context, and picking and choosing what parts to follow, all the while claiming they're somehow following the word of God.

[wiegeabo]

All those groups faced discrimination in some form of another though, and it was all perfectly legal under the law.

Yep. For a good bit of time there, if you weren't a male land-owning WASP, you weren't a real citizen.

And we're still putting up with that today, although thankfully to much lesser degrees.

[BillyZaned]

Well, that's a bit of an exaggeration.

Gays are getting rights, and there are a number of churches (using that very same book) that are accepting of them.

And the Bible isn't crap. It's taken far too literally, especially for a book that's been translated who knows how many times. But, fiction or not, the lessons and teachings do have value.

What's crap are the people who narrowly interpret those teachings, even to the point of pulling single lines out of context, and picking and choosing what parts to follow, all the while claiming they're somehow following the word of God.

you are always going to have that as long as their is relgion..

religion is a business, pure and simple.... sure, you can state "it's not meant to be"... but it is... and you get these leaders who pick and pull stuff out to get people wild and crazed about things. The whole gay rights thing will never go away, look at racism, we've come a long way, but it's still pretty bad....

the simple fact is, people who don't beleive in gay rights, are Chirstian, Muslim or another form of organized religion...

I don't think there is no progressive, or "athiest" out there who doesn't want gay rights...

[Marx]

Well, that's a bit of an exaggeration.

Gays are getting rights, and there are a number of churches (using that very same book) that are accepting of them.

And the Bible isn't crap. It's taken far too literally, especially for a book that's been translated who knows how many times. But, fiction or not, the lessons and teachings do have value.

What's crap are the people who narrowly interpret those teachings, even to the point of pulling single lines out of context, and picking and choosing what parts to follow, all the while claiming they're somehow following the word of God.

Well said.

[Wylie Times]

you are always going to have that as long as their is relgion..

religion is a business, pure and simple.... sure, you can state "it's not meant to be"... but it is... and you get these leaders who pick and pull stuff out to get people wild and crazed about things. The whole gay rights thing will never go away, look at racism, we've come a long way, but it's still pretty bad....

the simple fact is, people who don't beleive in gay rights, are Chirstian, Muslim or another form of organized religion...

I don't think there is no progressive, or "athiest" out there who doesn't want gay rights...

I would like a link to some evidence that proves this "fact".

You're being totally unfair in focusing on every negative that can come with religion and ignoring all th positives. I personally don't follow any organize religion but I do know it is an important and good presence in some peoples lives.

I hope you realize that you're dripping with irony right now...

[Marx]

A writer for badmouth.net (John Marcotte) is collecting signatures in California to get 'California Protection of Marriage Act' on the ballot. The ballot basically seeks to make divorce in the state of California.

He's actually doing this to make a point for gay rights.

This PSA was just released...

3LnIDwx9M_s

:hehe:

[Wylie Times]

A write for badmouth.net (John Marcotte) is collecting signatures in California to get 'California Protection of Marriage Act' on the ballot. The ballot basically seeks to make divorce in the state of California.

He's actually doing this to make a point for gay rights.

This PSA was just released...

3LnIDwx9M_s

Brilliant :awesome:

[BillyZaned]

I would like a link to some evidence that proves this "fact".

You're being totally unfair in focusing on every negative that can come with religion and ignoring all th positives. I personally don't follow any organize religion but I do know it is an important and good presence in some peoples lives.

I hope you realize that you're dripping with irony right now...

:doh: wow... and good presence in people's lives? Give me a break.... beliving the world was created in the "I Dream of Genie" fashion, and thinking the world should be run according to some old book that contradicts itself over and over again...

evidence, I'm going to pull some christain way of thinking right now to argue that point... show me evidence that i'm wrong, that people who are not religious want gays to have limited rights?

[Bathead]

Hilarious, spot-on satire.

[BlackLantern]

I would like a link to some evidence that proves this "fact".

You're being totally unfair in focusing on every negative that can come with religion and ignoring all th positives. I personally don't follow any organize religion but I do know it is an important and good presence in some peoples lives.

I hope you realize that you're dripping with irony right now...

Organized religion is for people who don't have anything and NEED something to give them purpose...or they were indoctrinated from a young age and never chose their belief system for themselves

[Marx]

:doh: wow... and good presence in people's lives? Give me a break.... beliving the world was created in the "I Dream of Genie" fashion, and thinking the world should be run according to some old book that contradicts itself over and over again...

evidence, I'm going to pull some christain way of thinking right now to argue that point... show me evidence that i'm wrong, that people who are not religious want gays to have limited rights?

You cannot fault religion for the ignorance of some of its followers.

[BillyZaned]

You cannot fault religion for the ignorance of some of its followers.


it preaches ignorane though... i mean, come on man, your a smart dude... the most brilliant mines ever, have stated the Bible is nothing but milarky.... the ideals and stories in this book are a breeding ground for intolerance...

look at how is charactrizes women, and black people....

[BillyZaned]

Organized religion is for people who don't have anything and NEED something to give them purpose...or they were indoctrinated from a young age and never chose their belief system for themselves

people follow this story of Jesus, which is just a reinteruptation of older tales passed down through humanity, and don't take it as a "ethic building" story... they take it as fact....

[Marx]

it preaches ignorane though... i mean, come on man, your a smart dude... the most brilliant mines ever, have stated the Bible is nothing but milarky.... the ideals and stories in this book are a breeding ground for intolerance...

look at how is charactrizes women, and black people....

...it all depends on how you view the bible. There's quite a difference between viewing it as THE word of God and viewing as an interpretation of THE word of God written by man.

All I'm saying is that I do not blame religion for the world's problems. I blame the followers who have twisted the words of a higher power into a hate-filled, self-serving agenda.

[BlackLantern]

...it all depends on how you view the bible. There's quite a difference between viewing it as THE word of God and viewing as an interpretation of THE word of God written by man.

All I'm saying is that I do not blame religion for the world's problems. I blame the followers who have twisted the words of a higher power into a hate-filled, self-serving agenda.

what he said

[Wylie Times]

...it all depends on how you view the bible. There's quite a difference between viewing it as THE word of God and viewing as an interpretation of THE word of God written by man.

All I'm saying is that I do not blame religion for the world's problems. I blame the followers who have twisted the words of a higher power into a hate-filled, self-serving agenda.

Exactly

[Nivek]

a writer for badmouth.net (john marcotte) is collecting signatures in california to get 'california protection of marriage act' on the ballot. The ballot basically seeks to make divorce in the state of california.

he's actually doing this to make a point for gay rights.

this psa was just released...

3lnidwx9m_s

:hehe:

thats great!

[Matt]

A writer for badmouth.net (John Marcotte) is collecting signatures in California to get 'California Protection of Marriage Act' on the ballot. The ballot basically seeks to make divorce in the state of California.

He's actually doing this to make a point for gay rights.

This PSA was just released...

3LnIDwx9M_s

:hehe:

:lmao:

"John and Kate Plus Eight divided by two equals mortal sin."

"If we let divorce be legal, how long until people start divorcing their dogs?"

Best satire I've seen in awhile.

[Schlosser85]

"til death do we part....and you're not dead yet"

I don't know how some of these people say these lines with straight faces.

[spideyboy_1111]

just got back from DC last night... man o man was that a breathtaking weekend. probably one of the most moving and coolest things ive ever experienced. :up:

[Marx]

just got back from DC last night... man o man was that a breathtaking weekend. probably one of the most moving and coolest things ive ever experienced. :up:

I'm glad to hear that you had a good time man! http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Because I believe that homosexuality is wrong first of all. Second in the united states it has always been between man and women(even minor variations still had that tho.).


That's a bad reason to be against gay marriage.


lol... you do realize what country this is... where people hold on to this book, that long ago, should have been filed in the fiction section, and follow the context inside to their death beds...

untill the people wake up, and realize that the bible is crap, Gays will have NO RIGHTS... it's as simple as that.... but don't count on that happening for a long long time....


I'm going to have to read that book one day, because I think people can say anything they want and use the Bible as reference...and nobody will call them on it.

People used to use the Bible to justify blocking interracial marriages, and even worse astrocities as well.

I would like a link to some evidence that proves this "fact".

You're being totally unfair in focusing on every negative that can come with religion and ignoring all th positives. I personally don't follow any organize religion but I do know it is an important and good presence in some peoples lives.

I hope you realize that you're dripping with irony right now...

I think his point, though, is that most of the time personal belief justified by people's faith and religion controls they're beliefs in what laws and rights should be "given".

Religion plays far too large a role in politics, as well.

[wiegeabo]

Wow. It's not just gays. Interracial couples can have a hard time getting married too.

Interracial couple denied marriage license in Louisiana (http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/16/interracial-couple-denied-marriage-license-in-louisiana/)

One point of interest towards the end.

The ACLU says the Supreme Court ruled in 1967 that the government cannot tell people who they can marry… they want the state judiciary committee to investigate.

And I really liked the first comment

I lived with a black woman for 6 years and even though we ended up going our separate ways, mainly due to the fact that she wanted to get married and have children and I had been there, done that – I loved her and still do. People are people and you can’t always choose who you fall in love with.

[Dude101]

That embarrass me since I live in New Orleans. But im still against gay marriage.

[Wylie Times]

That embarrass me since I live in New Orleans. But im still against gay marriage.

Are you against gay marriage on the basis of religious reasons?

[Dude101]

Not really im more against because I feel that... well that I dislike homosexuality. I my bias might be rooted in religion its not really now cause im more agnostic now but I just feel that that its wrong and disgusting. I'm not gonna lie I don't have many reasons other than its nasty and disgusting but its just personal believe that is rooted in my culture and where I grew up.

[Lightning Strykez!]

Not really im more against because I feel that... well that I dislike homosexuality. I my bias might be rooted in religion its not really now cause im more agnostic now but I just feel that that its wrong and disgusting. I'm not gonna lie I don't have many reasons other than its nasty and disgusting but its just personal believe that is rooted in my culture and where I grew up.

I rarely peek in this thread, but I have to tell you something: Every. Single. Time I have opened this thread to monitor it, you are always here saying the exact same thing. Please don't take offense at what I'm about to say but...are you trying to convince us or yourself?

[Kelly]

I think he is just answering people's question of .... "Why are you against Gay Marriage"? Same question, same answer....lol