It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

More than $83 million spent on Prop 8

page: 9
17
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Do it the other way. Since I am received as a second class citizen then my taxes should be cut in half. If you say it's all about money you are darned right. Can't carry each other on health insurance, can't jointly buy a new home or have any kind of guardianship in case of medical emergency and just many more things already listed. I did have a ceremony though performed by the Church of Wicca although not legal means very much to me and I have a better relationship than many heterosexual people will ever have getting close to being as great as my own parents.

As for the money, personally it should be a non issue. I would like to use that money to feed some homeless here. It is 18f outside and they very well could be freezing to death.

As for the pedophile scorecard 97% or so of victims are from heterosexuals doing that act. Since the majority in the US are religious a great many of pedophile acts are very likely to be done by religious blowhards.

As far as the fear of straight men attracting me, lol. Get real about 90% look like a broken down mule by the time they hit 30 while I still get carded for liquor at 35.




posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman


So the nitty gritty with you is the claim that marriage or cohabitation is somehow only defined by you religion ?


I never said gays couldn't cohabitate so don't misrepresent my statements I said whet I mean and I meant what I said it is THAT simple




Not everyone is religious my friend, not everyone shares your beliefs but everyone is entitled to family and marriage and cohabitation are about family and nothing to do with sex.


No again, NOT everyone IS alowed to MARRY! Nor SHOULD THEY BE!




Isn't marriage defined by love, care, and attachment ? Isn't marriage extending this family ?


Ill tell you what it isn't! It isn't about two people of the same sex GOT IT?



Why would you deny someone love,care and attachment just because of the way they have sex ?


The word smithing in here is astounding. A married man and his wife can have any sex they want.




Would you refuse to adopt one of a pair of twins because he or she was gay, why would you deny one love care and attachment ?


This is a straw man and has nothing to do with the topic. You want to make a thread about adopting gay kids be my guest




If you had a child that you knew would turn out to be gay would you deny it love? Would you deny your attachment to her ? Would you deny him care ? Of course you wouldn't so why would you deny it someone else ?


Another damn straw man but here Ill humor you with this one so you'll STOP bringing up the same tactic.

NO I wouldn't deny them any of those things but when it comes to marriage IGNORANCE DENIED!



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by toochaos4u
Do it the other way. Since I am received as a second class citizen then my taxes should be cut in half. If you say it's all about money you are darned right. Can't carry each other on health insurance, can't jointly buy a new home or have any kind of guardianship in case of medical emergency and just many more things already listed. I did have a ceremony though performed by the Church of Wicca although not legal means very much to me and I have a better relationship than many heterosexual people will ever have getting close to being as great as my own parents.

As for the money, personally it should be a non issue. I would like to use that money to feed some homeless here. It is 18f outside and they very well could be freezing to death.

As for the pedophile scorecard 97% or so of victims are from heterosexuals doing that act. Since the majority in the US are religious a great many of pedophile acts are very likely to be done by religious blowhards.

As far as the fear of straight men attracting me, lol. Get real about 90% look like a broken down mule by the time they hit 30 while I still get carded for liquor at 35.


Oh The hypocrisy here is just amazing! Second class citizen my BUTT! You guys have it so good we have to walk on eggshells saying any damn thing about you or we get hit for hate crimes while GAYS on the other hand can say whatever they want about Christians and that is all they do is BITCH about them while in the same voice expecting us to not be affected and vote for this asinine proposition.

Guess what smart guy, Ill bet NOT ONE of the homeless you are squawking about is warm and comfortable because YOU have taken it upon yourself to take them into your home
feed them.

I HAVE!

Untill the gays can step up to the pump and feed as many starving and house as many of the homeless as the religious do, Then and only till then can we get into an argument about that. until then

STAY ON TOPIC!



[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Bottom line is, there are alternatives we have bent over backwards to afford the gay community but they are never "quite" good enough and they won't be happy till they can have the legitimacy of marriage rub off by some magical process of social osmosis thinking we will accept them when the FACT is

WE DON'T HAVE TO if we don't want to and even if we did ALL hold hands and sing "we are the world hand in hand with every whining gay homosexual, this would only hurt the sanctity of marriage like it has where ever it has been tried. meanwhile the shame gays have for themselves wouldn't have changed an IOTA but even THAT they blame on all of us



[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 

Aermacchi, face it. It has to be our fault.

You don't think they're going to take responsibility for their actions do you?

Come on, man. It's not their fault they are that way. It's not their fault they've assumed an aberrant behavior. It's not their fault they are looked down upon. It's not their fault than not everyone isn't accepting of their choices.

It's not their fault!

It's your fault. It's my fault!

Let's throw a pity party!



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:24 PM
link   
OK so first of all Jesus never condemned gay marriage that whole argument is bullox, and irrelevant to this thread. What are we going to quote Levitcus oh crap kill me I worked on sunday wore clothes made from different cloths while eating a rabbit talking to a guy who wanted to buy my dughter. The few mentions of homosexuality in the Bible need to be looked at in context.

Next comes the 'unnatural' crap - there are several mammals in the animal kingdom besides humans that are born homosexual, and even a few that are monogomos, again irrelevant to this thread.

Let me also say I am hugely sick of homosexuality being called a lifestyle. Homosexuality is not a lifestyle - nor is race or color, jetsetting, traveling, adventuring, naturalist these are lifestyles. To paraphrase a really ignorant repeated comment - Get it?

This thread is about the bucks spent on prop 8 a law in one state which will soon be overturned- along with several equality laws which will soon be passed in other states (thank God).

I for one have no problem with the 83 mil spent by both sides hell we gave BoA more than that so they could pay bonuses and buy merrill lynch- at least the passion generated by both sides added some money to CAs economy - I hear they could use it.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
I have been following this thread for the past couple of days and it just amazes me that anyone would even bother replying to Aermacchi. There is no reasoning with this type of individual. Fortunately, he is a dying breed, a breed that has no use in an evolving society. Only time and evolution will free us from the hateful, bigoted and ignorant views of such primitive souls.

Peace


[edit on 4-2-2009 by TERAKO68]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Well - money spent isn't money wasted unless it is thrown out of the country or invested poorly by those receiving.

I wonder how many people quoted the founders of this country and writers of the original constitution when trying to prove slavery was okay...it is all context on how one perceives it when it is not written in a literal sense.

However you read the bible, I do not see why a gay couple should not be allowed to be joined. They are born that way just like you are born with whatever hair color you have. Is it natural? I do not think so. Are there cases out there? Yes.

Equal rights.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   
I blame those who are afraid of change......












/ points towards Religious people.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhedonFan
Next comes the 'unnatural' crap - there are several mammals in the animal kingdom besides humans that are born homosexual, and even a few that are monogomos, again irrelevant to this thread.


We never make this a class distinction GAYS DO! How you have sex is entirely up to you!



Let me also say I am hugely sick of homosexuality being called a lifestyle. Homosexuality is not a lifestyle - nor is race or color, jetsetting, traveling, adventuring, naturalist these are lifestyles. To paraphrase a really ignorant repeated comment


Oh rly? what is the politically correct thing to call it now smart guy? A culture? or is it the third sex likek male female and gay (it is all right if I use the word "gay" isn't it? I wouldn't want to make you sick PffT)

- Get it?




This thread is about the bucks spent on prop 8 a law in one state which will soon be overturned- along with several equality laws which will soon be passed in other states (thank God).


Yeah right like God would have anything to do with that lol Don'count your chickens hotshot because of people like you who can't take NO for an answer the Churches of all denominations are getting behind this one so don't count chickens or is it twinks



OK so first of all Jesus never condemned gay marriage that whole argument is bullox, and irrelevant to this thread.


The Bible assumes you have common sense guy Jesus never condemns anyone for marrying their car or their house or their boat either but does that mean he is all for it ?

GET REAL!

The Bible is explicit when God made eve he said a woman will leave her parents and cleave to her husband. I don't think Jesus ever anticipated how utterly ridiculous some of these arguments can reach



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Oh The hypocrisy here is just amazing! Second class citizen my BUTT! You guys have it so good we have to walk on eggshells saying any damn thing about you or we get hit for hate crimes while GAYS on the other hand can say whatever they want about Christians and that is all they do is BITCH about them while in the same voice expecting us to not be affected and vote for this asinine proposition.

Guess what smart guy, Ill bet NOT ONE of the homeless you are squawking about is warm and comfortable because YOU have taken it upon yourself to take them into your home
feed them.

I HAVE!

Untill the gays can step up to the pump and feed as many starving and house as many of the homeless as the religious do, Then and only till then can we get into an argument about that. until then

STAY ON TOPIC!

[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]


Have is so good lol! What planet do you come from sir? I am from South Carolina! What that essentially means is that I've lost out on job promotions over just speculation that I might be gay. When a married religious nut lady hit on me at work and turned her down and told her nicely that I was gay and not interested. I was fired for being, "hard to get along with". True hate crime is going to a religious school by force of parents and having not only the administrators and students harass one daily even so much as to throw rocks at the student and spit on him. Then the audacity to have the person stand up to the bully and look them in the eye finally!

Dear sir you will find that not only did I care for my Alzheimer's stricken grandfather from the time I was 13 until I was 18 and watched him die in what used to be my bedroom. For a good number of years I raised my niece and nephew when their mom was out being a drug addict. I most certainly have done much work with the homeless and donate several days a week doing down in the dirt work for the homeless and many other organizations that benefit the needy. Yes, several homeless people have lived in my home.

Yes, the religious feed the needy if it benefits them to have conversion locked up as a stipulation for charity. Haha it was the Christian churches that denied joining together with other churches in a citywide move to help the homeless. They flat out said that if other religions were involved they would pull out!






[edit on 4/2/2009 by toochaos4u]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TERAKO68
I have been following this thread for the past couple of days and it just amazes me that anyone would even bother replying to Aermacchi. There is no reasoning with this type of individual. Fortunately, he is a dying breed, a breed that has no use in an evolving society. Only time and evolution will free us from the hateful, bigoted and ignorant views of such primitive souls.

Peace


[edit on 4-2-2009 by TERAKO68]


hah ha don't confuse the issue guy their is no BS'ing me and that is all anyone has been trying to do. These arguments DON'T HOLD UP plane and simple



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by toochaos4u

Have is so good lol! What planet do you come from sir? I am from South Carolina! What that essentially means is that I've lost out on job promotions over just speculation that I might be gay. When a married religious nut lady hit on me at work and turned her down and told her nicely that I was gay and not interested. I was fired for being, "hard to get along with". True hate crime is going to a religious school by force of parents and having not only the administrators and students harass one daily even so much as to throw rocks at the student and spit on him. Then the audacity to have the person stand up to the bully and look them in the eye finally!

Dear sir you will find that not only did I care for my Alzheimer's stricken grandfather from the time I was 13 until I was 18 and watched him die in what used to be my bedroom. For a good number of years I raised my niece and nephew when their mom was out being a drug addict. I most certainly have done much work with the homeless and donate several days a week doing down in the dirt work for the homeless and many other organizations that benefit the needy. Yes, several homeless people have lived in my home.



Yes, the religious feed the needy if it benefits them to have conversion locked up as a stipulation for charity. Haha it was the Christian churches that denied joining together with other churches in a citywide move to help the homeless. They flat out said that if other religions were involved they would pull out!


I have never seen ANY one in ANY church say "we won't feed you till you accept the lord" Frankly I think it is just more BS the rest of your post is none of my business.

BTW next time when someone hits on you, telling them what kind of sex you are into is again NONE of our business. Just say you are not interested you never had to justify it any further than that





[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seaman_Richie
I blame those who are afraid of change......
/ points towards Religious people.


you wanna change stuff change yourself. As for marriage between one man and one woman We like it just the way it is and don't think gays would make any improvements to it.

in fact, going by the places that have allowed it, the idea has turned it into a complete pathetic joke and marriage has declined, families have suffered, and in Mass. they have government paid for announcements suggesting guys try a circle jerk in highschools there FACT!


What same-sex "marriage" has done to Massachusetts
It's far worse than most people realize
October 20, 2008

by Brian Camenker

Anyone who thinks that same-sex “marriage” is a benign eccentricity which won’t affect the average person should consider what it has done in Massachusetts. It’s become a hammer to force the acceptance and normalization of homosexuality on everyone. And this train is moving fast. What has happened so far is only the beginning.

On November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court announced its Goodridge opinion, ruling that it was unconstitutional not to allow same-sex “marriage.” Six months later, homosexual marriages began to be performed.
The public schools

The homosexual “marriage” onslaught in public schools across the state started soon after the November 2003, court decision.

*

At my own children's high school there was a school-wide assembly to celebrate same-sex “marriage” in early December, 2003. It featured an array of speakers, including teachers at the school who announced that they would be “marrying” their same-sex partners and starting families either through adoption or artificial insemination. Literature on same-sex marriage – how it is now a normal part of society – was handed out to the students.
*

Within months it was brought into the middle schools. In September, 2004, an 8th-grade teacher in Brookline, MA, told National Public Radio that the marriage ruling had opened up the floodgates for teaching homosexuality. “In my mind, I know that, `OK, this is legal now.' If somebody wants to challenge me, I'll say, `Give me a break. It's legal now,'” she told NPR. She added that she now discusses gay sex with her students as explicitly as she desires. For example, she said she tells the kids that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex toys.
*

By the following year it was in elementary school curricula. Kindergartners were given picture books telling them that same-sex couples are just another kind of family, like their own parents. In 2005, when David Parker of Lexington, MA – a parent of a kindergartner – strongly insisted on being notified when teachers were discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, the school had him arrested and put in jail overnight.

Second graders at the same school were read a book, “King and King”, about two men who have a romance and marry each other, with a picture of them kissing. When parents Rob and Robin Wirthlin complained, they were told that the school had no obligation to notify them or allow them to opt-out their child.
*

In 2006 the Parkers and Wirthlins filed a federal Civil Rights lawsuit to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt-out their elementary-school children when homosexual-related subjects were taught. The federal judges dismissed the case. The judges ruled that because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children, and that schools have no obligation to notify parents or let them opt-out their children! Acceptance of homosexuality had become a matter of good citizenship!

Think about that: Because same-sex marriage is “legal”, a federal judge has ruled that the schools now have a duty to portray homosexual relationships as normal to children, despite what parents think or believe!
*

In 2006, in the elementary school where my daughter went to Kindergarten, the parents of a third-grader were forced to take their child out of school because a man undergoing a sex-change operation and cross-dressing was being brought into class to teach the children that there are now “different kinds of families.” School officials told the mother that her complaints to the principal were considered “inappropriate behavior.”
*

Libraries have also radically changed. School libraries across the state, from elementary school to high school, now have shelves of books to normalize homosexual behavior and the lifestyle in the minds of kids, some of them quite explicit and even pornographic. Parents complaints are ignored or met with hostility.

Over the past year, homosexual groups have been using taxpayer money to distribute a large, slick hardcover book celebrating homosexual marriage titled “Courting Equality” into every school library in the state.
*

It’s become commonplace in Massachusetts schools for teachers to prominently display photos of their same-sex “spouses” and occasionally bring them to school functions. Both high schools in my own town now have principals who are “married” to their same-sex partners, whom they bring to school and introduce to the students.
*

“Gay days” in schools are considered necessary to fight “intolerance” which may exist against same-sex relationships. Hundreds of high schools and even middle schools across the state now hold “gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender appreciation days”. They “celebrate” homosexual marriage and move forward to other behaviors such as cross-dressing and transsexuality. In my own town, a school committee member recently announced that combating “homophobia” is now a top priority.

Once homosexuality has been normalized, all boundaries will come down. The schools are already moving on to normalizing transgenderism (including cross-dressing and sex changes). The state-funded Commission on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth includes leaders who are transsexuals.

Public health

*

The Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health is “married” to another man. In 2007 he told a crowd of kids at a state-sponsored youth event that it’s “wonderful being gay” and he wants to make sure there’s enough HIV testing available for all of them.
*

Since homosexual marriage became “legal” the rates of HIV / AIDS have gone up considerably in Massachusetts. This year public funding to deal with HIV/AIDS has risen by $500,000.
*

Citing “the right to marry” as one of the “important challenges” in a place where “it’s a great time to be gay”, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health helped produce The Little Black Book, Queer in the 21st Century, a hideous work of obscene pornography which was given to kids at Brookline High School on April 30, 2005. Among other things, it gives “tips” to boys on how to perform oral sex on other males, masturbate other males, and how to “safely” have someone urinate on you for sexual pleasure. It also included a directory of bars in Boston where young men meet for anonymous sex.

Domestic violence

*

Given the extreme dysfunctional nature of homosexual relationships, the Massachusetts Legislature has felt the need to spend more money every year to deal with skyrocketing homosexual domestic violence. This year $350,000 was budgeted, up $100,000 from last year.

Business

*

All insurance in Massachusetts must now recognize same-sex “married” couples in their coverage. This includes auto insurance, health insurance, life insurance, etc.
*

Businesses must recognize same-sex “married” couples in all their benefits, activities, etc., regarding both employees and customers.
*

The wedding industry is required serve the homosexual community if requested. Wedding photographers, halls, caterers, etc., must do same-sex marriages or be arrested for discrimination.
*

Businesses are often “tested” for tolerance by homosexual activists. Groups of homosexual activists often go into restaurants or bars and publicly kiss and fondle each other to test whether the establishment demonstrates sufficient “equality” — now that homosexual marriage is “legal”. In fact, more and more overt displays of homosexual affection are seen in public places across the state to reinforce "marriage equality".

Legal profession

*

The Massachusetts Bar Exam now tests lawyers on their knowledge of same-sex "marriage" issues. In 2007, a Boston man, Stephen Dunne, failed the Massachusetts bar exam because he refused to answer the questions in it about homosexual marriage.
*

Issues regarding homosexual “families” are now firmly entrenched in the Massachusetts legal system. In many firms, lawyers in Massachusetts practicing family law must now attend seminars on homosexual "marriage". There are also now several homosexual judges overseeing the Massachusetts family courts.

Adoption of children to homosexual “married” couples

*

Homosexual “married” couples can now demand to be able to adopt children the same as normal couples. Catholic Charities decided to abandon handling adoptions rather submit to regulations requiring them to allow homosexuals to adopt the children in their care.
*

In 2006 the Massachusetts Department of Social Services (DSS) honored two men “married” to each other as their “Parents of the Year”. The men already adopted a baby through DSS (against the wishes of the baby’s birth parents). According to news reports, the day after that adoption was final DSS approached the men about adopting a second child. Homosexuals now appear to be put in line for adopting children a. of heterosexual parents by state agencies in Massachusetts.

Government mandates

*

In 2004, Governor Mitt Romney ordered Justices of the Peace to perform homosexual marriages when requested or be fired. At least one Justice of the Peace decided to resign.
*

Also thanks to Gov. Romney, marriage licenses in Massachusetts now have “Party A and Party B” instead of “husband and wife.” Romney did not have a legal requirement to do this; he did it on his own. (See more on this below.)
*

Since homosexual relationships are now officially “normal”, the Legislature now gives enormous tax money to homosexual activist groups. In particular, the Massachusetts Commission on Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Youth is made up of the most radical and militant homosexual groups which target children in the schools. This year they are getting $700,000 of taxpayer money to go into the public schools.
*

In 2008 Massachusetts changed the state Medicare laws to include homosexual “married” couples in the coverage.

The public square

*

Since gay “marriage”, annual gay pride parades have become more prominent. There are more politicians and corporations participating, and even police organizations take part. And the envelope gets pushed further and further. There is now a profane “Dyke March” through downtown Boston, and recently a “transgender” parade in Northampton that included bare-chested women who have had their breasts surgically removed so they could “become” men. Governor Patrick even marched with his “out lesbian” 17-year old daughter in the 2008 Boston Pride event, right behind a “leather” group brandishing a black & blue flag, whips and chains!

The media

*

Boston media, particularly the Boston Globe newspaper, regularly does feature stories and news stories portraying homosexual “married” couples where regular married couples would normally be used. It’s “equal”, they insist, so there must be no difference in the coverage. Also, the newspaper advice columns now deal with homosexual "marriage" issues, and how to properly accept it.
*

A growing number of news reporters and TV anchors are openly “married” homosexuals who march in the “gay pride” parades.

Is gay marriage actually legal in Massachusetts?

Like everywhere else in America, the imposition of same-sex marriage on the people of Massachusetts was a combination of radical, arrogant judges and pitifully cowardly politicians.

The Goodridge ruling resulted in a complete cave-in by politicians of both parties on this issue. Same-sex “marriage” is still illegal in Massachusetts. On November 18, 2003 the court merely ruled that it was unconstitutional not to allow it, and gave the Legislature six months to “take such action as it may deem appropriate.” Note that the Massachusetts Constitution strongly denies courts the power to make or change laws, or from ordering the other branches to take any action. The constitution effectively bans “judicial review” – a court changing or nullifying a law. Thus, the court did not order anything to happen; it simply rendered an opinion on that specific case. And the Legislature did nothing. The marriage statutes were never changed. However, against the advice of many, Gov. Romney took it upon himself to alter the state's marriage licenses to say "Party A and Party B" and order officials to perform same-sex "weddings" if asked, though he had no legal obligation to do so. Technically, same-sex marriages are still illegal in Massachusetts.

Nevertheless, we are having to live with it. And furthermore, this abdication of their proper constitutional roles by the Legislature and Governor has caused a domino effect as "copycat" rulings have been issued in California and Connecticut, with other states fearful it will happen there.
In conclusion

Homosexual “marriage” hangs over society like a hammer with the force of law. And it’s only just begun.

It’s pretty clear that the homosexual movement’s obsession with marriage is not because large numbers of them actually want to marry each other. Research shows that homosexual relationships are fundamentally dysfunctional on many levels, and “marriage” as we know it isn’t something they can achieve, or even desire. (In fact, over the last three months, the Sunday Boston Globe’s marriage section hasn’t had any photos of homosexual marriages. In the beginning it was full of them.) This is about putting the legal stamp of approval on homosexuality and imposing it with force throughout the various social and political institutions of a society that would never accept it otherwise. To the rest of America: You've been forewarned. www.massresistance.org...


[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


well thats why I'm Catholic!



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


thats why I'm Catholic



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 05:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
[mor


If you had a child that you knew would turn out to be gay would you deny it love? Would you deny your attachment to her ? Would you deny him care ? Of course you wouldn't so why would you deny it someone else ? Another damn straw man but here Ill humor you with this one so you'll STOP bringing up the same tactic.

NO I wouldn't deny them any of those things but when it comes to marriage IGNORANCE DENIED!



So you would not deny your own child, love, care and attachment but you would deny deny it to my child, if he or she would be gay.
You would even go as far as trying to deny me love care and attachment if I chose to cohabit with another person of the same sex as me and expect to be treated no differently to you.

How does the phrase go ? "What you deny another you deny me " ? "What you do unto the very least of these you do unto me "?
I can't remember who said that but they appear to be very wise words whose meaning runs far deeper then superficial sentences.

I fortunately live in a country where civil partnerships are now the norm between same sex couples. There was some kicking and screaming along the road to common sense but the dust has almost settled no.

No these civil partner don't have marriage certificates as marriage is a religious institution so one is not required, unless of course the couple want their partnership to be recognized by whatever god that they worship, then it's up to that particular cult to sort it out.


The decision to allow same sex couples the same rights as anyone else, was not made by voting. It was was allowed under the human rights act because it was simply, not disallowed, a human right to family life defined by love care and attachment, nothing to do with how a person chooses to have sex.

I am unsure how your civil rights work exactly, doesn't it go something like
"all men are equal under god "?

Clearly this assumption needs to be changed to "All men are equal unless they choose to have sex in a given way"
Or given that god is probably imaginary and the US is supposed to be a secular, then logically the word god should be removed from all statutes.

Your totalitarian posts are somewhat reminiscent of a certain little Austrian man with a small mustache. You appear to be desperately tying to protect your own marriage (if your married) from something, when no one is trying to impinge upon your life.

Many others have posted in this manner, the I am right and you are wrong, attitude without giving good reason for denying another human being love care and attachment.

I could not help but wonder as I cannot with you, whether these people are in fact in the gay closet or have some hang ups that they certainly don't know how to deal with.

This statement you made -



NO I wouldn't deny them any of those things but when it comes to marriage IGNORANCE DENIED!


Does not make any sense at all, it only shows that you are trying to deny somebody something without any logical reason., what on earth are you trying to hide ?



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
So you would not deny your own child, love, care and attachment but you would deny deny it to my child, if he or she would be gay.
You would even go as far as trying to deny me love care and attachment if I chose to cohabit with another person of the same sex as me and expect to be treated no differently to you.



Asked and answered THREE TIMES NOW



How does the phrase go ? "What you deny another you deny me " ? "What you do unto the very least of these you do unto me "?
I can't remember who said that but they appear to be very wise words whose meaning runs far deeper then superficial sentences.


Jesus said that but you already know that


I fortunately live in a country where civil partnerships are now the norm between same sex couples. There was some kicking and screaming along the road to common sense but the dust has almost settled no.No these civil partner don't have marriage certificates as marriage is a religious institution so one is not required, unless of course the couple want their partnership to be recognized by whatever god that they worship, then it's up to that particular cult to sort it out.


yeah so?


The decision to allow same sex couples the same rights as anyone else, was not made by voting. It was was allowed under the human rights act because it was simply, not disallowed, a human right to family life defined by love care and attachment, nothing to do with how a person chooses to have sex.


Pssst,, moocowman, C'mere, Pssst C'mere, closer

(whispering) do you know why it was never "dis allowed"?


BECUASE IT WAS NEVER ALLOWED TO BE DIS-ALLOWED IN THE FIRST PLACE!



I am unsure how your civil rights work exactly, doesn't it go something like "all men are equal under god "?


No thats wrong, it's "under the law"



Clearly this assumption needs to be changed to "All men are equal unless they choose to have sex in a given way"
Or given that god is probably imaginary and the US is supposed to be a secular, then logically the word god should be removed from all statutes.


Well there you go again thinking the laws apply different to gays when they don't. Any gay man can marry any woman he wants if she will have him JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE! Or do gays think they are special and above the law?



Your totalitarian posts are somewhat reminiscent of a certain little Austrian man with a small mustache. You appear to be desperately tying to protect your own marriage (if your married) from something, when no one is trying to impinge upon your life.Many others have posted in this manner, the I am right and you are wrong, attitude without giving good reason for denying another human being love care and attachment.


Not ONE person here has said they are denying gays love care or attachement So KNOCK IT OFF and quit putting words in everyones mouth. If I said that or anyone else for that matter then SHOW ME THE COPY PASTED QUOTE! I tire of your silly circular logic and semantics




I could not help but wonder as I cannot with you, whether these people are in fact in the gay closet or have some hang ups that they certainly don't know how to deal with.



lemme guess, you're going to use the old "he must have repressed latent homosexual proclivities canard"






This statement you made -
"NO I wouldn't deny them any of those things but when it comes to marriage IGNORANCE DENIED! "


ok


Does not make any sense at all, it only shows that you are trying to deny somebody something without any logical reason., what on earth are you trying to hide ?


what part of "when it comes to marriage IGNORANCE DENIED!"

do you not understand? Here let me say it another way,

Gays are welcome to sharing caring, loving and attachching all they want

Gays can also get married as I have said no one is denying them that

BUT, two people of the same sex getting married cannot and their is a very logical reason for this.

IT'S AGAINST THE LAW!

DEAL WITH IT!



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


I'm sorry sir, but this source you keep posting is obviously, blatantly propoganda. It's sad that something trying so hard to be Christian can come so far from being that.

From your source:


* It takes approximately $300,000 to take care of each AIDS victim, so thanks to the promiscuous lifestyle of homosexuals, medical insurance rates have been skyrocketing for all of us


And then:


Since homosexual marriage became “legal” the rates of HIV / AIDS have gone up considerably in Massachusetts. This year public funding to deal with HIV/AIDS has risen by $500,000.


So in the four years since gay marriage became legal in Mass., approximately 1.5 more people got infected with HIV/AIDS? That is actually an amazing reduction in infection rates.

That would mean that in Mass. it takes about 3 years for someone to get infected with the HIV virus. That's probably the lowest infection rate in the entire US (according to your source). Actually, if we include inflation and increased healthcare funding, it probably means the infection rate has remained about the same.

Of course, your source is neither accurate, truthful, unbiased, or Christian, so I would expect nothing less from a group that spews only hate from a forked tongue.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 





I am unsure how your civil rights work exactly, doesn't it go something like "all men are equal under god "? No thats wrong, it's "under the law"


So the law has nothing to do with religion, so any christian moral authority is now defunct in the argument.

This will also negate any reference to marriage, as this as we have established is a religious custom which has no place in secular law.

We are then left with all men are equal under the law, unless of course the law treats them unequally.

Two men choosing to cohabit but being prevented by the law makes a complete ass of the law which allows a man and woman cohabit, yet claims all men are equal.

Is this not the very same law that claimed all men are equal, yet only applied to white men ?

Yes the law is quite clear that two men can cohabit but cannot have the legal status of civil partnership.

There is absolutely no difference between this and a law that says any student can sit anywhere on a bus unless of course they are black. They can still sit anywhere on the bus except where they cannot.


Clearly then, any law which claims "All men are equal under the law" should in fact state that "All men are are equal except under certain laws"


There is a world of difference between a law and a just law, what I find most incomprehensible about this argument is how any black person could possibly agree with you and wonder where Dr Kings continence would lead
him.

Fortunately for the world, ancient supernatural religious beliefs are disappearing fast, xtianity appears to be imploding the quickest. With this out of the way humanity may well have the opportunity to move into the age of reason. Until then you can snuggle up on the sofa with your good wife content in the fact that those nasty gay people have not got their way or they'll have you to deal with.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join