Thread: Same sex marriage

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

And the decline of America continues................

You're right Davis. But sadly, with Obama reelected, I'm afraid we haven't seen anything yet.

^^

The Washington state gay marriage is now at 53% and is being called a "pass."

^ That is what most of these blokes seem to forget,bush & his cronies absolutley ruined the place and obama got the blame.

Oregon, another state to join the list.

Today, February 19, faith leaders and Oregon United for Marriage Chief Petitioner Jeana Frazzini turned in 2,000 sponsorship signatures on the Freedom to Marry and Religious Protection Initiative—twice the number of signatures needed to move into the ballot title process.

Oregon United for Marriage collected the signatures in one week, one of the fastest turnaround times for a sponsorship petition. The signatures come from 29 counties across Oregon, counties representing over 97 percent of Oregon’s population. Leaders from across the state—including Governor John Kitzhaber and former Governor Barbara Roberts, plus state legislators, mayors, and city and county elected officials—signed the sponsorship petitions. Over 70 clergy and faith leaders from numerous denominations signed the sponsorship petition, representing Protestant, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Lutheran-Catholic, Methodist, Jewish, Quaker, and Buddhist faith traditions.

Once the Secretary of State Elections Division processes the signatures and ensures that the requirement for 1,000 valid signatures is met, the ballot title process begins. After a ballot title is approved, Oregon United for Marriage can get to work collecting the 116,284 valid signatures required to qualify for the November 2014 ballot. We’ll need your help; Sign up to volunteer or contribute today.

Obama Evolves Even Further, Denies That State Marriage Bans Are Constitutional

President Obama’s endorsement of marriage equality was an historic occasion, but he also qualified it somewhat by suggesting that states should continue to decide whether to discriminate against their citizens. In an interview released this morning with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, the president indicated that his views on marriage have evolved even further. He now says that he cannot imagine how a state’s decision to discriminate against same-sex couples could be constitutional:

“Well, I’ve gotta tell you that — in terms of practical politics, what I’ve seen is a healthy debate taking place state by state, and not every state has the exact same attitudes and cultural mores. And I — you know, my thinking was that this is traditionally a state issue and — that it will work itself out,” he said. “On the other hand — what I also believe is that the core principle that people don’t get discriminated against — that’s one of our core values. And it’s in our Constitution.”

Stephanopoulos then asked whether Obama could imagine a circumstance wherein a state’s gay marriage ban could pass constitutional muster.

“Well, I can’t, personally. I cannot,” Obama responded. “That’s part of the reason I said, ultimately, I think that, same-sex couples should be able to marry. That’s my personal position. And, frankly, that’s the position that’s reflected — in the briefs that we filed — in the Supreme Court.”

It's laughable that the ones that allow same sex marriage are either ABOVE the Mason - Dixon line or out on the west coast.

Originally Posted by ralphlsasser

It's laughable that the ones that allow same sex marriage are either ABOVE the Mason - Dixon line or out on the west coast.

Yeah...we like to keep the pre-evolved down in the swamps where they like it.

I forgot where I read it,……if only Republican children could come out poor.

GOP Senator Rob Portman (R-OH) on CNN has come out for gay marriage, all because his son Will, who’s a junior at Yale, came out to him as gay two years ago.

Portman was against gay marriage, voted for the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), voted to ban gays from adopting in Washington, DC, and supported a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Now he’s changed his mind, all because his son Will had the courage to come out to dad.

UPDATE: Conference-goers at the annual CPAC conference today – the biggest and most important conservative/GOP conference of the year – wasted no time in blasting Portman for having a gay son (it’s Portman’s “fault”), and for “agreeing with sodomy.”


Senator Portman: My son is gay, I'm for gay marriage

_____________________________________

Published on Mar 12, 2013

Lynne Osterman who was elected as a Republican to the Minnesota legislature says she regrets casting a "political expedient" vote for Minnesota's "Defense of Marriage" law that outlawed same-sex marriage. She tears up when talking about it and urges Minnesota lawmakers to legalize same-sex marriage.

^^Conservatives have a long and storied history of either being against something or simply not caring about it until it effects them personally.

Studies show that conservatives are lacking in empathy, more fearful, and favour low-effort thought processes.

^
Heh...what a crock.

Study after study shows how Placebos work better on Libtards than Conservatives.

You scare easier too!

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Heh...what a crock.

Is it though, Booners.

Would you hold yourself out as representative of the intellect/psychology of conservatives?

^
Why do you have your repo turned off, Pee Wee?

Tired of seeing nothing but RED?

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Would you hold yourself out as representative of the intellect/psychology of conservatives?

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Why do you have your repo turned off, Pee Wee? Tired of seeing nothing but RED?

excellent, you answered his question perfectly

Yep, that he did indeed.

Marriage is a union between a Man and a Woman .

"Marriage" is just a relatively modern construct based on Judeo-Christian principles and has meant different things throughout the ages. Extending it to include same sex couples is just natural progression.

No it isn't. Marriage predates the earliest records of the promised people in the chosen land by many millenia. Homosexual marriage however does not have any traditions or precedents in any culture with the exception of very rare cases in ancient China, and they didn't get the religious ceremony reserved for the proper marriage.

Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. 'If it weren't for children, there would be no need for an institution concerned with sex.' Bertrand Russell, liberal philosopher. Gays don't produce children that have to be protected by the marriage of their parents.

Originally Posted by Rainfall

No it isn't. Marriage predates the earliest records of the promised people in the chosen land by many millenia. Homosexual marriage however does not have any traditions or precedents in any culture with the exception of very rare cases in ancient China, and they didn't get the religious ceremony reserved for the proper marriage.

I was obviously referring to the modern concept of the 'traditional' marriage - I say 'traditional' because it really isn't traditional. Marriage has been a constantly changing and evolving concept. Polygamy used to be a relatively common form of marriage and is still practised today, and even the notion of same-sex marriage isn't new: it was practised up until the 13th century when the Church became involved and declared it 'immoral'. So in fact, in the grand scheme of things, the 'traditional' concept of marriage as being between one man and one woman is a relatively new development.

Also remembering of course that many of the same arguments for 'traditional' marriage today were also applied not that very long ago to actively deny inter-racial marriages; something that is increasingly common today.

Originally Posted by Rainfall

Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. 'If it weren't for children, there would be no need for an institution concerned with sex.' Bertrand Russell, liberal philosopher. Gays don't produce children that have to be protected by the marriage of their parents.

Nonsense. You are not required to even be married to have kids nor 'protect' them. And even then how do you explain couples who use birth-control or childless couples (either by choice or infertility). Should they be denied the right to marry as well.

Originally Posted by Rainfall

No it isn't. Marriage predates the earliest records of the promised people in the chosen land by many millenia. Homosexual marriage however does not have any traditions or precedents in any culture with the exception of very rare cases in ancient China, and they didn't get the religious ceremony reserved for the proper marriage.

Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. 'If it weren't for children, there would be no need for an institution concerned with sex.' Bertrand Russell, liberal philosopher. Gays don't produce children that have to be protected by the marriage of their parents.

I often wonder why arrogance is only found in Humans. Perhaps it is not?

Here are some real facts for you freakoids. The Bible and all religious texts are....wait for it....made up. They are fiction. All of them. It is all bullshit. So, when we can accept that simple fact, we then understand that a marriage ceremony is a load of balls as well when related to religion. After all, how many of the millions of people who are married actually go to church and all that shit at times when there is not a show and tell ceremony to go to - 5%? maybe 7%? I doubt it is as high as that. So really the actual marriage ceremony has fuck all to do with religion because the vast amount of people there are not "real believers" they are just faking it.

So, a marriage ceremony is a show, and there are no one better than gays when it comes to putting on a show. And you retards want to stop them doing this because you believe some shit in a made up book? Do you take Lord of the Rings as real as well?

Bloody hell - if two people want to put on a show of love for their friends and family, and happen to believe in some shite made up religion, then who the fuck are you all to tell them that your made up god wouldn't like it? What really gets my goat is the discrimination against unmarried people, taxing people basically who chose not to believe in some bullshit book written a few hundred years ago.

....do you think Jesus would beat up a couple of gays for being gay? Surely he would see their love and approve of them, being that he lived in a time when is was the fashion for men to have a young man to arse fuck when their wife was on the blob.

Originally Posted by Koojo

Originally Posted by pseudolus

[


What really gets my goat is the discrimination against unmarried people, taxing people basically who chose not to believe in some bullshit book written a few hundred years ago.

UM, you can get married without going anywhere near a church or muttering anything about god or whatever, at the registery office.
" do you? Do you? sign here, that'll be 10 bucks please."

So what? Marriage is a load of bull shit, and the only reason we as humans do it, regardless of some bullshit made up crap from another poster, is religion. Civil marriages are new, church ones are not.

So why should anyone be told "you are not allowed to marry" when their only objections has to do with fake bullshit religions because really it has fuck all to do with anyone else who does what, except when those who chose not to or can not get married lose out on tax breaks. That is abhorrent.

Colorado’s governor on Thursday signed into law a bill that allows same-sex couples in the state to enter into civil unions.

Supporters of the bill packed into the History Colorado Museum to celebrate the signing of SB11, the Colorado Civil Union Act.

“It’s about fucking time,” one woman said after kissing her partner.

The new law provides committed gay and lesbian couples with many of the legal protections and rights provided to married couples, including adopting children and making end-of-life decisions for a partner.

The development is a dramatic change from 2006, when voters approved an amendment to the state constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage.

Colorado state Reps. Mark Ferrandino and Pat Steadman introduced the first civil unions bill in 2011. The legislation was blocked by Republican lawmakers until this year, when Democrats won back the state House.