Colorado votes NO to gay marriage

[RightWingFerret]

we can only hope Colorado joins the ranks of North Carolina and gives Bambi the finger and a one year supply of Purnina Dog Chow in 2013.

 

[LockeJaw]

we can only hope Colorado joins the ranks of North Carolina and gives Bambi the finger and a one year supply of Purnina Dog Chow in 2013.

Is that to fatten up Bo for his farewell dinner at the WH?

 

[RightWingFerret]

I think Obama prefers the white meat of saint bernards.

 

[thereisnospoon]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/us/colorado-rejects-same-sex-civil-unions.html?_r=2&hp

Yet another state to reject gay marriage. And Colorado of all places.

This was a huge fuck up for Team Obama. Most Americans do not support gay marriage. I dont care about the issue, but I DO CARE about defeating Obama. And this topic may have pushed the snowball over the slope that will accumulate enough momentum to grow on itself and kick him out of Washington. Yay!

Bunch of God damned backwards assed bible thumping hicks...
Right lefties?

 

[bodecea]

I thank god every day that we haven't become the Stalinist Republic you favor.

And you long for a government like that of Iran.

Yeah, right: Opposing gay marriage is the equivalent of stoning homosexuals to death.

Why does anyone even bother talking to liberals?

In order not to fossilize.

 

[bodecea]

I thank god every day that we haven't become the Stalinist Republic you favor.

And you long for a government like that of Iran.

Yeah, right: Opposing gay marriage is the equivalent of stoning homosexuals to death.

Why does anyone even bother talking to liberals?

Ah...another "You gays are so lucky you live in a place where we only deny you equal rights. We COULD stone you like they do in Iran" thread.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Its the "in your face" activism that turns people off, from any group. I'm all for things like ensuring minorities aren't discriminated against, but in your face tactics from the NAACP turn me off from it. Same with immigration rights, etc, etc.

As opposed to "passive activism" in which everyone just sits arounds and wishes for things to change? Give me a break.

Nothing changes in this country unless people get up, get out and march. You just don't like it when things change because change is scary to you.

March? Please. That just pisses off people even more.
Imagine trying to get to work or the hospital with your sick child and these cock suckers are blocking the road on account of some very unpopular cause?
Yeah, that'll get us to support them.
As with OWS, people like that are not gaining any traction for their cause nor are they acquiring any friends.
So go ahead and march. Be careful you don't get run over.
Protest is fine. Just don't make your problem my problem.
In other words, the right to protest ends where everyone else's rights begin

 

[bigrebnc1775]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/us/colorado-rejects-same-sex-civil-unions.html?_r=2&hp

Yet another state to reject gay marriage. And Colorado of all places.

This was a huge fuck up for Team Obama. Most Americans do not support gay marriage. I dont care about the issue, but I DO CARE about defeating Obama. And this topic may have pushed the snowball over the slope that will accumulate enough momentum to grow on itself and kick him out of Washington. Yay!

Oh god. They look like Mississippi!

Haha, you mean "Oh God, they look like North Carolina".

Thank you if only other states would want to be like North Carolina No Democratic Gov. would want to run for re-election.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And you long for a government like that of Iran.

Yeah, right: Opposing gay marriage is the equivalent of stoning homosexuals to death.

Why does anyone even bother talking to liberals?

Ah...another "You gays are so lucky you live in a place where we only deny you equal rights. We COULD stone you like they do in Iran" thread.

There no rights to protect illegal acts.

 

[J.E.D]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/us/colorado-rejects-same-sex-civil-unions.html?_r=2&hp

Yet another state to reject gay marriage. And Colorado of all places.

This was a huge fuck up for Team Obama. Most Americans do not support gay marriage. I dont care about the issue, but I DO CARE about defeating Obama. And this topic may have pushed the snowball over the slope that will accumulate enough momentum to grow on itself and kick him out of Washington. Yay!

You're either a liar or you need to get your news from someplace else. It was killed by the state House Speaker. Most people in Colorado and most of the state legislature support the bill. And btw, the bill was about civil unions, not marriage.

 

[J.E.D]

I thank god every day that we haven't become the Stalinist Republic you favor.

And you long for a government like that of Iran.

Yeah, right: Opposing gay marriage is the equivalent of stoning homosexuals to death.

Why does anyone even bother talking to liberals?

Shut up, dumb ass.

 

[HUGGY]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/us/colorado-rejects-same-sex-civil-unions.html?_r=2&hp

Yet another state to reject gay marriage. And Colorado of all places.

This was a huge fuck up for Team Obama. Most Americans do not support gay marriage. I dont care about the issue, but I DO CARE about defeating Obama. And this topic may have pushed the snowball over the slope that will accumulate enough momentum to grow on itself and kick him out of Washington. Yay!

Sounds like a personal problem.

 

[clevergirl]

Colorado already passed a referendum in 2006 granting same sex couples ALL of the benefits of marriage. So called "same sex marriage acts" are a direct assault on religious institutions. It is a bogus back door attack on freedom of religion.

No dear, this has nothing to do with religion.

This has to do with government and benefits.

You're still free to practice your religion.

No, dear, this has everything to do with religion. Matrimony "marriage" is a covenant made between a man and a woman. A covenant instituted by God.

As I stated, the "government benefits" in the state of Colorado had already been granted by referendum in 2006. Any homosexual couple can go out and have a civil ceremony and have these "benefits". But the act of "marriage" is an act that has historically been granted between a "man and a woman". It is an institution that is historically religious.

That is why even the president (despite all of his evolving) is in agreement with Mitt Romney that this is a states right issue.

Religious Freedom is infringed upon when its rights and practices are forced upon conscientious objectors- as it regularly is. link

 

[clevergirl]

Colorado already passed a referendum in 2006 granting same sex couples ALL of the benefits of marriage. So called "same sex marriage acts" are a direct assault on religious institutions. It is a bogus back door attack on freedom of religion.

No dear, this has nothing to do with religion.

This has to do with government and benefits.

You're still free to practice your religion.

Thank God, we haven't become a theocracy yet.

Believing that homosexuality is against nature and morally wrong as a society, does not a theocracy make.

 

[Political Junky]

Colorado already passed a referendum in 2006 granting same sex couples ALL of the benefits of marriage. So called "same sex marriage acts" are a direct assault on religious institutions. It is a bogus back door attack on freedom of religion.

No dear, this has nothing to do with religion.

This has to do with government and benefits.

You're still free to practice your religion.

No, dear, this has everything to do with religion. Matrimony "marriage" is a covenant made between a man and a woman. A covenant instituted by God.

As I stated, the "government benefits" in the state of Colorado had already been granted by referendum in 2006. Any homosexual couple can go out and have a civil ceremony and have these "benefits". But the act of "marriage" is an act that has historically been granted between a "man and a woman". It is an institution that is historically religious.

That is why even the president (despite all of his evolving) is in agreement with Mitt Romney that this is a states right issue.

Religious Freedom is infringed upon when its rights and practices are forced upon conscientious objectors- as it regularly is. link

Anyone, preacher or justice of the peace, performing a marriage ceremony says, "by the power invested in me from state of". Marriage is a legality, not a religious.

 

[clevergirl]

No dear, this has nothing to do with religion.

This has to do with government and benefits.

You're still free to practice your religion.

No, dear, this has everything to do with religion. Matrimony "marriage" is a covenant made between a man and a woman. A covenant instituted by God.

As I stated, the "government benefits" in the state of Colorado had already been granted by referendum in 2006. Any homosexual couple can go out and have a civil ceremony and have these "benefits". But the act of "marriage" is an act that has historically been granted between a "man and a woman". It is an institution that is historically religious.

That is why even the president (despite all of his evolving) is in agreement with Mitt Romney that this is a states right issue.

Religious Freedom is infringed upon when its rights and practices are forced upon conscientious objectors- as it regularly is. link

Anyone, preacher or justice of the peace, performing a marriage ceremony says, "by the power invested in me from state of". Marriage is a legality, not a religious.

That's right- and as I stated: when passing a "law" legalizing what is a religious act forcing homosexual marriage to be accepted- it forces some persons to act against their conscience- religious freedom is then infringed upon. If laws exist that grant the homosexuals the benefits of marriage...why must laws be changed to cater to a special group- when it then infringes upon a Constitutionally protected one?

Homosexual marriage is a back door attack on religious freedom.

 

[thereisnospoon]

So how are you going to prevent people from tossing the word marriage around? Pass a law?

That worked so well when people tried to prevent the word gay from meaning homosexual.

I doubt people will stand around at cocktail parties and talk about how their friends got "civil unionized".

That's my point. The legal definition would be "civil union" but colloquially everyone would refer to it as "marriage". Win/Win

What happens when gay couples have their ceremonies performed by religious institutions which also call it marriage?

"What happens when" "What if" "But what about"....
These are the questions liberals always ask. And these are the questions that make others conclude liberals are nothing but a big pain in the ass.

 

[bucs90]

Haha fags. jk

 

[starcraftzzz]

No, dear, this has everything to do with religion. Matrimony "marriage" is a covenant made between a man and a woman. A covenant instituted by God.

As I stated, the "government benefits" in the state of Colorado had already been granted by referendum in 2006. Any homosexual couple can go out and have a civil ceremony and have these "benefits". But the act of "marriage" is an act that has historically been granted between a "man and a woman". It is an institution that is historically religious.

That is why even the president (despite all of his evolving) is in agreement with Mitt Romney that this is a states right issue.

Religious Freedom is infringed upon when its rights and practices are forced upon conscientious objectors- as it regularly is. link

Anyone, preacher or justice of the peace, performing a marriage ceremony says, "by the power invested in me from state of". Marriage is a legality, not a religious.

That's right- and as I stated: when passing a "law" legalizing what is a religious act forcing homosexual marriage to be accepted- it forces some persons to act against their conscience- religious freedom is then infringed upon. If laws exist that grant the homosexuals the benefits of marriage...why must laws be changed to cater to a special group- when it then infringes upon a Constitutionally protected one?

Homosexual marriage is a back door attack on religious freedom.

So according to you allowing churches who want to marry gays do so is an attack on religious freedom.
Are you really so stupid that you think not forcing everyone to follow your religion means we are atttacking freedom

 

[starcraftzzz]

Colorado already passed a referendum in 2006 granting same sex couples ALL of the benefits of marriage. So called "same sex marriage acts" are a direct assault on religious institutions. It is a bogus back door attack on freedom of religion.

No dear, this has nothing to do with religion.

This has to do with government and benefits.

You're still free to practice your religion.

No, dear, this has everything to do with religion. Matrimony "marriage" is a covenant made between a man and a woman. A covenant instituted by God.

As I stated, the "government benefits" in the state of Colorado had already been granted by referendum in 2006. Any homosexual couple can go out and have a civil ceremony and have these "benefits". But the act of "marriage" is an act that has historically been granted between a "man and a woman". It is an institution that is historically religious.

That is why even the president (despite all of his evolving) is in agreement with Mitt Romney that this is a states right issue.

Religious Freedom is infringed upon when its rights and practices are forced upon conscientious objectors- as it regularly is. link

So you disagree with the supreme court when they said separate was not equal