Finally....the end of "gay" marriage....

[Kosh]

Nah, we know it's about Fishy not wanting those icky gays to use the word marriage...but when changing the name is proposed for everyone, he doesn't like that. He likes having his special little right all to his hetero self. Sorry...18 and counting now.

as usual, you have it backwards, wytchey.

you cliam that the issue is equality and tolerance, but its not. civil unions would give you equality, tolerance, fairness, and rights. But thats not what this is really about, is it?

If you would have the balls (oops, only your sperm donor has balls) to admit your true agenda, you might have some credibility. But as long as you continue the lie, your credibility is zero.

Why are you opposed to simply changing all civil marriages to civil unions, Fishy? I'd get behind that. Seems like a perfect compromise don't you think?

However your posts prove otherwise, you want the term "marriage" to punish the church and nothing more.

Otherwise you just defeated all your talking points in this thread.

 

[Redfish]

Nah, we know it's about Fishy not wanting those icky gays to use the word marriage...but when changing the name is proposed for everyone, he doesn't like that. He likes having his special little right all to his hetero self. Sorry...18 and counting now.

as usual, you have it backwards, wytchey.

you cliam that the issue is equality and tolerance, but its not. civil unions would give you equality, tolerance, fairness, and rights. But thats not what this is really about, is it?

If you would have the balls (oops, only your sperm donor has balls) to admit your true agenda, you might have some credibility. But as long as you continue the lie, your credibility is zero.

Why are you opposed to simply changing all civil marriages to civil unions, Fishy? I'd get behind that. Seems like a perfect compromise don't you think?

That would require banning all religions and their doctrines. Have you asked your local Imam if islam would be Ok with that? How about your local Rabbi, Priest, Minister, Pastor?

Should be also declare that 5000 years of human cultural history is now invalid?

Admit it, this whole gay marriage thing is about forced social acceptance, i.e. thought control. much like the hate crime legislation which attempts to punish thoughts rather than acts.

 

[Seawytch]

Well if you can see what you posted as being racist (the picture) then no one will be able to explain it to you.

I posted a picture of separate but equal which was ruled unconstitutional. Separate but equal is exactly what you are proposing when you say "gays can have civil unions". I thought that was clear, but apparently it needs to be explained to you. There is nothing racist in my posting a picture showing how the idea of separate but equal is unconstitutional.

All those "automatics" that are believed to exist when people get married are now just a myth (except for social security).

Just because you are married does not mean that you get everything if the legally binding will says otherwise (which can even block SS benefits).

No, they aren't and I gave you a pretty bipartisan link to prove it.

You want the church to be forced to accept your life choices and that is what this all about nothing more.

Only through public opinion..as they have been.

Churches becoming more gay-friendly, study shows

Most Lawyers vote (D) as they know that is who will create more laws and make them rich.

There will be no new laws that need to be created. The same laws will simply apply to gay consenting adult couples. No changes required.

So yes your far left laced propaganda posts show your political nature not to mention your racist post.

Good luck with your far left Obama drone posts.

I'm proud of you...you tried to discuss before your Tourette kicked in. Bravo Zulu!

 

[RDD_1210]

They can get that through civil unions, but choose to go after the term "marriage".

Good luck with that far left thinking of yours.

Goo d point. Gays could have achieved what they wanted through civil union legislation. BUt they outright rejected it. So the issue is not protection. The issue is as I said, tearing down the norms, mores and values of society.

right, this is all about FORCED SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE GAY LIFESTYLE AS NORMAL AND EQUAL TO HETEROSEXUAL HUMAN EXISTENCE.

Its not about equality, rights, families, tolerance, or legality--------this is all about finding a way for the government to mandate social acceptance of homosexuality as "normal"

But its not and never will be normal. homosexuality is an aberation of the human condition, its a sickness just as being bi-polar is a sickness.

Are bi-polar people not allowed to marry other bi-polar people?

Otherwise, solid analogy.

 

[Redfish]

as usual, you have it backwards, wytchey.

you cliam that the issue is equality and tolerance, but its not. civil unions would give you equality, tolerance, fairness, and rights. But thats not what this is really about, is it?

If you would have the balls (oops, only your sperm donor has balls) to admit your true agenda, you might have some credibility. But as long as you continue the lie, your credibility is zero.

Why are you opposed to simply changing all civil marriages to civil unions, Fishy? I'd get behind that. Seems like a perfect compromise don't you think?

However your posts prove otherwise, you want the term "marriage" to punish the church and nothing more.

Otherwise you just defeated all your talking points in this thread.

she defeats her own arguments in every thread on this topic. Its really tiresome

 

[bodecea]

The goal is for gay marriage to have the exact same legal protections that every other marriage has. No more, no less.

They can get that through civil unions, but choose to go after the term "marriage".

Good luck with that far left thinking of yours.

Goo d point. Gays could have achieved what they wanted through civil union legislation. BUt they outright rejected it. So the issue is not protection. The issue is as I said, tearing down the norms, mores and values of society.

We did? Wrongo.

 

[Seawytch]

as usual, you have it backwards, wytchey.

you cliam that the issue is equality and tolerance, but its not. civil unions would give you equality, tolerance, fairness, and rights. But thats not what this is really about, is it?

If you would have the balls (oops, only your sperm donor has balls) to admit your true agenda, you might have some credibility. But as long as you continue the lie, your credibility is zero.

Why are you opposed to simply changing all civil marriages to civil unions, Fishy? I'd get behind that. Seems like a perfect compromise don't you think?

That would require banning all religions and their doctrines. Have you asked your local Imam if islam would be Ok with that? How about your local Rabbi, Priest, Minister, Pastor?

Should be also declare that 5000 years of human cultural history is now invalid?

Admit it, this whole gay marriage thing is about forced social acceptance, i.e. thought control. much like the hate crime legislation which attempts to punish thoughts rather than acts.

No it wouldn't Drama Queen. We're talking about legal, not religious marriage. No wonder this is such a difficult topic for you...you haven't grasped the concept.

 

[Redfish]

Goo d point. Gays could have achieved what they wanted through civil union legislation. BUt they outright rejected it. So the issue is not protection. The issue is as I said, tearing down the norms, mores and values of society.

right, this is all about FORCED SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE GAY LIFESTYLE AS NORMAL AND EQUAL TO HETEROSEXUAL HUMAN EXISTENCE.

Its not about equality, rights, families, tolerance, or legality--------this is all about finding a way for the government to mandate social acceptance of homosexuality as "normal"

But its not and never will be normal. homosexuality is an aberation of the human condition, its a sickness just as being bi-polar is a sickness.

Are bi-polar people not allowed to marry other bi-polar people?

Otherwise, solid analogy.

Geez, you lefties are a thick headed bunch. Of course a bi-polar man can marry a bi-polar woman.

the analogy was that being bi-polar is a mental condition, just as being homosexual is a mental condition.

 

[Seawytch]

as usual, you have it backwards, wytchey.

you cliam that the issue is equality and tolerance, but its not. civil unions would give you equality, tolerance, fairness, and rights. But thats not what this is really about, is it?

If you would have the balls (oops, only your sperm donor has balls) to admit your true agenda, you might have some credibility. But as long as you continue the lie, your credibility is zero.

Why are you opposed to simply changing all civil marriages to civil unions, Fishy? I'd get behind that. Seems like a perfect compromise don't you think?

However your posts prove otherwise, you want the term "marriage" to punish the church and nothing more.

Otherwise you just defeated all your talking points in this thread.

The "church" has nothing to do with legal civil marriage. Nothing at all.

A Marriage License is what the states have decided they issue. If you don't like that, change the name, really. Give all consenting adult couples a civil union, not a civil marriage I don't care. You can call it anything you want from Civil Union to Civil Cabbage fucking Soup...just make it exactly the same for ALL couples. Easy peasy.

 

[deltex1]

No, "they" can't. Civil unions do not provide the exact same rights, benefits and protections that legal civil marriage provides.

Now, if you want to make ALL legal civil marriages into Civil Unions so those icky gays can't use the word "marriage" (although we've been marrying in churches for decades), go right ahead. That wouldn't put you afoul of the Constitution like your separate but equal idea does.

It goes far beyond the constitution of the USA...it goes to the constitution of humanity.

I nominate this for dumbest post of the month.

For a lesbo, you appear braindead.

 

[Redfish]

Why are you opposed to simply changing all civil marriages to civil unions, Fishy? I'd get behind that. Seems like a perfect compromise don't you think?

That would require banning all religions and their doctrines. Have you asked your local Imam if islam would be Ok with that? How about your local Rabbi, Priest, Minister, Pastor?

Should be also declare that 5000 years of human cultural history is now invalid?

Admit it, this whole gay marriage thing is about forced social acceptance, i.e. thought control. much like the hate crime legislation which attempts to punish thoughts rather than acts.

No it wouldn't Drama Queen. We're talking about legal, not religious marriage. No wonder this is such a difficult topic for you...you haven't grasped the concept.

a civil union for gays gives you all of the legal rights that you claim to want.

at the risk of being repetitious, you are not interested in equal rights, you are interested in forced social acceptance of your deviant lifestyle.

Until you admit your true agenda this is like pissing into the wind and wondering why your shoes are wet.

 

[SwimExpert]

what is being said, that you libtards cannot seem to comprehend, is that civil unions for gays SHOULD BE THE SAME LEGALLY AS MAN/WOMAN MARRIAGES.

No one wants to limit the rights of any citizen. But a gay union is not, and will never be, a marriage.

You fake conservatives really give me a hoot. You complain about the government intruding into people's lives, and the government trying to "protect" you from yourself. You complain that the government makes things too complicated and that there are too many laws and regulations. But then you turn around and throw it all away because you don't like the way two consenting adults have sex. So you orchestrate this whole gay marriage war, you insist that you're not trying to discriminate against gay people, you say that you want equality. But at every turn you fight tooth and nail to stop gay people from having the same fundamental rights to marry the person they love as the rest of us. You create an entirely new social institution, the civil union, you leave it under powered and ineffective, and then when people say that it's not the same, you apparently find fault with them. You sit back and say "Well, that's not my fault, it should be the same." But the truth all along is that you never wanted it to be the same, you never intended for it to be the same, and you amend state constitutions to make damn sure that it never will be the same.

You CINOs really need to go buy an island and go form your own country. Because you are the ultimate corruption of everything that makes the United States and our process of government and politics a good and wonderful thing. You dare call yourselves conservatives but you have no personal responsibility for the policies you advocate and promote, and you want the government to dictate all kinds of things about people's private lives.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Civil rights transcend any group's lack of social acceptance of them.

Fact.

 

[Kosh]

I posted a picture of separate but equal which was ruled unconstitutional. Separate but equal is exactly what you are proposing when you say "gays can have civil unions". I thought that was clear, but apparently it needs to be explained to you. There is nothing racist in my posting a picture showing how the idea of separate but equal is unconstitutional.



No, they aren't and I gave you a pretty bipartisan link to prove it.



Only through public opinion..as they have been.

Churches becoming more gay-friendly, study shows



There will be no new laws that need to be created. The same laws will simply apply to gay consenting adult couples. No changes required.



I'm proud of you...you tried to discuss before your Tourette kicked in. Bravo Zulu!

Well I see the far left propaganda never ceases with you.

All the automatics that come with marriage are now mostly myths as we have become more legal than spiritual.

Then again if you could post without the propaganda maybe you could understand that it is all about forcing the church to accept you and nothing else.

If your partner (or whatever you call one another) puts in their will that you get nothing, being married to them will not stop that legal document.

Here is an article they may help you understand:

The gay people against gay marriage
BBC News - The gay people against gay marriage

But gay people who are in favour of same-sex marriage believe anything short of marriage is not equality.

Like I said it is about a word and thinking they are a second class citizen as your posts continue to show.

Then again I bet you see being gay as a "race" since you brought up racism a few times already.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The only reason is that is a consenting adult's right to marry a consenting adult.

It is one of the reasons for gay "marriage"

The goal is for gay marriage to have the exact same legal protections that every other marriage has. No more, no less.

That's already the case.

The goal is to get the states to acknowledge that fact.

 

[Redfish]

Civil rights transcend any group's lack of social acceptance of them.

Fact.

so you support bigamists and polygamists getting "married" and having their marriages recognized as legal and equal to man/woman marriages?

the FACT is that if gays are allowed to "marry" then there is no legal defense that can be put forward to not allow polygamists and bigamists to marry.

I hate to use "slippery slope" but it does apply here.

 

[Kosh]

Why are you opposed to simply changing all civil marriages to civil unions, Fishy? I'd get behind that. Seems like a perfect compromise don't you think?

However your posts prove otherwise, you want the term "marriage" to punish the church and nothing more.

Otherwise you just defeated all your talking points in this thread.

The "church" has nothing to do with legal civil marriage. Nothing at all.

A Marriage License is what the states have decided they issue. If you don't like that, change the name, really. Give all consenting adult couples a civil union, not a civil marriage I don't care. You can call it anything you want from Civil Union to Civil Cabbage fucking Soup...just make it exactly the same for ALL couples. Easy peasy.

And your post is BS as you have shown in the past that you want to make the church pay (by using the term "marriage") for not accepting you.

That is all it is to many and not about any "civil" rights.

 

[bodecea]

Why are you opposed to simply changing all civil marriages to civil unions, Fishy? I'd get behind that. Seems like a perfect compromise don't you think?

However your posts prove otherwise, you want the term "marriage" to punish the church and nothing more.

Otherwise you just defeated all your talking points in this thread.

she defeats her own arguments in every thread on this topic. Its really tiresome

Nope...but you are free to say so. Just don't expect people to believe you.

 

[Redfish]

what is being said, that you libtards cannot seem to comprehend, is that civil unions for gays SHOULD BE THE SAME LEGALLY AS MAN/WOMAN MARRIAGES.

No one wants to limit the rights of any citizen. But a gay union is not, and will never be, a marriage.

You fake conservatives really give me a hoot. You complain about the government intruding into people's lives, and the government trying to "protect" you from yourself. You complain that the government makes things too complicated and that there are too many laws and regulations. But then you turn around and throw it all away because you don't like the way two consenting adults have sex. So you orchestrate this whole gay marriage war, you insist that you're not trying to discriminate against gay people, you say that you want equality. But at every turn you fight tooth and nail to stop gay people from having the same fundamental rights to marry the person they love as the rest of us. You create an entirely new social institution, the civil union, you leave it under powered and ineffective, and then when people say that it's not the same, you apparently find fault with them. You sit back and say "Well, that's not my fault, it should be the same." But the truth all along is that you never wanted it to be the same, you never intended for it to be the same, and you amend state constitutions to make damn sure that it never will be the same.

You CINOs really need to go buy an island and go form your own country. Because you are the ultimate corruption of everything that makes the United States and our process of government and politics a good and wonderful thing. You dare call yourselves conservatives but you have no personal responsibility for the policies you advocate and promote, and you want the government to dictate all kinds of things about people's private lives.

nice little rant, but totally wrong. We want gay couples to have equal rights. We want them to be able to make a legal committment to each other and to have ir recognized as legal and binding.

Civil unions give you those rights-------------what you don't get is that you cannot legislate social acceptance of a lifestyle that a majority consider an aberation of the human condition.

 

[Redfish]

However your posts prove otherwise, you want the term "marriage" to punish the church and nothing more.

Otherwise you just defeated all your talking points in this thread.

she defeats her own arguments in every thread on this topic. Its really tiresome

Nope...but you are free to say so. Just don't expect people to believe you.

are you wytchey's partner?