One step forward, two steps back for Republicans: Boehner and DoMA

[Bern80]

So Republicans make these huge gains in the last election based on what appears to be the sentiment by many that government is simply getting to big and spending too much. Should have told republicans it's time to work on shrinking government, right?

So what does Boehner in his infinite wisdom decide to make a priority? the Defense of Marriage Act. Are you kidding? Why don't you just head out back, shoot yourself in the foot instead, and call it even. Talk about stupid strategy. You aren't going to win over the masses with that one. I guess they are content to remain the part of old, conservative (small c) white people.

 

[whitehall]

Shrinking government and managing spending is only part of the agenda bernie. You lefties need to quit whining. You are still free to live with any species you chose and you still have the senate and the president not to mention the gay minority in the house.

 

[rightwinger]

Good luck to Mr Boehner

You passed this monstrosity of a law....why don't you pay to defend its Constitutionality in court?

Why should the taxpayers have to pay for your grandstanding?

 

[Two Thumbs]

how dumb.

They have been working on spending as the priority.

The defense of marriage is a waste of time though. But he has to keep the bible thumpers happy.

I still haven't found anywhere in the Constitution where they talk about weddings. If a state wants to say no, they need to vote on a law that says so. However the Fed gov needs to follow the Constitution.

 

[Mini 14]

So Republicans make these huge gains in the last election based on what appears to be the sentiment by many that government is simply getting to big and spending too much. Should have told republicans it's time to work on shrinking government, right?

So what does Boehner in his infinite wisdom decide to make a priority? the Defense of Marriage Act. Are you kidding? Why don't you just head out back, shoot yourself in the foot instead, and call it even. Talk about stupid strategy. You aren't going to win over the masses with that one. I guess they are content to remain the part of old, conservative (small c) white people.

When did homosexuals become "the masses?"

 

[WorldWatcher]

So Republicans make these huge gains in the last election based on what appears to be the sentiment by many that government is simply getting to big and spending too much. Should have told republicans it's time to work on shrinking government, right?

So what does Boehner in his infinite wisdom decide to make a priority? the Defense of Marriage Act. Are you kidding? Why don't you just head out back, shoot yourself in the foot instead, and call it even. Talk about stupid strategy. You aren't going to win over the masses with that one. I guess they are content to remain the part of old, conservative (small c) white people.

When did homosexuals become "the masses?"

Mini,

Bern80 didn't say that homosexuals were "the masses", he said "win over the masses".

Since in the last two referendums on Same-sex Civil Marriage had 47-48% of the vote supporting Same-sex Civil Marriage its pretty accurate to indicated that there are large numbers of people supporting equal treatment of same-sex couples under civil law. Not all of those supporters are homosexuals.



BTW - I support the repeal of DOMA which targets only one type of marriage and for Congress to pass a replacement that provides that no state must recognize ANY Civil Marriage that conflicts with it's own state laws and that the Federal government will recognize ALL legal civil marriage entered into under state law.


>>>>

 

[DiveCon]

So Republicans make these huge gains in the last election based on what appears to be the sentiment by many that government is simply getting to big and spending too much. Should have told republicans it's time to work on shrinking government, right?

So what does Boehner in his infinite wisdom decide to make a priority? the Defense of Marriage Act. Are you kidding? Why don't you just head out back, shoot yourself in the foot instead, and call it even. Talk about stupid strategy. You aren't going to win over the masses with that one. I guess they are content to remain the part of old, conservative (small c) white people.

When did homosexuals become "the masses?"

Mini,

Bern80 didn't say that homosexuals were "the masses", he said "win over the masses".

Since in the last two referendums on Same-sex Civil Marriage had 47-48% of the vote supporting Same-sex Civil Marriage its pretty accurate to indicated that there are large numbers of people supporting equal treatment of same-sex couples under civil law. Not all of those supporters are homosexuals.



BTW - I support the repeal of DOMA which targets only one type of marriage and for Congress to pass a replacement that provides that no state must recognize ANY Civil Marriage that conflicts with it's own state laws and that the Federal government will recognize ALL legal civil marriage entered into under state law.


>>>>

so do i, it was a stupid piece of legislation
i also support the government totally get out of the marriage business and stop "vesting powers" in religious leaders

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

DoMA is unconstitutional

 

[Two Thumbs]

DoMA is unconstitutional

Think about the CHILDREN!!!



Cool sig vid. that had to take some time.

 

[Bern80]

Shrinking government and managing spending is only part of the agenda bernie. You lefties need to quit whining. You are still free to live with any species you chose and you still have the senate and the president not to mention the gay minority in the house.

Lefty? LOL. You haven't been around here too long have ya.

 

[Bern80]

So Republicans make these huge gains in the last election based on what appears to be the sentiment by many that government is simply getting to big and spending too much. Should have told republicans it's time to work on shrinking government, right?

So what does Boehner in his infinite wisdom decide to make a priority? the Defense of Marriage Act. Are you kidding? Why don't you just head out back, shoot yourself in the foot instead, and call it even. Talk about stupid strategy. You aren't going to win over the masses with that one. I guess they are content to remain the part of old, conservative (small c) white people.

When did homosexuals become "the masses?"

The masses are not just homosexuals. They are people who don't see the point in fighting this fight. The government shouldn't have anything to do with marriage, straight or gay. Many of the masses even on the right and even those who aren't gay, oppose bigotry no matter what form it takes

 

[WorldWatcher]

so do i, it was a stupid piece of legislation
i also support the government totally get out of the marriage business and stop "vesting powers" in religious leaders

DC,

Understanding that "marriage" as a single term in incomplete, "marriage" actually exists in two realms with three combinations: Civil Marriage only, Religious Marriage only, or combined Civil & Religious Marriage. (Well I guess you could say 4 realms if you want to say that "not married" is one. LOL)

Can't you imagine that, the big government/social authoritarians would go ballistic if clergy were no longer allowed to perform the Civil Marriage component?


>>>>

 

[DiveCon]

so do i, it was a stupid piece of legislation
i also support the government totally get out of the marriage business and stop "vesting powers" in religious leaders

DC,

Understanding that "marriage" as a single term in incomplete, "marriage" actually exists in two realms with three combinations: Civil Marriage only, Religious Marriage only, or combined Civil & Religious Marriage. (Well I guess you could say 4 realms if you want to say that "not married" is one. LOL)

Can't you imagine that, the big government/social authoritarians would go ballistic if clergy were no longer allowed to perform the Civil Marriage component?


>>>>

doesnt matter
the way i see it(and it seems to be catching on) is we shouldnt be vesting powers in religious leaders of any kind
and by separating the religious and civil sides it would solve the problem
that way the government can recognize civil unions for all, and those that want a religious ceremony can do so however they wish

 

[Two Thumbs]

so do i, it was a stupid piece of legislation
i also support the government totally get out of the marriage business and stop "vesting powers" in religious leaders

DC,

Understanding that "marriage" as a single term in incomplete, "marriage" actually exists in two realms with three combinations: Civil Marriage only, Religious Marriage only, or combined Civil & Religious Marriage. (Well I guess you could say 4 realms if you want to say that "not married" is one. LOL)

Can't you imagine that, the big government/social authoritarians would go ballistic if clergy were no longer allowed to perform the Civil Marriage component?


>>>>

doesnt matter
the way i see it(and it seems to be catching on) is we shouldnt be vesting powers in religious leaders of any kind
and by separating the religious and civil sides it would solve the problem
that way the government can recognize civil unions for all, and those that want a religious ceremony can do so however they wish

Religious unions are not altogether legal unions.

To you be legal you must see the Justice of the Peace, or some judge that will act as one, and get married by him. It takes about 45 seconds, $35 dollars and a witness. Ours was someone there on drunk driving charges. No religion, or bible or any such thing was needed. but THAT non-sense needs to go. Ya gotta pay a fine to get hitched? that should clue most of us in.

 

[DiveCon]

DC,

Understanding that "marriage" as a single term in incomplete, "marriage" actually exists in two realms with three combinations: Civil Marriage only, Religious Marriage only, or combined Civil & Religious Marriage. (Well I guess you could say 4 realms if you want to say that "not married" is one. LOL)

Can't you imagine that, the big government/social authoritarians would go ballistic if clergy were no longer allowed to perform the Civil Marriage component?


>>>>

doesnt matter
the way i see it(and it seems to be catching on) is we shouldnt be vesting powers in religious leaders of any kind
and by separating the religious and civil sides it would solve the problem
that way the government can recognize civil unions for all, and those that want a religious ceremony can do so however they wish

Religious unions are not altogether legal unions.

To you be legal you must see the Justice of the Peace, or some judge that will act as one, and get married by him. It takes about 45 seconds, $35 dollars and a witness. Ours was someone there on drunk driving charges. No religion, or bible or any such thing was needed. but THAT non-sense needs to go. Ya gotta pay a fine to get hitched? that should clue most of us in.

right, but that is a civil marriage

 

[rightwinger]

So Republicans make these huge gains in the last election based on what appears to be the sentiment by many that government is simply getting to big and spending too much. Should have told republicans it's time to work on shrinking government, right?

So what does Boehner in his infinite wisdom decide to make a priority? the Defense of Marriage Act. Are you kidding? Why don't you just head out back, shoot yourself in the foot instead, and call it even. Talk about stupid strategy. You aren't going to win over the masses with that one. I guess they are content to remain the part of old, conservative (small c) white people.

When did homosexuals become "the masses?"

The masses are not just homosexuals. They are people who don't see the point in fighting this fight. The government shouldn't have anything to do with marriage, straight or gay. Many of the masses even on the right and even those who aren't gay, oppose bigotry no matter what form it takes

Agree...let people marry the person that they love

 

[VaYank5150]

Shrinking government and managing spending is only part of the agenda bernie. You lefties need to quit whining. You are still free to live with any species you chose and you still have the senate and the president not to mention the gay minority in the house.

Oh yeah...the other part was supposed to be jobs. Where's the jobs, Boehner? Too busy keeping the ceremony for out final deceased WWI veteran out of the capital?

 

[Two Thumbs]

doesnt matter
the way i see it(and it seems to be catching on) is we shouldnt be vesting powers in religious leaders of any kind
and by separating the religious and civil sides it would solve the problem
that way the government can recognize civil unions for all, and those that want a religious ceremony can do so however they wish

Religious unions are not altogether legal unions.

To you be legal you must see the Justice of the Peace, or some judge that will act as one, and get married by him. It takes about 45 seconds, $35 dollars and a witness. Ours was someone there on drunk driving charges. No religion, or bible or any such thing was needed. but THAT non-sense needs to go. Ya gotta pay a fine to get hitched? that should clue most of us in.

right, but that is a civil marriage

A civil union is required in all states, that I know of. You wanna be hitched in the eyes of the law you have to pony up the dough. Seems abusive to me, but each state has the right to regulate itself.

Has anyone ever met anyone that got common lawed? 2 people that lived together so long the state considered the married?

 

[DiveCon]

Religious unions are not altogether legal unions.

To you be legal you must see the Justice of the Peace, or some judge that will act as one, and get married by him. It takes about 45 seconds, $35 dollars and a witness. Ours was someone there on drunk driving charges. No religion, or bible or any such thing was needed. but THAT non-sense needs to go. Ya gotta pay a fine to get hitched? that should clue most of us in.

right, but that is a civil marriage

A civil union is required in all states, that I know of. You wanna be hitched in the eyes of the law you have to pony up the dough. Seems abusive to me, but each state has the right to regulate itself.

Has anyone ever met anyone that got common lawed? 2 people that lived together so long the state considered the married?

yup
i've known a few

hell, last i knew, the law in TX was so open that if you checked into a hotel/motel for a weekend as husband and wife it was enough to get common law marriage

 

[Two Thumbs]

right, but that is a civil marriage

A civil union is required in all states, that I know of. You wanna be hitched in the eyes of the law you have to pony up the dough. Seems abusive to me, but each state has the right to regulate itself.

Has anyone ever met anyone that got common lawed? 2 people that lived together so long the state considered the married?

yup
i've known a few

hell, last i knew, the law in TX was so open that if you checked into a hotel/motel for a weekend as husband and wife it was enough to get common law marriage

In (Conn, I think) If you declared yourself wedded at any time, for any reason, you were hitched. I knew of (not personnally) people that ended up "married" b/c one of them claimed Head of Household on taxes, just to get a few bucks back.

rumor of course. "I heard about this one guy...."