Prop. 8 Equals Homophobia...Let's Be Honest.

[chanel]

Yep. My opposition to gay marriage is simply linguistic. They can have the rights in a civil union; but they cannot have the word. And they will not be satisfied until they have the word. I'm really getting sick of libs re-writing the dictionary. A man is still a man even if he's gay. Now is that opposition "homophobic"?

And the radical Prop 8 opponents are hurting the cause even further. People have a problem with old ladies being harrassed at church and cyber terrorists posting personal information of opponents on the internet. That's what I call "hate".

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The opposition to Gay Marriage crosses those same lines dumb ass.

You be the dumb ass.

Maybe I was not clear enough or you are not paying attention...just striking out? I said the arguments against gay marriage are based on homophobia. Being a populist, a progressive or even a liberal or a conservative is no shield from feelings of homophobia.

Did you read the first few posts before jumping in and stating the obvious?

Obama himself is opposed to Gay Marriage.

Using Obama as cover? LOL

Obamam like Clinton and Dean...have argued that they support civil unions.

Niether Obama nor Dean, would fight overturning Gay Marriages being made legal. I don't know about Clinton's stance there. Obama's admin has sided with people Obama himself says he disagrees with. ... go figure

I do know many progressive and some liberal politicians (shame) are taking stands on both sides of the issue...there are only a handful of profiles in courage here.

I notice not many people can argue the point. The arguments against gay marriage...where ever they come from...are based in homophobia.

The reason I focus on conservatives is they are the force behind fighting gains gay have made. Name me the progressives or liberals who are fighting to overturn the gains....if you can.

btw..Who on the left backs and funds things lke Prop. 8? There must be a few.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Yep. My opposition to gay marriage is simply linguistic.

Marriage is not a linguistic issue.

They can have the rights in a civil union; but they cannot have the word.

They? The word is patented?

And they will not be satisfied until they have the word.

Separate but equal?

So you are defending a ward against what....attacks?

I'm really getting sick of libs re-writing the dictionary.

Uhm... gay supporters on this issue are NOT all liberals. Te position is a liberal one but Bush v Gore ring a bell? LOL

A man is still a man even if he's gay. Now is that opposition "homophobic"?

Yes...and angry, ignorant baseless. Gay marriage supporters (conservatives too) are not trying to redifine what is a 'man'

are you arguing with yourself here?

And the radical Prop 8 opponents are hurting the cause even further.

radical? LOL

People have a problem with old ladies being harrassed at church and cyber terrorists posting personal information of opponents on the internet. That's what I call "hate".

What people have been harmed by Prop.8 opponents?

your alarmist propaganda belongs in fascist and authoritarian nations...not here.

You are a perfect (perfect people?) example of ignorance and hostility on display.

 

[hubblerules]

I disagree - strongly - with the OP - and I support Gay Rights - so long as they don't trample on my rights or try to force 'open acceptance' of every aspect of their lifestyle upon me...

Most people object on religious grounds. Their religious upbringing has made it very clear that marriage is between a man and woman - without exception...

Why can't they call gay marriages something else - yet give them the same legal protections as marriage?

I think that is a very fair compromise...

 

[del]

i've lived under the oppressive yoke of gay marriage for almost six years now.


it's had zero effect on my life, my marriage or my kids.

the horror

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

First, I must admit to it being an effort to take you seriously only because of how I interpret your screen name. The effort is small, but I remain leery.

I'm not afraid that much. I do admit that I find gay marriage immoral based on my own personal beliefs. Some people find it immoral based on their chrisitan beliefs. This is probably the main factor behind this but why is it that liberals can get on a soap box and condemn the entire world based on their morality yet christians do not?

The support for gay marriage actually crosses ideological divides.

Most people 'condemn' but true liberals very rarely do. Christians condemn as a matter of dogma.

If you can I ask you to name me one prominent liberal who condemns the entire world. Based on anything they believe.

.... why is it that liberals feel that they have the right to judge others by their moral code yet deny others to do the same.

Again, please if you can...give me the name of a prominent liberal who does the above.

The opposition to Gay Marriage crosses those same lines dumb ass. Obama himself is opposed to Gay Marriage.

I see where you confused things...you ignored all questions and made a comment that I thought was an obvious fact.

The argumeny above...the poster was asked to defend his/her statements about liberals.

you added absolutely nothing

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I find it quite funny that you liberals always seem to find hate and anger with anyone who disagrees with your fucked positions on a number of social issues.

So you don't sound angry here? LOL

Instead of understanding that there are differences of opinions and not everyone is in lockstep like you progressives, you and those like you just engage in personal smear tactics and the politics of destruction....oh and the incessant whine "Why is everyone picking on me!!!!!!!!!!"

Wow. I'm absolutley stunned you would help make my case with such example.

thanks are in order here.

Whacko liberals personified in song....
[/quote] thank you I jsut don...of those crazy leftist ladies in pink. :lol:

 

[Gem]

My concerns regarding the legalization of gay marriage have absolutely nothing to do with liking or disliking homosexuality and everything to do with my questions regarding what precedent such a legal decision would mean for our country.

 

[AllieBaba]

Where are the social conservatives? Too embarassed to acknowledge, even to themselves, that hate and fear motivates their efforts to deny a basic human right to others?
Nah, that would require introspection.

Where are the people who say they want honesty in public debate?

When you're honest maybe they'll show up.

 

[AllieBaba]

My concerns regarding the legalization of gay marriage have absolutely nothing to do with liking or disliking homosexuality and everything to do with my questions regarding what precedent such a legal decision would mean for our country.

Exactly.
They start the thread with a lie, then piss and moan because nobody will play.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Gays have lost no rights at all. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Pretty simple concept.

Actually professor...Prop.8 is a petition to stop gay marriages.

Gays were legally married. Prop.8 was written to deny this legal right from continuing.

Are you trying to argue the gay marriages performed were not legal?

LOL

 

[PatekPhilippe]

I find it quite funny that you liberals always seem to find hate and anger with anyone who disagrees with your fucked positions on a number of social issues.

So you don't sound angry here? LOL

Instead of understanding that there are differences of opinions and not everyone is in lockstep like you progressives, you and those like you just engage in personal smear tactics and the politics of destruction....oh and the incessant whine "Why is everyone picking on me!!!!!!!!!!"

Wow. I'm absolutley stunned you would help make my case with such example.

thanks are in order here.

Whacko liberals personified in song....
[/quote] [B]thank you[/B] I j......posrep is in order!!!! I'm waiting..:lol:

 

[midcan5]

There is no basic human right.

There is no basic human right to marriage.

Gays currently have the exact same Constitutional Rights everyone else has, and more protection under the law white heterosexuals. If 'Rights' are created they can be created fairly.

You extremist leftwingnuts are just too stupid to be embarrassed; otherwise, you would the way you misuse the English language to further your dopey causes.

If there are no rights as you state in your first two statements, then your third makes no sense, and your fourth is equally off base. If 'rights' are created they should be created fairly for all.

But in fairness there are conservatives who do more than just react, they think.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-and-justice-system/101616-a-conservative-i-agree-with.html

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Where are the social conservatives? Too embarassed to acknowledge, even to themselves, that hate and fear motivates their efforts to deny a basic human right to others?
Nah, that would require introspection.

There is no basic human right.

There is no basic human right to marriage.

Courts have ruled Marriage is a fundamental and basic right. I posted the court opinion elsewhere.

Gays currently have the exact same Constitutional Rights everyone else has,..

And that is the argument proponents of gay marriage are making.
thank you for agreeing, Oh masterful Gunnyshit

...

and more protection under the law white heterosexuals.

how so? and... what protections do white heterosexuals need and from whom?

minorities usually need protections restated. are white heterosexuals a minority?

You extremist leftwingnuts are just too stupid to be embarrassed; otherwise, you would the way you misuse the English language to further your dopey causes.

Dopey is exhibiting your ignorance in such a public way...and then ranting about how proud of IT you are....all the while claiming Victim Status for straight white males.



Courts have ruled Marriage is a fundamental and basic right

 

[ihopehefails]

I'm not afraid that much. I do admit that I find gay marriage immoral based on my own personal beliefs. Some people find it immoral based on their chrisitan beliefs. This is probably the main factor behind this but why is it that liberals can get on a soap box and condemn the entire world based on their morality yet christians do not?

I'm not saying that either side has the moral highground because that is a matter of your personal choice about your own code of ethics but why is it that liberals feel that they have the right to judge others by their moral code yet deny others to do the same.

I speak only for myself, the moral code relevent in this discussion is defined by the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. You may hold whatever bias and moral outrage you like, but to move beyond that and violate the rights of others is reprehensible and makes you more Taliban then American.

Really? How as anyone violated the free action of any gay person? They can still pursue whatever relationship they want however the government is perfectly allowed to hand out marriage licenses based on whatever criteria they want just like any other license. Its a thing created by the government in order to manage our behaviors just like those pesky gun licenses. Those actually restrict rights found in the constitution such as the 2nd amendment but no one seems to cry how unfair it is that the government is issueing a permission slip for otherwise private behavior.

The 14th amendment...yawn...that says that any law that gives protections to any person must do it for everyone covered under that law. If it says that no one shall be murdered then the government has to provide that protection to everyone and not just to some people. If the law said no black person shall be murdered it would still not violate the 14th amendment as long as every black person is being protected as the law says.

 

[ihopehefails]

Where are the social conservatives? Too embarassed to acknowledge, even to themselves, that hate and fear motivates their efforts to deny a basic human right to others?
Nah, that would require introspection.

There is no basic human right.

There is no basic human right to marriage.

Gays currently have the exact same Constitutional Rights everyone else has, and more protection under the law white heterosexuals.

You extremist leftwingnuts are just too stupid to be embarrassed; otherwise, you would the way you misuse the English language to further your dopey causes.

That is correct. There are no human rights. The idea sounds hegallian if you ask me. We do have natural rights which are nothing based on the interactions within the private sphere. A human right to free speech would declare that I have the right to speak no matter what power others may have to remove that. For example: At work if I were to use my human right to speak freely I could tell the boss to F-off and there will be no repurcussions since firing me would be removing my human right. However, I do have a natural right to speak freely in the same manor but because I will get fired for doing so I don't. In this setting, I do not have the right to speak freely based on my work situation and the power my boss has. Where my right to speak freely exist completely is with respect to the government since it can not silence me no matter what.

Gay-marriage is a natural right in the same way because if two people were to get married and be the same sex they would have to find a private institution (like a church) to grant that and depending on the morality of the community it may or may not happen. Now lets say it did happen. The rest of the community may or may not accept that which hampers the ability of the gay marriage to exists.

The advantage of a natural right vs a human right is that a natural right allows people to pursue something and all others to retain the freedom not to help in that pursuit therefore leaving their right not to pursue their cause while a human right will demand everyone in the community to do something that they don't want to.

Natural rights allows the values of the community to flow and change depending on the free interaction of people within it while a human right seems to need the force of government in order for it to exist.

 

[Tom Clancy]

Some people who aren't Bigots or whatever you like to call us nowadays, just want to keep the The Meaning of Marriage Sacred.

Gays have every other right we have. We are equal.

Except they think Marriage is a Right.

Yeah.. ok.

 

[ihopehefails]

Some people who aren't Bigots or whatever you like to call us nowadays, just want to keep the The Meaning of Marriage Sacred.

Gays have every other right we have. We are equal.

Except they think Marriage is a Right.

Yeah.. ok.

I've notice something about the left and what they want to do is to make everyone accept gay marriage morally as well as legally. Think about the fact that polygamy can be made legal by the same arguments that they present for gay marriage yet they are not on this crusade to make accept it as morally equal to straight marriage. It is as if they want us not only to accept it legally but morally as well.

 

[Oscar Wao]

There is no right to "marriage," per se. However, there is a right to access and a right to choose.

 

[Oddball]

Where are the social conservatives? Too embarassed to acknowledge, even to themselves, that hate and fear motivates their efforts to deny a basic human right to others?
Nah, that would require introspection.

A license (and the gay marriage thing is ALL about state licensing of their marriages), by definition, is not a right, basic or otherwise.

But thanks for playing today....Johnny has a case of Bardahl for you as a parting gift.