Romney's real swipe at gay marriage

A constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman would take ratification of 2/3 of the states. Would 2/3 of the states ratify such an Amendment? If just the states that voted against gay marriage already voted for ratification it would pass. It would pass in states that haven't voted against gay marriage but had it imposed on them.

If it is true that the "vast majority" of people support same sex marriage, then there's no problem whatsoever with putting it up as a Constitutional Amendment.

With our current political alignment, I doubt if it is possible to get 2/3 agreement on any amendment

One by one, states are allowing gay marriage. Only the bible belt states will maintain their prohibition

Unless the courts step in
 
Forget about Ann.
And damnit... This just kills me too.

You have to take what Ann said in context with everything else. She wasn't saying anything other than her marriage was like anyone else. I mean it's basically the same thing over the Obama thing. Take the one sentence and whoa, by itself it's a different meaning. In context you'd have to be pretty fuck'n stupid not to understand what she was saying.

Unfortunately getting a democrat or republican to see the other sides viewpoint while taking it in context is harder than a wedding dick.

My point is, never mind whether or not Ann was really taking a swipe at gay marriage with her comments (I don't think she was); instead look at what her husband, the man running for president said that is not open to interpretation. And look at his party's platform.
 
Forget about Ann. During his RNC speech, Mitt said, “As president, I will protect the sanctity of life,” Romney said. “I will honor the institution of marriage, and I will guarantee America’s first liberty: the freedom of religion.”

Not to mention the fact that the Republican platform calls for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Interesting how he highlights the freedom of religion but has no problems forcing his religious views on gay marriage on the whole country

His views are God's views.

Don't like it ?

Stick a dick in your mouth.

"God" doesn't make law.
 
Forget about Ann.
And damnit... This just kills me too.

You have to take what Ann said in context with everything else. She wasn't saying anything other than her marriage was like anyone else. I mean it's basically the same thing over the Obama thing. Take the one sentence and whoa, by itself it's a different meaning. In context you'd have to be pretty fuck'n stupid not to understand what she was saying.

Unfortunately getting a democrat or republican to see the other sides viewpoint while taking it in context is harder than a wedding dick.

My point is, never mind whether or not Ann was really taking a swipe at gay marriage with her comments (I don't think she was); instead look at what her husband, the man running for president said that is not open to interpretation. And look at his party's platform.
Preaching to the choir.
 
Shocking. A neanderthal who doesn't see that the times are a' changing.

So, ahhh, how many states have VOTED in gay marriage? How many voted against it?

Yea, he is using to cull voters, the republican base for the most part. What did you expect? Him to suddenly declare that he supports a measure that is going to ensure he will not get elected? That is asinine. No matter what you believe on gay marriage, this is exactly what you should have expected from ANY of the republican candidates.


The bigger issue is that this is even something worth mentioning. You do realize that the courts are taking this matter into their own hands, right? Romney is going to have nothing to do with the gay movement, it is going to be handled in the courts and there is nothing that he can do about it.

Then he should admit it's a legal issue.

The dishonesty is that he insists on supporting a constitutional amendment (that would never pass) when he knows darned well that eventually,the courts are going to legalize gay marriage for the whole country.

Because he thinks there might be a few homophobes out there who will vote for lower wages and offshoring because hates the gays so much.
 
"God" doesn't make law.

He gave us the 10 commandments.

All the other shit/variations were made up by inbreds like you.

NOthing about gay marriage in the 10 Commandments.

And if you want to use the rest of the Mosaic Laws as a justification for your homophobia, then we need to install all the other crazy laws, too.

You know, stoning rape vicitms, stoning disobedient children, stoning people who work on the Sabbath. I mean, there's a shitload of folks God wants killed.
 
A constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman would take ratification of 2/3 of the states. Would 2/3 of the states ratify such an Amendment? If just the states that voted against gay marriage already voted for ratification it would pass. It would pass in states that haven't voted against gay marriage but had it imposed on them.

If it is true that the "vast majority" of people support same sex marriage, then there's no problem whatsoever with putting it up as a Constitutional Amendment.

Correction- An amendment would take approval of 2/3rds of BOTH houses of Congress, and then 3/4 of the states.

More to the point, amending the constitution shouldn't be because you don't like the law. I would recommend that you look up the whole prohibition thingee, and see how well that worked out. A bunch of dumb, bible thumping assholes made alcohol illegal by playing on anti-immigrant sentiment during WWI, got a dumb amendment passed, and 15 years later, everyone had to admit they screwed up and repealed it.
 
If it is true that the "vast majority" of people support same sex marriage, then there's no problem whatsoever with putting it up as a Constitutional Amendment.
Yes there is... All men are created equal. It's the federal governments job to assure that. By making a law such as this it's not assuring that all men are created equal.

The people are equal. The relationships are different. I never saw anything in any document that says "all relationships are created equal".
 

Forum List

Back
Top