Why won’t Republicans “Own Up”?

[theHawk]

I don't see liberals telling gay people they can't get married.

Neither are conservatives. Gay marriage is legal in every state, and no conservative has ever said they shouldn't be able to get married. Denying state recognition is not denying the act.

I don't see liberals telling people they must share their political rights with inanimate corporations.

What excatly does anyone give up by sharing a right with anyone else? You imply that people are somehow giving up their rights in order for someone or a group of people to have that right. A corporation or a union having the right to speak, in no way infringes on anyone elses rights. Are you or anyone else going to be censored by the government just because a corporation can buy a TV ad?

Actually, what I hear and have hear conservatives arguing for are Civil Unions which would be recognized by the state and against marriage, not because of state recognition, but because of religious issues. Now, I may be wrong, but it would take more than just your word to convince me. Got any proof of your asscertions?

I've never heard of conservatives pushing for civil unions. The main point of conservatives opposing legal recognition of gay marriages is so they are not given the same perks as real married couples, like being able to adopt children and get tax breaks.

 

[Oldandtired]

that's just a dishonest spin to the law. If the law was you could only marry homosexuals, would you want to get married to another man? NO. Heteros can marry who they want and are attracted to and in love with , and get legal rights, while homosexuals can't.

Maybe the gay community should respect the word marriage and how many religions view it and stop asking religions to change the meaning of a tradition and religious rite.

Maybe the gay community should simply ask for it to be called.....murriage....or merriage.

Something tells me they will find a lot less resistance.

ANd please....a "lot less resistance" does not open the door to petroleum jelly jokes.

All over a word, and you don't see how stupid that is? Who cares what its called. I guess people not married in a church are also considered civil unions?

I really don't think they will find opposition, many in the anti-gay crowd just uses semantics to try and claim they are not against gays getting the same rights. \They will just make up some other stupid reason why they oppose it, all while we all know why, its their bigotry

In some cases...yes. I agree. In most cases, it is strictly how their religion and their traditions view the word marriage...a union between a man and a woman.

Me? I dont give a crap. Call it marriage, call it union....but make it legal. No government or any of its people have the right to tell you who you can live the rest of your life with...

But on the same note....dont ask others to change their religious beliefs to accommodate something YOU want.

 

[Dr Gregg]

Maybe the gay community should respect the word marriage and how many religions view it and stop asking religions to change the meaning of a tradition and religious rite.

Maybe the gay community should simply ask for it to be called.....murriage....or merriage.

Something tells me they will find a lot less resistance.

ANd please....a "lot less resistance" does not open the door to petroleum jelly jokes.

All over a word, and you don't see how stupid that is? Who cares what its called. I guess people not married in a church are also considered civil unions?

I really don't think they will find opposition, many in the anti-gay crowd just uses semantics to try and claim they are not against gays getting the same rights. \They will just make up some other stupid reason why they oppose it, all while we all know why, its their bigotry

Actually it appears you are the one arguing over a word. What rights are present in 'marriage' that are missing in a civil union? In fact, as far as the state is concerned, the rights granted by 'marriage' are the same, no?

why can't gay marriage be called a marriage?
sorry, its the anti gay people trying to spin it to make them sound less bigoted

 

[Dr Gregg]

Maybe the gay community should respect the word marriage and how many religions view it and stop asking religions to change the meaning of a tradition and religious rite.

Maybe the gay community should simply ask for it to be called.....murriage....or merriage.

Something tells me they will find a lot less resistance.

ANd please....a "lot less resistance" does not open the door to petroleum jelly jokes.

All over a word, and you don't see how stupid that is? Who cares what its called. I guess people not married in a church are also considered civil unions?

I really don't think they will find opposition, many in the anti-gay crowd just uses semantics to try and claim they are not against gays getting the same rights. \They will just make up some other stupid reason why they oppose it, all while we all know why, its their bigotry

In some cases...yes. I agree. In most cases, it is strictly how their religion and their traditions view the word marriage...a union between a man and a woman.

Me? I dont give a crap. Call it marriage, call it union....but make it legal. No government or any of its people have the right to tell you who you can live the rest of your life with...

But on the same note....dont ask others to change their religious beliefs to accommodate something YOU want.

how am I telling anybody to change their religious beliefs?
Maybe they should complain to the state for making "marriage in a church" not mean anything, when all the rights and acknowledgement in the eyes of the lord are when the marriage certificate is applied for

 

[Annie]

All over a word, and you don't see how stupid that is? Who cares what its called. I guess people not married in a church are also considered civil unions?

I really don't think they will find opposition, many in the anti-gay crowd just uses semantics to try and claim they are not against gays getting the same rights. \They will just make up some other stupid reason why they oppose it, all while we all know why, its their bigotry

Actually it appears you are the one arguing over a word. What rights are present in 'marriage' that are missing in a civil union? In fact, as far as the state is concerned, the rights granted by 'marriage' are the same, no?

why can't gay marriage be called a marriage?
sorry, its the anti gay people trying to spin it to make them sound less bigoted

Only when you are the one defining not only words, but those others that use them. I've no problem with gays. My ex-brother-in-law is, one of my best friends-an ex-nun is. Both live with their lovers, both have civil unions, as both couples own considerable joint property.

I don't know how the taxes work, but if civil unions don't give same benefits, sue the IRS.

 

[Dr Gregg]

As I am sure you have found, people on here find themselves debating things they know absolutely nothing about.
They think they know as they watch the news...but they have not yet realized that the news cherry picks what it deems worthy of people knowing about.

speaking about yourself apparently

Brilliant response.
I have many times admitted not knowing about a topic...and even admitted seeing the views differently after the debate.

But please...continue withyour well thought out jabs. I makes you look .....manly.

Yes old and tired and stupid, since this is such a brilliant response

As I am sure you have found, people on here find themselves debating things they know absolutely nothing about.
They think they know as they watch the news...but they have not yet realized that the news cherry picks what it deems worthy of people knowing about.

 

[Oldandtired]

Neither are conservatives. Gay marriage is legal in every state, and no conservative has ever said they shouldn't be able to get married. Denying state recognition is not denying the act.


What excatly does anyone give up by sharing a right with anyone else? You imply that people are somehow giving up their rights in order for someone or a group of people to have that right. A corporation or a union having the right to speak, in no way infringes on anyone elses rights. Are you or anyone else going to be censored by the government just because a corporation can buy a TV ad?

Actually, what I hear and have hear conservatives arguing for are Civil Unions which would be recognized by the state and against marriage, not because of state recognition, but because of religious issues. Now, I may be wrong, but it would take more than just your word to convince me. Got any proof of your asscertions?

I've never heard of conservatives pushing for civil unions. The main point of conservatives opposing legal recognition of gay marriages is so they are not given the same perks as real married couples, like being able to adopt children and get tax breaks.

What news do you watch?
I am a conservative and I say do as you please. Just do not ask me to change certain wording of my religion. Most I know that are conservatives feel the same way.
If I get a tax break loving my wife, you can get a tax break loving who you reside with. No issue with that whatsoever.

 

[Oldandtired]

speaking about yourself apparently

Brilliant response.
I have many times admitted not knowing about a topic...and even admitted seeing the views differently after the debate.

But please...continue withyour well thought out jabs. I makes you look .....manly.

Yes old and tired and stupid, since this is such a brilliant response

As I am sure you have found, people on here find themselves debating things they know absolutely nothing about.
They think they know as they watch the news...but they have not yet realized that the news cherry picks what it deems worthy of people knowing about.

I see. If you do not agree with what I say then it warrants your saying...."I know you are but what am I"?

What is this...third grade?

 

[Dr Gregg]

Actually, what I hear and have hear conservatives arguing for are Civil Unions which would be recognized by the state and against marriage, not because of state recognition, but because of religious issues. Now, I may be wrong, but it would take more than just your word to convince me. Got any proof of your asscertions?

I've never heard of conservatives pushing for civil unions. The main point of conservatives opposing legal recognition of gay marriages is so they are not given the same perks as real married couples, like being able to adopt children and get tax breaks.

What news do you watch?
I am a conservative and I say do as you please. Just do not ask me to change certain wording of my religion. Most I know that are conservatives feel the same way.
If I get a tax break loving my wife, you can get a tax break loving who you reside with. No issue with that whatsoever.

Since when is marriage solely a religious word? So you are against people getting married by the justice of the peace, and not in a religious ceremony? I guess your definition has already been changed

 

[Oldandtired]

All over a word, and you don't see how stupid that is? Who cares what its called. I guess people not married in a church are also considered civil unions?

I really don't think they will find opposition, many in the anti-gay crowd just uses semantics to try and claim they are not against gays getting the same rights. \They will just make up some other stupid reason why they oppose it, all while we all know why, its their bigotry

Actually it appears you are the one arguing over a word. What rights are present in 'marriage' that are missing in a civil union? In fact, as far as the state is concerned, the rights granted by 'marriage' are the same, no?

why can't gay marriage be called a marriage?
sorry, its the anti gay people trying to spin it to make them sound less bigoted

Because in many religions marriage is defined by a union between a man and a woman.

What is so hard to understand AND respect?

 

[Dr Gregg]

Brilliant response.
I have many times admitted not knowing about a topic...and even admitted seeing the views differently after the debate.

But please...continue withyour well thought out jabs. I makes you look .....manly.

Yes old and tired and stupid, since this is such a brilliant response

As I am sure you have found, people on here find themselves debating things they know absolutely nothing about.
They think they know as they watch the news...but they have not yet realized that the news cherry picks what it deems worthy of people knowing about.

I see. If you do not agree with what I say then it warrants your saying...."I know you are but what am I"?

\
What is this...third grade?

you tell me, you make a stupid response I would expect from a 3rd grader

all I did was point out that you're stupid response fit you to a tee

 

[Oldandtired]

I've never heard of conservatives pushing for civil unions. The main point of conservatives opposing legal recognition of gay marriages is so they are not given the same perks as real married couples, like being able to adopt children and get tax breaks.

What news do you watch?
I am a conservative and I say do as you please. Just do not ask me to change certain wording of my religion. Most I know that are conservatives feel the same way.
If I get a tax break loving my wife, you can get a tax break loving who you reside with. No issue with that whatsoever.

Since when is marriage solely a religious word? So you are against people getting married by the justice of the peace, and not in a religious ceremony? I guess your definition has already been changed

You are spinning.
Because it is ALSO use in religion...not JUST religion......but ALSO in religion as a union between a man and a woman, it is only right to acknowledge that changing the meaning of the word interferes with religion.
It is a matter of respect.
Most that I know that support gay marriage, as I do, agree that it is best to give it another word....out of respect for others....you know...like the respect the gay community is asking for?

 

[Oldandtired]

Yes old and tired and stupid, since this is such a brilliant response

As I am sure you have found, people on here find themselves debating things they know absolutely nothing about.
They think they know as they watch the news...but they have not yet realized that the news cherry picks what it deems worthy of people knowing about.

I see. If you do not agree with what I say then it warrants your saying...."I know you are but what am I"?

\
What is this...third grade?

you tell me, you make a stupid response I would expect from a 3rd grader

all I did was point out that you're stupid response fit you to a tee

Cool. If that makes you feel manly...go for it.
I have had enough of your childish ranting.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

It's semantics anyway, since plenty of people are married and not in churches. But everything should be "civil unions" than, since the state doesn't recognize church marriage, people married there still need to get a marriage certificate from the state.

Why?

People are claiming they are against the use of "marriage" because of religious purposes, but marriage in the church is not what is recognized, but the marriage certificate filed with the state and benefits given by the state is the issue at hand. Hence why I said that.

I don't believe that, just think its stupid argument dicking around on the semantics of a use of a word

Marriage by definition is a union between a man and a woman. Why is it you homosexuals cannot understand that?

 

[Dr Gregg]

Why?

People are claiming they are against the use of "marriage" because of religious purposes, but marriage in the church is not what is recognized, but the marriage certificate filed with the state and benefits given by the state is the issue at hand. Hence why I said that.

I don't believe that, just think its stupid argument dicking around on the semantics of a use of a word

Marriage by definition is a union between a man and a woman. Why is it you homosexuals cannot understand that?

once again showing your idiocy, as I'm not gay.

 

[Dr Gregg]

I see. If you do not agree with what I say then it warrants your saying...."I know you are but what am I"?

\
What is this...third grade?

you tell me, you make a stupid response I would expect from a 3rd grader

all I did was point out that you're stupid response fit you to a tee

Cool. If that makes you feel manly...go for it.
I have had enough of your childish ranting.

blah blah blah, again you are speaking about yourself

 

[ihopehefails]

Own up for what?

A better question to ask is why do liberals think they have the right to tell everyone what to do and act like the judge of mankind about everything? Is it because the utopia political entitiy has crowned them as 'good' and everyone else as 'evil'? What else explains why these people think they have a right to judge everyone else?

Another good question is why can't liberals disconnect from private lives where a person is accountable for their actions not for what their elected people do? Or why is it that, in their mind, political groups are the equivalent of racial stereotyping that people do? Have you noticed how they break everyone down by what their politics are. If you are black then you are left, white christian then you are right, if you are rich then you are a republicans. Normal people don't think like this.

Own up for what?

Oh, I don't know.

The economy?

The Iraqi war?

The deficit?

The lack of health care reform?

The devestated military?

Letting Bin Laden go?

Ok, none of those. I can't think of a thing.

Again, why am I responsible for that?

 

[rightwinger]

What news do you watch?
I am a conservative and I say do as you please. Just do not ask me to change certain wording of my religion. Most I know that are conservatives feel the same way.
If I get a tax break loving my wife, you can get a tax break loving who you reside with. No issue with that whatsoever.

Since when is marriage solely a religious word? So you are against people getting married by the justice of the peace, and not in a religious ceremony? I guess your definition has already been changed

You are spinning.
Because it is ALSO use in religion...not JUST religion......but ALSO in religion as a union between a man and a woman, it is only right to acknowledge that changing the meaning of the word interferes with religion.
It is a matter of respect.
Most that I know that support gay marriage, as I do, agree that it is best to give it another word....out of respect for others....you know...like the respect the gay community is asking for?

I was going to jump all over you...but I respect your position

 

[Dr Gregg]

Since when is marriage solely a religious word? So you are against people getting married by the justice of the peace, and not in a religious ceremony? I guess your definition has already been changed

You are spinning.
Because it is ALSO use in religion...not JUST religion......but ALSO in religion as a union between a man and a woman, it is only right to acknowledge that changing the meaning of the word interferes with religion.
It is a matter of respect.
Most that I know that support gay marriage, as I do, agree that it is best to give it another word....out of respect for others....you know...like the respect the gay community is asking for?

I was going to jump all over you...but I respect your position

yeah, i think I probably jumped a little too early.

 

[rdean]

Own up for what?

A better question to ask is why do liberals think they have the right to tell everyone what to do and act like the judge of mankind about everything? Is it because the utopia political entitiy has crowned them as 'good' and everyone else as 'evil'? What else explains why these people think they have a right to judge everyone else?

Another good question is why can't liberals disconnect from private lives where a person is accountable for their actions not for what their elected people do? Or why is it that, in their mind, political groups are the equivalent of racial stereotyping that people do? Have you noticed how they break everyone down by what their politics are. If you are black then you are left, white christian then you are right, if you are rich then you are a republicans. Normal people don't think like this.

Hmmmm....I don't see liberals telling women that if they get pregnant they must have the baby. I don't see liberals telling gay people they can't get married. I don't see liberals telling people they must share their political rights with inanimate corporations.

It seems to me that both liberals AND conservatives have things they'd likd to see and are not above using the federal government and the law to get them. So, to me, they are two peas in a pod.

Corporations are not inanimate objects because an inanimate object is a chair. That is not capable of any human thought but corporations are not the same thing because they are composed of animated objects like people who make decisions about how that corporation, they they compose of, act so denying a corporation their rights is denying all the people who compose it their rights.

As for abortion, the law forbids anyone from murdering other people and that includes abortion.

Gay marriage, some of us were content with allowing common law marriages for both gays and straights but that was rejected but the door has closed on that because the tide is turning in our favor.

Soooo, your "favor" is "discrimination"?