Homosexual boy scout is mad because he won't be given eagle badge

[bigrebnc1775]

I was addressing your statement about having to provide services to homosexuals as a business owner, you already have to do that as a function of the law (a law which I disagree with, but yet still the law).




Just hold on to that thought if you take comfort in it and it helps.

But history is not a predictor of how people will vote on Same-sex Civil Marriage. We say a 20% shift in one State that installed discriminatory statutory law in 2000 and by 2008 that same state when it voted again only succeeded by 2.5%.

A person NEVER flew under powered flight, did that mean that the Wright brothers didn't succeed? SSCM will pass at the ballot box, this year? Maybe. Maybe not. But the fact remains that as younger voters have a greater impact on the outcomes of elections over the years then outcomes will change. May take 5 more years, might take 25 more years.


>>>>

In many states it will now take another amendment to their State's Constitutions to allow it...

Yep, just like they were passed at the ballot box, they can be repealed at the ballot box.

The Federal government will be recognizing all legal Civil Marriages in the next couple of years either through the Congressional repeal of DOMA or the SCOTUS overturning statutory law that discriminates between like situated citizens (Same-sex Civilly Married couples and Different-sex Civilly Married couples) based on gender and with no compelling government interest except the intend to discriminate. Section 3 of DOMA (the part that limits Federal recognition) will go down the tubes. Section 2 of DOMA (which provides States don't have to recognize Civil Marriage not recognized in their State ONLY based on gender) will probably be around for a few extra years. I see, and yes this is IMHO, will be repealed and replaced with a more Constitutional version which provides that State don't have to recognize Civil Marriages that conflict with their own laws for ANY reason.

and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

"Soon" is a subjective term not a quantitative term. In 2004 there were Zero, 0, nadda, zip legal entities that recognized Same-sex Civil Marriage in any capacity. Now there are 9 (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, The District of Columbia, California*, and Maryland**)


* Despite Prop 8 (which would not pass today), the Government of California still recognizes as Civilly Married all California Civil Marriage performed between June and November of 2008 and all Civil Marriage performed out of state during that time.

**Maryland also recognizes legal Civil Marriage from outside the State irregardless of gender even though, currently, Same-sex Civil Marriages cannot be performed there. (Maryland Attorney General [Feb 2010], Maryland Court of Appeals (Port v. Cowan, May 2012])



>>>>

Gay marriage will never pass in North Carolina.

 

[bodecea]

In many states it will now take another amendment to their State's Constitutions to allow it...

Yep, just like they were passed at the ballot box, they can be repealed at the ballot box.

The Federal government will be recognizing all legal Civil Marriages in the next couple of years either through the Congressional repeal of DOMA or the SCOTUS overturning statutory law that discriminates between like situated citizens (Same-sex Civilly Married couples and Different-sex Civilly Married couples) based on gender and with no compelling government interest except the intend to discriminate. Section 3 of DOMA (the part that limits Federal recognition) will go down the tubes. Section 2 of DOMA (which provides States don't have to recognize Civil Marriage not recognized in their State ONLY based on gender) will probably be around for a few extra years. I see, and yes this is IMHO, will be repealed and replaced with a more Constitutional version which provides that State don't have to recognize Civil Marriages that conflict with their own laws for ANY reason.

and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

"Soon" is a subjective term not a quantitative term. In 2004 there were Zero, 0, nadda, zip legal entities that recognized Same-sex Civil Marriage in any capacity. Now there are 9 (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, The District of Columbia, California*, and Maryland**)


* Despite Prop 8 (which would not pass today), the Government of California still recognizes as Civilly Married all California Civil Marriage performed between June and November of 2008 and all Civil Marriage performed out of state during that time.

**Maryland also recognizes legal Civil Marriage from outside the State irregardless of gender even though, currently, Same-sex Civil Marriages cannot be performed there. (Maryland Attorney General [Feb 2010], Maryland Court of Appeals (Port v. Cowan, May 2012])



>>>>

Gay marriage will never pass in North Carolina.

Like other third world countries and their ilk.

 

[bodecea]

In many states it will now take another amendment to their State's Constitutions to allow it and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Can we come over and watch your head explode when it does?

Lol, my head won't explode heathen. I expect it to come to pass in this nation. The word of God tells me it will happen. That doesn't mean I'm supposed to sit on my ass an allow it without a fight. We, meaning Christians not your kind, are told to resist evil and I will do so until I meet the Lord.

And what form will your "resisting" take....crying in the pews?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yep, just like they were passed at the ballot box, they can be repealed at the ballot box.

The Federal government will be recognizing all legal Civil Marriages in the next couple of years either through the Congressional repeal of DOMA or the SCOTUS overturning statutory law that discriminates between like situated citizens (Same-sex Civilly Married couples and Different-sex Civilly Married couples) based on gender and with no compelling government interest except the intend to discriminate. Section 3 of DOMA (the part that limits Federal recognition) will go down the tubes. Section 2 of DOMA (which provides States don't have to recognize Civil Marriage not recognized in their State ONLY based on gender) will probably be around for a few extra years. I see, and yes this is IMHO, will be repealed and replaced with a more Constitutional version which provides that State don't have to recognize Civil Marriages that conflict with their own laws for ANY reason.



"Soon" is a subjective term not a quantitative term. In 2004 there were Zero, 0, nadda, zip legal entities that recognized Same-sex Civil Marriage in any capacity. Now there are 9 (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, The District of Columbia, California*, and Maryland**)


* Despite Prop 8 (which would not pass today), the Government of California still recognizes as Civilly Married all California Civil Marriage performed between June and November of 2008 and all Civil Marriage performed out of state during that time.

**Maryland also recognizes legal Civil Marriage from outside the State irregardless of gender even though, currently, Same-sex Civil Marriages cannot be performed there. (Maryland Attorney General [Feb 2010], Maryland Court of Appeals (Port v. Cowan, May 2012])



>>>>

Gay marriage will never pass in North Carolina.

Like other third world countries and their ilk.

Bull shit.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Don't tell me "nobody is forcing you to do anything". As a business owner I would be forced to offer the same benefits and services to two sodomites or two lesbos living together as a married couple as I would to a really married couple if gay "marriage" passes in Md this election. I will be forced to recognize their filth as a legitimate marriage no matter what my faith teaches me. All around the nation people of faith are being sued by lesbians and sodomites because they refuse to recognize two homosexuals as a married couple.

If you are a business owner in Maryland, Civil Marriage will have no impact on the services you offer as you are already prohibited by law from discriminating based on a person's race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability

§ 20-304. Prohibited act
An owner or operator of a place of public accommodation or an agent or employee of the owner or operator may not refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges of the place of public accommodation because of the person's race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability.
LexisNexis® Custom Solution: Code of Maryland Unannotated and Rules Research Tool​

The problem isn't Civil Marriage laws, the problem is Public Accommodation laws.

As for more and more people accepting this filth, that's kinda hard for me to believe seeing that in EVERY instance it was EVER put to a vote at the polls, the American people said NO to gay marrage. Americans are a tolerant people in general and usually have no problem with how you live your life as along as nobody else is effected or harmed, yet in vote after vote after viote they all say, there is not nor should there ever be anything called a gay "marraige". Md may be the first state to actually pass it at the polls but we'll see.

The trend has been toward more acceptance.


You can also see it at the polls. There was a slew of anti-Same-sex Civil Marriage ballots in 2000 & 2004 held during general elections, the were approved by margins of victory that ranged from (IIRC) 20%-75%. Now compare that the last two Same-sex Civil Marriage votes held on a general election day (California, Prop 8, 2008 and Maine, Question 1, 2009) which barely squeaked by from the point where a mere 2.5% change in the vote would have changed the outcome.

Attitudes are changing and as younger voters who, in general, support equal treatment under the law for Same-sex Couples you will see either this cycle or in the near future these laws repealed at the ballot box.

Just because something hasn't passed before, does not preclude it passing in the future. Personally I think Same-sex Civil Marriage supporters in Maine did it the right way. They accepted defeat with honor and humility in 2009 and then started a campaign of conversations knocking on doors and talking to people to change attitudes instead of having demonstrations and running to the courts. As a result it is Same-sex Civil Marriage supporters who actually initiated, for the first time in history, the initiative currently on the ballot.



>>>>

I bet that poll was taken in heavily populated faggot cities, I willing to be they never polled the suburbs

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Nobody is forcing you to do anything. You are still free to hate anyone you wish

There are homosexual families. Homosexuals do exist and are welcome in our society. More and more, it s people with your attitude who are not welcome

Yet you're trying to force the boy scouts to do something immoral

WILL RAINBOW WARRIOR YOU CAN HAVE THE FAGGOTS,.

Nobody is forcing the BSA to do anything

Condemning their position and expecting them to do the right thing is not forcing

They are doing the right thing.
if the boy wants to join a group he can join the rainbow warriors.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Don't tell me "nobody is forcing you to do anything". As a business owner I would be forced to offer the same benefits and services to two sodomites or two lesbos living together as a married couple as I would to a really married couple if gay "marriage" passes in Md this election. I will be forced to recognize their filth as a legitimate marriage no matter what my faith teaches me. All around the nation people of faith are being sued by lesbians and sodomites because they refuse to recognize two homosexuals as a married couple.

If you are a business owner in Maryland, Civil Marriage will have no impact on the services you offer as you are already prohibited by law from discriminating based on a person's race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability

§ 20-304. Prohibited act
An owner or operator of a place of public accommodation or an agent or employee of the owner or operator may not refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges of the place of public accommodation because of the person's race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability.
LexisNexis® Custom Solution: Code of Maryland Unannotated and Rules Research Tool​

The problem isn't Civil Marriage laws, the problem is Public Accommodation laws.

As for more and more people accepting this filth, that's kinda hard for me to believe seeing that in EVERY instance it was EVER put to a vote at the polls, the American people said NO to gay marrage. Americans are a tolerant people in general and usually have no problem with how you live your life as along as nobody else is effected or harmed, yet in vote after vote after viote they all say, there is not nor should there ever be anything called a gay "marraige". Md may be the first state to actually pass it at the polls but we'll see.

The trend has been toward more acceptance.


You can also see it at the polls. There was a slew of anti-Same-sex Civil Marriage ballots in 2000 & 2004 held during general elections, the were approved by margins of victory that ranged from (IIRC) 20%-75%. Now compare that the last two Same-sex Civil Marriage votes held on a general election day (California, Prop 8, 2008 and Maine, Question 1, 2009) which barely squeaked by from the point where a mere 2.5% change in the vote would have changed the outcome.

Attitudes are changing and as younger voters who, in general, support equal treatment under the law for Same-sex Couples you will see either this cycle or in the near future these laws repealed at the ballot box.

Just because something hasn't passed before, does not preclude it passing in the future. Personally I think Same-sex Civil Marriage supporters in Maine did it the right way. They accepted defeat with honor and humility in 2009 and then started a campaign of conversations knocking on doors and talking to people to change attitudes instead of having demonstrations and running to the courts. As a result it is Same-sex Civil Marriage supporters who actually initiated, for the first time in history, the initiative currently on the ballot.



>>>>

I bet that poll was taken in heavily populated faggot cities, I willing to be they never polled the suburbs

You would have to ask on methodology of the poll, normally they are conducted at random by phone.

The shift in voting results were based on general election between 2000/2004 and 2008/2009. Last I checked people in suburbs vote at the ballot box also.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

In many states it will now take another amendment to their State's Constitutions to allow it...

Yep, just like they were passed at the ballot box, they can be repealed at the ballot box.

The Federal government will be recognizing all legal Civil Marriages in the next couple of years either through the Congressional repeal of DOMA or the SCOTUS overturning statutory law that discriminates between like situated citizens (Same-sex Civilly Married couples and Different-sex Civilly Married couples) based on gender and with no compelling government interest except the intend to discriminate. Section 3 of DOMA (the part that limits Federal recognition) will go down the tubes. Section 2 of DOMA (which provides States don't have to recognize Civil Marriage not recognized in their State ONLY based on gender) will probably be around for a few extra years. I see, and yes this is IMHO, will be repealed and replaced with a more Constitutional version which provides that State don't have to recognize Civil Marriages that conflict with their own laws for ANY reason.

and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

"Soon" is a subjective term not a quantitative term. In 2004 there were Zero, 0, nadda, zip legal entities that recognized Same-sex Civil Marriage in any capacity. Now there are 9 (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, The District of Columbia, California*, and Maryland**)


* Despite Prop 8 (which would not pass today), the Government of California still recognizes as Civilly Married all California Civil Marriage performed between June and November of 2008 and all Civil Marriage performed out of state during that time.

**Maryland also recognizes legal Civil Marriage from outside the State irregardless of gender even though, currently, Same-sex Civil Marriages cannot be performed there. (Maryland Attorney General [Feb 2010], Maryland Court of Appeals (Port v. Cowan, May 2012])



>>>>

Gay marriage will never pass in North Carolina.

I'm sure those that enshrined anti-miscegenation as part of the North Carolina Constitution in 1875 felt that it would remain there forever also. However it was removed in 1971 when the new Constitution was adopted.

"Never" is a very long time.


>>>>

 

[ABikerSailor]

The good ole USA son, which has no laws forcing you to feed your neighbor's child if you see them starving. Or are you trying to tell me where you live there are laws forcing you to donate food to the hungry. Like I said US laws don't define morality, God does.

Wouldn't you just love to live in a theocratic society?

We'd love it if you moved to one.

Nope, not at all, and I'm pretty sure you don't even know what a Theocratic society even means. Why not address the stupidity you posted and I proved to be idiocy and stop trying to tell me what I think and want. You're barely intelligent enough to know what your own thoughts are, let alone what mine are.

It's apparent that you don't know the meaning of the word either, based on your bluster and failure to answer the question of whether or not you'd like to live in one.

It's obvious that you'd like to live in a theocratic society, especially based on the way you post about gays.

You DO know what a "theocratic society" is don't you? It's when religion rules the land, and everyone has to believe the same thing.

Better yet.................here's the definition from the dictionary..................

the·oc·ra·cy
   [thee-ok-ruh-see] Show IPA

noun, plural the·oc·ra·cies.
1.a form of government in which God or a deity is recognized as the supreme civil ruler, the God's or deity's laws being interpreted by the ecclesiastical authorities.

2. a system of government by priests claiming a divine commission.

3. a commonwealth or state under such a form or system of government.

Theocracy | Define Theocracy at Dictionary.com

You've stated repeatedly that you'd like to live in a country where it is ruled by Christianity.

Interestingly enough, both Islam and Sharia Law support theocracies for Muslims.

Ever wonder why we call you the "Christian Taliban"? There ya go.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yep, just like they were passed at the ballot box, they can be repealed at the ballot box.

The Federal government will be recognizing all legal Civil Marriages in the next couple of years either through the Congressional repeal of DOMA or the SCOTUS overturning statutory law that discriminates between like situated citizens (Same-sex Civilly Married couples and Different-sex Civilly Married couples) based on gender and with no compelling government interest except the intend to discriminate. Section 3 of DOMA (the part that limits Federal recognition) will go down the tubes. Section 2 of DOMA (which provides States don't have to recognize Civil Marriage not recognized in their State ONLY based on gender) will probably be around for a few extra years. I see, and yes this is IMHO, will be repealed and replaced with a more Constitutional version which provides that State don't have to recognize Civil Marriages that conflict with their own laws for ANY reason.



"Soon" is a subjective term not a quantitative term. In 2004 there were Zero, 0, nadda, zip legal entities that recognized Same-sex Civil Marriage in any capacity. Now there are 9 (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, The District of Columbia, California*, and Maryland**)


* Despite Prop 8 (which would not pass today), the Government of California still recognizes as Civilly Married all California Civil Marriage performed between June and November of 2008 and all Civil Marriage performed out of state during that time.

**Maryland also recognizes legal Civil Marriage from outside the State irregardless of gender even though, currently, Same-sex Civil Marriages cannot be performed there. (Maryland Attorney General [Feb 2010], Maryland Court of Appeals (Port v. Cowan, May 2012])



>>>>

Gay marriage will never pass in North Carolina.

I'm sure those that enshrined anti-miscegenation as part of the North Carolina Constitution in 1875 felt that it would remain there forever also. However it was removed in 1971 when the new Constitution was adopted.

"Never" is a very long time.


>>>>

North Carolina Amendment One LOOK IT UP.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If you are a business owner in Maryland, Civil Marriage will have no impact on the services you offer as you are already prohibited by law from discriminating based on a person's race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability

§ 20-304. Prohibited act
An owner or operator of a place of public accommodation or an agent or employee of the owner or operator may not refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges of the place of public accommodation because of the person's race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability.
LexisNexis® Custom Solution: Code of Maryland Unannotated and Rules Research Tool​

The problem isn't Civil Marriage laws, the problem is Public Accommodation laws.

The trend has been toward more acceptance.


You can also see it at the polls. There was a slew of anti-Same-sex Civil Marriage ballots in 2000 & 2004 held during general elections, the were approved by margins of victory that ranged from (IIRC) 20%-75%. Now compare that the last two Same-sex Civil Marriage votes held on a general election day (California, Prop 8, 2008 and Maine, Question 1, 2009) which barely squeaked by from the point where a mere 2.5% change in the vote would have changed the outcome.

Attitudes are changing and as younger voters who, in general, support equal treatment under the law for Same-sex Couples you will see either this cycle or in the near future these laws repealed at the ballot box.

Just because something hasn't passed before, does not preclude it passing in the future. Personally I think Same-sex Civil Marriage supporters in Maine did it the right way. They accepted defeat with honor and humility in 2009 and then started a campaign of conversations knocking on doors and talking to people to change attitudes instead of having demonstrations and running to the courts. As a result it is Same-sex Civil Marriage supporters who actually initiated, for the first time in history, the initiative currently on the ballot.



>>>>

I bet that poll was taken in heavily populated faggot cities, I willing to be they never polled the suburbs

You would have to ask on methodology of the poll, normally they are conducted at random by phone.

The shift in voting results were based on general election between 2000/2004 and 2008/2009. Last I checked people in suburbs vote at the ballot box also.


>>>>

Random phone yes, however nothing about random area codes.
I bet you can get a lot of gay's if you call area code 415 or 650

 

[jtpr312]

I was addressing your statement about having to provide services to homosexuals as a business owner, you already have to do that as a function of the law (a law which I disagree with, but yet still the law).




Just hold on to that thought if you take comfort in it and it helps.

But history is not a predictor of how people will vote on Same-sex Civil Marriage. We say a 20% shift in one State that installed discriminatory statutory law in 2000 and by 2008 that same state when it voted again only succeeded by 2.5%.

A person NEVER flew under powered flight, did that mean that the Wright brothers didn't succeed? SSCM will pass at the ballot box, this year? Maybe. Maybe not. But the fact remains that as younger voters have a greater impact on the outcomes of elections over the years then outcomes will change. May take 5 more years, might take 25 more years.


>>>>

In many states it will now take another amendment to their State's Constitutions to allow it...

Yep, just like they were passed at the ballot box, they can be repealed at the ballot box.

The Federal government will be recognizing all legal Civil Marriages in the next couple of years either through the Congressional repeal of DOMA or the SCOTUS overturning statutory law that discriminates between like situated citizens (Same-sex Civilly Married couples and Different-sex Civilly Married couples) based on gender and with no compelling government interest except the intend to discriminate. Section 3 of DOMA (the part that limits Federal recognition) will go down the tubes. Section 2 of DOMA (which provides States don't have to recognize Civil Marriage not recognized in their State ONLY based on gender) will probably be around for a few extra years. I see, and yes this is IMHO, will be repealed and replaced with a more Constitutional version which provides that State don't have to recognize Civil Marriages that conflict with their own laws for ANY reason.

and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

"Soon" is a subjective term not a quantitative term. In 2004 there were Zero, 0, nadda, zip legal entities that recognized Same-sex Civil Marriage in any capacity. Now there are 9 (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, The District of Columbia, California*, and Maryland**)


* Despite Prop 8 (which would not pass today), the Government of California still recognizes as Civilly Married all California Civil Marriage performed between June and November of 2008 and all Civil Marriage performed out of state during that time.

**Maryland also recognizes legal Civil Marriage from outside the State irregardless of gender even though, currently, Same-sex Civil Marriages cannot be performed there. (Maryland Attorney General [Feb 2010], Maryland Court of Appeals (Port v. Cowan, May 2012])



>>>>

Congress would be hard pressed to repeal DOMA seeing that most Republican Lawmakers and their Constituents believe marriage to be only a union between a man and a woman. As for there being zero in 2004 and 9 now, those 9 are due to activist judges making their own laws and democratic lawmakers ignoring the will of their citizens and instead pandering to the far left and the militant homosexuals in their party. As for the Supreme Court, that would all depend on whether obama is re-elected and can change the voting blocks of the 9 whores in DC.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Gay marriage will never pass in North Carolina.

I'm sure those that enshrined anti-miscegenation as part of the North Carolina Constitution in 1875 felt that it would remain there forever also. However it was removed in 1971 when the new Constitution was adopted.

"Never" is a very long time.


>>>>

North Carolina Amendment One LOOK IT UP.

Be happy to if you can explain why reading it would change what I mentioned. Many in 1875 who enshrined anti-miscegenation laws into the North Carolina Constitution in 1875 felt interracial Civil Marriage would "Never" occur.

Are interracial Civil Marriage still against the North Carolina Constitution?

Is "Never" not a long time?



Please explain.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

In many states it will now take another amendment to their State's Constitutions to allow it...

Yep, just like they were passed at the ballot box, they can be repealed at the ballot box.

The Federal government will be recognizing all legal Civil Marriages in the next couple of years either through the Congressional repeal of DOMA or the SCOTUS overturning statutory law that discriminates between like situated citizens (Same-sex Civilly Married couples and Different-sex Civilly Married couples) based on gender and with no compelling government interest except the intend to discriminate. Section 3 of DOMA (the part that limits Federal recognition) will go down the tubes. Section 2 of DOMA (which provides States don't have to recognize Civil Marriage not recognized in their State ONLY based on gender) will probably be around for a few extra years. I see, and yes this is IMHO, will be repealed and replaced with a more Constitutional version which provides that State don't have to recognize Civil Marriages that conflict with their own laws for ANY reason.

and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

"Soon" is a subjective term not a quantitative term. In 2004 there were Zero, 0, nadda, zip legal entities that recognized Same-sex Civil Marriage in any capacity. Now there are 9 (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, The District of Columbia, California*, and Maryland**)


* Despite Prop 8 (which would not pass today), the Government of California still recognizes as Civilly Married all California Civil Marriage performed between June and November of 2008 and all Civil Marriage performed out of state during that time.

**Maryland also recognizes legal Civil Marriage from outside the State irregardless of gender even though, currently, Same-sex Civil Marriages cannot be performed there. (Maryland Attorney General [Feb 2010], Maryland Court of Appeals (Port v. Cowan, May 2012])



>>>>

Congress would be hard pressed to repeal DOMA seeing that most Republican Lawmakers and their Constituents believe marriage to be only a union between a man and a woman. As for there being zero in 2004 and 9 now, those 9 are due to activist judges making their own laws and democratic lawmakers ignoring the will of their citizens and instead pandering to the far left and the militant homosexuals in their party. As for the Supreme Court, that would all depend on whether obama is re-elected and can change the voting blocks of the 9 whores in DC.

When polls show a majority of American citizens support Same-sex Civil Marriage and when in the last two general elections support for Same-sex Civil Marriage gathers 47.5% of the votes - that is hardly just "far left and the militant homosexuals", that's becoming a position pretty much held my mainstream people across the united states.

Watch the votes for Washington, Maine, Maryland, and Minnesota - think that it will be only "hard left" that will be voting in support of equal treatment? That would mean they only get about what - say 20% of the vote? I'd posit that in each state the vote in support will be a minimum of 45% each and there is a very good chance that at least two of the four will pass equal treatment under Civil Marriage laws.


Attitudes are changing and they are changing in the Republican party (which I've been a member of since I registered to vote in 1978). It's OK, give it time.


>>>>

 

[rightwinger]

Yep, just like they were passed at the ballot box, they can be repealed at the ballot box.

The Federal government will be recognizing all legal Civil Marriages in the next couple of years either through the Congressional repeal of DOMA or the SCOTUS overturning statutory law that discriminates between like situated citizens (Same-sex Civilly Married couples and Different-sex Civilly Married couples) based on gender and with no compelling government interest except the intend to discriminate. Section 3 of DOMA (the part that limits Federal recognition) will go down the tubes. Section 2 of DOMA (which provides States don't have to recognize Civil Marriage not recognized in their State ONLY based on gender) will probably be around for a few extra years. I see, and yes this is IMHO, will be repealed and replaced with a more Constitutional version which provides that State don't have to recognize Civil Marriages that conflict with their own laws for ANY reason.



"Soon" is a subjective term not a quantitative term. In 2004 there were Zero, 0, nadda, zip legal entities that recognized Same-sex Civil Marriage in any capacity. Now there are 9 (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, The District of Columbia, California*, and Maryland**)


* Despite Prop 8 (which would not pass today), the Government of California still recognizes as Civilly Married all California Civil Marriage performed between June and November of 2008 and all Civil Marriage performed out of state during that time.

**Maryland also recognizes legal Civil Marriage from outside the State irregardless of gender even though, currently, Same-sex Civil Marriages cannot be performed there. (Maryland Attorney General [Feb 2010], Maryland Court of Appeals (Port v. Cowan, May 2012])



>>>>

Congress would be hard pressed to repeal DOMA seeing that most Republican Lawmakers and their Constituents believe marriage to be only a union between a man and a woman. As for there being zero in 2004 and 9 now, those 9 are due to activist judges making their own laws and democratic lawmakers ignoring the will of their citizens and instead pandering to the far left and the militant homosexuals in their party. As for the Supreme Court, that would all depend on whether obama is re-elected and can change the voting blocks of the 9 whores in DC.

When polls show a majority of American citizens support Same-sex Civil Marriage and when in the last two general elections support for Same-sex Civil Marriage gathers 47.5% of the votes - that is hardly just "far left and the militant homosexuals", that's becoming a position pretty much held my mainstream people across the united states.

Watch the votes for Washington, Maine, Maryland, and Minnesota - think that it will be only "hard left" that will be voting in support of equal treatment? That would mean they only get about what - say 20% of the vote? I'd posit that in each state the vote in support will be a minimum of 45% each and there is a very good chance that at least two of the four will pass equal treatment under Civil Marriage laws.


Attitudes are changing and they are changing in the Republican party (which I've been a member of since I registered to vote in 1978). It's OK, give it time.


>>>>

He is right in that Red State Bible belters will filibuster any attempt to repeal DOMA. Congress can't pass the simplest bill, no way they would agree on this

That is why we have courts.

 

[rightwinger]

Yet you're trying to force the boy scouts to do something immoral

WILL RAINBOW WARRIOR YOU CAN HAVE THE FAGGOTS,.

Nobody is forcing the BSA to do anything

Condemning their position and expecting them to do the right thing is not forcing

They are doing the right thing.
if the boy wants to join a group he can join the rainbow warriors.

What if the boys father wants him to join scouts so that he can "man up" ?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Congress would be hard pressed to repeal DOMA seeing that most Republican Lawmakers and their Constituents believe marriage to be only a union between a man and a woman. As for there being zero in 2004 and 9 now, those 9 are due to activist judges making their own laws and democratic lawmakers ignoring the will of their citizens and instead pandering to the far left and the militant homosexuals in their party. As for the Supreme Court, that would all depend on whether obama is re-elected and can change the voting blocks of the 9 whores in DC.

When polls show a majority of American citizens support Same-sex Civil Marriage and when in the last two general elections support for Same-sex Civil Marriage gathers 47.5% of the votes - that is hardly just "far left and the militant homosexuals", that's becoming a position pretty much held my mainstream people across the united states.

Watch the votes for Washington, Maine, Maryland, and Minnesota - think that it will be only "hard left" that will be voting in support of equal treatment? That would mean they only get about what - say 20% of the vote? I'd posit that in each state the vote in support will be a minimum of 45% each and there is a very good chance that at least two of the four will pass equal treatment under Civil Marriage laws.


Attitudes are changing and they are changing in the Republican party (which I've been a member of since I registered to vote in 1978). It's OK, give it time.


>>>>

He is right in that Red State Bible belters will filibuster any attempt to repeal DOMA. Congress can't pass the simplest bill, no way they would agree on this

That is why we have courts.

Congress passed the repeal of DADT, the system works, sometimes you just have to have faith that our elected representatives will do the right thing and reject government sanctioned discrimination.

IMHO, repeal is much better then the courts overturning it because it pulls the teeth on the "activist judges" mantra.


>>>>

 

[rightwinger]

What happens to all the gay scouts whose parents sent them into scouting to develop the manly skills of camping, knot tying, first aid and being around positive male role models?

Let the boys in, let them earn rank....then kick them out if they actually admit they are gay

 

[Katzndogz]

What happens to all the gay scouts whose parents sent them into scouting to develop the manly skills of camping, knot tying, first aid and being around positive male role models?

Let the boys in, let them earn rank....then kick them out if they actually admit they are gay

There is nothing to prevent the formation of an organization that teaches the exact same things but admits gays.

Diversity so far is creating a kind of parallel business class. Those that will serve everyone and those that choose to discriminate. Like my mechanic who won't service the cars of black people. The photographer who has found a way to not take the wedding photographs of gay couples. The bakery who no longer bakes wedding cakes. Of course all these people still perform these services, they have just found a way around doing by force what they wouldn't do voluntarily. I thought that I was being innovative when I won my case against the lesbian couple. As it turns out, I was being quite ordinary.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Nobody is forcing the BSA to do anything

Condemning their position and expecting them to do the right thing is not forcing

They are doing the right thing.
if the boy wants to join a group he can join the rainbow warriors.

What if the boys father wants him to join scouts so that he can "man up" ?

Beat the gayness out of him first if that is what he wants too do.