Is gay marriage the most important issue in the USA?

[Soggy in NOLA]

Considering gays make up about 2% of the population and not 100% of that number care about gay marriage, I'd say it is of no real consequence. What this is really about is chipping away at tradition. Nothing more, nothing less.

So....what does being about 2% of the population have to do with this?

The question was is gay marriage the biggest issue in the U.S. today? How can something that affects 4.7 million people (maybe) out of 316 million be the biggest issue facing the country? Looka, don't get me wrong, I don't care one way or another. Get married, don't get married. But the biggest issue in the country today? Nah, no way. That's absurd. $60,000,000,000,000 in debt and unfunded liabilities? Ok... now you have my attention.

 

[Syriusly]

Is assuring equal treatment under law for every American citizen not a priority? I know that to Conservatives this issue is a non starter. Conservative would be content if, at the least, homosexuals remained closeted and demur. At the most, some Conservatives would bring back sodomy laws and make homosexuality itself a criminal offense. Conservative concern for civil liberties is always low.

But without equal justice, none of us are free.

not a word of your post is true. Gays have every constitutional right that non-gay people have. Marriage is not a constitutional right.

But the thread asks if this is the most important issue facing our nation. are you saying you think it is?

You keep saying it is not a right and are continually proven wrong

Yet you repeat the lie

the word marriage appears no where in the constitution, declaration of independence, or the bill of rights.

"pursuit of happiness" is a generic term. "pursuit" is guaranteed, not happiness.

Marriage licenses are issued by the states, the states should decide who they may be issued to.

And the 14th Amendment requires the states to allow the American citizens residing within the states equal protection of (equal access to) the laws of the states, including marriage law same-sex couples are eligible to participate in.

You and others on the right keep trying – and failing – to reject this fact: that Americans, including gay Americans, are first and foremost citizens of the United States, residents of the states subordinate to that, where their civil rights are immune from attack by the states, as one does not forfeit his inalienable rights merely as a consequence of his state of residence.

BTW, gay marriage is an oxymoron.

BTW- only moron's say that.

 

[Syriusly]

Come on people. We have some real problems in this country

18 trillion in debt
half the country on some form of govt handout
deficit spending every year
no confidence in congress or the president
the mid east burning
radical islam killing thousands because or religion
more americans in poverty than ever before
hundreds of trillions in unfunded liabilities
racial violence in our cities

and we spend hours arguing about gay marriage???? WTF is wrong with us? And yes, I am guilty of it too.

I have made my last post on a gay thread. I hope many of you will follow suit. Let the court do its job and live with the rulings

We have much more important issues to deal with than whether two gays or lesbians can call their union a marriage.

It IS an important issue because it calls into question the way the first amendment is defined. Since there is no definition of marriage in the constitution it cannot be interpreted to be solely between a man and a woman. Constitutionally, marriage is all inclusive, it has no limitations and the SCOTUS justices who stupidly question the "age old" definition of marriage need to recuse themselves out of sheer stupidity. This Supreme Court is a joke, but that's par for the course when rightists hold the majority.

your post is a study in contradictions. you first admit that marriage is not addressed in any of our founding documents, and then like most leftists, try to create something that you admit does not exist.

marriage is not a constitutional right, it is a permit issued by each state, not the federal government. The constitution leaves such things to the states, therefore, the voters of each should decide.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

you gays need to grow the **** up .

You bigots need to grow the **** up and stop telling gay people that they can't get married.

 

[Nosmo King]

Until I hear a sensible argument demonstrating actual harm resulting after same sex marriage, I will continue to believe that all arguments against it are based in ignorance, fear, suspicion and hurtful stereotypes.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Come on people. We have some real problems in this country

18 trillion in debt
half the country on some form of govt handout
deficit spending every year
no confidence in congress or the president
the mid east burning
radical islam killing thousands because or religion
more americans in poverty than ever before
hundreds of trillions in unfunded liabilities
racial violence in our cities

and we spend hours arguing about gay marriage???? WTF is wrong with us? And yes, I am guilty of it too.

I have made my last post on a gay thread. I hope many of you will follow suit. Let the court do its job and live with the rulings

We have much more important issues to deal with than whether two gays or lesbians can call their union a marriage.

It IS an important issue because it calls into question the way the first amendment is defined. Since there is no definition of marriage in the constitution it cannot be interpreted to be solely between a man and a woman. Constitutionally, marriage is all inclusive, it has no limitations and the SCOTUS justices who stupidly question the "age old" definition of marriage need to recuse themselves out of sheer stupidity. This Supreme Court is a joke, but that's par for the course when rightists hold the majority.

your post is a study in contradictions. you first admit that marriage is not addressed in any of our founding documents, and then like most leftists, try to create something that you admit does not exist.

marriage is not a constitutional right, it is a permit issued by each state, not the federal government. The constitution leaves such things to the states, therefore, the voters of each should decide.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

you gays need to grow the **** up .

You bigots need to grow the **** up and stop telling gay people that they can't get married.

And you moral busy bodies need to stop pushing your morality on others.

 

[Nosmo King]

It IS an important issue because it calls into question the way the first amendment is defined. Since there is no definition of marriage in the constitution it cannot be interpreted to be solely between a man and a woman. Constitutionally, marriage is all inclusive, it has no limitations and the SCOTUS justices who stupidly question the "age old" definition of marriage need to recuse themselves out of sheer stupidity. This Supreme Court is a joke, but that's par for the course when rightists hold the majority.

your post is a study in contradictions. you first admit that marriage is not addressed in any of our founding documents, and then like most leftists, try to create something that you admit does not exist.

marriage is not a constitutional right, it is a permit issued by each state, not the federal government. The constitution leaves such things to the states, therefore, the voters of each should decide.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

you gays need to grow the **** up .

You bigots need to grow the **** up and stop telling gay people that they can't get married.

And you moral busy bodies need to stop pushing your morality on others.

How can marriage equality directly effect you? How can it directly effect your community? Does your moral code trump all others? If so, why?

 

[Syriusly]

It IS an important issue because it calls into question the way the first amendment is defined. Since there is no definition of marriage in the constitution it cannot be interpreted to be solely between a man and a woman. Constitutionally, marriage is all inclusive, it has no limitations and the SCOTUS justices who stupidly question the "age old" definition of marriage need to recuse themselves out of sheer stupidity. This Supreme Court is a joke, but that's par for the course when rightists hold the majority.

your post is a study in contradictions. you first admit that marriage is not addressed in any of our founding documents, and then like most leftists, try to create something that you admit does not exist.

marriage is not a constitutional right, it is a permit issued by each state, not the federal government. The constitution leaves such things to the states, therefore, the voters of each should decide.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

you gays need to grow the **** up .

You bigots need to grow the **** up and stop telling gay people that they can't get married.

And you moral busy bodies need to stop pushing your morality on others.

Which 'moral busy bodies' would that be?

You say you are from New Orleans? Home of laws imposing morality on others- i.e. laws against consensual sodomy.

Doesn't get much more 'pushing morality' on others than telling others 'If you do that in your bedroom, we will send you to jail'.

 

[Redfish]

Come on people. We have some real problems in this country

18 trillion in debt
half the country on some form of govt handout
deficit spending every year
no confidence in congress or the president
the mid east burning
radical islam killing thousands because or religion
more americans in poverty than ever before
hundreds of trillions in unfunded liabilities
racial violence in our cities

and we spend hours arguing about gay marriage???? WTF is wrong with us? And yes, I am guilty of it too.

I have made my last post on a gay thread. I hope many of you will follow suit. Let the court do its job and live with the rulings

We have much more important issues to deal with than whether two gays or lesbians can call their union a marriage.

It IS an important issue because it calls into question the way the first amendment is defined. Since there is no definition of marriage in the constitution it cannot be interpreted to be solely between a man and a woman. Constitutionally, marriage is all inclusive, it has no limitations and the SCOTUS justices who stupidly question the "age old" definition of marriage need to recuse themselves out of sheer stupidity. This Supreme Court is a joke, but that's par for the course when rightists hold the majority.

your post is a study in contradictions. you first admit that marriage is not addressed in any of our founding documents, and then like most leftists, try to create something that you admit does not exist.

marriage is not a constitutional right, it is a permit issued by each state, not the federal government. The constitution leaves such things to the states, therefore, the voters of each should decide.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

you gays need to grow the **** up .

You bigots need to grow the **** up and stop telling gay people that they can't get married.

Listen carefully, idiot. A majority of the inhabitants of planet earth do not consider a gay union to be a marriage. In most of the world gays are shunned, ridiculed, or killed. In the USA they have the rights that every citizen has. Marriage of two men or two women is not a constitutional right. If the voters of some states want to sanction it, fine. But the voters of each state should make that decision.

Marriage is the union of one man and one woman. It has been that for over 3000 years (yes, there were some exceptions but they are tiny).

A gay civil union would give you all of the "cash and prizes" that you claim you can't get. The word marriage would not give you anything more, and you ******* well know it.

This is not about rights, equality, or fairness. its about a 2% minority trying to use the government to mandate societal acceptance of an aberant lifestyle, and you ******* well know that too.

 

[Redfish]

Until I hear a sensible argument demonstrating actual harm resulting after same sex marriage, I will continue to believe that all arguments against it are based in ignorance, fear, suspicion and hurtful stereotypes.

OK. one final time. If gay marriage is federally sanctioned using equality, discrimination, and fairness are legal arguments, then polygamy, sibling, parent/child, and every other form of marriage MUST also be sanctioned using the exact same arguments.

What legal argument will you bring to deny marriage to polygamists, etc? Why would you discriminate against them because they do not believe as you do.

Thats the societal damage----------------------

 

[Nosmo King]

Until I hear a sensible argument demonstrating actual harm resulting after same sex marriage, I will continue to believe that all arguments against it are based in ignorance, fear, suspicion and hurtful stereotypes.

OK. one final time. If gay marriage is federally sanctioned using equality, discrimination, and fairness are legal arguments, then polygamy, sibling, parent/child, and every other form of marriage MUST also be sanctioned using the exact same arguments.

What legal argument will you bring to deny marriage to polygamists, etc? Why would you discriminate against them because they do not believe as you do.

Thats the societal damage----------------------

Marriage is a contract between two consenting adults to establish a next-of-kin relationship where no such relationship previously exists. That eliminates polygamy, incestuous relationships and any other combination you might be fearful of.

Polygamy would require a multi-partnership, not the marriage contract which is exclusive to two individuals.

 

[JakeStarkey]

your post is a study in contradictions. you first admit that marriage is not addressed in any of our founding documents, and then like most leftists, try to create something that you admit does not exist.

marriage is not a constitutional right, it is a permit issued by each state, not the federal government. The constitution leaves such things to the states, therefore, the voters of each should decide.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

Oh, its not faaaaaaaaaair, it might hurt their feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings------well tough shit. Stay in a state that recognizes your gay hook up as a marriage.

My CC permit is not recognized in New Jersey or New York, so I don't go to those states with my gun in my pocket. BFD.

you gays need to grow the **** up and realize that you are less than 2% of the population and the rest of us don't have to cater to your feeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

Oh, its not faaaaaaaaaair, it might hurt their feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings------well tough shit. Stay in a state that recognizes your gay hook up as a marriage.

My CC permit is not recognized in New Jersey or New York, so I don't go to those states with my gun in my pocket. BFD.

you gays need to grow the **** up and realize that you are less than 2% of the population and the rest of us don't have to cater to your feeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings.

So much for the OP being the last gay thread post he makes.....once a liar always a liar, it would appear. He just can't quit the gay.

Just because it's not important to you doesn't mean it's not important to gays. Comparing your CC permit to gsy marriage is really fucked up, unless of course you want to give it a blow job. Ist Americans today approve of gay marriage, so a vote would be fine with me. You're the one that needs to grow the **** up and realize that it's a civil rights issue, and that your homophobic issues need to be dealt with through psychological therapy.

the majority does not approve of it. The very blue state of california voted it down twice. BTW, its not homophobic to be opposed to gay marriage. In this country we still have freedom of thought and belief, do we not?

Let's get the little wheels back on your broken band wagon.

(1) The majority does approve of it, the millennials overwhelmingly.

(2) To oppose marriage equality is homophobia.

(3) You may believe and think as you will, yes.

(4) Of course it is civil rights issue.

(5) #4 above is why SCOTUS will make it the law of the land.

(6) If you believe #3 above, you will not shut up about it, despite your lie otherwise.

 

[Redfish]

Until I hear a sensible argument demonstrating actual harm resulting after same sex marriage, I will continue to believe that all arguments against it are based in ignorance, fear, suspicion and hurtful stereotypes.

OK. one final time. If gay marriage is federally sanctioned using equality, discrimination, and fairness are legal arguments, then polygamy, sibling, parent/child, and every other form of marriage MUST also be sanctioned using the exact same arguments.

What legal argument will you bring to deny marriage to polygamists, etc? Why would you discriminate against them because they do not believe as you do.

Thats the societal damage----------------------

Marriage is a contract between two consenting adults to establish a next-of-kin relationship where no such relationship previously exists. That eliminates polygamy, incestuous relationships and any other combination you might be fearful of.

Polygamy would require a multi-partnership, not the marriage contract which is exclusive to two individuals.

where in the constitution do you find that definition of marriage? Where in the bill of rights or any of the amendments? where in any SC decision?

thats the problem, you THINK that definition is enshrined somewhere, but its not.

 

[bodecea]

It IS an important issue because it calls into question the way the first amendment is defined. Since there is no definition of marriage in the constitution it cannot be interpreted to be solely between a man and a woman. Constitutionally, marriage is all inclusive, it has no limitations and the SCOTUS justices who stupidly question the "age old" definition of marriage need to recuse themselves out of sheer stupidity. This Supreme Court is a joke, but that's par for the course when rightists hold the majority.

your post is a study in contradictions. you first admit that marriage is not addressed in any of our founding documents, and then like most leftists, try to create something that you admit does not exist.

marriage is not a constitutional right, it is a permit issued by each state, not the federal government. The constitution leaves such things to the states, therefore, the voters of each should decide.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

you gays need to grow the **** up .

You bigots need to grow the **** up and stop telling gay people that they can't get married.

Listen carefully, idiot. A majority of the inhabitants of planet earth do not consider a gay union to be a marriage. In most of the world gays are shunned, ridiculed, or killed. In the USA they have the rights that every citizen has. Marriage of two men or two women is not a constitutional right. If the voters of some states want to sanction it, fine. But the voters of each state should make that decision.

Marriage is the union of one man and one woman. It has been that for over 3000 years (yes, there were some exceptions but they are tiny).

A gay civil union would give you all of the "cash and prizes" that you claim you can't get. The word marriage would not give you anything more, and you ******* well know it.

This is not about rights, equality, or fairness. its about a 2% minority trying to use the government to mandate societal acceptance of an aberant lifestyle, and you ******* well know that too.

Evidence of what Red Minnow bases his belief system on......

 

[Redfish]

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

Oh, its not faaaaaaaaaair, it might hurt their feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings------well tough shit. Stay in a state that recognizes your gay hook up as a marriage.

My CC permit is not recognized in New Jersey or New York, so I don't go to those states with my gun in my pocket. BFD.

you gays need to grow the **** up and realize that you are less than 2% of the population and the rest of us don't have to cater to your feeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings.

Oh, its not faaaaaaaaaair, it might hurt their feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings------well tough shit. Stay in a state that recognizes your gay hook up as a marriage.

My CC permit is not recognized in New Jersey or New York, so I don't go to those states with my gun in my pocket. BFD.

you gays need to grow the **** up and realize that you are less than 2% of the population and the rest of us don't have to cater to your feeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings.

So much for the OP being the last gay thread post he makes.....once a liar always a liar, it would appear. He just can't quit the gay.

Just because it's not important to you doesn't mean it's not important to gays. Comparing your CC permit to gsy marriage is really fucked up, unless of course you want to give it a blow job. Ist Americans today approve of gay marriage, so a vote would be fine with me. You're the one that needs to grow the **** up and realize that it's a civil rights issue, and that your homophobic issues need to be dealt with through psychological therapy.

the majority does not approve of it. The very blue state of california voted it down twice. BTW, its not homophobic to be opposed to gay marriage. In this country we still have freedom of thought and belief, do we not?

Let's get the little wheels back on your broken band wagon.

(1) The majority does approve of it, the millennials overwhelmingly.

(2) To oppose marriage equality is homophobia.

(3) You may believe and think as you will, yes.

(4) Of course it is civil rights issue.

(5) #4 above is why SCOTUS will make it the law of the land.

(6) If you believe #3 above, you will not shut up about it, despite your lie otherwise.

1, wrong
2 wrong
3 true
4 wrong
5 maybe, maybe not
6 I will accept the SC ruling either way, will you if it goes against you?

 

[Nosmo King]

Until I hear a sensible argument demonstrating actual harm resulting after same sex marriage, I will continue to believe that all arguments against it are based in ignorance, fear, suspicion and hurtful stereotypes.

OK. one final time. If gay marriage is federally sanctioned using equality, discrimination, and fairness are legal arguments, then polygamy, sibling, parent/child, and every other form of marriage MUST also be sanctioned using the exact same arguments.

What legal argument will you bring to deny marriage to polygamists, etc? Why would you discriminate against them because they do not believe as you do.

Thats the societal damage----------------------

Marriage is a contract between two consenting adults to establish a next-of-kin relationship where no such relationship previously exists. That eliminates polygamy, incestuous relationships and any other combination you might be fearful of.

Polygamy would require a multi-partnership, not the marriage contract which is exclusive to two individuals.

where in the constitution do you find that definition of marriage? Where in the bill of rights or any of the amendments? where in any SC decision?

thats the problem, you THINK that definition is enshrined somewhere, but its not.

It's in the marriage license itself! The contract establishes a new legal entity and is exclusive to two individuals. What state has marriage defined as a group of three or more? What state says the marriage contract is open to minors? What state holds a marriage contract to those with a previous next-of-kin relationship?


If all we had as a code of law was the constitution, nothing much could get done!

 

[Syriusly]

It IS an important issue because it calls into question the way the first amendment is defined. Since there is no definition of marriage in the constitution it cannot be interpreted to be solely between a man and a woman. Constitutionally, marriage is all inclusive, it has no limitations and the SCOTUS justices who stupidly question the "age old" definition of marriage need to recuse themselves out of sheer stupidity. This Supreme Court is a joke, but that's par for the course when rightists hold the majority.

your post is a study in contradictions. you first admit that marriage is not addressed in any of our founding documents, and then like most leftists, try to create something that you admit does not exist.

marriage is not a constitutional right, it is a permit issued by each state, not the federal government. The constitution leaves such things to the states, therefore, the voters of each should decide.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

you gays need to grow the **** up .

You bigots need to grow the **** up and stop telling gay people that they can't get married.

Listen carefully, idiot. A majority of the inhabitants of planet earth do not consider a gay union to be a marriage. .

Listen carefully, moron. The United States does not live by what the majority of the inhabitants of the world consider- if we had gone by that women would not have gotten the vote for another 50 years- if ever. The majority of the world is opposed to the death penalty- and we don't care.

You bigots only suddenly care about what Russia and Saudi Arabia think about marriage when it comes to homosexuals.

You bigots need to grow the **** up and stop telling gay people that they can't get married.

 

[Syriusly]

your post is a study in contradictions. you first admit that marriage is not addressed in any of our founding documents, and then like most leftists, try to create something that you admit does not exist.

marriage is not a constitutional right, it is a permit issued by each state, not the federal government. The constitution leaves such things to the states, therefore, the voters of each should decide.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

Oh, its not faaaaaaaaaair, it might hurt their feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings------well tough shit. Stay in a state that recognizes your gay hook up as a marriage.

My CC permit is not recognized in New Jersey or New York, so I don't go to those states with my gun in my pocket. BFD.

you gays need to grow the **** up and realize that you are less than 2% of the population and the rest of us don't have to cater to your feeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings.

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

Oh, its not faaaaaaaaaair, it might hurt their feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings------well tough shit. Stay in a state that recognizes your gay hook up as a marriage.

My CC permit is not recognized in New Jersey or New York, so I don't go to those states with my gun in my pocket. BFD.

you gays need to grow the **** up and realize that you are less than 2% of the population and the rest of us don't have to cater to your feeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings.

So much for the OP being the last gay thread post he makes.....once a liar always a liar, it would appear. He just can't quit the gay.

Just because it's not important to you doesn't mean it's not important to gays. Comparing your CC permit to gsy marriage is really fucked up, unless of course you want to give it a blow job. Ist Americans today approve of gay marriage, so a vote would be fine with me. You're the one that needs to grow the **** up and realize that it's a civil rights issue, and that your homophobic issues need to be dealt with through psychological therapy.

BTW, its not homophobic to be opposed to gay marriage.

Simply being opposed to gay marriage does not necessarily make you homophobic- but you certainly could be.

But certainly if you are not opposed to gay marriage you are not homophobic.

 

[Syriusly]

Until I hear a sensible argument demonstrating actual harm resulting after same sex marriage, I will continue to believe that all arguments against it are based in ignorance, fear, suspicion and hurtful stereotypes.

OK. one final time. If gay marriage is federally sanctioned using equality, discrimination, and fairness are legal arguments, then polygamy, sibling, parent/child, and every other form of marriage MUST also be sanctioned using the exact same arguments.---

No- only someone who does not understand the arguments believes that is true.

None of those things happened when mixed race marriage bans were overturned, none of those things happened when the bans on inmate marriage were overturned, and none of those things happened when the bans on marriage by people who owed child support were overturned.

Its false argument- essentially a strawman by those who cannot make a successful argument against gay marriage.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Syriusly has Redfish on the run.

The following is a slippery slope fallacy: "If gay marriage is federally sanctioned using equality, discrimination, and fairness are legal arguments, then polygamy, sibling, parent/child, and every other form of marriage MUST also be sanctioned using the exact same arguments." Absolutely no proof that such will happen, not even common sense to that point.

 

[bodecea]

It is an issue for the federal government to decide on. If a same sex couple is married in one state, and they need to relocate to another state that doesn't recognize their marriage it's not fair for them. This is too difficult for the simpleton right wing mind to comprehend, but it's a very distinct possibility and it gives the federal government due cause to rule on it.

Oh, its not faaaaaaaaaair, it might hurt their feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings------well tough shit. Stay in a state that recognizes your gay hook up as a marriage.

My CC permit is not recognized in New Jersey or New York, so I don't go to those states with my gun in my pocket. BFD.

you gays need to grow the **** up and realize that you are less than 2% of the population and the rest of us don't have to cater to your feeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings.

Oh, its not faaaaaaaaaair, it might hurt their feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings------well tough shit. Stay in a state that recognizes your gay hook up as a marriage.

My CC permit is not recognized in New Jersey or New York, so I don't go to those states with my gun in my pocket. BFD.

you gays need to grow the **** up and realize that you are less than 2% of the population and the rest of us don't have to cater to your feeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings.

So much for the OP being the last gay thread post he makes.....once a liar always a liar, it would appear. He just can't quit the gay.

Just because it's not important to you doesn't mean it's not important to gays. Comparing your CC permit to gsy marriage is really fucked up, unless of course you want to give it a blow job. Ist Americans today approve of gay marriage, so a vote would be fine with me. You're the one that needs to grow the **** up and realize that it's a civil rights issue, and that your homophobic issues need to be dealt with through psychological therapy.

BTW, its not homophobic to be opposed to gay marriage.

Simply being opposed to gay marriage does not necessarily make you homophobic- but you certainly could be.

But certainly if you are not opposed to gay marriage you are not homophobic.

Question...would a person opposed to allowing legal marriage for people of the Jewish Faith be considered anti-semitic?