NJ Same-Sex Marriage Bill to be Considered Next Week

[rightwinger]

Just more dictatorship by the politicians.

Why not let the people vote on the issue?

Is this more of your lame attempt to justify bigotry by numbers instead of ethics?

So you are saying that the American people can't be trusted to vote rationally or logically?

That we should have a Democracy in name only?

And the people should have NO say in the laws that we live under?

We are a republic not a pure democracy. In a republic you elect those who make decisions on behalf of the public.

In a pure democracy where every issue gets voted on, would blacks ever get civil rights? Maybe in some states and not others. Would women have equal rights?

 

[CurveLight]

Just more dictatorship by the politicians.

Why not let the people vote on the issue?

Is this more of your lame attempt to justify bigotry by numbers instead of ethics?

So you are saying that the American people can't be trusted to vote rationally or logically?

That we should have a Democracy in name only?

And the people should have NO say in the laws that we live under?

Iam absolutely saying the general public cannot be trusted to vote logically or rationally as a whole. Want some examples? How many millions voted for Dubya? Obama? How do you think jokes like britney spears becomes a best selling "musician?" Pet rocks were a product of popular vote. Collectively we let the government confiscate hundreds of billions of our money every year only to watch them waste large portions and give billions to other countries while many Americans are struggling to just stay off the streets. So yes, I am saying on the whole Americans cannot be trusted to vote with reason and logic. Many do it on emotions.

We should not be a Democracy in name only because you just helped prove how ignorance prevails. We are not and never have been a straight Democracy. Here you are bemoaning a legal process while not even knowing that we are a Republic.

Your last question is too bizarre to dignify.

 

[Sunni Man]

Is this more of your lame attempt to justify bigotry by numbers instead of ethics?

So you are saying that the American people can't be trusted to vote rationally or logically?

That we should have a Democracy in name only?

And the people should have NO say in the laws that we live under?

I am absolutely saying the general public cannot be trusted to vote logically or rationally as a whole. Want some examples? How many millions voted for Dubya? Obama? How do you think jokes like britney spears becomes a best selling "musician?" Pet rocks were a product of popular vote. Collectively we let the government confiscate hundreds of billions of our money every year only to watch them waste large portions and give billions to other countries while many Americans are struggling to just stay off the streets. So yes, I am saying on the whole Americans cannot be trusted to vote with reason and logic. Many do it on emotions.

We should not be a Democracy in name only because you just helped prove how ignorance prevails. We are not and never have been a straight Democracy. Here you are bemoaning a legal process while not even knowing that we are a Republic.

I don't remember "Pet Rocks" ever being on the ballot????

So you are saying that people who don't agree with you are ignorant and most Americans are stupid.

That "We the People" cannot be trusted to chart the direction of the nation.

Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, would most definatly agree with you CurveLight

 

[rdean]

You would think that with a 50% divorce rate, straights would be posting right and left to figure out why they are such failures at marriage.

I guess, the answer for them is to concentrate on stopping the pitiful few number of gays that want to get married, cuz I have NEVER seen a thread about lowering the divorce rate.

As if that will somehow "save" what they are terrible failures at. And believe me, 50% is NOT passing anywhere ever. 50% is always counted as "failure".

And while you are at it, where is the "sanctity" when some are getting married three and four times? Jesus wasn't married once, of course, he had Paul.


Ohhhh

MY

Gawd!!!

Don't let gays get married. They might be more successful at it. Even if their divorce rate were only 49%, they would be a greater success. Ha ha ha ha ho ho ha ha. Tee hee. 'scuz me. That was funny.

 

[saveliberty]

Marriage is a religious institution, the state should stay out of marriages period. They want civil unions, fine.

 

[bodecea]

Marriage is a religious institution, the state should stay out of marriages period. They want civil unions, fine.

Then you support striking the word "marriage" out of all laws, legal documents, and licenses. Not a question... I know you do.

 

[rightwinger]

Marriage is a religious institution, the state should stay out of marriages period. They want civil unions, fine.

Then you support striking the word "marriage" out of all laws, legal documents, and licenses. Not a question... I know you do.

If they required equal terminology for both, you would see gay marriage pass around the country

 

[saveliberty]

Marriage is a religious institution, the state should stay out of marriages period. They want civil unions, fine.

Then you support striking the word "marriage" out of all laws, legal documents, and licenses. Not a question... I know you do.

If they required equal terminology for both, you would see gay marriage pass around the country

Sure rightwinger. That is why what, 30 states have constitutional amendments against gay marriage. Pretty strange thinking that religious people are just concerned with "terminology". Your failure to see what the real problem here is, is why you debate so poorly on the issue.

 

[rightwinger]

Then you support striking the word "marriage" out of all laws, legal documents, and licenses. Not a question... I know you do.

If they required equal terminology for both, you would see gay marriage pass around the country

Sure rightwinger. That is why what, 30 states have constitutional amendments against gay marriage. Pretty strange thinking that religious people are just concerned with "terminology". Your failure to see what the real problem here is, is why you debate so poorly on the issue.

The tide is turning my friend....give it time

 

[Sunni Man]

The tide is turning my friend....give it time

I believe you are right; the tide is turning.

People are sick of the homos and their sick agenda.

I will be glad when sodomy is once again criminalized and these faggots are all locked up.

 

[Oscar Wao]

The tide is turning my friend....give it time

I believe you are right; the tide is turning.

People are sick of the homos and their sick agenda.

I will be glad when sodomy is once again criminalized and these faggots are all locked up.

If health care can actually be considered a basic human right (*chortle*), homos are going to be just as much considered as herteros, with no differences except their attraction/behavior.

 

[saveliberty]

The tide is turning my friend....give it time

I believe you are right; the tide is turning.

People are sick of the homos and their sick agenda.

I will be glad when sodomy is once again criminalized and these faggots are all locked up.

Now you've done it rightwinger. Sunni Man is here. You two play nice. I think I'll just pull over and watch the carnage.

 

[Oscar Wao]

The tide is turning my friend....give it time

I believe you are right; the tide is turning.

People are sick of the homos and their sick agenda.

I will be glad when sodomy is once again criminalized and these faggots are all locked up.

Now you've done it rightwinger. Sunni Man is here. You two play nice. I think I'll just pull over and watch the carnage.

It's funny how he's been defending the Bible all of a sudden; his brothers in the IsLAME faith better not get a wind of this

 

[Sunni Man]

I believe you are right; the tide is turning.

People are sick of the homos and their sick agenda.

I will be glad when sodomy is once again criminalized and these faggots are all locked up.

Now you've done it rightwinger. Sunni Man is here. You two play nice. I think I'll just pull over and watch the carnage.

It's funny how he's been defending the Bible all of a sudden; his brothers in the IsLAME faith better not get a wind of this

Both the Bible and Islam agree that homosexuality is a grave sin.

I will back any Christian group that is against this sick perversion.

 

[stevecox]

There is nothing regarding the constitution in this debate. This debate is about a word. That word is Marriage. You are unwilling to settle for a civil union because in your sin you'd prefer to feel that everyone else approves of you guess what jack that will never happen. Get over it. Take what you can get and move on.

The 14th amendment says it does.

People like you are the first ones to shout "sin!" while pretending you are free of sin. You're the kind of hypocrite that embarrasses Christianity and you're the kind of Christian that does nothing but try to make others feel bad. You're also the worst kind of American because you want to use the government to force your theology on others while ignoring the basic principles of equality that is the basis for our Constitution.

You know nothing of Christ as demonstrated by your bigotry and you know nothing of America as demonstrated by your claim this issue has nothing to do with the Constitution.

...and you're just throwing a temper tantrum because nobody ever taught you how to argue your opinions in a mature fashion.

No constitutional amendment mandates the creation of a law. The 14th Amendment, loosely speaking, says the law has to pertain to everyone, but it doesn't have to appease everyone. If the law said "gay people can't marry", that would be unconstitutional. However, since the law says marriage is defined as one man and one woman, that might not appease those who would want to marry someone of the same sex, but it's not unconstitutional.

Also, you don't have to permit sin to be a Christian or appeasing in the eyes of God. You shouldn't be a hypocrite and overly judgmental, but even Christ had standards. He wasn't just some long-haired hippie standing around with an olive branch. Remember the story of the adulteress woman who was about to be stoned? Yeah, he stopped the people from stoning her, but he also told her to go forth and sin no more. So people who rightly think homosexuality is a sin aren't compelled to support them in that. If anything, you're the one with the issues, because you're only worried about being popular.

 

[CurveLight]

There is nothing regarding the constitution in this debate. This debate is about a word. That word is Marriage. You are unwilling to settle for a civil union because in your sin you'd prefer to feel that everyone else approves of you guess what jack that will never happen. Get over it. Take what you can get and move on.

The 14th amendment says it does.

People like you are the first ones to shout "sin!" while pretending you are free of sin. You're the kind of hypocrite that embarrasses Christianity and you're the kind of Christian that does nothing but try to make others feel bad. You're also the worst kind of American because you want to use the government to force your theology on others while ignoring the basic principles of equality that is the basis for our Constitution.

You know nothing of Christ as demonstrated by your bigotry and you know nothing of America as demonstrated by your claim this issue has nothing to do with the Constitution.

...and you're just throwing a temper tantrum because nobody ever taught you how to argue your opinions in a mature fashion.

No constitutional amendment mandates the creation of a law. The 14th Amendment, loosely speaking, says the law has to pertain to everyone, but it doesn't have to appease everyone. If the law said "gay people can't marry", that would be unconstitutional. However, since the law says marriage is defined as one man and one woman, that might not appease those who would want to marry someone of the same sex, but it's not unconstitutional.

Also, you don't have to permit sin to be a Christian or appeasing in the eyes of God. You shouldn't be a hypocrite and overly judgmental, but even Christ had standards. He wasn't just some long-haired hippie standing around with an olive branch. Remember the story of the adulteress woman who was about to be stoned? Yeah, he stopped the people from stoning her, but he also told her to go forth and sin no more. So people who rightly think homosexuality is a sin aren't compelled to support them in that. If anything, you're the one with the issues, because you're only worried about being popular.

Christians shouldn't be hypocritical and overly judgmental? Is that your theological depth? Must be because you have absolutely no idea what the narrative about the adultress was discussing so unless necessary I recommend not trying to appear informed simply because you know how to repeat ignorant Biblical exegesis.

Like garyd, you pretend to know something about me personally by claiming I'm "worried about being popular." Ask around, the last thing I'm concerned with is approval from a bunch of random people on a message board. You two should really should stick to your day jobs (if you have them) because your psychic abilities suck.

Instead of relying on your "loosely" speaking bullshit on the 14th let's take a look at what the two relevant sections state:

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section. 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.


Notice S1 clearly states all persons are guaranteed equal protection of the laws and S5 says Congress has the power by legislation to enforce those provisions. Obviously, your ignorance on the Constitution is a close second behind scripture.

If the government gives two Citizens over a thousand laws based on their petition to the State to have their marriage legally recognized then it must do so for any two Citizens regardless of physical anatomy. Or do you wish to live in a country that places more importance on what is between peoples' legs versus equality? We are not a theocracy so don't waste our time with your theological reasons, aside from the obvious you are ill informed on that matter, because if you wish to inject religion then by the 14th you must respect any and all other religions. But we are not in much danger of experiencing consistency from your camp, are we?

 

[CurveLight]

Now you've done it rightwinger. Sunni Man is here. You two play nice. I think I'll just pull over and watch the carnage.

It's funny how he's been defending the Bible all of a sudden; his brothers in the IsLAME faith better not get a wind of this

Both the Bible and Islam agree that homosexuality is a grave sin.

I will back any Christian group that is against this sick perversion.

You don't know the Bible very well. That means you shouldn't try to speak about it. Furthermore, any American that tries to justify their bigotry based on their religion is about as unAmerican as it gets.

 

[CurveLight]

Marriage is a religious institution, the state should stay out of marriages period. They want civil unions, fine.

That's bullshit. Marriage is a personal commitment and is not endemic to religions. Also, atheists have the lowest divorce rates so I strongly recommend not trying to inject false info into an argument that will simply backfire.

 

[CurveLight]

So you are saying that the American people can't be trusted to vote rationally or logically?

That we should have a Democracy in name only?

And the people should have NO say in the laws that we live under?

I am absolutely saying the general public cannot be trusted to vote logically or rationally as a whole. Want some examples? How many millions voted for Dubya? Obama? How do you think jokes like britney spears becomes a best selling "musician?" Pet rocks were a product of popular vote. Collectively we let the government confiscate hundreds of billions of our money every year only to watch them waste large portions and give billions to other countries while many Americans are struggling to just stay off the streets. So yes, I am saying on the whole Americans cannot be trusted to vote with reason and logic. Many do it on emotions.

We should not be a Democracy in name only because you just helped prove how ignorance prevails. We are not and never have been a straight Democracy. Here you are bemoaning a legal process while not even knowing that we are a Republic.

I don't remember "Pet Rocks" ever being on the ballot????

So you are saying that people who don't agree with you are ignorant and most Americans are stupid.

That "We the People" cannot be trusted to chart the direction of the nation.

Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, would most definatly agree with you CurveLight

Let me spell it out a bit more clearly. The pet rock/spears examples were meant to show how collectively we finance and support some really dumb products. I'm also not saying people who disagree with my personal views are ignorant. I understand your desire to whitewash the post but do try not to inject false claims. It's a nasty habit. Most Americans as individuals are bright, but collectively we are apathetic and rather dumb. As I pointed out with the above example regarding our tax dollars.

Your response has been focused on demonizing a poster instead of addressing the fact we are not a Democracy. Was it something of an embarrassment for you to realize you were pontificating about an American style of government that doesn't exist? I don't care. Wipe your tears and move on. The reason the founders created a Republic was to prevent tyranny of the majority. The truly ironic part of your response? Referencing Stalin, Hitler, and Mao. All became powerful by the very system you desire, majority rules. Log off USMB for a few days and obtain some basic knowledge about issues before trying to speak on them.

 

[Sunni Man]

You don't know the Bible very well. That means you shouldn't try to speak about it. Furthermore, any American that tries to justify their bigotry based on their religion is about as unAmerican as it gets.

I have studied the Bible for many years and have read it cover to cover many times.

I am not bigoted at all. Just opposed to the homo agenda and perverted lifestyle.

So you are saying that a person who lives by the tenents of their chosen religion is unAmerican???