Sad about gay marriage bill in MD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:See, but I am not of your faith, and in my faith it is not a sin. In America we separate religious law and civil law. This discrimination makes no sense once you take religion out of the debate and speak in terms of civil laws.

. Then your law is based on nothing. You have no standing to object to the next Hitler. His opinion and law is just as moral as yours and Military power decides the winner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:See, but I am not of your faith, and in my faith it is not a sin. In America we separate religious law and civil law. This discrimination makes no sense once you take religion out of the debate and speak in terms of civil laws.

. Then your law is based on nothing. You have no standing to object to the next Hitler. His opinion and law is just as moral as yours and Military power decides the winner.

Ah, the inevitable Godwin's rule. The last refuge of a losing argument.

[Anonymous]

Common sense always wins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:in order of importance:

1. because we consider marriage to be a religious sacrament with traditions going back thousands of years.

2. because once you chance the definition of marriage, you open up very plausible arguments for polygamy.

3. because we consider the traditional family to be society's ideal.

how doesn't the civil union get you where you need to be? same rights as a spouse. just don't call it "marriage".

1. So, men and women who were married by someone other than a religious leader would not be considered married in your eyes?

2. this is utter bullshit

3. Society's ideal isn't always what's best for the kids in said relationship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Homosexuality is a sin Just like any other sin. No better no worse. Everybody sins every day, we all need God. The problem lies in raising a sin up and approving of it as acceptable and good. That is where the line is crossed.

Right, if it was a sim=n, why did God make homosexuals in the first place? Or are you going to tell me they have a choice?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason why it didn't pass in CA is because of a certain demographic who all came out to vote for Obama. It's a shame.

I don't think most Mormons voted for Obama. Much of the anti-gay marriage movement in California leading up to the referendum was funded by money from out-of-state Mormons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great. So Charlie Sheen and Brittany Spears should have the right, but I shouldn't even though I am in multiple decade monomagous relationship with a bunch of kids, spending my time at PTA, chaperoning teen dances at school, volunteering at fundraisers, chauffering kids to sporting events and helping my kids with homework. Yep, makes sense to me that people who have no respect for the institution of marriage should have that right but others who do should be denied.

I may get flamed for these comments, but I'm going to share them anyway. I have several gay/lesbian friends who are living pretty much the way you've described your life. Regular family life in a loving, monogamous relationship with great, well-adjusted kids. Unfortunately, the outlandish outfits, crude behaviors,and strident voices that voters typically see when they're watching Gay Rights parades and protests are hurtful to your pursuit of deserved recognition as a marriage and family.

This isn't really true or typical anymore. That sounds more like the gay rights movement of the 70s and 80s where marriage wasn't on the table and the movement was geared more toward forcing society to recognize that gays existed. If you've been to a gay rights rally lately, you see exactly the kind of poster you're responding to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great. So Charlie Sheen and Brittany Spears should have the right, but I shouldn't even though I am in multiple decade monomagous relationship with a bunch of kids, spending my time at PTA, chaperoning teen dances at school, volunteering at fundraisers, chauffering kids to sporting events and helping my kids with homework. Yep, makes sense to me that people who have no respect for the institution of marriage should have that right but others who do should be denied.

I may get flamed for these comments, but I'm going to share them anyway. I have several gay/lesbian friends who are living pretty much the way you've described your life. Regular family life in a loving, monogamous relationship with great, well-adjusted kids. Unfortunately, the outlandish outfits, crude behaviors,and strident voices that voters typically see when they're watching Gay Rights parades and protests are hurtful to your pursuit of deserved recognition as a marriage and family.

This isn't really true or typical anymore. That sounds more like the gay rights movement of the 70s and 80s where marriage wasn't on the table and the movement was geared more toward forcing society to recognize that gays existed. If you've been to a gay rights rally lately, you see exactly the kind of poster you're responding to.

Been to San Francisco, New York, or Atlanta lately?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great. So Charlie Sheen and Brittany Spears should have the right, but I shouldn't even though I am in multiple decade monomagous relationship with a bunch of kids, spending my time at PTA, chaperoning teen dances at school, volunteering at fundraisers, chauffering kids to sporting events and helping my kids with homework. Yep, makes sense to me that people who have no respect for the institution of marriage should have that right but others who do should be denied.

I may get flamed for these comments, but I'm going to share them anyway. I have several gay/lesbian friends who are living pretty much the way you've described your life. Regular family life in a loving, monogamous relationship with great, well-adjusted kids. Unfortunately, the outlandish outfits, crude behaviors,and strident voices that voters typically see when they're watching Gay Rights parades and protests are hurtful to your pursuit of deserved recognition as a marriage and family.

This isn't really true or typical anymore. That sounds more like the gay rights movement of the 70s and 80s where marriage wasn't on the table and the movement was geared more toward forcing society to recognize that gays existed. If you've been to a gay rights rally lately, you see exactly the kind of poster you're responding to.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/28/gay-pride-parade-hits-new_n_627277.html#s106881

[Anonymous]

Listen, I am not thrilled at what I see at Tea Party rallies and NASCAR races but that doesn't mean I would strip you of your rights. Our community is brash bold creative and fun-loving and I wouldn't have it any other way even if it means bubba never pulls his head out and realizes that we are citizens too. It is all a question of fairness. Straight freaks and outcasts can still collect their spouses social security death benefit, but boring ol me with two kids and mom jeans can't. But I still won't turn my back on my community. Viva la drag queens!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Listen, I am not thrilled at what I see at Tea Party rallies and NASCAR races but that doesn't mean I would strip you of your rights. Our community is brash bold creative and fun-loving and I wouldn't have it any other way even if it means bubba never pulls his head out and realizes that we are citizens too. It is all a question of fairness. Straight freaks and outcasts can still collect their spouses social security death benefit, but boring ol me with two kids and mom jeans can't. But I still won't turn my back on my community. Viva la drag queens!

Since you've mentioned NASCAR and Tea Party rallies, just think of all the negative (actually very biased and derogatory) comments on DCUM about Tea Party members, southerners, small town folk, "rednecks," etc. Most get a big pass here. Except in a very few highly tolerant communities, your drag queens and flamboyant types aren't going to fare much, if any, better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Listen, I am not thrilled at what I see at Tea Party rallies and NASCAR races but that doesn't mean I would strip you of your rights. Our community is brash bold creative and fun-loving and I wouldn't have it any other way even if it means bubba never pulls his head out and realizes that we are citizens too. It is all a question of fairness. Straight freaks and outcasts can still collect their spouses social security death benefit, but boring ol me with two kids and mom jeans can't. But I still won't turn my back on my community. Viva la drag queens!

Since you've mentioned NASCAR and Tea Party rallies, just think of all the negative (actually very biased and derogatory) comments on DCUM about Tea Party members, southerners, small town folk, "rednecks," etc. Most get a big pass here. Except in a very few highly tolerant communities, your drag queens and flamboyant types aren't going to fare much, if any, better.

But no one tries to justify actual gov'tal discrimination against those people based on dislike of them. No one seriously says "tea partiers with signs like 'keep the government's hands on my medicare' are too uninformed to be allowed to vote" do they?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Homosexuality is a sin Just like any other sin. No better no worse. Everybody sins every day, we all need God. The problem lies in raising a sin up and approving of it as acceptable and good. That is where the line is crossed.

Right, if it was a sim=n, why did God make homosexuals in the first place? Or are you going to tell me they have a choice?

. Everybody is a sinner. Different people are tempted by different sins. Trying to pretend sin is good will not work .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Listen, I am not thrilled at what I see at Tea Party rallies and NASCAR races but that doesn't mean I would strip you of your rights. Our community is brash bold creative and fun-loving and I wouldn't have it any other way even if it means bubba never pulls his head out and realizes that we are citizens too. It is all a question of fairness. Straight freaks and outcasts can still collect their spouses social security death benefit, but boring ol me with two kids and mom jeans can't. But I still won't turn my back on my community. Viva la drag queens!

Since you've mentioned NASCAR and Tea Party rallies, just think of all the negative (actually very biased and derogatory) comments on DCUM about Tea Party members, southerners, small town folk, "rednecks," etc. Most get a big pass here. Except in a very few highly tolerant communities, your drag queens and flamboyant types aren't going to fare much, if any, better.

But no one tries to justify actual gov'tal discrimination against those people based on dislike of them. No one seriously says "tea partiers with signs like 'keep the government's hands on my medicare' are too uninformed to be allowed to vote" do they?

I get it. But when you're swimming upstream, you need to think smart! Otherwise, you're not gonna get far . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Homosexuality is a sin Just like any other sin. No better no worse. Everybody sins every day, we all need God. The problem lies in raising a sin up and approving of it as acceptable and good. That is where the line is crossed.

Some Jews believe just as strongly that eating shrimp or lobster is a terrible sin. That eating venison is a sin. I don't care what they eat. I do care if they become such a powerful, numerous constituency that they have the power to dictate to me that I can't eat what I want.

Just because your religion concludes certain things are a sin, and you choose to accept that, should not mean you get to dictate the definitions of sin to the rest of us.