Anonymous
03/12/2011 10:50
Subject: Re:Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
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.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 10:31
Subject: Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
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.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 10:23
Subject: Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
The prejudice and hatred directed at homosexuals in this day and age is truly disgusting. All the arguments against gay marriage ultimately boil down to ignorance, prejudice and hatred of the other.
Very sad.
Very sad.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 10:14
Subject: Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
The act of homosexual sodomy is the highest and most uplifting action of the human race. There are scientists at this very moment working on grafting ovaries inside the bowels of homosexual males so we can once and for all sanctify this beautiful connection between penis and rectum. Then you can bet the wing nuts will make a huge "stink" about the Infants being covered in fecal matter at birth. They will never grow up!
Anonymous
03/12/2011 10:07
Subject: Re:Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
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.
Wow, so civil rights should be given to people who are inconspicuous and don't raise a fuss. With logic like that, women wouldn't even have the vote, because that's what people thought of the Suffragists too.
Nooo . . . I wasn't referring to the marching and protests. I was referring to the outlandish clothing and crude behaviors that are frequently seen in the parades and news clips. Feel free to not tone it down. I'm just sharing my thoughts on how to get past the negative perceptions that are frequently out there. In any push for change, it makes sense to put your best foot forward, as they say.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 09:53
Subject: Re:Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
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.
Wow, so civil rights should be given to people who are inconspicuous and don't raise a fuss. With logic like that, women wouldn't even have the vote, because that's what people thought of the Suffragists too.
takoma
03/12/2011 09:32
Subject: Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
Anonymous wrote:It was arbitrarily passed by the City Council under pressure by a small vocal minority even though all polls showed that it would have failed to pass if put to a vote.
In other words, it was passed by our duly elected representatives in response to the First Amendment petition of grievance by a group of their constituents.
And as to the fact that we were denied the right to vote on it in a referendum, my response is that putting minority right up for vote by the majority is the antithesis of our Constitution's protection of individual rights.
As usual, what you see depends on where you stand.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 08:38
Subject: Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It wouldn't have passed in DC either. The Council forced it down our throats.
I would love to know how a gay marriage law is forced down your throat. Unless I misread the law, no one is forcing you to marry or to be gay, so gay marriage rights should be neither here nor there to you.
And it is my belief, controversial as it may be, that human rights should never be put up for a vote.
It was arbitrarily passed by the City Council under pressure by a small vocal minority even though all polls showed that it would have failed to pass if put to a vote.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 08:05
Subject: Re:Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
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.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 07:45
Subject: Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
Anonymous wrote:It wouldn't have passed in DC either. The Council forced it down our throats.
I would love to know how a gay marriage law is forced down your throat. Unless I misread the law, no one is forcing you to marry or to be gay, so gay marriage rights should be neither here nor there to you.
And it is my belief, controversial as it may be, that human rights should never be put up for a vote.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 07:34
Subject: Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
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.
You can't name the "certain demographic?" Many, if not most, black voters are very spiritual and voted accordingly. Same for most hispanic voters.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 07:18
Subject: Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
It wouldn't have passed in DC either. The Council forced it down our throats.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 00:40
Subject: Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
Anonymous
03/12/2011 00:39
Subject: Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
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.
Anonymous
03/12/2011 00:22
Subject: Re:Sad about gay marriage bill in MD
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".
Great. No one is trying to redefine the sacrament in your church.
But the laws on the books are also called marriage. We'd be fine just relabeling that "civil union" and eliminating the legal term "marriage" for everyone. I assume that would be fine for you since you can still have your sacramental marriage.
What's the argument against that?