BREAKING: New York Legalizes Same Sex Marriage

[93henfan]

Thank God (Yahway?) that Citdog has returned triumphantly. It wouldn't be the same without him.

[89Hen]

Gross, marriage should be between a man and a women not of the same sex.

You got that shit right.

Surprised you'd act that way.

[jmufan]

good luck having that "marriage" recognized in South Carolina or ANY State that recognizes that you're mentally ill.

Sadly, it is just a matter of time. It's just a matter of time before the "full faith and credit" clause is invoked to say South Carolina has to recognize marriages in New York. And I think that it does require that. The sad thing is that people in ANY state would allow themselves to be so convinced of things that are obviously not true. As I implied in my last post, it's an excellent example of the "Emporer's New Clothes" effect. People want to be perceived as "enlightened" and a critical mass has been convinced to believe that if you are "enlightened" you will say that there's nothing disfunctional about being a homosexual as defined by an actual preference for sexual contact with members of your own sex over sexual contact with members of the opposite sex. Just like the people in the fable saw a naked emporer but said they saw clothes because they'd been told that if you were enlightened you'd see them.

Though ridiculous, it actually wouldn't be so bad to just say homosexuals can be "married." The bad part is going to be there are going to be even more attacks upon Liberty.

Can someone say thought police? That's what I see coming, a government, who will arrest you for thinking a certain way.

[dbackjon]

Sadly, it is just a matter of time. It's just a matter of time before the "full faith and credit" clause is invoked to say South Carolina has to recognize marriages in New York. And I think that it does require that. The sad thing is that people in ANY state would allow themselves to be so convinced of things that are obviously not true. As I implied in my last post, it's an excellent example of the "Emporer's New Clothes" effect. People want to be perceived as "enlightened" and a critical mass has been convinced to believe that if you are "enlightened" you will say that there's nothing disfunctional about being a homosexual as defined by an actual preference for sexual contact with members of your own sex over sexual contact with members of the opposite sex. Just like the people in the fable saw a naked emporer but said they saw clothes because they'd been told that if you were enlightened you'd see them.

Though ridiculous, it actually wouldn't be so bad to just say homosexuals can be "married." The bad part is going to be there are going to be even more attacks upon Liberty.

Can someone say thought police? That's what I see coming, a government, who will arrest you for thinking a certain way.

Talk about an assinine leap of illogic. How do you get that? If you don't want gay marriage, don't get one. As it stands, YOU are the one trying to dictate to the rest of us how to live. Gay marriage doesn't change a thing for straights. Your bigoted opposition to equality for all Americans does effect me.


Either you are for equality for all Americans, or you are a fucking bigot. But that is your right. No one is going to arrest you for being a bigot. KKK is alive and well, they are bigots, and their bigoted hate speech is protected by the 1st Amendment, just like your bigotry is protected.

[∞∞∞]

I hope that with this equal rights victory in a major state, the dominoes begin falling so my children can grow up in a nation where same sex marriage is not even so much as an afterthought, as is being gay.

And JSO, I respect your opinion, but "Your old road is rapidly agin'. Please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand. For the times they are a-changin'."

[citdog]

I hope that with this equal rights victory in a major state, the dominoes begin falling so my children can grow up in a nation where same sex marriage is not even so much as an afterthought, as is being gay.

And JSO, I respect your opinion, but "Your old road is rapidly agin'. Please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand. For the times they are a-changin'."

"Old Times They Are NOT Forgotten"

after all you have no say........how are queers treated where you are from? they are murdered that's how. fix your OWN TENT in the desert before you try and dictate to US how we live and what we will tolerate.

[∞∞∞]

after all you have no say........how are queers treated where you are from?

Where I'm from? Well they're treated pretty shitty compared to the rest of the population. Hopefully the country where I'm from, the United States of America, will get its act together.

[grizzaholic]

I hope that with this equal rights victory in a major state, the dominoes begin falling so my children can grow up in a nation where same sex marriage is not even so much as an afterthought, as is being gay.

And JSO, I respect your opinion, but "Your old road is rapidly agin'. Please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand. For the times they are a-changin'."

"Old Times They Are NOT Forgotten"

after all you have no say........how are queers treated where you are from? they are murdered that's how. fix your OWN TENT in the desert before you try and dictate to US how we live and what we will tolerate.

Deep breath Cit. Deep breath. Count to 1000 by prime numbers. Recite the ABC's backward skipping every 4th letter.

[citdog]

Can someone say thought police? That's what I see coming, a government, who will arrest you for thinking a certain way.

Talk about an assinine leap of illogic. How do you get that? If you don't want gay marriage, don't get one. As it stands, YOU are the one trying to dictate to the rest of us how to live. Gay marriage doesn't change a thing for straights. Your bigoted opposition to equality for all Americans does effect me.


Either you are for equality for all Americans, or you are a fucking bigot. But that is your right. No one is going to arrest you for being a bigot. KKK is alive and well, they are bigots, and their bigoted hate speech is protected by the 1st Amendment, just like your bigotry is protected.

you see THAT'S where the bullshit starts. jon you know my feelings for you personally but the above is TOTAL HORSESHIT. THE STATES WILL HAVE THEIR SAY AND SOME WILL TOLERATE THIS AND SOME WILL NOT WHICH IS FINE BUT WHEN YOU AND OTHERS TRY AND SMEAR ALL WHO OPPOSE THIS WITH THAT BRUSH IT SHOWS THAT YOUR SPIRIT OF TOLERANCE IS A PILE OF QUEERSHIT.

[grizzaholic]

I have had enough of all you fucks bitching back and forth. Can we just all agree on this?

Here is one side of the argument




And here is the other side of the argument



UNH, fuck you.


Everybody happy?

[citdog]

after all you have no say........how are queers treated where you are from?

Where I'm from? Well they're treated pretty shitty compared to the rest of the population. Hopefully the country where I'm from, the United States of America, will get its act together.

FUCKING ARAB MUSLIM TRASH ANCHOR BABY IS WHAT YOU ARE.

[∞∞∞]

FUCKING ARAB MUSLIM TRASH ANCHOR BABY IS WHAT YOU ARE.

Except my parents were citizens before they had me, and both have lived in the US longer than where they were born. Depending on your age, they might be living here longer than you.

You keep tryin' though citdog. I like the effort!

[citdog]

FUCKING ARAB MUSLIM TRASH ANCHOR BABY IS WHAT YOU ARE.

Except my parents were citizens before they had me, and both have lived in the US longer than where they were born. Depending on your age, they may have even lived here longer than you.

sure they were. We've been here since the 1600's and we will be here long after the trash is taken to the street.

[∞∞∞]

sure they were. We've been here since the 1600's and we will be here long after the trash is taken to the street.

Damn you're old, I'll concede that one. They definitely haven't reached 404 years old yet. Getting there though.

[kalm]

I just take the "Serenity Prayer" approach. I'll say what I see as the truth but there are certain things that are beyond one's control and you have to just live with them and make your way in the world as it is. One of those things is the fact that a decades long propaganda campaign has been largely successful in convicing people that a disfunctional condition, homosexuality, is "normal." It's ridiculous that a culture would even contemplate thinking of a homosexual relationship as "marriage," but it's not the only ridiculous popular outlook egalitarians have been successful in establishing.

The only real practical consequence is that those who are not willing to proclaim that the Emporer's Clothes are beautiful when the Empoerer has no clothes are going to be pressured to say they see the clothes and go along with it. And those who consider homosexuality immoral are going to be forced to accept it in their personal dealings.

One example I've used before is that of my Mother in Law who lives in a house with a little rent house in back. She should be free to advertise that rent house in anyway she wants and rent it to whoever she wants or not rent it to whoever she wants. She is a fundamentalist Christian who believes homosexuality to be immoral. She should be completely free to openly advertise that she will not allow homosexual couples to rent her little rent house because she believes she is facilitating immorality by doing so. Beyond just general principles of Liberty, a federal law telling her she can't do that without consequence is an obvious violation of the actual language of the first amendment because it is prohibiting the free practice of religion. And Federal law is going to tell her that advertising that she will only rent to Christian heterosexual married couples is is illegal housing discrimination.

Same thing with Christian ministers being concerned about being pressured to perform married ceremonies for homosexual couples when they believe that to be wrong. It's going to happen if it hasn't happened already, and it's going to be interferring with the practice of people's religion. So we'll be in a situation where we say the first Amendment prohibits all sorts of things it does NOT really prohibit while establishing policies that very clearly DO violate both its clear language and its original understanding.

And that's the real problem with this. People who have enough sense to see that this is sick are going to be forced to go along with it.

Did I miss something? Will churches now be forced to marry gays?

I kind of agree with Ron Paul's take in that government should be out of the marriage business, but since it is not, and there remains legal and financial issues associated with marriage than gays and churches should both be free to do what they want - regardless of your fears.

[∞∞∞]

I kind of agree with Ron Paul's take in that government should be out of the marriage business, but since it is not, and there remains legal and financial issues associated with marriage than gays and churches should both be free to do what they want - regardless of your fears.

I actually disagree. Marriage isn't owned by religion (hell the concept of marrriage predates any modern religion), so the goverment needs to still be able to hand out marriage licenses to atheists, agnostics, and etc. If can't honestly imagine it working for non-religious couples/same sex couples if the government was taken out of the picture.

[93henfan]

You got that shit right.

Surprised you'd act that way.

Sorry. 'Twas a joke from over in the lounge forum. "You got that shit right" is my new catch phrase. Bandl may try to claim it, but I invented it.

I don't agree with jmufan's stance at all. I support same-sex marriage. Even in South Carolina where the repressed homos live.

[∞∞∞]

Surprised you'd act that way.

Sorry. 'Twas a joke from over in the lounge forum. "You got that shit right" is my new catch phrase. Bandl may try to claim it, but I invented it.

I don't agree with jmufan's stance at all. I support same-sex marriage. Even in South Carolina where the repressed homos live.

Just an FYI, but 89Hen quoted you wrong. You were replying to expandspanos when you said it...not jmufan.

[93henfan]

Just an FYI, but 89Hen quoted you wrong. You were replying to expandspanos when you said it...not jmufan.

I get the sneaking suspicion that 89 probably never wrote his own term paper in high school.

[citdog]

Surprised you'd act that way.

Even in South Carolina where the repressed homos live.

I think you meant oppressed. I currently have pink triangle armbands in production.



i see what you did there

[blueballs]

With same sex marriage comes same sex divorce... this should be entertaining. Better be careful what you ask for boys.

There's an old saying that divorce is defined by ripping a man's nuts out through his wallet... I wonder if gay divorce will be the same way.

[JohnStOnge]

Talk about an assinine leap of illogic. How do you get that? If you don't want gay marriage, don't get one. As it stands, YOU are the one trying to dictate to the rest of us how to live. Gay marriage doesn't change a thing for straights. Your bigoted opposition to equality for all Americans does effect me.


Either you are for equality for all Americans, or you are a **** bigot. But that is your right. No one is going to arrest you for being a bigot. KKK is alive and well, they are bigots, and their bigoted hate speech is protected by the 1st Amendment, just like your bigotry is protected.

On message boards like this one as well as in general I have always said that homosexuals should be free to engage in homosexual relationships if they want. Being opposed to the idea of recognizing a relationship between two members of the same sex as "marriage" is not telling anyone how to live. As far as equality goes: If you define marriage in any way at all you are treating certain relationships as "different" from others. You are not treating everyone with every possible preference for relationship structure equally.

Again, the denial of liberty lies in this country's practice of forcing people to engage in interaction with people they would rather not interact with. It's a lot broader than the homosexuality issue but I think this is going to make it worse. For example: A company that hires people should be free to refuse to recognize homosexual relationships as "marriage" regardless of what the State does. So if the management of a country wishes not to provide health insurance benefits to partners of "married" homosexual employees while offering such benefits to partners of married heterosexual partners they should be free to do so. But they will not be.

And, yes, that is unequal treatment on the part of the private business. But non governmental entities should be free to treat people unequally. Government should not be in the business of compelling egalitarianism.

[JohnStOnge]

Did I miss something? Will churches now be forced to marry gays?

I kind of agree with Ron Paul's take in that government should be out of the marriage business, but since it is not, and there remains legal and financial issues associated with marriage than gays and churches should both be free to do what they want - regardless of your fears.

Will churches "now" be forced to marry homosexuals? I don't know. But if not I think they will be. I think it is inevitable. I think it is inevitable that some pair of homosexuals will approach a Christian minister and ask to be married. Then when the Christian minister refuses they will sue to force him to do it. The idea will be that if he is authorized to issue a civil marriage license he must be willing to issue such a license to homosexuals. If there is some law "protecting" the minister the Constitutionality of that law will be challenged. Eventually ministers and churches who consider homosexuality immoral will be forced to either marry them or stop issuing civil licenses.

It is very reasonable to think that when one contemplates how things have worked in this country over the last century or so.

[JohnStOnge]

I actually disagree. Marriage isn't owned by religion (hell the concept of marrriage predates any modern religion), so the goverment needs to still be able to hand out marriage licenses to atheists, agnostics, and etc. If can't honestly imagine it working for non-religious couples/same sex couples if the government was taken out of the picture.

Why can't the concept of marriage as a civil matter just be discarded entirely now that we have substantial disagreement over what a marriage is? I think the whole point of "marriage" as a social institution has been lost anyway and had been before this absurd movement towards homosexual "marriage" got a foothold.

To me the whole point was to encourage a sitution in which children were born to mothers who were in a stable relationship with a father then were nuturted in a stable environment throughout their formative years. That is not what happens most of the time now anyway nor is it what has happened most of the time for quite a while now. A high percentage of children are born to single mothers and a high percentage of those that are born to married mothers have their environment disrupted by divorce. And the society generally seems to be fine with that.

There is no need to have the concept of "marriage" in order to have the concept of dependents for tax and insurance purposes.

[JohnStOnge]

Please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand. For the times they are a-changin'."

Yes. The times "are a-changin." For the worse. And that's been going on in the United States since the early part of the 20th Century.

But while I recognize that it's not likely that the cultural degradation will cease, I am not going to contribute to facilitating it. I can see that the Emporer has no clothes and I am not going to say that he does.