Message boards :
Politics :
Gay Marriage.
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
President Barry is about to speak on said subject. His thoughts are as he said on the subject are "evolving" but to get eleced he said he did not accept it. Thoughts on both or either? |
MOMMY: He is MAKING ME Read His Posts Thoughts and Prayers. GOoD Thoughts and GOoD Prayers. HATERWORLD Vs THOUGHTs and PRAYERs World. It Is a BATTLE ROYALE. Nobody LOVEs Me. Everybody HATEs Me. Why Don't I Go Eat Worms. Tasty Treats are Wormy Meat. Yes Send message Joined: 16 Jun 02 Posts: 6895 Credit: 6,588,977 RAC: 0 |
Marriage between two men or two women is fine by me. Gay People should have all the Rights and Privileges as Man and Woman together. In anything, A Man or Woman Gay or Not Gay, should not matter. All Should Be Same Same. People are People. No matter how They Swang. When I lived in Long Beach, Kali a long time ago, and would walk the streets due to not having a car, many a time a Gay Guy would stop and offer me a ride. Sometimes I took it. And they would offer something else. I didn't partake, but if I had to do it over again, I would have. I don't See The Diff now. Man Sex, Woman Sex. All Good. DanglingDullNanDo May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!! |
Blurf Send message Joined: 2 Sep 06 Posts: 8962 Credit: 12,678,685 RAC: 0 |
I have no problem with anyone wanting to marry anybody else. It's not our business. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30651 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
How much tax $ does a ban on gay marriage bring in? Is this the only way a tea will allow tax, on something tea hates? |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30651 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Sweet Mother of God! You mean God has a mother? Who's the Daddy? |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
Sweet Mother of God! God. Mary and the immaculate conception and all that nonsense. Rather bizarrely Roman Catholics (and a few others) believe Mary was a virgin until the day she died, and suggest that the references to Jesus' siblings are merely honorifics, like monks referring to each other as brother this, brother that, or some other nonsense to obscure the rather clear references to the children of Joseph and Mary. Quite why people believe the bible would only refer to 4 people in this way and not the disciples is beyond me. Oh yeah, that whole faith thing... As for the thread's subject, I must admit to having trouble understanding the objections. Perhaps someone could detail what they are? I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
skildude Send message Joined: 4 Oct 00 Posts: 9541 Credit: 50,759,529 RAC: 60 |
Sweet Mother of God! We also know nothing of Joseph before he married Mary. I'd assume he had other children. Also the Jesus sibling thing is again taken in modern context as we see it. The people mentioned could be any near relative of similar age to Jesus. I also like to make a point that many christian faithful call each other brother and sister. This doesn't mean they really are. In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face. Diogenes Of Sinope |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
Sweet Mother of God! All true, though why are 4 people picked out to be labeled this way? Sure they could be what today would be half-brothers or step-brothers, though in that case why would one of them (James) be specifically referred to as "the Lord's brother"? Most puzzling, and quite off topic :-). I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
skildude Send message Joined: 4 Oct 00 Posts: 9541 Credit: 50,759,529 RAC: 60 |
I recall hearing about this very argument. The answer is Hebrew at the time didn't define brother, half brother, or cousin. Its all the same to them. They are all close male relatives. What we chose to assume from modern interpretation is all on us. As far as gay marriage. Who cares. Maybe a couple guys will do better at marriage than I do. The whole can of worms we open is the adoption of children or birth of children with Lesbians. In a divorce, who is the parent, who gets the kids, etc. I see the current young adult generation being much more tolerant of gays lesbians etc. I have to assume that this was our tax dollars at work in schools. It's not something we discussed at home. Quite honestly I make the mistake of assuming everyone is straight. Big mistake. Like a guy with a woman if you get them talking its great. Assuming someone is straight and just talking....well lets just say some gay men over assume the same way I do with women. In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face. Diogenes Of Sinope |
Ex: "Socialist" Send message Joined: 12 Mar 12 Posts: 3433 Credit: 2,616,158 RAC: 2 |
Marriage between two men or two women is fine by me. Gay People should have all the Rights and Privileges as Man and Woman together. WOW! Dull, for a change, we are in 110% agreement. I had to read this 3 times to make sure I wasn't mistaken. +1 dull. #resist |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
Kafkatrapping... I don't hate Gay people. I don't agree with the life style they have 'chosen' for themselves. They cannot claim that they are being discriminated against. We have rule of law for a reason. In that law at the federal level we have the 14 and 15 amendments. For both it isn't a life choice we are talking about. In both cases you are born this way and have no control over this matter. Kafkatrapping... If you want wiggle room, go to the state and ask. However, remember that if 2/3rds of the states tell you no then at the federal level you have no wiggle room. In California the most liberial state in the Union voted for prop 8. This was the consensus of the people. However, this was not allowed. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals took a vote of the people themselves and said it was unconstitutional. The Hollywood elite backed the effort in cash and didn't have a hard time finding Judges who would Rule from the Bench in place of ruling on established law, first and foremost---precedent. Indeed, Kafkatrapping... |
MOMMY: He is MAKING ME Read His Posts Thoughts and Prayers. GOoD Thoughts and GOoD Prayers. HATERWORLD Vs THOUGHTs and PRAYERs World. It Is a BATTLE ROYALE. Nobody LOVEs Me. Everybody HATEs Me. Why Don't I Go Eat Worms. Tasty Treats are Wormy Meat. Yes Send message Joined: 16 Jun 02 Posts: 6895 Credit: 6,588,977 RAC: 0 |
WOW! I'm Voting For MEH, and Believe Me it Makes Me Puke to do so. I CAN'T STAND their Social/Cultural Views, but, Zombies(Dem/Libs) make Me Cringe for So Many Reasons More. Jimmy Da Peanut; Slick Willie; GoreBal Change; Pitiful; and ALL the Rest. Blech Blech Blech. I'd like to see All of Them have Sex with an Intern, Under The Bus. BusDriverDullNanDo May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!! |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
Kafkatrapping... If the law says something it can't be discrimination? Is this your view? If so are willing to defend it? Kafkatrapping... What in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling was not based on precedent? I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
Ex: "Socialist" Send message Joined: 12 Mar 12 Posts: 3433 Credit: 2,616,158 RAC: 2 |
President Obama was against gay marriage when he got elected. Now he just announced that he backs gay marriage, however, he *believes* it should be left to the states. When will someone admit that there is certain terminology in the constitution which no longer applies to the times? And how does it affect you, Guy, whether two individuals of the same sex are Married, or as (apparently) you'd prefer just have a civil union? What effect does two people of the same sex being married, have on your life... (I.D. or anyone can feel free to answer here as well) #resist |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30651 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
We can solve this debate today. Willing to do it? As of today forward churches do marriage, which will not be recognized by government. Government does civil unions, which will not be recognized by church. Problem solved. |
Ex: "Socialist" Send message Joined: 12 Mar 12 Posts: 3433 Credit: 2,616,158 RAC: 2 |
We can solve this debate today. Willing to do it? Unfortunately, marriage is as much of a legal institution, as it is religious. As a matter of fact, I'd argue in my case that marriage would have nothing to do my religion, and instead is for the purposes of two people joining, UNDER LAW. Because marriage is neither tied specifically to religion, or law, you can't solve the issue in that manner. #resist |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
We can solve this debate today. Willing to do it? Sure you can, marriage becomes a purely religious exercise, and a marriage certificate would become meaningless in civil law; for taxes, wills, insurance, and everything else in the non-purely religious world, a civil union is the means to show assets are shared, etc. Those ordained to perform marriages could also be certified to perform civil unions, so both could be conducted simultaneously. Lawyers would love it ;-) I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
President Obama was against gay marriage when he got elected. Now he just announced that he backs gay marriage, however, he *believes* it should be left to the states. If a church wishes to conduct marriage ceremonies for same sex couples, why should state law prohibit it? What value has a tradition other than serve as a means to continue doing the same thing as before without having to think about its worth? 2) President Obama just stated he *believes* it should be left to the states. (and of course his little parrot Joe Biden just said the same thing.) Believes? Well, there ya go. Proof he's ignoring the laws of his office (AKA the US CONSTITUTION) and blatantly acting more and more like a dictator. I don't like this. Obama believes it should be left to the states compared to? Perhaps an amendment to the USC? Why would proposing such an amendment be considered a dictatorial action? I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.