|
Author
|
Topic: Bush urges gay marriage ban enshrined in Constitution
|
Mannu
Knowflake Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 05, 2006 05:43 PM
  
J, I think you are comparing apples and oranges and giving fuel for stupid arguments. All things being equal, I asked why exclude 2 adult guys (or girls) wanting to marry traditionally. Lets keep the discussion to that. I wonder what type of world you are avoiding. Beware for that world is yours next LOL
IP: Logged |
Rainbow~
unregistered
|
posted June 05, 2006 06:11 PM
In a golden baritone voice we hear jwhop singing....   quote:
They're coming to take me away, HA HA
They're coming to take me away, HO HO HEE HEE HA HA
To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see
Those nice, young men
In their clean, white coats
And they're coming to take me away, Ha-haaa!
....and I join in....  You thought it was a joke
And so you laughed
You laughed when I had said
dubya's gay
and flipped your lid,
what can I say and now we are both utterly mad
and they're coming to take us away... They're coming to take us away, HA HA
They're coming to take us away, HO HO HEE HEE HA HA
To the happy home
With trees and flowers and chirping birds
And basket weavers who sit and smile
And twiddle their thumbs and toes,
And cuz Dubya's gay,
And they're coming to take us away, Ha-haaa! (cool song jwhop)
IP: Logged |
jwhop
Knowflake Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 05, 2006 06:24 PM
Why confine the discussion to 2 gay people of the same sex being a marriage?Once you open up the legal definition of "marriage", any combination is possible...on exactly the same terms you brought up...in the pursuit of "liberty and happiness". Now why would you want to deny others their right to pursue their liberty and happiness as they see fit and proper? Others who have a different idea of what could constitute a marriage? Are you suggesting gay couples should have special rights you would deny to others who are also outside the accepted definition of "marriage"? Are you saying...this far and no further?  IP: Logged |
Petron
unregistered
|
posted June 05, 2006 10:25 PM
a real conservative (like myself) would tell the govt'ment to butt out and mind their own business.....and get out of the marriage issue alltogether.....the issue should be between two or more people who can legally enter into such a contract..... this would automatically exclude minors, animals, and lawn ornaments......
IP: Logged |
jwhop
Knowflake Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 05, 2006 10:49 PM
Says you Petron but since the discussion is joined and gays want to be recognized as entering into a "marriage" relationship, why should it be confined to just their idea of what constitutes "marriage"?If I understand you Petron, then 2 or "more" adults should be able to "marry". But why only adults? On the strength of what some say, marriage is on shaky ground with high divorce rates. Why not open it up to those 12 and over? According to some, 12 year olds are more mature and stable than some adults. But the point is, if the issue of what constitutes "marriage" is to be redefined, then who are the rest of us to put any limitations on legal "marriage" at all. Why is your idea of "marriage" better than the pedophile's from the North American Man Boy Love Association...just for instance? NAMBLA would certainly get some votes from the American Psychological Association. IP: Logged |
lotusheartone
unregistered
|
posted June 05, 2006 11:03 PM
hehe..that was on South Park. ...Jwhop..I agree with you..  Love and Respect for ALL.... IP: Logged |
Petron
unregistered
|
posted June 05, 2006 11:25 PM
what i'm saying jwhop, is that i believe that marriages should be entered into as contracts....that should clear up any confusion on your part about wether or not you can marry a 12 year old...... IP: Logged |
jwhop
Knowflake Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 06, 2006 12:25 AM
There's no doubt or confusion in my mind as to whether I want to marry a 12 year old Petron.  I don't.I'm well aware of the law of contracts..and that a legally binding contract cannot be entered into with a minor. Are you aware that in Kansas minors may marry at age 15? That in Minnesota, it's 16 and that there are provisions in most state laws for minors to marry under the age of their majority..with parental consent, with consent of a guardian or by petition to a court? With the crazy rulings coming out of state and federal courts, what makes you think it's beyond the realm of possibility for a 12 year old to marry? Still, I think you're ducking the question...which is...if you're going to permit any group of people who cannot legally marry now to marry...and change the definition of marriage, then who is to say which groups of people may marry and why can't all others do the same. This far...and no further sounds somewhat lame and discriminatory on it's face....if the rules are to be changed at all. I didn't see that on South Park lotus IP: Logged |
Mirandee
unregistered
|
posted June 06, 2006 02:37 AM
Each week, Senator Frist and the Republican Leadership make choices about the Senate agenda. They could focus our work on record high gas prices, the war in Iraq, or skyrocketing health care costs.But there's an ugly truth: it's election season and down-in-the-polls Republicans are turning to their same old playbook - fear and division. Next week, Bill Frist, in an attempt to appease extreme right wing elements of the Republican Party, has promised that the Senate will vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment and attempt to write discrimination into the Constitution for the first time in 230 years. This divisive and unnecessary amendment that would undermine the Constitution has overwhelmingly failed each time the Senate has voted on it. We don't need another Terri Schiavo moment where we spend valuable time away from the important work that needs to be done. Now, more than ever, it's time to focus on security, solutions for the high cost of healthcare and gas prices. But you know Bill Frist and the Republican Leadership can't be trusted to address real issues. After all, Senate Republicans and their big oil friends have forced more than ten votes to drill for oil in ANWR, but not a single vote to lower gas prices. They spent months trying to privatize Social Security, but Bill Frist can't find room in the schedule to raise the minimum wage or provide funding for Stem Cell research. We need a President and a Congress that doesn't play divisive politics. At a time of war, Republicans should unite the country and focus on the real issues, not divide and undermine its founding principles.
IP: Logged |
Mannu
Knowflake Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 06, 2006 03:43 AM
>>>Are you suggesting gay couples should have special rights you would deny to others who are also outside the accepted definition of "marriage"?
Well take one thing at a time. Why chastise gay people. Stress is bad for health. I am glad, their voices are heard and its a good beginning. We have to raise awareness.
Marriage is an institution based on contracts amongst other things. I for one do not believe in it (be it hetero or home). But if people are happy marrying traditionally(with customs) so be it. I was focussing more on that and on protection for gay lover's survivor. Also 15,16,or 18 to be legal limit is so dependent on the maturity of the person not just harmonal but mental. Definitely in the times that we live in, I have never seen a 12 year old mentally mature and there fore I think it makes sense to have laws to protect these 12 year olds. Comeon, the boy may not even have sperm in his body at that age. How does law know if he will really be happy? J, I think you have forgotten that democracy is for the people , of the people and by the people. We must constantly see the demographics , get feedbacks, keep it(constitution) dynamic and alive. Old conservatives, write everything in stone and try to live a life from that. Must be their Gods trap them in that bondage LOL. Anyway its way off topic.
quote:
The Gods wants us to be happy, really.
IP: Logged |
proxieme
unregistered
|
posted June 06, 2006 09:19 AM
I love how you frame things, jwhop:
quote:
Are you aware that in Kansas minors may marry at age 15? That in Minnesota, it's 16 and that there are provisions in most state laws for minors to marry under the age of their majority..with parental consent, with consent of a guardian or by petition to a court?With the crazy rulings coming out of state and federal courts, what makes you think it's beyond the realm of possibility for a 12 year old to marry?
As if 15, et al are recent developements or ruling of "renegade judges" rather than relics of the 1800s/early 1900s.You're a master at this! IP: Logged |
jwhop
Knowflake Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 06, 2006 10:17 PM
Well proxie, I wish I could take credit for that tricky argument you credited me with...but it weren't that way at all I've known for a long time marriage age laws vary all over the country...in addition to being open to interpretation of courts and subject to petitions to the courts. You'll notice I mentioned 15 and 16 year olds being of legal marrying age now....and then started another paragraph to talk about what a crazy/renegade court might do if a 12 year old petitioned the court for a ruling granting the right to marry Two different thoughts. You'll also notice I didn't say a word about state laws granting 15 and 16 year olds the right to marry being new or recent developments. Did you know teenagers used to elope across state lines to get married because the adjoining state or another state had a lower age limit for legal marriage? However, master jwhop has a nice ring, so thank you.  IP: Logged |
AcousticGod
Knowflake Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 07, 2006 11:43 AM
Seven Republicans, many from New England, voted to kill the amendment. They were Sens. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Susan Collins of Maine, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, John McCain of Arizona, Olympia Snowe of Maine, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and John Sununu of New Hampshire. Two Democrats voted for the amendment: Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Robert Byrd of West Virginia. Three senators did not vote: Democrats Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and John Rockefeller of West Virginia, and Republican Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.
ARticle IP: Logged |
Mannu
Knowflake Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 07, 2006 12:45 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13181735/ quote:
In the ten commandments, God didn't say do not have homosex, He only said do not commit adultery. Applies to both hetero and homo. All other references to homosexuality in the Bible particularly the OT is written by hands of men and error prone. Makes me think no adultery implies no divorce. Lets see how the rest of heteros takes it when it becomes a law. Hahahaha....My $0.02 
IP: Logged |
pidaua
Knowflake Posts: 67
From: Back in AZ with Bear the Leo
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 07, 2006 01:23 PM
Mannu,Where is that quote from and what does it mean? I am not sure if it is a language barrier, but it doesn't make a whole heck of a lot of sense. Thanks, ~Pidaua IP: Logged |
lotusheartone
unregistered
|
posted June 07, 2006 01:40 PM
The Universal Laws..Simple!male and female..balance..this is the way we were created..to keep creation going. ... karma..caused this problem..you get what you give..you reap what you sow..or vice-Versa.. Love and Respect for ALL.. Marriage is between a woman and a man... IP: Logged |
AcousticGod
Knowflake Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 07, 2006 01:40 PM
Yeah, I like this part:"He only said do commit adultery." Must be a language barrier. IP: Logged |
Mannu
Knowflake Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 07, 2006 03:22 PM
Hahahaha... I typed it with a blazing speed and resulted in my eating the word 'no'....Its fixed now... AG,
No its not lang barrier. My english is not that bad...I'm just lazy..
But isn't that convenient "do commit adultery." - Who hasn't yet? Everyone has. Second married ones, People who fell in love and married someone else....everyone ....LOL....Even fantasies are sort of adultery....So is watching porn.... Wondering if having a crush on your favourite actor/actress is sort of adultery...Hmmmm....I did use to have a pin up poster of so many stars...Did I commit adultery ....Hehehehe.... 
IP: Logged |
Mannu
Knowflake Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 07, 2006 03:25 PM
Lotusheart,
>>>Marriage is between a woman and a man...
Says who? Its your Gods who makes you say that. Marriage happens first in heavens and then later on earth.
<forgive the typos...i don't proof read ...>
IP: Logged |
AcousticGod
Knowflake Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted June 07, 2006 03:37 PM
It's cool. IP: Logged |
lotusheartone
unregistered
|
posted June 07, 2006 09:53 PM
Says Who? God MOther and Father..and the Universal Laws that were given..and that we broke. ...Love and Respect for ALL.. IP: Logged |
silverstone
unregistered
|
posted June 07, 2006 10:54 PM
Hello everyone,People should have the right to be with who ever they decide! That is all I have been trying to convey... Who are we to judge or arrange their desires! Gay people should have freedom of choice! Why not let them get married... they are not going to harm anyone! It is that logical! They are still going to be together... why not let these people fulfill their dreams of marriage? Mannu, great points! 
Lotus... good points but I disagree that Father and Mother would disagree! They want hapiness on earth. I do not think it envolves Karma in this matter!
Cheers, ------------------
~*Silverstone~* IP: Logged |
silverstone
unregistered
|
posted June 07, 2006 11:02 PM
Mannu: quote:
<forgive the typos...i don't proof read ...>
 ------------------
~*Silverstone~* IP: Logged |
lotusheartone
unregistered
|
posted June 07, 2006 11:02 PM
The Universal Laws are Simple..black and white..good or evil..same sex marriges stop creation..do you understand..????
I have nothing against gay people..my aunt is a lesbian..and I have gay friends..but you know..
the laws are simple..any acceptance that would cause the loss of creation is wrong..plain and simple. ...that is the Law... Love and Respect for all... IP: Logged |
silverstone
unregistered
|
posted June 07, 2006 11:04 PM
Lotus: quote:
karma..caused this problem..you get what you give..you reap what you sow..or vice-Versa..
not on this matter!
------------------
~*Silverstone~* IP: Logged |
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
