PDA

View Full Version : Washington state blocks same-sex "marriage"



Little-Acorn
11-04-2009, 11:40 AM
In the state of Washington, the Governor had signed a law months ago, saying that same-sex unions had all the rights of heterosexual marriages EXCEPT they couldn't call it a "marriage".

Yesterday that state had a similar ballot proposition to Maine's, asking if the people wanted to reject that ruling. The issue was voted down by a very slim margin, and the law was permitted to stand.

It's another nail in the coffin of gay "marriages". Nobody objects to a same-sex partner having hospital visitation rights, unwilled inheritance rights, etc. But there has been a lot of objection to gay advocates changing the fundamental definition of marriage.

Gay advocates have been trying for years to force people to accept their new definition of "marriage". At the same time, they have been insisting that all they wanted was the same rights as heterosexuals had in real marriages.

This Washington law reveals the gay advocates' longstanding lie: it GAVE them all the rights they were demanding. But they screamed and protested that it wasn't good enough. It's easy to see why: The law as it stands, blocks them from calling their unions "marriages", the way a law might block calling a table a chair.

Clearly, equal rights was NOT what they wanted. They wanted to force everyone to change the definition of marriage. And now the lid has been nailed a little tighter on the coffin of that lie.

YamiB.
11-05-2009, 12:21 PM
In the state of Washington, the Governor had signed a law months ago, saying that same-sex unions had all the rights of heterosexual marriages EXCEPT they couldn't call it a "marriage".

Yesterday that state had a similar ballot proposition to Maine's, asking if the people wanted to reject that ruling. The issue was voted down by a very slim margin, and the law was permitted to stand.

It's another nail in the coffin of gay "marriages". Nobody objects to a same-sex partner having hospital visitation rights, unwilled inheritance rights, etc. But there has been a lot of objection to gay advocates changing the fundamental definition of marriage.

Gay advocates have been trying for years to force people to accept their new definition of "marriage". At the same time, they have been insisting that all they wanted was the same rights as heterosexuals had in real marriages.

This Washington law reveals the gay advocates' longstanding lie: it GAVE them all the rights they were demanding. But they screamed and protested that it wasn't good enough. It's easy to see why: The law as it stands, blocks them from calling their unions "marriages", the way a law might block calling a table a chair.

Clearly, equal rights was NOT what they wanted. They wanted to force everyone to change the definition of marriage. And now the lid has been nailed a little tighter on the coffin of that lie.

Please provide where you are getting this information. The opposition who started and supported the referendum to cancel these domestic partnership laws were from anti-gay groups. The lesson is that many opponents of same-sex marriage have been lying when they say they are okay with gay couples being treated equally, just not letting them have marriage.

http://protectmarriagewa.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Referendum_71_%282009%29

cat slave
11-05-2009, 08:03 PM
Well, I dont get why "civil unions" are not good enough! Let male/female
couples get married and let gay couples have a civil union with legal rights
such as medical decisions, property etc......and they could have divorces too!
We dont want to have all the fun.:lol: