Gays

[glockmail]

Journalist Tresa Baldas wrote for The Detroit Free Press 6 November 2014:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld same-sex marriage bans in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee, issued its decision three months after hearing same-sex marriage cases from all four states. In each of those states, federal judges had struck down same-sex marriage bans on constitutional grounds.


In a 2-1 vote, the Sixth Circuit overturned those decisions, concluding the definition of marriage should be left to the voters -- not judges -- and that voters should be allowed to decide whether gay marriage is a good idea or not.


"Not one of the plaintiffs' theories ... makes the case for constitutionalizing the definition of marriage and for removing the issue from the place it has been since the founding: in the hands of state voters," the court wrote.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


article

So is my state's constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman valid or no?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So is my state's constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman valid or no?

I suspect currently in this nation nothing not directly sanctioned by King Obama is valid unless one is ready to fight for it!
Myself, I know in the next two years he will get more and more extreme--he is unbearable right now with his treason!
Imagine what he can and will do the next two years if not stopped!! -Tyr

[Jeff]

Police brutality is in the news too, and I post about that. I post about taxes that are in the news too. I think about it when I am posting about it.

You're not coming on to me here, are you?

fj is a liberal and a Fag OK the two go hand in hand but wow I am shocked

[indago]

Journalist Alexa Ura wrote for The New York Times 20 December 2014:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fourteen states allowed same-sex marriage when Cleopatra De Leon and Nicole Dimetman filed a lawsuit late last year challenging Texas’ constitutional ban on marriages that are not between a man and a woman. The couple, who had married in Massachusetts in 2009, live in Austin and collided with a Texas law when they could not both be listed on the birth certificate of their first child.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

article

Yes, I can see it now:

FULL NAME OF MOTHER: Cleopatra De Leon

FULL NAME OF FATHER: Nicole Dimetman

Now, how much sense does that make...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defa...-long-form.pdf

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

fj is a liberal and a Fag OK the two go hand in hand but wow I am shocked

Well, I knew something was wrong with the boy! --Tyr

[fj1200]

So is my state's constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman valid or no?

It seems not.

4th Circuit Won't Stop Gay Marriage in SC

fj is a liberal and a Fag OK the two go hand in hand but wow I am shocked

Don't make me...

[Abbey Marie]

The problem is that you must accept his premise to be angry like him. nambla is disgusting enough on its own but tying the to two together is intellectually dishonest.

But that's the thing. Most people once thought gay marriage was disgusting, too. Do you really think we are not solidly on a road to making most people's proclivities legitimate? I've already heard more comments recently about legitimizing multiple spouses, for example.

But most upsetting, I believe this is true, from the original post. Any liberty-loving person would have a lot of trouble with this family being forced to host that wedding.

..“We’ve gone from tolerance to compulsion,’’ the Giffords’ lawyer, James Trainor, told me. ...

[fj1200]

But that's the thing. Most people once thought gay marriage was disgusting, too. Do you really think we are not solidly on a road to making most people's proclivities legitimate? I've already heard more comments recently about legitimizing multiple spouses, for example.

But most upsetting, I believe this is true, from the original post. Any liberty-loving person would have a lot of trouble with this family being forced to host that wedding.

I'm not sure where you found that but I agree, compulsion is not the best route to tolerance, see the Civil Rights Act. Nevertheless nambla is disgusting because pedophilia is disgusting. The question is the state preferencing one set of relationships over another. Don't you think that legitimizing relationships would lead to more stable relationships?

[tailfins]

But that's the thing. Most people once thought gay marriage was disgusting, too. Do you really think we are not solidly on a road to making most people's proclivities legitimate? I've already heard more comments recently about legitimizing multiple spouses, for example.

But most upsetting, I believe this is true, from the original post. Any liberty-loving person would have a lot of trouble with this family being forced to host that wedding.

For me disgusting never entered the picture. It's a simple matter of provoking God to judge our nation.

[indago]

nambla is disgusting because pedophilia is disgusting.

Pederasty — Not to be confused with Pedophilia ...Historically, pederasty has existed as a variety of customs and practices within different cultures. ...Geoffrey Gorer and others distinguish pederasty from pedophilia

article

So, you are in denial, and attempting to blur the distinction between pederasty and pedophilia so that you can sustain your denial. Not surprising that you would now back away from your support of the homosexual lifestyle in this way, now that you see just where all this is heading.

[fj1200]

So, you are in denial, and attempting to blur the distinction between pederasty and pedophilia so that you can sustain your denial. Not surprising that you would now back away from your support of the homosexual lifestyle in this way, now that you see just where all this is heading.

WTF are you talking about? There is a distinction between the two just as there is a distinction between what consenting adults do and what pederasts do.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

WTF are you talking about? There is a distinction between the two just as there is a distinction between what consenting adults do and what pederasts do.

Yes, the thousand shades of grey excuse..
Going with that instead of a "moral absolute" is likely why you are so confused...
Of course going with the "shades of grey" crap keeps your so-called "enlightened credentials" intact , right? --Tyr

[fj1200]

Yes, the thousand shades of grey excuse..
Going with that instead of a "moral absolute" is likely why you are so confused...
Of course going with the "shades of grey" crap keeps your so-called "enlightened credentials" intact , right? --Tyr

Confused? Not me. I know what words mean and don't have different opinions based on the sexes involved unlike yourself.

[Drummond]

Exactly why does it bother you?
If it does then don't read the thread! Don't reply , don't even glance at it.
Is that too hard or are you keen on defending yet another liberal specially protected group of damn perverts?
Then you wonder why so many question your true political stand..
Second and third hand defense of muslims, liberals, gays, Obama and others are why many question where
you truly stand.
And stop showing your massive bias by calling my friend Drummond an "idiot"..
He is a very intelligent guy. I do not recall either he or I ever calling you stupid!
Seems he and I give you far more respect than you care to show in return...
If you'd like that civility and manners to continue try some reciprocation of the politeness now shown you.
A friendly suggestion only. -Tyr

Thanks, Tyr, much appreciated.

FJ, pretty much perpetually, argues from positions of weakness. I fully understand that he needs to compensate for that, so he does it by insulting and (in his own mind, if in nobody else's) by trying to 'belittle' me, or others who oppose him.

It's completely pathetic. But if he didn't stoop to such things, he'd have to - shock, horror - sometimes ADMIT when he's WRONG. And .. well, that would never do.

Especially for a Leftie.

What combativeness FJ gets from me is no more, no less, than is deserved. And apart from saying as a general comment that Leftieism is ITSELF stupid ... I will not specifically mete out to FJ any comment he doesn't deserve. That isn't on the cards.

Pity that FJ can't reasonably say the same. Still, he can always turn over a new leaf. Not likely, I know .....

[fj1200]

Thanks, Tyr, much appreciated.

FJ, pretty much perpetually, argues from positions of weakness. I fully understand that he needs to compensate for that, so he does it by insulting and (in his own mind, if in nobody else's) by trying to 'belittle' me, or others who oppose him.

It's completely pathetic. But if he didn't stoop to such things, he'd have to - shock, horror - sometimes ADMIT when he's WRONG. And .. well, that would never do.

Especially for a Leftie.

What combativeness FJ gets from me is no more, no less, than is deserved. And apart from saying that Leftieism is ITSELF stupid ... I will not mete out to FJ any comment he doesn't deserve. That isn't on the cards.

Pity that FJ can't reasonably say the same. Still, he can always turn over a new leaf. Not likely, I know .....

What a moron you are. Go running to the arms of the knuckleheads when the going gets rough. I've proven you are mentally incapable of hanging in an actual discussion without prattling on like a dolt (see pollution thread). You suck at this.

Admit you're wrong you ignorant fool.