Azizza fucked around with this message on 04-28-2005 at 11:25 AM.
quote:
Check out the big brain on Liam!
You have to admit that it's rather ironic to typo moron
What typo? 
This guy has no idea what America stands for. Reynar fucked around with this message on 04-28-2005 at 11:51 AM.
Some people are like Slinkys... Not really good for anything, But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.
quote:
Peanut butter ass Shaq Jensus booooze lime pole over bench lick:
God bless Jesusland.
If I looked at one marxist opinion held by one extreme communist that just happened to live in your country and used it as an excuse to call your country Commieland, how would you feel?
Oho, but I forget - your forte is pot stirring, not debate.
quote:
"I don't look at it as censorship," says State Representative Gerald Allen. "I look at it as protecting the hearts and souls and minds of our children."
It's weird how the extreme right and the extreme left seem to have the same book of stock bullshit phrases. Maradon! fucked around with this message on 04-28-2005 at 12:51 PM.
That said, I don't think they (the Republican support base) will tolerate too much more. Gay marriage bans, fine. No adoption by gay people, maybe, but probably not. Maybe I'm just being optimistic, but I can't fathom that a majority of Republicans seriously want gay people to be second class citizens in so many ways.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
Everyone wondered WTF when Karnaj wrote:
That said, I don't think they (the Republican support base) will tolerate too much more. Gay marriage bans, fine. No adoption by gay people, maybe, but probably not. Maybe I'm just being optimistic, but I can't fathom that a majority of Republicans seriously want gay people to be second class citizens in so many ways.
Yep pretty much. I don't even have a problem with Homosexual couple adopting kids. Pretty much the only place I see an issue is traditional marriage and some people here label me as a Homophobe for that. But they are really off base. *shrugs*
This guy has gone way over the top. I already sent a pretty nasty email to him about it. I am sure he thinks he is beyond questioning in this. But I feel ever member of this board knows the truth. He is an idiot who should just leave politics.
If it was an Alabama state law writen up in the state legislature I wouldn't care at all. Let the people in Alabama be backwards, and let them fill their libraries with 40000 copies of the Bible. The whole situation is honestly not fair to the open minded individuals who live in the rest of the country. DrPaintThinner fucked around with this message on 04-28-2005 at 01:59 PM.
quote:
Karnajing:
I think the Republicans are banking on this "eliminate the rights of gays" thing a bit too much.
Remember, though, that only the marriage ban has happened on a federal level. All the other things you're mentioning are the work of nutjob state governments.
I've mentioned before that I do swim in some pretty far-right circles, and most of the people I know of even on the extreme right can't help but support at least civil unions.
quote:
Editor's Note: When the time for the vote in the legislature came there were not enough state legislators present for the vote, so the measure died automatically.
quote:
I like it when Maradon! says:
Remember, though, that only the marriage ban has happened on a federal level. All the other things you're mentioning are the work of nutjob state governments.I've mentioned before that I do swim in some pretty far-right circles, and most of the people I know of even on the extreme right can't help but support at least civil unions.
Yeah, that whole seperate but equal thing always works.
quote:
Kait had this to say about Knight Rider:
That's hilarious.
I love how bookstores have all the gay literature shoved into its own corner, regardless of genre...we don't want to offend people in their shells, now.
I dream of a bookstore where fantasy gay fiction is filed in with straight fantasy fiction, and gay romance is treated just as sappily as straight romance, and...
Guess you don't read much Anne Rice.
quote:
Kait wrote this stupid crap:
That's hilarious.
I love how bookstores have all the gay literature shoved into its own corner, regardless of genre...we don't want to offend people in their shells, now.
I dream of a bookstore where fantasy gay fiction is filed in with straight fantasy fiction, and gay romance is treated just as sappily as straight romance, and...
You haven't been to the manga section recently, have you?
quote:
Verily, Kait doth proclaim:
That's hilarious.
I love how bookstores have all the gay literature shoved into its own corner, regardless of genre...we don't want to offend people in their shells, now.
I dream of a bookstore where fantasy gay fiction is filed in with straight fantasy fiction, and gay romance is treated just as sappily as straight romance, and...
tbh I don't really want to read about gay relationships, so I'm not complaining.
quote:
Nae wrote this then went back to looking for porn:
Guess you don't read much Anne Rice.
Haha, there are some parts where I start to think "Wait, are we still talking about vampirism?".
quote:
Nae probably says this to all the girls:
Guess you don't read much Anne Rice.
Yes.. That's Uh... Not why I read it.. I read it for the vampires... Really!
quote:
x--Blindy.O-('-'Q) :
Yeah, that whole seperate but equal thing always works.
Ah, the oft-repeated cry of the opponent of civil unions. It's supposed to be a scathing one-line zinger that illustrates an obvious fault in the idea, however there are a number of flaws with this argument.
First off, there's no reason to believe "separate but equal" doesn't work. It works fine. A few examples: Men's and Women's bathrooms, all-black universities, segregation of public schools based on age, and any number of things.
Second, civil unions are neither separate nor equal. As in this chart, proposed civil unions would be just like marriage, except recognized on a state governmental level only, and without tax benefits. (note that this chart is obviously supposed to be vehemently pro-gay marriage, but only manages a few weak points)
The entire purpose of marriage related tax relief is to accommodate the immense expenses incurred by having children anyway, and the vast majority of homosexual couples will never have children.
Personally I feel civil marriage should be abolished entirely and that everybody should have a civil union with tax breaks attributed only to the number of dependants, but that's just not going to happen with so many people so traditionally attached to the idea of marriage and all.
quote:
Maradon! had this to say about Matthew Broderick:
Personally I feel civil marriage should be abolished entirely and that everybody should have a civil union with tax breaks attributed only to the number of dependants, but that's just not going to happen with so many people so traditionally attached to the idea of marriage and all.
I totally agree with that.
quote:
Check out the big brain on Nae!
Guess you don't read much Anne Rice.
Not particularly. But I mean all fantasy, romance, sci-fi, etc. books, not just the classics. I don't think many stores put Anne Rice books in with the rest of the mill, though I admit that's not something I actively research on a regular basis.
I'm so happy Barnes and Noble devoted an entire aisle to manga, finally. 
manga.
And I live in one of the worst states for it. I think I read somewhere in a fantasy novel something about church and state being seperate. Not the state being run (( overrun )) with religious bigots.
My personal view on gay marriage or whatever is not my issue here. It is that ALL people should be created equal. No matter thier differences. Hey I should write a declaration or something like that about it. Think people would like it? 
quote:
Nobody really understood why Maradon! wrote:
If I looked at one marxist opinion held by one extreme communist that just happened to live in your country and used it as an excuse to call your country Commieland, how would you feel?Oho, but I forget - your forte is pot stirring, not debate.
You already do that.
quote:
Why, Lashanna! where you goin' with that shotgun?
Haha, there are some parts where I start to think "Wait, are we still talking about vampirism?".
Yeah.. I gave up on reading those.
It's not something people hear about.
quote:
Maradon! must think they're pretty smart:
Ah, the oft-repeated cry of the opponent of civil unions. It's supposed to be a scathing one-line zinger that illustrates an obvious fault in the idea, however there are a number of flaws with this argument.First off, there's no reason to believe "separate but equal" doesn't work. It works fine. A few examples: Men's and Women's bathrooms,
quote:
all-black universities,
quote:
segregation of public schools based on age,
quote:
and any number of things.
quote:
Second, civil unions are neither separate nor equal. As in this chart, proposed civil unions would be just like marriage, except recognized on a state governmental level only, and without tax benefits. (note that this chart is obviously supposed to be vehemently pro-gay marriage, but only manages a few weak points)
So they are just like it, except for the good things. How awesome.
quote:
The entire purpose of marriage related tax relief is to accommodate the immense expenses incurred by having children anyway, and the vast majority of homosexual couples will never have children.
Infertile couples should be forced to have a civil union without tax benefits then.
quote:
Personally I feel civil marriage should be abolished entirely and that everybody should have a civil union with tax breaks attributed only to the number of dependants, but that's just not going to happen with so many people so traditionally attached to the idea of marriage and all.
I agree. But I think the way of handling the fact that marriage will never be abolished is to stop being bigoted about who we let get married. Blindy. fucked around with this message on 04-29-2005 at 08:38 AM.
I guess it's a foggy issue because marriage has both the civil union part (state) and the spiritual marriage part (church).
quote:
Verily, the chocolate bunny rabits doth run and play while Snugglits gently hums:
I'm confused; is it a violation of separation of church and state for the state to tell the church who they can and can't marry? If it was just the church telling gays that they wouldn't marry them, I could see that as one thing, but with the state telling the church what they have to do it seems kind of odd to me and that it should be up to the church.I guess it's a foggy issue because marriage has both the civil union part (state) and the spiritual marriage part (church).
No one is telling churches they have to marry anybody. Imprecise terminology is pretty much the heart of this stupid debate.
The intelligent thing to do would be to let churches keep the emotionally-laden term "marriage," and universally call the legal institution "civil union" with equal rights and protections for everyone.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
x--Blindy.O-('-'Q) :
Which are a horrible idea and don't "work", they are artifacts of segregation and continue to exist only because no politition is dumb enough to go against them and lose any possibilty of getting the black vote.
HAHA!! All black universities are funded largely by the black community! Blacks go to them VOLUNTARILY and they're widely hearalded as tremendous civil rights victories! Where the hell have you been?
quote:
are you honestly telling me that a kindergarten has the same teaching equipment and facilities as a high school?
What's equipment have to do with anything?
You're arguing a totally irrelevant sidebar anyway, it's idiotic to suggest that two separate things cannot be equal.
quote:
Things which need to be separate because they wouldn't work together. Explain to me why Straight Marriage and Gay Marriage are incompatible, and don't use the words "God," "Morality," or "Bible".
Straight marriages almost always involve kids. Gay marriages almost never do.
quote:
So they are just like it, except for the good things. How awesome.
A tax break is the only good thing about a marriage?
quote:
Infertile couples should be forced to have a civil union without tax benefits then.
Infertile couples are exceptions, just as homosexual couples with kids are the exceptions. We legislate based on the majority, not on the exceptions.
quote:
I agree. But I think the way of handling the fact that marriage will never be abolished is to stop being bigoted about who we let get married.
Sadly the only way to do that is to abolish marriage.
quote:
A sleep deprived Maradon! stammered:
We legislate based on the majority, not on the exceptions.
Policians have a long standing record for making legislation based on "exception cases". Remember Terry Schiavo?
quote:
Maradon! needs to learn to type:
HAHA!! All black universities are funded largely by the black community! Blacks go to them VOLUNTARILY and they're widely hearalded as tremendous civil rights victories! Where the hell have you been?
Have you no idea why they were founded in the first place? Do some research. You'll see exactly why I say they are artifacts of segregation.
quote:
What's equipment have to do with anything?You're arguing a totally irrelevant sidebar anyway, it's idiotic to suggest that two separate things cannot be equal.
You're the one saying that Kindergardens and Highschools are perfect examples of "seperate but equal" working. They aren't equal. They aren't supposed to be equal. They address two very different things.
Gay marriage and Straight marriage do not address different things.
quote:
Straight marriages almost always involve kids. Gay marriages almost never do.
Just because the couple cannot concieve naturally doesn't mean they dont want to have kids. Did you ever think that the reason gay couples are so afraid of having children is because of how persecuted the couples and their children are in the first place- just like interracial couples in the 70s?
quote:
A tax break is the only good thing about a marriage?
quote:
Infertile couples are exceptions, just as homosexual couples with kids are the exceptions. We legislate based on the majority, not on the exceptions.
We legislate to protect the rights of all citizens. Not just ones in the majority.
quote:
Sadly the only way to do that is to abolish marriage.
Exactly like we had to abolish marriage so that interracial couples could get married? Right? Blindy. fucked around with this message on 04-29-2005 at 03:41 PM.
quote:
And I was all like 'Oh yeah?' and Demos was all like:
I guess somebody forgot that the framers of the consitution specifically tried to prevent tyranny of the majority.
And is tyranny of the minority any better?
quote:
Naimah's unholy Backstreet Boys obsession manifested in:
And is tyranny of the minority any better?
How is wanting equal rights in any way the "tyranny of the minority." I'm sure it sounded good in your head, but just think
Personally I think the whole thing is stupid, but I can see where both sides are coming from. It is more then the people against it saying 'Gay people are icky.'
quote:
Peanut butter ass Shaq Blindy. booooze lime pole over bench lick:
You're the one saying that Kindergardens and Highschools are perfect examples of "seperate but equal" working. They aren't equal. They aren't supposed to be equal. They address two very different things.Gay marriage and Straight marriage do not address different things.
You're confusing "equal" and "identical"
Gay marriage and straight marriage DO address different things - a union between a couple that will breed, and a union between a couple that will not.
quote:
Just because the couple cannot concieve naturally doesn't mean they dont want to have kids. Did you ever think that the reason gay couples are so afraid of having children is because of how persecuted the couples and their children are in the first place- just like interracial couples in the 70s?
Wish in one hand and shit in the other. By the way, how is this at all relevant to what we're talking about?
quote:
Two people in a "civil union" go on vacation to a different state. One partner gets in an accident and goes to the hospital. GUESS WHO CAN'T MAKE MEDICAL DECISIONS FOR THEIR PARTNER? This is just one of many many reasons why civil unions are not good enough. Just fucking let them get married. We've already got all the laws layed out around marriage. Everyone knows what that means. The only reason we're holding them back is because some people are bigots.
Did you know that the right to make medical decisions for another person can be arranged by a lawyer between any two people, married or not? As can nearly everything that a civil union doesn't grant, except a tax break.
Nobody is proposing we forbid gays from visiting each other in the hospital or making medical decisions.
quote:
We legislate to protect the rights of all citizens. Not just ones in the majority.
One must first assume that homosexual couples have a right to a tax break that is intended to relieve financial stress caused by children they cannot produce in order to make that argument.
quote:
Exactly like we had to abolish marriage so that interracial couples could get married? Right?
Inaccurate comparsion. Skin color is not an obstacle to reproduction. Gender, however, is.
Once again, I AGREE with you on the points about infertile couples and gays that adopt, this is why I want civil marriage to be abolished and replaced with civil unions and a bigger tax break for dependants. I will continue to argue that view and support candidates who agree with it, but there comes a time when you have to be realistic.
Until such a time as everyone can REALLY be made equal in the eyes of the law by abolishing civil marriage, civil unions for gays is the closest you're going to come, and it's NOT any less fair than civil marriage would be. Civil marriage for gays would extend tax rights that simply aren't warranted by the kind of union gays have. Maradon! fucked around with this message on 04-29-2005 at 06:14 PM.
