If Romney is making birther jokes then maybe Obama should make a joke about how blacks were banned from the Mormon church until 1978. Let that sink in. 1978!
This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
Hmmmm...if Jimmy programs her to consent, is that really consent?
Not sure - the robot says it is. It also says - why does it effect you and who are you to judge? Jimmy just wants to marry his robot. His robot wants to do the same. Why not let these two be wed?
I understand it's a stretch, but not really. Once this thing goes down, just wait... you'll see more and more of this.
Like I said, I'm not saying no to polygamists, nor to hetero or same sex adults. I don't think marriage should be limited by biological sex or the ability to procreate between two adults.
I know you're not saying "no"... But, you're not saying "yes" to polygamists either - no offense, but you're kinda just evading that question. And I know the robot thing is a bit far-fetched, but the polygamist one is not at all.
On another subject entirely, do you think a tranny would make a good parent?
Hmmmm...if Jimmy programs her to consent, is that really consent?
Not sure - the robot says it is. It also says - why does it effect you and who are you to judge? Jimmy just wants to marry his robot. His robot wants to do the same. Why not let these two be wed?
I understand it's a stretch, but not really. Once this thing goes down, just wait... you'll see more and more of this.
Like I said, I'm not saying no to polygamists, nor to hetero or same sex adults. I don't think marriage should be limited by biological sex or the ability to procreate between two adults.
I know you're not saying "no"... But, you're not saying "yes" to polygamists either - no offense, but you're kinda just evading that question. And I know the robot thing is a bit far-fetched, but the polygamist one is not at all. Like I said, I haven't really thought about poly
On another subject entirely, do you think a tranny would make a good parent?
Well I don't think Rosie the robot has rights under the constitution, so I don't think that's relevant to same sex marriage between 2 adults who do have rights to equal protections. Like I said, I haven't really thought about polygamy, but assuming they're consensualim not opposing it. As for the tranny question - not sure if you mean transgender or transsexual, but sure they could and do. That really depends on the individual
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
Well I don't think Rosie the robot has rights under the constitution, so I don't think that's relevant to same sex marriage between 2 adults who do have rights to equal protections.
The guy in the storyline thas rights under the constitution. Moreover, where in the constitution does it the government receive the right to declare marriages by the way?
Like I said, I haven't really thought about polygamy, but assuming they're consensualim not opposing it.
Did you actually answer this? I'm not sure I'm reading this wrong, or if you said you think it's ok. You seem to keep trying to hedge for some reason. Even this answer doesn't read as an answer.
As for thinking about it - why not start now? Then respond when you're finished. Answer: are you for or against legal polygamy? I mean I've asked it several times now, so I'm pretty certain you have thought about it now. Not trying to be unreasonable, just interested in your answer.
As for the tranny question - not sure if you mean transgender or transsexual, but sure they could and do. That really depends on the individual
What exactly makes a good parent to you? Do you not think a tranny (either) parent would cause a bit of developmental problems for a youngster? Why or why not?
And who's to stop it? If marriage legal definition is changed to man + man or woman + woman, why not man + woman + woman and so on. Why not man + robot? Should there be a line, and why should there be?
Why the government is becoming Webster's dictionary - I'm not sure.
OH please.
Just another bullshit, phony indignation and made-up hysteria about "changing the definition of a word."
A word that - and sorry, but you know this is true - Christians don't own, don't give a shit about and have changed the definition of themselves MANY times over the ages. Marriage used to be about trading your daughter for goats. Or two further business arrangements. Or to just get rid of your daughter so you did't have to care for her anymore and selling her like a cow.
If you know the first thing about European history, you know that marriage used to mean "a life-long union" until the King of England got tired of beheading the women who didn't give him sons and created the protestant church so he could invent "divorce."
If you know about the early North American history, you know that many fat, chunky women were shipped to the colonies so they could be wives for the men who were working the land. The stouter, the better, the men needed women who could carry heavy things and handle livestock.
And if Christians really gave a shit about the "sanctity of marriage," they would be spending more time trying to make divorces harder to get, trying to shut down the drunken-marriage chapels in Vegas and they would be trying to make sure that low-income couples could afford marriage counseling. Trying to make wages higher so one parent can stay home to care for children and one can work. They do none of those. Certainly not with the zeal that they fight to keep my family legally below them. They sure don't pour the tens of millions of dollars that they do into limiting my family's rights and protections.
Finally.. all those absurd subject-changing arguments were used in the 60s when interracial marriage was still illegal. But more than that, it's meant as a vile slag at me and my family. Presented as a "thoughtful argument."
Saying "Do you support marriage of a man and a dog?" or "do you support a man and a robot?" is intentionally obnoxious and vicious...vile, and insulting at a very deep and personal level. It shows a desperate attempt to de-humanize my family. Reducing us to freaks who fuck their dogs or get themselves off with a blow-up doll. Anything to remove the love between two people that's strong enough that they want to build a home and a life together. For 20 years. Since I was 23.
The last gasp of the people who hate us so much that they will do or say ANYTHING to keep us beneath them. And for no other reason than "I don't like them and I don't want to be equal in the eyes of the law to them." Or "I want to feel special and better than SOMEONE."
And who's to stop it? If marriage legal definition is changed to man + man or woman + woman, why not man + woman + woman and so on. Why not man + robot? Should there be a line, and why should there be?
Why the government is becoming Webster's dictionary - I'm not sure.
OH please.
Just another bullshit, phony indignation and made-up hysteria about "changing the definition of a word."
A word that - and sorry, but you know this is true - Christians don't own, don't give a shit about and have changed the definition themselves MANY times over the ages. Marriage used to be about trading your daughter for goats. Or two further business arrangements. Or to just get rid of your daughter so you did't have to care for her anymore and selling her like a cow.
If you know the first thing about European history, you know that marriage used to mean "a life-long union" until the King of England got tired of beheading the women who didn't give him sons and created the protestant church so he could invent "divorce."
If you know about the early North American history, you know that many fat, chunky women were shipped to the colonies so they could be wives for the men who were working the land. The stouter, the better, the men needed women who could carry heavy things and handle livestock.
And if Christians really gave a shit about the "sanctity of marriage," they would be spending more time trying to make divorces harder to get, trying to shut down the drunken-marriage chapels in Vegas and they would be trying to make sure that low-income couples could afford marriage counseling. They do none of those. Certainly not with the zeal that they fight keeping my family legally below them. They sure don't pour tens of millions of dollars that they do into limiting my family's rights and protections.
Finally, seeing all those absurd subject changing arguments were used in the 60s when interracial marriage was still illegal. But more than that, it's meant as a vile slag at me and my family. Presented as a "thoughtful argument."
Saying "Do you support marriage of a man and a dog?" or "do you support a man and a robot?" is intentionally obnoxious and vicious...vile, and insulting at a very deep and personal level. It shows a desperate attempt to de-humanize my family. Reducing us to freaks who fuck their dogs or fall in love with a blow-up doll. Anything to remove the love between two people that's strong enough that they want to build a home and a life together.
And a last gasp of the people who hate us so much that they want to keep us beneath them. And for no other reason than "I don't like them and I don't want to be equal in the eyes of the law to them."
Perfectly stated.
This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
What exactly makes a good parent to you? Do you not think a tranny (either) parent would cause a bit of developmental problems for a youngster? Why or why not?
Since it's possible you don't know, calling someone "a tranny" is the equivalent of calling me a "faggot" or the first lady "a nigress." While I'm used to the gleeful disrespect that comes from people who clearly get a kick out of playing "keep away" with my family's protections, it might make me want to see your "point of view" if it didn't get served dripping with such rude distain.
As far as can transexual parents raise children well... yes. They can and do. And every single study that's even been done on GLBT parents have shown that any emotional harm caused to the children is caused by people outside the family being mean to the kids... not the GLBT parents.
(AND if you want to talk about cultures that raise fucked-up kids but are allowed to procreate with abandon, let's talk about my Catholic friends. Or... for that matter... The Mormons who are famous for turning out emotionally wrecked offspring.)
It'll be funny if/when whites aren't the majority. Think DS will say something like "all this for 42% of the population?"
a lot of people tend to gloss over that 'where all men are created equal' part of the declaration of independence
You're rigth. All men are created equal. We also have the right to equal representation. If the majority of the public doesn't want it...well there you go. If this were such an easy issue and so many people wanted it...wouldn't it just be done with. :? Situation is the majority of people don't want it.
It'll be funny if/when whites aren't the majority. Think DS will say something like "all this for 42% of the population?"
So you think gay marriage is about whites and blacks? :? It's about less that 4% of the population. Let me know when it doubles and affects 8%.
Keep talking, dude. It's quite amusing for everyone here. I assure you, everyone is getting a kick out of your idiocy. Bigotry and ignorance is a very sad thing
It'll be funny if/when whites aren't the majority. Think DS will say something like "all this for 42% of the population?"
a lot of people tend to gloss over that 'where all men are created equal' part of the declaration of independence
You're rigth. All men are created equal. We also have the right to equal representation. If the majority of the public doesn't want it...well there you go. If this were such an easy issue and so many people wanted it...wouldn't it just be done with. :? Situation is the majority of people don't want it.
It will be done with sooner or later, and bigots like you will be on the wrong side of history, just like the assholes in the south who wanted to continue with segregation.
It will be done with sooner or later, and bigots like you will be on the wrong side of history, just like the assholes in the south who wanted to continue with segregation.
So now I'm a bigot and also an idiot. Any other big boy words you want to call me? :corn: I just lay it out there. If this were such a cut and dried issue...wouldn't it already be done? Like another poster brought up...I think I should be able to marry multiple partners...man, woman, maybe another man...alll at the same time. Shouldn't that be just as recognized then? Less than 4% of the population trying to lay their will on the other 96%. Amzaing...even though the majority doesn't want it.
The George Wallace's of our time indeed. Except with technology they'll be much easier to locate.
I love how people try to align this with the black/white race issue. Last time I checked there were white, black, hispanic, native amrican, chinese, indian straight people as well as gay people in this country. How is this a race issue...unless you are inferring gay people are a separate race? :?
Well I don't think Rosie the robot has rights under the constitution, so I don't think that's relevant to same sex marriage between 2 adults who do have rights to equal protections.
The guy in the storyline thas rights under the constitution. Moreover, where in the constitution does it the government receive the right to declare marriages by the way?
Like I said, I haven't really thought about polygamy, but assuming they're consensualim not opposing it.
Did you actually answer this? I'm not sure I'm reading this wrong, or if you said you think it's ok. You seem to keep trying to hedge for some reason. Even this answer doesn't read as an answer.
As for thinking about it - why not start now? Then respond when you're finished. Answer: are you for or against legal polygamy? I mean I've asked it several times now, so I'm pretty certain you have thought about it now. Not trying to be unreasonable, just interested in your answer.
As for the tranny question - not sure if you mean transgender or transsexual, but sure they could and do. That really depends on the individual
What exactly makes a good parent to you? Do you not think a tranny (either) parent would cause a bit of developmental problems for a youngster? Why or why not?
The guy does - so if he wants to marry someone else that also has those rights, I support that. The constitution provides equal protection under the 14th amendment. The constitution also states all men are created equal, but they left robots out.
I don't oppose polygamy. As I've said, I haven't thought much about it. That's the answer I'm comfortable providing on an issue I haven't put much thought into beyond what we've discussed on here today. I hope you can accept that. If I give more thought to it and have more to say on that point I will post on here again or PM you. I will say that I'm comfortable with the concept of family evolving and people shaping it for themselves. There was a time, and in other cultures still, that the extended family took on more of a role. I see the benefit of that, hence the jokes with my friend. I imagine that will continue evolve.
A good parent is someone who provides a safe and loving home for their child, they can attach to them properly and attend to their needs, developmental and otherwise. I'm not sure if you mean transvestites or transgender, but I don't think it matters either way. I don't believe that either would make someone a bad parent as long as those other concerns are met. That goes for anyone.
Interesting issue though. What if 2 women have a civil union and one is pre-op transgender (biologically female), after their union she become biologically male - would they now be entitled to "marry?" Of if the opposite happens - a man and a woman marry, and after the fact the woman becomes biologically a male. Does that void their marriage?
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
It will be done with sooner or later, and bigots like you will be on the wrong side of history, just like the assholes in the south who wanted to continue with segregation.
So now I'm a bigot and also an idiot. Any other big boy words you want to call me? :corn: I just lay it out there. If this were such a cut and dried issue...wouldn't it already be done? Like another poster brought up...I think I should be able to marry multiple partners...man, woman, maybe another man...alll at the same time. Shouldn't that be just as recognized then? Less than 4% of the population trying to lay their will on the other 96%. Amzaing...even though the majority doesn't want it.
Nah, those two pretty much sum it up. Dude, it's happening. Civil rights issues take time. No civil rights issue has happened overnight but this is well on the way to happening.
It'll be funny if/when whites aren't the majority. Think DS will say something like "all this for 42% of the population?"
a lot of people tend to gloss over that 'where all men are created equal' part of the declaration of independence
You're rigth. All men are created equal. We also have the right to equal representation. If the majority of the public doesn't want it...well there you go. If this were such an easy issue and so many people wanted it...wouldn't it just be done with. :? Situation is the majority of people don't want it.
53% of people in this country are for gay marriage. That's up from 36% just six years ago. Not surprisingly republicans and the elderly are still fighting it.
This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
The George Wallace's of our time indeed. Except with technology they'll be much easier to locate.
I love how people try to align this with the black/white race issue. Last time I checked there were white, black, hispanic, native amrican, chinese, indian straight people as well as gay people in this country. How is this a race issue...unless you are inferring gay people are a separate race? :?
Like Cliffy said, civil rights issues don't need to involve race. You're against a segment of the country having the same rights as the majority. That a pretty obvious case of bigotry.
This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
It will be done with sooner or later, and bigots like you will be on the wrong side of history, just like the assholes in the south who wanted to continue with segregation.
So now I'm a bigot and also an idiot. Any other big boy words you want to call me? :corn: I just lay it out there. If this were such a cut and dried issue...wouldn't it already be done? Like another poster brought up...I think I should be able to marry multiple partners...man, woman, maybe another man...alll at the same time. Shouldn't that be just as recognized then? Less than 4% of the population trying to lay their will on the other 96%. Amzaing...even though the majority doesn't want it.
Nah, those two pretty much sum it up. Dude, it's happening. Civil rights issues take time. No civil rights issue has happened overnight but this is well on the way to happening.
OK. If you say so. Maybe it will and maybe it won't. If it does, I'll support it just like any other law in this country. Until that happens, I will continue to oppse it for my own reasons.
OK. If you say so. Maybe it will and maybe it won't. If it does, I'll support it just like any other law in this country. Until that happens, I will continue to oppse it for my own reasons.
OK. If you say so. Maybe it will and maybe it won't. If it does, I'll support it just like any other law in this country. Until that happens, I will continue to oppse it for my own reasons.
You support every law in this country?
Yes I do. DOesn't mean I like them, but when push comes to shove, it's the law and I abide. If the majority of people want gay marriage...so be it. I'll even give you directions to the courthouse if you want. DOesn't mean until that point I can't have an opinion, and it doesn't mean after that point I can't have an opinion either.
OK. If you say so. Maybe it will and maybe it won't. If it does, I'll support it just like any other law in this country. Until that happens, I will continue to oppse it for my own reasons.
You support every law in this country?
Yes I do. DOesn't mean I like them, but when push comes to shove, it's the law and I abide. If the majority of people want gay marriage...so be it. I'll even give you directions to the courthouse if you want. DOesn't mean until that point I can't have an opinion, and it doesn't mean after that point I can't have an opinion either.
I don't know what this means. There is a difference between supporting a law and abiding by a law.
And who's to stop it? If marriage legal definition is changed to man + man or woman + woman, why not man + woman + woman and so on. Why not man + robot? Should there be a line, and why should there be?
Why the government is becoming Webster's dictionary - I'm not sure.
OH please.
Just another bullshit, phony indignation and made-up hysteria about "changing the definition of a word."
A word that - and sorry, but you know this is true - Christians don't own, don't give a shit about and have changed the definition themselves MANY times over the ages. Marriage used to be about trading your daughter for goats. Or two further business arrangements. Or to just get rid of your daughter so you did't have to care for her anymore and selling her like a cow.
If you know the first thing about European history, you know that marriage used to mean "a life-long union" until the King of England got tired of beheading the women who didn't give him sons and created the protestant church so he could invent "divorce."
If you know about the early North American history, you know that many fat, chunky women were shipped to the colonies so they could be wives for the men who were working the land. The stouter, the better, the men needed women who could carry heavy things and handle livestock.
And if Christians really gave a shit about the "sanctity of marriage," they would be spending more time trying to make divorces harder to get, trying to shut down the drunken-marriage chapels in Vegas and they would be trying to make sure that low-income couples could afford marriage counseling. They do none of those. Certainly not with the zeal that they fight keeping my family legally below them. They sure don't pour tens of millions of dollars that they do into limiting my family's rights and protections.
Finally, seeing all those absurd subject changing arguments were used in the 60s when interracial marriage was still illegal. But more than that, it's meant as a vile slag at me and my family. Presented as a "thoughtful argument."
Saying "Do you support marriage of a man and a dog?" or "do you support a man and a robot?" is intentionally obnoxious and vicious...vile, and insulting at a very deep and personal level. It shows a desperate attempt to de-humanize my family. Reducing us to freaks who fuck their dogs or fall in love with a blow-up doll. Anything to remove the love between two people that's strong enough that they want to build a home and a life together.
And a last gasp of the people who hate us so much that they want to keep us beneath them. And for no other reason than "I don't like them and I don't want to be equal in the eyes of the law to them."
very well said. My thoughts only articulated much clearer than I could ever say.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
It'll be funny if/when whites aren't the majority. Think DS will say something like "all this for 42% of the population?"
a lot of people tend to gloss over that 'where all men are created equal' part of the declaration of independence
You're rigth. All men are created equal. We also have the right to equal representation. If the majority of the public doesn't want it...well there you go. If this were such an easy issue and so many people wanted it...wouldn't it just be done with. :? Situation is the majority of people don't want it.
uh oh...slightly more than half the population is female...making us the majority...look out :shock:
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
For the record... the majority of the country DOES want it.
Looks pretty 50/50 to me especially with the downward trend throughout the 2011 year as people realized it would cost them money.
I think you read the graph backwards. The downward trend in 2011 was for people who did not think it should be valid. The support for gay marriage rose in 2011
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
very well said. My thoughts only articulated much clearer than I could ever say.
Thanks.
I've had to say this so many times. I've had to defend myself so many times it's almost done from memory now.
Yeah, I have a very thick skin and words seldom hurt me at all. When someone asshole tries to poke at me with phrases like "alternative lifestyle" or something equally out-dated and obtuse, it just makes them look like... well, assholes.
But when you start to compare my husband to a dog or a robot... the man who has been with me through everything and supported me through it all... well, that's where I'm not going to just shrug it off.
Comments
Kind of funny that Gawker calls this out given they are based in the Caymen Islands.
SHOW COUNT: (164) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=108, US=118, CAN=15, Europe=20 ,New Zealand=4, Australia=5
Mexico=1, Colombia=1
Not sure - the robot says it is. It also says - why does it effect you and who are you to judge? Jimmy just wants to marry his robot. His robot wants to do the same. Why not let these two be wed?
I understand it's a stretch, but not really. Once this thing goes down, just wait... you'll see more and more of this.
I know you're not saying "no"... But, you're not saying "yes" to polygamists either - no offense, but you're kinda just evading that question. And I know the robot thing is a bit far-fetched, but the polygamist one is not at all.
On another subject entirely, do you think a tranny would make a good parent?
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
The guy in the storyline thas rights under the constitution. Moreover, where in the constitution does it the government receive the right to declare marriages by the way?
Did you actually answer this? I'm not sure I'm reading this wrong, or if you said you think it's ok. You seem to keep trying to hedge for some reason. Even this answer doesn't read as an answer.
As for thinking about it - why not start now? Then respond when you're finished. Answer: are you for or against legal polygamy? I mean I've asked it several times now, so I'm pretty certain you have thought about it now. Not trying to be unreasonable, just interested in your answer.
What exactly makes a good parent to you? Do you not think a tranny (either) parent would cause a bit of developmental problems for a youngster? Why or why not?
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
OH please.
Just another bullshit, phony indignation and made-up hysteria about "changing the definition of a word."
A word that - and sorry, but you know this is true - Christians don't own, don't give a shit about and have changed the definition of themselves MANY times over the ages. Marriage used to be about trading your daughter for goats. Or two further business arrangements. Or to just get rid of your daughter so you did't have to care for her anymore and selling her like a cow.
If you know the first thing about European history, you know that marriage used to mean "a life-long union" until the King of England got tired of beheading the women who didn't give him sons and created the protestant church so he could invent "divorce."
If you know about the early North American history, you know that many fat, chunky women were shipped to the colonies so they could be wives for the men who were working the land. The stouter, the better, the men needed women who could carry heavy things and handle livestock.
And if Christians really gave a shit about the "sanctity of marriage," they would be spending more time trying to make divorces harder to get, trying to shut down the drunken-marriage chapels in Vegas and they would be trying to make sure that low-income couples could afford marriage counseling. Trying to make wages higher so one parent can stay home to care for children and one can work. They do none of those. Certainly not with the zeal that they fight to keep my family legally below them. They sure don't pour the tens of millions of dollars that they do into limiting my family's rights and protections.
Finally.. all those absurd subject-changing arguments were used in the 60s when interracial marriage was still illegal. But more than that, it's meant as a vile slag at me and my family. Presented as a "thoughtful argument."
Saying "Do you support marriage of a man and a dog?" or "do you support a man and a robot?" is intentionally obnoxious and vicious...vile, and insulting at a very deep and personal level. It shows a desperate attempt to de-humanize my family. Reducing us to freaks who fuck their dogs or get themselves off with a blow-up doll. Anything to remove the love between two people that's strong enough that they want to build a home and a life together. For 20 years. Since I was 23.
The last gasp of the people who hate us so much that they will do or say ANYTHING to keep us beneath them. And for no other reason than "I don't like them and I don't want to be equal in the eyes of the law to them." Or "I want to feel special and better than SOMEONE."
Perfectly stated.
So you think gay marriage is about whites and blacks? :?
Since it's possible you don't know, calling someone "a tranny" is the equivalent of calling me a "faggot" or the first lady "a nigress." While I'm used to the gleeful disrespect that comes from people who clearly get a kick out of playing "keep away" with my family's protections, it might make me want to see your "point of view" if it didn't get served dripping with such rude distain.
As far as can transexual parents raise children well... yes. They can and do. And every single study that's even been done on GLBT parents have shown that any emotional harm caused to the children is caused by people outside the family being mean to the kids... not the GLBT parents.
(AND if you want to talk about cultures that raise fucked-up kids but are allowed to procreate with abandon, let's talk about my Catholic friends. Or... for that matter... The Mormons who are famous for turning out emotionally wrecked offspring.)
You're rigth. All men are created equal. We also have the right to equal representation. If the majority of the public doesn't want it...well there you go. If this were such an easy issue and so many people wanted it...wouldn't it just be done with. :? Situation is the majority of people don't want it.
Keep talking, dude. It's quite amusing for everyone here. I assure you, everyone is getting a kick out of your idiocy. Bigotry and ignorance is a very sad thing
It will be done with sooner or later, and bigots like you will be on the wrong side of history, just like the assholes in the south who wanted to continue with segregation.
So now I'm a bigot and also an idiot. Any other big boy words you want to call me? :corn:
I love how people try to align this with the black/white race issue. Last time I checked there were white, black, hispanic, native amrican, chinese, indian straight people as well as gay people in this country. How is this a race issue...unless you are inferring gay people are a separate race? :?
I don't oppose polygamy. As I've said, I haven't thought much about it. That's the answer I'm comfortable providing on an issue I haven't put much thought into beyond what we've discussed on here today. I hope you can accept that. If I give more thought to it and have more to say on that point I will post on here again or PM you. I will say that I'm comfortable with the concept of family evolving and people shaping it for themselves. There was a time, and in other cultures still, that the extended family took on more of a role. I see the benefit of that, hence the jokes with my friend. I imagine that will continue evolve.
A good parent is someone who provides a safe and loving home for their child, they can attach to them properly and attend to their needs, developmental and otherwise. I'm not sure if you mean transvestites or transgender, but I don't think it matters either way. I don't believe that either would make someone a bad parent as long as those other concerns are met. That goes for anyone.
Interesting issue though. What if 2 women have a civil union and one is pre-op transgender (biologically female), after their union she become biologically male - would they now be entitled to "marry?" Of if the opposite happens - a man and a woman marry, and after the fact the woman becomes biologically a male. Does that void their marriage?
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
Nah, those two pretty much sum it up. Dude, it's happening. Civil rights issues take time. No civil rights issue has happened overnight but this is well on the way to happening.
53% of people in this country are for gay marriage. That's up from 36% just six years ago. Not surprisingly republicans and the elderly are still fighting it.
Like Cliffy said, civil rights issues don't need to involve race. You're against a segment of the country having the same rights as the majority. That a pretty obvious case of bigotry.
For the record... the majority of the country DOES want it.
OK. If you say so. Maybe it will and maybe it won't. If it does, I'll support it just like any other law in this country. Until that happens, I will continue to oppse it for my own reasons.
Looks pretty 50/50 to me especially with the downward trend throughout the 2011 year as people realized it would cost them money.
You support every law in this country?
Yes I do. DOesn't mean I like them, but when push comes to shove, it's the law and I abide. If the majority of people want gay marriage...so be it. I'll even give you directions to the courthouse if you want. DOesn't mean until that point I can't have an opinion, and it doesn't mean after that point I can't have an opinion either.
I don't know what this means. There is a difference between supporting a law and abiding by a law.
Ok then, I guess I'll reword it so you can follow. I will abide by any law in this country but I don't personally support every law.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
Thanks.
I've had to say this so many times. I've had to defend myself so many times it's almost done from memory now.
Yeah, I have a very thick skin and words seldom hurt me at all. When someone asshole tries to poke at me with phrases like "alternative lifestyle" or something equally out-dated and obtuse, it just makes them look like... well, assholes.
But when you start to compare my husband to a dog or a robot... the man who has been with me through everything and supported me through it all... well, that's where I'm not going to just shrug it off.