Anyone who opposes gay marriage is a bigot, plain and simple. They can hide behind some BS bible shit all they want, but it all comes down to them being a bigot. Two dudes getting married has absolutely no impact on anyone elses lives or marriage. No one should be treated like a second class citizen.
Obama is talking to Robin Roberts this afternoon about it. Come on, be a man and do what's right and set an example.
Anyone who opposes gay marriage is a bigot, plain and simple. They can hide behind some BS bible shit all they want, but it all comes down to them being a bigot. Two dudes getting married has absolutely no impact on anyone elses lives or marriage. No one should be treated like a second class citizen.
Obama is talking to Robin Roberts this afternoon about it. Come on, be a man and do what's right and set an example.
And spare me the defintion bullshit.
Agree 100% No different than people that were against integration or different races marrying.
This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
Anyone who opposes gay marriage is a bigot, plain and simple. They can hide behind some BS bible shit all they want, but it all comes down to them being a bigot. Two dudes getting married has absolutely no impact on anyone elses lives or marriage. No one should be treated like a second class citizen.
Obama is talking to Robin Roberts this afternoon about it. Come on, be a man and do what's right and set an example.
And spare me the defintion bullshit.
Agree 100% No different than people that were against integration or different races marrying.
Absolutely. Seperate but equal was a law and has a definition but that sure as fuck doesn't make it right.
it's hilarious...since some people won't admit they're ignorant bigots, they bring up the definition of marriage as a defense of restricting people's rights...is 2012 or 1812? of course, if we're talking about the south, then maybe it is 1812 :roll:
it's hilarious...since some people won't admit they're ignorant bigots, they bring up the definition of marriage as a defense of restricting people's rights...is 2012 or 1812? of course, if we're talking about the south, then maybe it is 1812 :roll:
Bingo
And it's even more hilarious that some talk about love and loving everyone in pretty much every post, yet want to restrict a group of people from expressing their love. Quite hypocritical if you ask me.
People opposed clearly do not want a gay union to be called 'marriage'. It is not marriage by definition nor history.
This based in the tradition of the word marriage and what it has
meant for thousands of years, for billions of participants.
Most protecters of the union of marriage do not oppose rights being equal
or that there is a union
it is obvious there are many unions and gay is here to stay.
Gay people can not marry because of the fact they are the same sex.
By definition and now by law which could expand unfortunately because
of the definition and history of marriage.
But a new word a new amendment can bring equality to the unions to end this.
It will not be called marriage but will be called _ _ _ _ _ _
with the same legal rights and may, in my opinion, more than likely,
out number 'marriages' in the distant future.
Those wanting the traditional marriage union, that was created long ago,
to stay intact, it does
as gay couples move forward with a new life, a new word,
a new union with the same rights as all.
If the haters still hate that is their problem ...so be it....
there are more lovers than haters.
I would much prefer for homosexuals to have the right to marry than for bigots to have the right to procreate.
+1
that bigotry is passed down and it is generational. and it is TAUGHT. we are not born thinking the way we do. being a bigot is not biological... it is socialized...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
it's so tragic that in a world so full of hate that ignorance continues to make people do hurtful things ... it's a fucking word ... people are hiding their prejudice behind semantics ...
:fp: They allow that but don't allow civil unions??
Also, I can't believe states allow cousins to marry each other.
Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
People opposed clearly do not want a gay union to be called 'marriage'. It is not marriage by definition nor history.
This based in the tradition of the word marriage and what it has
meant for thousands of years, for billions of participants.
Most protecters of the union of marriage do not oppose rights being equal
or that there is a union
it is obvious there are many unions and gay is here to stay.
Gay people can not marry because of the fact they are the same sex.
By definition and now by law which could expand unfortunately because
of the definition and history of marriage.
But a new word a new amendment can bring equality to the unions to end this.
It will not be called marriage but will be called _ _ _ _ _ _
with the same legal rights and may, in my opinion, more than likely,
out number 'marriages' in the distant future.
Those wanting the traditional marriage union, that was created long ago,
to stay intact, it does
as gay couples move forward with a new life, a new word,
a new union with the same rights as all.
If the haters still hate that is their problem ...so be it....
there are more lovers than haters.
This still does not come close to answering the question of how your or anyone elses marriage is fucked up by two dudes marrying each other.
it is not just a word obviously :fp:
What is the problem with a new word, a new amendment, granting equal rights to gay unions?
would this not speed everything up ...
this a great approach that even our current administration could enact.
Our President satisfies those who want the traditional definition that has been around
for thousands of years
while moving the gay rights into place and setting an example for equality.
It is a word of the future that will embrace future love and families!
Groovy-cool!
Anyone who opposes gay marriage is a bigot, plain and simple.
I don't think so entirely. I think there are some really good people out there that have never been exposed to the issue. When a vote comes up, they don't really understand and they only go off what they know in their own lives.
I think ignorance is a big problem when it comes to many issues.
it is not just a word obviously :fp:
What is the problem with a new word, a new amendment, granting equal rights to gay unions?
would this not speed everything up ...
this a great approach that even our current administration could enact.
Our President satisfies those who want the traditional definition that has been around
for thousands of years
while moving the gay rights into place and setting an example for equality.
It is a word of the future that will embrace future love and families!
Groovy-cool!
Great idea. Let's call it a second class marriage. That way bigots can be happy that gay people aren't allowed to express their love in the same way they are. You're a genius, I tell you. You figured it out.
People opposed clearly do not want a gay union to be called 'marriage'. It is not marriage by definition nor history.
This based in the tradition of the word marriage and what it has
meant for thousands of years, for billions of participants.
Most protecters of the union of marriage do not oppose rights being equal
or that there is a union
it is obvious there are many unions and gay is here to stay.
Gay people can not marry because of the fact they are the same sex.
By definition and now by law which could expand unfortunately because
of the definition and history of marriage.
But a new word a new amendment can bring equality to the unions to end this.
It will not be called marriage but will be called _ _ _ _ _ _
with the same legal rights and may, in my opinion, more than likely,
out number 'marriages' in the distant future.
Those wanting the traditional marriage union, that was created long ago,
to stay intact, it does
as gay couples move forward with a new life, a new word,
a new union with the same rights as all.
If the haters still hate that is their problem ...so be it....
there are more lovers than haters.
This still does not come close to answering the question of how your or anyone elses marriage is fucked up by two dudes marrying each other.
Slavery was once a tradition...
:? Poor analogy unless you think marriage is owning another human being.
Marriage is the union of a man and woman has been since the beginning... why is was created
it is tradition and history and changing that is obviously a problem for many.
So why not find a solution for all not just some.
What happened yesterday and we may see more,
is the people saying they want to keep marriage traditional out of respect for the union.
They do not want marriage to change.
So create a new union, a new word, grant equality and move on.
Please don't talk about prejudice because your posts have been the best example of just that.
I would like to see resolution not further discourse. I would like to see
my friends united with equal rights in a union all there own.
I would like to see this as an example for the rest of the world in the future....
now.
:? Poor analogy unless you think marriage is owning another human being.
Marriage is the union of a man and woman has been since the beginning... why is was created
it is tradition and history and changing that is obviously a problem for many.
So why not find a solution for all not just some.
What happened yesterday and we may see more,
is the people saying they want to keep marriage traditional out of respect for the union.
They do not want marriage to change.
So create a new union, a new word, grant equality and move on.
Please don't talk about prejudice because your posts have been the best example of just that.
I would like to see resolution not further discourse. I would like to see
my friends united with equal rights in a union all there own.
I would like to see this as an example for the rest of the world in the future....
now.
it will only be equal when it is called the same.. gay or straight. by labelling gay marriage simply as a union or whatever stigmatises it as unequal. that somehow because youre gay your union isnt on a par with straight marriage. giving it its own name doesnt change the benign bigotry expressed in the label.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Please don't talk about prejudice because your posts have been the best example of just that.
I am perfectly fine with being prejudice of intolerant people. If I am intolerant towards intolerance, so fucking be it and it's actually something I am proud of.
I can't be bothered with the rest. All groups of people regardless of sex, race or religion should have the EXACT same rights and freedoms. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and if marrying (not some bullshit made up word to satisfy bigots, yes, bigots) is your pursuit of happiness, then gay people have the right to marry just as straight do.
I cannot conceivably understand how this is an argument in 2012.
It isn't equal. That's the point it's different. Clearly.
but it should be. thats the point. if i want to marry my lover and they happen to have a vagina then as a ctiizen with equal rights i should be allowed to.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Comments
Godfather.
Obama is talking to Robin Roberts this afternoon about it. Come on, be a man and do what's right and set an example.
And spare me the defintion bullshit.
Agree 100% No different than people that were against integration or different races marrying.
Absolutely. Seperate but equal was a law and has a definition but that sure as fuck doesn't make it right.
Godfather.
Bingo
And it's even more hilarious that some talk about love and loving everyone in pretty much every post, yet want to restrict a group of people from expressing their love. Quite hypocritical if you ask me.
It is not marriage by definition nor history.
This based in the tradition of the word marriage and what it has
meant for thousands of years, for billions of participants.
Most protecters of the union of marriage do not oppose rights being equal
or that there is a union
it is obvious there are many unions and gay is here to stay.
Gay people can not marry because of the fact they are the same sex.
By definition and now by law which could expand unfortunately because
of the definition and history of marriage.
But a new word a new amendment can bring equality to the unions to end this.
It will not be called marriage but will be called _ _ _ _ _ _
with the same legal rights and may, in my opinion, more than likely,
out number 'marriages' in the distant future.
Those wanting the traditional marriage union, that was created long ago,
to stay intact, it does
as gay couples move forward with a new life, a new word,
a new union with the same rights as all.
If the haters still hate that is their problem ...so be it....
there are more lovers than haters.
No need to plead the 5th. We know where you stand on "that gay stuff". My opinion of you is above.
can we see ourselves in each other? :?
that bigotry is passed down and it is generational. and it is TAUGHT. we are not born thinking the way we do. being a bigot is not biological... it is socialized...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/hum ... cousi.aspx
check out polaris's post on the bottom of page 9 and read it. it is marriage by definition. it's in black and white.
and history should define how we act in the present only if that is an act of change.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Also, I can't believe states allow cousins to marry each other.
"Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
This still does not come close to answering the question of how your or anyone elses marriage is fucked up by two dudes marrying each other.
Slavery was once a tradition...
What is the problem with a new word, a new amendment, granting equal rights to gay unions?
would this not speed everything up ...
this a great approach that even our current administration could enact.
Our President satisfies those who want the traditional definition that has been around
for thousands of years
while moving the gay rights into place and setting an example for equality.
It is a word of the future that will embrace future love and families!
Groovy-cool!
god speed ...
I don't think so entirely. I think there are some really good people out there that have never been exposed to the issue. When a vote comes up, they don't really understand and they only go off what they know in their own lives.
I think ignorance is a big problem when it comes to many issues.
Translation=what will get me the most votes.
Nice leadership
http://gma.yahoo.com/timeline-obamas-ev ... itics.html
yup
Great idea. Let's call it a second class marriage. That way bigots can be happy that gay people aren't allowed to express their love in the same way they are. You're a genius, I tell you. You figured it out.
Marriage is the union of a man and woman has been since the beginning...
why is was created
it is tradition and history and changing that is obviously a problem for many.
So why not find a solution for all not just some.
What happened yesterday and we may see more,
is the people saying they want to keep marriage traditional out of respect for the union.
They do not want marriage to change.
So create a new union, a new word, grant equality and move on.
Please don't talk about prejudice because your posts have been the best example of just that.
I would like to see resolution not further discourse. I would like to see
my friends united with equal rights in a union all there own.
I would like to see this as an example for the rest of the world in the future....
now.
it will only be equal when it is called the same.. gay or straight. by labelling gay marriage simply as a union or whatever stigmatises it as unequal. that somehow because youre gay your union isnt on a par with straight marriage. giving it its own name doesnt change the benign bigotry expressed in the label.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Treat under law with same rights... I'm for that.
I am perfectly fine with being prejudice of intolerant people. If I am intolerant towards intolerance, so fucking be it and it's actually something I am proud of.
I can't be bothered with the rest. All groups of people regardless of sex, race or religion should have the EXACT same rights and freedoms. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and if marrying (not some bullshit made up word to satisfy bigots, yes, bigots) is your pursuit of happiness, then gay people have the right to marry just as straight do.
I cannot conceivably understand how this is an argument in 2012.
but it should be. thats the point. if i want to marry my lover and they happen to have a vagina then as a ctiizen with equal rights i should be allowed to.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say