Hello conservative right wingers:

Why do you deny the happiness, that you yourself enjoy, from your fellow citizens? Isn't doing that UN Christianlike???? I think it IS!!!

You are bad and wrong for doing that. Tell my why you're not.

excon

excon

Hello tom and Steve:

Sorry, fellas. You are still looking at this issue through the prism of your church... I am looking at it through the prism of the Constitution. I am right.

If we were talking about RELIGION, then your arguments have merit. But, we're NOT talking about religion. We're talking about CIVIL RIGHTS!!!

To wit:

Tom you see marriage defined as between a man and a woman. To me, that's a RELIGIOUS viewpoint.

I see marriage as an event the state recognizes and grants rights to the married. That's a secular viewpoint.

Steve, you see a homosexual marriage as unequal, I suppose because they can't propagate. That a religious viewpoint.

I see marriage as a bond between two people, and whether they can propagate or not, isn't an issue. That's a secular viewpoint.

You cannot force your religious values on people. It's UNAMERICAN. It's an anethema to the American way. It's UNCONSTITUTIONAL. It ain't right. And, it ain't gonna fly.

excon

tomder55

it aint gonna fly ? unless the courts do another imperial fiat and force cultural change on the country then it will fly.
The fact is that everywhere it has been put to the ballot ;gay marriage has been voted down ....even in the bluest of blue states California.

excon

Hello again, tom:

As I've said many times on these pages, the majority cannot vote out the civil rights of the minority.

Even in the blue states, where the RED stated Mormon church spent zillions to pass the proposition. I wonder why they did that if it WASN'T a religious issue.

Nope, the civil rights of the oppressed WILL be recognized. This is a GREAT country, where even though it might take a while, we DO recognize our core values. Those values are ones of INCLUSION - not exclusion as you would have it be. I dunno where you get that exclusion stuff.

I have every confidence that Obama WILL appoint Supreme Court Justices who will rectify this wrong. We shall overcome.

excon

PS> Fiat???? Tom, you CAN read where it says ALL, can't you??? Bwa, ha ha ha.

speechlesstx

I intentionally omitted the church in my position, someone else injected the church into this, not me. But since those rights you mentioned are endowed by our Creator as defined by the founders I suppose it is appropriate to consider the religious view on this, right? But since you’ve backed away from justifying your position based on the Declaration, at least show us exactly in the constitution guarantees the right to gay marriage since I must have missed that somewhere. The people in California have spoken, what is the constitutional basis for overturning their will?

What I stated is simply a fact. It is entirely impossible for a gay marriage to be equal to heterosexual marriage, they may both be “a bond between two people” but they cannot be equal, in procreation, sexually, emotionally or otherwise. Face it, men and women are different, marriage is historically, traditionally, predominantly between a man and a woman for good reason and calling it something else doesn’t change that.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

Do you want me to give you the "Constitution doesn't list rights" lecture again? Nahh, we're going round in circles.

Good thing Obama is going to fix it. But, I'll bet the California Supreme Court will fix it first.

excon

speechlesstx

I knew we would just go around in circles right off the bat. We'll see what the courts do soon enough I'm sure.

tomder55

ex : recommended reading :
Amazon.com: The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (American Politics and Political Economy Series): Gerald N. Rosenberg: Books

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's 2003 gay marriage decision led to over 30 States taking it to the ballot and approving bans . Gerald Rosenberg in the book above correctly argues that judical fiat in fact sets back the social change that was sought by the decision.

Civil unions on the other hand are supported by the majority because it is a reasonable solution.
Polls: Gay civil unions favored - Same-Sex Marriage - MSNBC.com

You claim it is our religion that is the problem ;but it seems to me that you are the absolutist .
Maybe when the populace becomes "more enlightened " then support will grow .But for now the political waters have been tested and the country isn't there yet.

excon

Hello again, tom:

Well, me and my pink tighted friends are gonna see if we can't coax it along.

excon

xoxaprilwine

I think I heard my brother say...the reason why they had multiple wives...is because men are pigs! - He said it not me So I couldn't agree more.

talaniman

Eventually gay marriage will have equal protection under the law, as we well know, nothing changes until the oppressed, or the minority, have raised enough hell. Thats been true of every rights movement in history. It looks as if the gay marriage folks have escalated to invading churches. Good for them. Wonder whats next??? Is denying them a piece of paper, and a few tax breaks, worth holding on to some outdated traditions??