You fail to understand the function of a constitutional republic. It does not work in the same way as a pure democracy. I see that you are essentially unfamiliar with the checks/balances of the U.S. system of government, and your posts illustrate that lack of information.
Law ain't going to force anyone's church to perform ceremonies for anyone they don't want to.
Elena's still miserable about all of that wanton anal sex. Don't reckon there's much can be done for her about it.
?
Welcome to Britain...
Is it a traditional American way of holding a debate: mouthing off for your opponent?
LOL, when are you gay marriage advocates going to realize that normal people don't think like you? When the most liberal state in the union shot it down last year, you should have taken your hint and cut your losses.
Strictly speaking, the "religious right" cannot, by definition, be radical.That is the problem. "An ancient institution" needs not to be changed at all. Churches and preachers can deny marrying gay people all they want, as it is a religious thing. If the gays want to get married in a church.. start your own church or find a preacher/church that is open to such things!
Now the legal aspect of marriage is not a religious thing. This has to do with taxes, inheritance and so on and that is all civilian law... heck even marriage is that these days too.. you need a licence for example and can skip the whole church thing if you want.
But the debate in the US (like it was in Europe) has been hijacked by especially the radical religious right and together with the radical gay movement, it has turned into something that it, it is in reality not.
I don't believe that gays being allowed to marry will impact me, at all. That's why I have a libertarian stance on the matter. The only people who DO seem to care about it a great deal seem to spend a significant amount of their time fixated on anuses. I find that rather creepy. :shrug:
I do not think it is a matter of people liking or disliking gays. Its a matter of wanting marriage to remain exclusively between one man and one woman.
I belive I already answered that. If they do not represent the majority of the society of your country, the society has the right to decide what to do about them. What is your point?
In other words, those that support same sex marriage are actually in the minority, on the fringe, and happen to be the ones who actually fixate on anuses.
Marriage is not now and has never been a "basic human right" and Loving v. Virginia did not make it so. It ruled, very specifically, that marriage could not be denied to otherwise legal applicants on the basis of race.
Which is to say, believing that only heterosexuals are fit to raise children and that only heterosexuals deserve to be able to legally designate their next of kin. That sounds very suspiciously like having a serious dislike of people who are not heterosexuals, especially when all available scientific evidence contradicts the first point.
I just dont get it to be honest.
On one hand the US prides it self on freedom, liberty, equal rights and so on, and with the other hand it denies the very same thing to a minority of its population...
I guess soon we will see segregation laws proposed again in some states..
exactly. thanks.That is the problem. "An ancient institution" needs not to be changed at all. Churches and preachers can deny marrying gay people all they want, as it is a religious thing. If the gays want to get married in a church.. start your own church or find a preacher/church that is open to such things!
Now the legal aspect of marriage is not a religious thing. This has to do with taxes, inheritance and so on and that is all civilian law... heck even marriage is that these days too.. you need a licence for example and can skip the whole church thing if you want.
But the debate in the US (like it was in Europe) has been hijacked by especially the radical religious right and together with the radical gay movement, it has turned into something that it, it is in reality not.
So, in your opinion its the people who exist to service a state: government institutions and officials (government, courts, police, army) who should empose their will on the said public by means of laws that do not represent the interests of the majority of the society? Is that so? Is that what America is about? Where is democracy coming into play?
So those who disprove of polygamous marriages dislike traditional Mormons or any other group of people who engage in polygamous marriages?
Someone disapproves of single people being able to adopt kids so that must mean they hate single people...
... or someone disapproves on non-seniors getting a seniors discount then that person must dislike people under 60?
Because the court concluded that marriage is a basic human right. That was the entire foundation of the "Loving" decision.
Because the court concluded that marriage is a basic human right. That was the entire foundation of the "Loving" decision.
Do I have to answer your little "I don't know what objection I can come up with, so I will just pretend to be slow on the uptake"?
Am I? Thank you, o, Septic Peg, for clarifying it for me!
Is it a traditional American way of holding a debate: mouthing off for your opponent?
I voted NO which is to say I voted YES for allowing gay marriage.
And I wonder how many people did not vote as they wished to simply because the question was worded confusingly. Intentionally, I am sure.
Also, ads were all over the T.V. trying to persuade people that their kids were going to be taught deviant things from kindergarten, onward if the law remained intact. I say Hurray for Mainers that so many people saw their way through the morass of misinformation and came out 47% for tolerance.
You ignored the rest of my post.
Can you please explain how marriage can be a "basic human right" when it is routinely denied on all of the grounds I listed in the post you are replying to?
Just goes to show no one can legislate loves and hatreds. Gays are repulsive no matter how who says or does what. Women dressing like men and men in little dresses is vulgar in every direction. The very fact (FACT) that they are biologically and mentally screwed has to serve to keep them separate from the normal humans all over the world. Homosexuality is punishible by death in many countries and justifyably so.
Just goes to show no one can legislate loves and hatreds. Gays are repulsive no matter how who says or does what. Women dressing like men and men in little dresses is vulgar in every direction. The very fact (FACT) that they are biologically and mentally screwed has to serve to keep them separate from the normal humans all over the world. Homosexuality is punishible by death in many countries and justifyably so.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?