Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The text of the Texas GOP platform forthrightly states that the Party opposethe legalization of sodomy and says that homosexual behavior is contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have been ordained by God, recognized by our countrys founders, and shared by the majority of Texans.
Read more: Texas GOP platform endorses anti-sodomy laws, other controversial positions | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
the GOP platform there also seeks to turn back the clock and return to a pre-Lawrence authoritarian utopia:
The 2010 GOP platform in Texas supports laws that criminalize sodomy and suggests that straight people who support same-sex marriage should be penalized with jail time. The GOP platform was quoted as openly stating:
We oppose the legalization of sodomy. We demand that Congress exercise its authority granted by the U.S. constitution to withhold jurisdiction from the federal courts from cases involving sodomy, the GOP platform reads. Meaning that even though the U.S. Supreme Court overturned sodomy laws last decade (ironically in a case that stemmed from Texas), Texas Republicans would like the state to have the power to criminalize LGBT folks for having sex.
Montana Republicans Believe in Things, too | Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee
Oh. Well I'm not sure a party platform constitutes your declaration that "Texas and Montana are reinstating criminalization of homosexuality," but I do disagree with the Texas GOP. There are all sorts of things that show up in party platforms which do not become law. However, I certainly would not vote for any Republican in Texas that didn't publicly speak out against this bit of idiocy.
Do you plan to keep blaming "Christians" in such a broad brush way? Seems to me the blame here belongs on GOP idiots.
Queers shouldn't be wetting their panties:
The United States legalized sodomy in 2003, so anything done on the state lever really doesn't threaten the Supreme Court decision Lawrence v Texas.
The text of the Texas GOP platform forthrightly states that the Party opposethe legalization of sodomy and says that homosexual behavior is contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have been ordained by God, recognized by our countrys founders, and shared by the majority of Texans.
Read more: Texas GOP platform endorses anti-sodomy laws, other controversial positions | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment
the GOP platform there also seeks to turn back the clock and return to a pre-Lawrence authoritarian utopia:
The 2010 GOP platform in Texas supports laws that criminalize sodomy and suggests that straight people who support same-sex marriage should be penalized with jail time. The GOP platform was quoted as openly stating:
We oppose the legalization of sodomy. We demand that Congress exercise its authority granted by the U.S. constitution to withhold jurisdiction from the federal courts from cases involving sodomy, the GOP platform reads. Meaning that even though the U.S. Supreme Court overturned sodomy laws last decade (ironically in a case that stemmed from Texas), Texas Republicans would like the state to have the power to criminalize LGBT folks for having sex.
Montana Republicans Believe in Things, too | Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee
Oh. Well I'm not sure a party platform constitutes your declaration that "Texas and Montana are reinstating criminalization of homosexuality," but I do disagree with the Texas GOP. There are all sorts of things that show up in party platforms which do not become law. However, I certainly would not vote for any Republican in Texas that didn't publicly speak out against this bit of idiocy.
Do you plan to keep blaming "Christians" in such a broad brush way? Seems to me the blame here belongs on GOP idiots.
As long as CHristians organize in large numbers to defeat marriage equality, for example, or to reinstitute criminalization for homosexuality, I will make a note of that.
I also am aware that the majority of people who have posted on this thread do not fall into that category.
Oh. Well I'm not sure a party platform constitutes your declaration that "Texas and Montana are reinstating criminalization of homosexuality," but I do disagree with the Texas GOP. There are all sorts of things that show up in party platforms which do not become law. However, I certainly would not vote for any Republican in Texas that didn't publicly speak out against this bit of idiocy.
Do you plan to keep blaming "Christians" in such a broad brush way? Seems to me the blame here belongs on GOP idiots.
As long as CHristians organize in large numbers to defeat marriage equality, for example, or to reinstitute criminalization for homosexuality, I will make a note of that.
That is fair. It is unfair for you to broadbrush all Christians and/or Republicans for the acts of this specific group of idiots.
I also am aware that the majority of people who have posted on this thread do not fall into that category.
Then why the continued use of your broadbrush smear? I think you enjoy the taunt more than you wish to be productive.
Who do you think stands a better chance at changing the minds of conservatives? A howling liberal smearing or a fellow conservative making a salient point?
I've traveled to India, Nepal, Thailand and Korea. What I am specifically addressing, is the LDS and Catholic Church's activism in defeating marriage equality in California. That directly impacted my life.
Not being supportive of marriage equality does not equate to hating homosexuals or being homophobic.
To me, marriage is a rite of the church. I do not think anyone except the church should be involved in the rite of marriage. That means if a church is "gay friendly" and wants to marry homosexuals, it should have every right to do so.
That is why I am for the idea of "civil unions". I realize it is just semantics, but to me, it leaves marriage in the church and allows the state to treat every citizen equally.
Immie
Simply not true....once you admit that, we can speak honestly on the issue.
Of course, it would mean that all couples would get a 'civil union', meaning marriage would become a purely spiritual bond.That is why I am for the idea of "civil unions". I realize it is just semantics, but to me, it leaves marriage in the church and allows the state to treat every citizen equally.
That way, you can get married at your "straights-only" church, and LGBTs can get married at a "LGBT-friendly" church...because we're all equal under the law.
Right?
Not being supportive of marriage equality does not equate to hating homosexuals or being homophobic.
To me, marriage is a rite of the church. I do not think anyone except the church should be involved in the rite of marriage. That means if a church is "gay friendly" and wants to marry homosexuals, it should have every right to do so.
That is why I am for the idea of "civil unions". I realize it is just semantics, but to me, it leaves marriage in the church and allows the state to treat every citizen equally.
Immie
Simply not true....once you admit that, we can speak honestly on the issue.
You are full of shit. Just because someone does not support gay marriage, does not mean they hate gay people. I believe the state should treat both gay and straight equally. I support your right to get married in any church that will marry you. In the mean time, the state should sanction civil unions for all and stay out of the religious field.
You seem to hate everyone that does not give in to you. I feel so sorry for you. Once you admit that the state has no business being involved in religious rites, we can have an hones discussion. Until then, your hatred of those who will not bow down to your cause will always be in the way.
You talk of Christians hating you? You should look in the damned mirror.
Immie
Simply not true....once you admit that, we can speak honestly on the issue.
You are full of shit. Just because someone does not support gay marriage, does not mean they hate gay people. I believe the state should treat both gay and straight equally. I support your right to get married in any church that will marry you. In the mean time, the state should sanction civil unions for all and stay out of the religious field.
You seem to hate everyone that does not give in to you. I feel so sorry for you. Once you admit that the state has no business being involved in religious rites, we can have an hones discussion. Until then, your hatred of those who will not bow down to your cause will always be in the way.
You talk of Christians hating you? You should look in the damned mirror.
Immie
I'm going to come to bodecea's aid here because she is only openly lesbian poster I know of at USMB.
You have'nt walked in her shoes. You have no idea what crap she's had to put up with.
Maybe you could extend some of that Christian love and acceptance to people who have been hurt by Christian anti-gay activists. You never know who's been the victim of a hate crime.
Just a thought.
You are full of shit. Just because someone does not support gay marriage, does not mean they hate gay people. I believe the state should treat both gay and straight equally. I support your right to get married in any church that will marry you. In the mean time, the state should sanction civil unions for all and stay out of the religious field.
You seem to hate everyone that does not give in to you. I feel so sorry for you. Once you admit that the state has no business being involved in religious rites, we can have an hones discussion. Until then, your hatred of those who will not bow down to your cause will always be in the way.
You talk of Christians hating you? You should look in the damned mirror.
Immie
I'm going to come to bodecea's aid here because she is only openly lesbian poster I know of at USMB.
You have'nt walked in her shoes. You have no idea what crap she's had to put up with.
Maybe you could extend some of that Christian love and acceptance to people who have been hurt by Christian anti-gay activists. You never know who's been the victim of a hate crime.
Just a thought.
I have tried before, but every time I do, I get slapped in the face by her.
I have tried to come up with a workable solution to the issue. I have not once stated that she should not be able to be married in a church that will marry her. Unfortunately, she is not happy with that. It seems she believes that every church must submit to accepting gay marriage. That may come eventually, but it is not going to happen by force.
Immie
have you seen this thread yet?I'm going to come to bodecea's aid here because she is only openly lesbian poster I know of at USMB.
You have'nt walked in her shoes. You have no idea what crap she's had to put up with.
Maybe you could extend some of that Christian love and acceptance to people who have been hurt by Christian anti-gay activists. You never know who's been the victim of a hate crime.
Just a thought.
I have tried before, but every time I do, I get slapped in the face by her.
I have tried to come up with a workable solution to the issue. I have not once stated that she should not be able to be married in a church that will marry her. Unfortunately, she is not happy with that. It seems she believes that every church must submit to accepting gay marriage. That may come eventually, but it is not going to happen by force.
Immie
Bodecea is interested in civil marriage equality. that's what I read in her posts. What are the churches doing messing around with civil law? They can choose to marry whoever they like.
bodecea can speak for herself but I see no evidence that she believes every church must submit to accepting gay marriage.
Oh. Well I'm not sure a party platform constitutes your declaration that "Texas and Montana are reinstating criminalization of homosexuality," but I do disagree with the Texas GOP. There are all sorts of things that show up in party platforms which do not become law. However, I certainly would not vote for any Republican in Texas that didn't publicly speak out against this bit of idiocy.
Do you plan to keep blaming "Christians" in such a broad brush way? Seems to me the blame here belongs on GOP idiots.
Queers shouldn't be wetting their panties:
The United States legalized sodomy in 2003, so anything done on the state lever really doesn't threaten the Supreme Court decision Lawrence v Texas.
Agreed, but the GOP platform calls on Congress enact legislation nullifying the federal government's authority in this area.
It's hardly the same as "Texas is recriminalizing homosexuality," but it is a significant perspective.
have you seen this thread yet?I have tried before, but every time I do, I get slapped in the face by her.
I have tried to come up with a workable solution to the issue. I have not once stated that she should not be able to be married in a church that will marry her. Unfortunately, she is not happy with that. It seems she believes that every church must submit to accepting gay marriage. That may come eventually, but it is not going to happen by force.
Immie
Bodecea is interested in civil marriage equality. that's what I read in her posts. What are the churches doing messing around with civil law? They can choose to marry whoever they like.
bodecea can speak for herself but I see no evidence that she believes every church must submit to accepting gay marriage.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-government-be-in-the-marriage-business.html
check it out, it might just shock you
have you seen this thread yet?I have tried before, but every time I do, I get slapped in the face by her.
I have tried to come up with a workable solution to the issue. I have not once stated that she should not be able to be married in a church that will marry her. Unfortunately, she is not happy with that. It seems she believes that every church must submit to accepting gay marriage. That may come eventually, but it is not going to happen by force.
Immie
Bodecea is interested in civil marriage equality. that's what I read in her posts. What are the churches doing messing around with civil law? They can choose to marry whoever they like.
bodecea can speak for herself but I see no evidence that she believes every church must submit to accepting gay marriage.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-government-be-in-the-marriage-business.html
check it out, it might just shock you
You are full of shit. Just because someone does not support gay marriage, does not mean they hate gay people. I believe the state should treat both gay and straight equally. I support your right to get married in any church that will marry you. In the mean time, the state should sanction civil unions for all and stay out of the religious field.
You seem to hate everyone that does not give in to you. I feel so sorry for you. Once you admit that the state has no business being involved in religious rites, we can have an hones discussion. Until then, your hatred of those who will not bow down to your cause will always be in the way.
You talk of Christians hating you? You should look in the damned mirror.
Immie
I'm going to come to bodecea's aid here because she is only openly lesbian poster I know of at USMB.
You have'nt walked in her shoes. You have no idea what crap she's had to put up with.
Maybe you could extend some of that Christian love and acceptance to people who have been hurt by Christian anti-gay activists. You never know who's been the victim of a hate crime.
Just a thought.
I have tried before, but every time I do, I get slapped in the face by her.
I have tried to come up with a workable solution to the issue. I have not once stated that she should not be able to be married in a church that will marry her. Unfortunately, she is not happy with that. It seems she believes that every church must submit to accepting gay marriage. That may come eventually, but it is not going to happen by force.
Immie
thats why i said "might"have you seen this thread yet?Bodecea is interested in civil marriage equality. that's what I read in her posts. What are the churches doing messing around with civil law? They can choose to marry whoever they like.
bodecea can speak for herself but I see no evidence that she believes every church must submit to accepting gay marriage.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-government-be-in-the-marriage-business.html
check it out, it might just shock you
What exactly is it you think I'd be shocked by?
did i address that to you?have you seen this thread yet?Bodecea is interested in civil marriage equality. that's what I read in her posts. What are the churches doing messing around with civil law? They can choose to marry whoever they like.
bodecea can speak for herself but I see no evidence that she believes every church must submit to accepting gay marriage.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-government-be-in-the-marriage-business.html
check it out, it might just shock you
A thread where I have not one post. Your point would be?
thats why i said "might"have you seen this thread yet?
http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-government-be-in-the-marriage-business.html
check it out, it might just shock you
What exactly is it you think I'd be shocked by?
Not being supportive of marriage equality does not equate to hating homosexuals or being homophobic.
To me, marriage is a rite of the church. I do not think anyone except the church should be involved in the rite of marriage. That means if a church is "gay friendly" and wants to marry homosexuals, it should have every right to do so.
That is why I am for the idea of "civil unions". I realize it is just semantics, but to me, it leaves marriage in the church and allows the state to treat every citizen equally.
Immie
Simply not true....once you admit that, we can speak honestly on the issue.
You are full of shit. Just because someone does not support gay marriage, does not mean they hate gay people. I believe the state should treat both gay and straight equally. I support your right to get married in any church that will marry you. In the mean time, the state should sanction civil unions for all and stay out of the religious field.
You seem to hate everyone that does not give in to you. I feel so sorry for you. Once you admit that the state has no business being involved in religious rites, we can have an honest discussion. Until then, your hatred of those who will not bow down to your cause will always be in the way.
You talk of Christians hating you? You should look in the damned mirror.
Immie
Oh. Well I'm not sure a party platform constitutes your declaration that "Texas and Montana are reinstating criminalization of homosexuality," but I do disagree with the Texas GOP. There are all sorts of things that show up in party platforms which do not become law. However, I certainly would not vote for any Republican in Texas that didn't publicly speak out against this bit of idiocy.
Do you plan to keep blaming "Christians" in such a broad brush way? Seems to me the blame here belongs on GOP idiots.
Queers shouldn't be wetting their panties:
The United States legalized sodomy in 2003, so anything done on the state lever really doesn't threaten the Supreme Court decision Lawrence v Texas.
Agreed, but the GOP platform calls on Congress enact legislation nullifying the federal government's authority in this area.
It's hardly the same as "Texas is recriminalizing homosexuality," but it is a significant perspective.
I'm going to come to bodecea's aid here because she is only openly lesbian poster I know of at USMB.
You have'nt walked in her shoes. You have no idea what crap she's had to put up with.
..cock-blocked again.......<<<sigh>>>.....well, I guess I sould have known when she refused the pina colada I bought for her, and she began doing tequilla shooters.there are a lot of both conservatives and Christians in that thread that are saying that the government should give equal treatment to gay couplesthats why i said "might"What exactly is it you think I'd be shocked by?
Why don't you just spit it out instead of making me 'guess' what might have been shocking?
