Down goes DOMA!!

[Vandalshandle]

In reading these threads, I note that many on the Right focus on how disgusting homosexual acts are. This is interesting, because these acts have absolutely nothing to do with gay marriage. These acts have been going on, and will continue to go on, with or without gay marriage. The question then should focus on if consenting adults who are not breaking any laws should be denied the opportunity to formalize their relationship for legal purposes. The answer appears to be "No, because they perform disgusting acts", (from the Right). Well, I have news for you. My wife and I had performed some of the same acts. Does that mean that we should not have been allowed to marry?

The irony of the thought process on the Right is just too bizarre to take seriously.

 

[Dot Com]

if anything, it will improve marriages image.

 

[Trajan]

so I guess African Americans attitudes don't warrant comment...inteeeeerressting...

Sure, here you go...

More African Americans get behind gay marriage

a philly news article?



sure, here you go-



Changing Attitudes on Gay Marriage

June 2013

In 2001, roughly one-third of both whites and blacks expressed support for same-sex marriage. Today, 50% of whites support same-sex marriage, as do 38% of blacks.


Pew-Forum: Gay Marriage Attitudes

the slide would not let me copy it for pasting...go have a look.


so, it appears to me if one were fair and played that game, blacks should be in for the same treatment cons are when speaking in the collective sense......I await the outrage

 

[Trajan]

so I guess African Americans attitudes don't warrant comment...inteeeeerressting...

Who has said they don't?

Well, its entirely possible I missed it, would you be kind enough to link me to threads or posts where in African amercian viewpoints on gay marriage where treated comparably vis a vis conservatives?

 

[Trajan]

An intolerance of bigotry, ipso facto, is not bigotry. Just common sense.

An intolerance of homophobia is not bigotry. Just common sense.

An intolerance of racism and so forth is common sense.

An intolerance of murder and rape is not evidence of bigotry.

Let this silliness is end.

An intolerance of bigotry, ipso facto, is not bigotry. Just common sense.

you have not connected the dots, as in the corollary put forth and for which I am still awaiting an answer- the bigotry term, using 'racism ala inter racial marriage' equal to being against gay marriage....?

Both are examples of bigotry. They are different forms of bigotry, but still bigotry...a desire to discriminate against a group of people.

Sometimes the language takes easily similar forms, however...

Same-sex or “inter-racial” marriage? Take the quiz.

desire? I see. thats uhm , pretty messed up.


so, to be clear as I have asked this several times and have received what appears to be the same answer 3(?) times- if one is against or don't believe in racial inter marriage they are a bigot, if they are against or don't believe in gay marriage, they are a bigot......? Period?

 

[bodecea]

so I guess African Americans attitudes don't warrant comment...inteeeeerressting...

Who has said they don't?

Well, its entirely possible I missed it, would you be kind enough to link me to threads or posts where in African amercian viewpoints on gay marriage where treated comparably vis a vis conservatives?

Wait...you say something...and I'm the one who has to go prove it or disprove it?

 

[bodecea]

you have not connected the dots, as in the corollary put forth and for which I am still awaiting an answer- the bigotry term, using 'racism ala inter racial marriage' equal to being against gay marriage....?

Both are examples of bigotry. They are different forms of bigotry, but still bigotry...a desire to discriminate against a group of people.

Sometimes the language takes easily similar forms, however...

Same-sex or “inter-racial” marriage? Take the quiz.

desire? I see. thats uhm , pretty messed up.


so, to be clear as I have asked this several times and have received what appears to be the same answer 3(?) times- if one is against or don't believe in racial inter marriage they are a bigot, if they are against or don't believe in gay marriage, they are a bigot......? Period?

YOU asked that question?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In reading these threads, I note that many on the Right focus on how disgusting homosexual acts are. This is interesting, because these acts have absolutely nothing to do with gay marriage. These acts have been going on, and will continue to go on, with or without gay marriage. The question then should focus on if consenting adults who are not breaking any laws should be denied the opportunity to formalize their relationship for legal purposes. The answer appears to be "No, because they perform disgusting acts", (from the Right). Well, I have news for you. My wife and I had performed some of the same acts. Does that mean that we should not have been allowed to marry?

The irony of the thought process on the Right is just too bizarre to take seriously.

What you’ll find with many conservatives on the issue is fear and ignorance; fear of change and diversity, and ignorance of the Constitution, its case law, and the fundamental tenet of the rule of law in our Constitutional Republic.

 

[Seawytch]

you have not connected the dots, as in the corollary put forth and for which I am still awaiting an answer- the bigotry term, using 'racism ala inter racial marriage' equal to being against gay marriage....?

Both are examples of bigotry. They are different forms of bigotry, but still bigotry...a desire to discriminate against a group of people.

Sometimes the language takes easily similar forms, however...

Same-sex or “inter-racial” marriage? Take the quiz.

desire? I see. thats uhm , pretty messed up.


so, to be clear as I have asked this several times and have received what appears to be the same answer 3(?) times- if one is against or don't believe in racial inter marriage they are a bigot, if they are against or don't believe in gay marriage, they are a bigot......? Period?

I gave you an example of when you wouldn't be a bigot...if you opposed marriage itself, otherwise yes.

 

[Trajan]

Who has said they don't?

Well, its entirely possible I missed it, would you be kind enough to link me to threads or posts where in African amercian viewpoints on gay marriage where treated comparably vis a vis conservatives?

Wait...you say something...and I'm the one who has to go prove it or disprove it?

I said-

so I guess African Americans attitudes don't warrant comment...inteeeeerressting...

you answered with sophistry. You see, I don't know. I have not seen it, thats why I asked.

I can hardly prove what I already alluded to as a non event, I am willing to be proved ignorant of such posts/threads......if you didn't want to get into it, why even comment?

 

[Trajan]

Both are examples of bigotry. They are different forms of bigotry, but still bigotry...a desire to discriminate against a group of people.

Sometimes the language takes easily similar forms, however...

Same-sex or “inter-racial” marriage? Take the quiz.

desire? I see. thats uhm , pretty messed up.


so, to be clear as I have asked this several times and have received what appears to be the same answer 3(?) times- if one is against or don't believe in racial inter marriage they are a bigot, if they are against or don't believe in gay marriage, they are a bigot......? Period?

YOU asked that question?

I asked what the corollary was, apparently , the same answer keeps coming back- its all bigotry. I was spelling out what I think seawytch's stance is...is that yours too?

 

[Trajan]

Both are examples of bigotry. They are different forms of bigotry, but still bigotry...a desire to discriminate against a group of people.

Sometimes the language takes easily similar forms, however...

Same-sex or “inter-racial” marriage? Take the quiz.

desire? I see. thats uhm , pretty messed up.


so, to be clear as I have asked this several times and have received what appears to be the same answer 3(?) times- if one is against or don't believe in racial inter marriage they are a bigot, if they are against or don't believe in gay marriage, they are a bigot......? Period?

I gave you an example of when you wouldn't be a bigot...if you opposed marriage itself, otherwise yes.

marriage as in the governments involvement, is that correct? Not simply gay marriage, vs, say gay rights?

 

[Katzndogz]

The argument isn't over because gays aren't going to get the acceptance they think legalization will give them. The form of argument may change but that's all.

Jonathan Allen was on Americas got talent. He has a truly magical voice . His parents threw him out when he turned 18 because he's gay. Is this law going to change that? Is it going to give gay couples a seat at the family holiday dinner, the co-worker's party or anything because they are "married"? No. There might be some backlash but nothing much will change.

 

[Dot Com]

ummm.....ok. Does that give you solace? Are you a monotheist or just intolerant as a rule?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

you have not connected the dots, as in the corollary put forth and for which I am still awaiting an answer- the bigotry term, using 'racism ala inter racial marriage' equal to being against gay marriage....?

Both are examples of bigotry. They are different forms of bigotry, but still bigotry...a desire to discriminate against a group of people.

Sometimes the language takes easily similar forms, however...

Same-sex or “inter-racial” marriage? Take the quiz.

desire? I see. thats uhm , pretty messed up.


so, to be clear as I have asked this several times and have received what appears to be the same answer 3(?) times- if one is against or don't believe in racial inter marriage they are a bigot, if they are against or don't believe in gay marriage, they are a bigot......? Period?

There’s no such thing as ‘gay marriage,’ there’s only marriage law as written by a given state, so not believing in it makes sense. Same-sex couples marry in accordance with the same law as do opposite-sex couples. That’s also why acknowledging same-sex couples’ equal protection rights in no way ‘redefines’ marriage, as the law remains exactly the same.

The Equal Protection Clause requires the states to allow all persons access to a given state’s laws, including same-sex couples access to marriage law.

One might disagree with how the Equal Protection Clause is interpreted, but that won’t work because there’s no rational basis to justify rejecting 14th Amendment jurisprudence. Indeed, the courts have held that opposition to same-sex couples accessing marriage law is predicated solely on animus towards homosexuals, failing to realize a legitimate legislative end.

Given there’s no rational, objective reason to oppose same-sex couples access to marriage law, it’s difficult to come to any other conclusion than that of being motivated by bigotry.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The argument isn't over because gays aren't going to get the acceptance they think legalization will give them. The form of argument may change but that's all.

Jonathan Allen was on Americas got talent. He has a truly magical voice . His parents threw him out when he turned 18 because he's gay. Is this law going to change that? Is it going to give gay couples a seat at the family holiday dinner, the co-worker's party or anything because they are "married"? No. There might be some backlash but nothing much will change.

Gays aren’t seeking ‘acceptance,’ they’re seeking acknowledgement of their equality, equality which was theirs since before the advent of the Republic, equality denied them by jurisdictions ignorant of – or in contempt of – the Constitution and its case law.

With equality will come acceptance.

 

[buckeye45_73]

So hazl when are you marrying your boyfriend

 

[Katzndogz]

The argument isn't over because gays aren't going to get the acceptance they think legalization will give them. The form of argument may change but that's all.

Jonathan Allen was on Americas got talent. He has a truly magical voice . His parents threw him out when he turned 18 because he's gay. Is this law going to change that? Is it going to give gay couples a seat at the family holiday dinner, the co-worker's party or anything because they are "married"? No. There might be some backlash but nothing much will change.

Gays aren’t seeking ‘acceptance,’ they’re seeking acknowledgement of their equality, equality which was theirs since before the advent of the Republic, equality denied them by jurisdictions ignorant of – or in contempt of – the Constitution and its case law.

With equality will come acceptance.[/QUOT

They aren't going to get acknowledgment of equality either.

 

[Vandalshandle]

"They aren't going to get acknowledgment of equality either. "

They are, in the only place that counts. A court of law.

 

[rightwinger]

The argument isn't over because gays aren't going to get the acceptance they think legalization will give them. The form of argument may change but that's all.

Jonathan Allen was on Americas got talent. He has a truly magical voice . His parents threw him out when he turned 18 because he's gay. Is this law going to change that? Is it going to give gay couples a seat at the family holiday dinner, the co-worker's party or anything because they are "married"? No. There might be some backlash but nothing much will change.

Gays aren’t seeking ‘acceptance,’ they’re seeking acknowledgement of their equality, equality which was theirs since before the advent of the Republic, equality denied them by jurisdictions ignorant of – or in contempt of – the Constitution and its case law.

With equality will come acceptance.[/QUOT

They aren't going to get acknowledgment of equality either.

You are still free to hate as you like......the law didn't change that