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.
Gay people have children too and you do not get to define the purpose of marriage
hipocracy? i don’t support you sleeping with hippos…likely won’t end up well for youNice try but a major fail. You guys are the ones who have a problem with love. We have a problem with hipocracy.
Do you support gay marriage?
i don’t find it hard you aren’t able to answer the question.I find it hard to believe that you actuallly asked that
Elected officials are there to do the peoples will. A parent supports their children. Hard for you to grasp that perhaps.
Just cut the bullshit already SCOTUS might wrll overturn Obergefell and you know it.Good question. Which is why no bill is needed.
Hypocrite? Thy name is magaturd...
Pa. Rep. Glenn Thompson votes against same-sex marriage days after attending son's gay wedding
A Pennsylvania lawmaker is facing criticism for attending his gay son's wedding last week, just days after opposing a bill in the U.S. house that would enshrine protections for same-sex marriage into federal law.www.cbsnews.com
"A Pennsylvania lawmaker is facing criticism for attending his gay son's wedding last week, just days after opposing a bill in the U.S. house that would enshrine protections for same-sex marriage into federal law. Representative Glenn Thompson's office said in a statement that he and his wife were thrilled to attend the nuptials and are very happy to welcome a new son-in-law into the family. His office did not respond to a follow-up question about why he decided to vote against the measure."
So I guess the key to opposing same sex marriage is to just oppose it for everyone else but not your own family? Cool...Kinda makes for an awkward wedding knowing your Dad would have gladly voted to stop you from being married "legally" if Republicans ever had their wish....I am sure the weasel excuse given is:
"I am totally for gay marriage bro, I just don't want them to be federally protected...that's all"
I assume this is a case of a politician just doing what he thinks he has to do to get elected -- and for some reason, there are a lot of Republicans believing that the easiest way to remain in power is to oppose gay rights in any form it pops up...which is odd, because I keep hearing from the so-called Conservatives on this message board that "Bro, nobody is trying to take away rights from gays bro..." -- Seems once again, Conservatives are lying about their own positions....
What is your point? That because gay people do not have children 1 on 1 without help, they should not be ble to marry? Or that their relationship is some how less valued? If so, then can I assume that heterosexual couples who can't have children without "help" should not be able to marry either?Gay people CAN'T have children. They MUST include a third party in their union in order to MAKE a baby. If there is a child involved in a gay union it is from another legit marriage or relationship or its adopted. But its NOT from a gay union.
You don't know alot, do you.? In many cases the children being raised by a gay couple are the biological children of one of them. Ever hear of surogacy and sperm donors? In any case what matters far more is that fact that they are parents. They provide a home and stability for childrenIf there is a child involved in a gay union it is from another legit marriage or relationship or its adopted.
Are you serious? What is being denied? How about the social status of being married and all of the financial benefits, legal protections and rights that go with marriage for the parents and the children?. Please give me some sign that you are not actually too stupid to understand that.i don’t find it hard you aren’t able to answer the question.
This retard had all the benefits of queers in the "Civil Union" created by the rapist in chief "William Jefferson Clinton", but that wasnt good enough, because the faggots want to destroy the institution of marriage...Are you serious? What is being denied? How about the social status of being married and all of the financial benefits, legal protections and rights that go with marriage for the parents and the children?. Please give me some sign that you are not actually too stupid to understand that.
"Destroy the institue of marriage" in this case simply means, hurt the feelings fragile white men.This retard had all the benefits of queers in the "Civil Union" created by the rapist in chief "William Jefferson Clinton", but that wasnt good enough, because the faggots want to destroy the institution of marriage...
where is that being denied?Are you serious? What is being denied? How about the social status of being married and all of the financial benefits, legal protections and rights that go with marriage for the parents and the children?. Please give me some sign that you are not actually too stupid to understand that.
Pa. Rep. Glenn Thompson votes against same-sex marriage days after attending son's gay wedding
A Pennsylvania lawmaker is facing criticism for attending his gay son's wedding last week, just days after opposing a bill in the U.S. house that would enshrine protections for same-sex marriage into federal law.
"A Pennsylvania lawmaker is facing criticism for attending his gay son's wedding last week, just days after opposing a bill in the U.S. house that would enshrine protections for same-sex marriage into federal law. Representative Glenn Thompson's office said in a statement that he and his wife were thrilled to attend the nuptials and are very happy to welcome a new son-in-law into the family. His office did not respond to a follow-up question about why he decided to vote against the measure."
So I guess the key to opposing same sex marriage is to just oppose it for everyone else but not your own family? Cool...Kinda makes for an awkward wedding knowing your Dad would have gladly voted to stop you from being married "legally" if Republicans ever had their wish....I am sure the weasel excuse given is:
"I am totally for gay marriage bro, I just don't want them to be federally protected...that's all"
I assume this is a case of a politician just doing what he thinks he has to do to get elected -- and for some reason, there are a lot of Republicans believing that the easiest way to remain in power is to oppose gay rights in any form it pops up...which is odd, because I keep hearing from the so-called Conservatives on this message board that "Bro, nobody is trying to take away rights from gays bro..." -- Seems once again, Conservatives are lying about their own positions....
You're seriously butthurt about someone doing their job and respecting the Constitution and the limits of Congressional power even when it doesn't align with their personal interest or situation?
So, you just WANT corrupt authoritarians to rule you.
Got it,
ok…so you agree with the comgressman…there is no need for the law, and this thread is just bsThe Constitution clearly grants the people equal access to the laws. If you wish to deny some the right to marry who they wish, remove the government from the institution of marriage.
ok…so you agree with the comgressman…there is no need for the law, and this thread is just bs
but you just said it already existThere is a need for this law to ensure all have equal access to the Federal benefits associated with marriage.
Kinda the same as Democrats saying they personally oppose abortion but don't think they should "impose" their personal belies on anyone else.want them to be federally protected...that's all"
but you just said it already exist
