NAACP endorses gay marriage

[TheGreatGatsby]

Really. So give me a list of all the stuff you've personally done to help black people.

We'll wait.

What kind of retarded challenge is that. I treat people equally. But if you must know, I've taught and volunteered in the inner cities.

Oooh, yeah, I guess that makes you special.

It kind of like makes me like a community organizer. Pretty special I must say.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

TGG is one of the most immoral posters on the Board.

Great to see that you've made it out from underneath your bridge.

The truth is the truth. Any intelligent individual who adheres to Beckian philosophy and world view must be, ipso facto, a liar, because it is false.

Woh. Your brain cells are dying fast. I adhere to reason. I don't even read Beck or watch him. But I actually find him to be honest relative to the general media. That's why liberal trolls like you have to constantly evoke his name.

 

[BDBoop]

It is not the same thing. That was comparing apples to apples. Homosexual marriage compares apples to bananas.

No it's comparing discrimination to discrimination. Keeping gays and lesbians from legally marrying their consenting adult partner of choice is exactly the same as keeping heterosexuals from legally marrying their partner of choice.

You seem to be confusing religious marriage with legal, civil marriage. Those are truly two completely different fruits.

No, what you are discussing is a "special" new right. As the law stands now any person of consenting age can marry. Redefining what "marriage" is does not rise to the level of "discrimination" that proponents wish to create as fact, towards those who oppose such a move.

As a matter of religious belief, marriage is considered a rite- not a right. States do not even consider marriage a right, but legal standing.

You're looking at it from the inside. From the outside it looks like "Except you. YOU can't get married."

 

[Jroc]

No, they won't. They will vote, not for Romney.

Based on chatter I think you are wrong.

"Fast forward four years: While polls suggest America on the whole is moving toward support of same-sex marriage, ABC/Washington Post polling shows 55% of black voters are still against it. That compares to 43% of whites.

And this opposition from blacks could hurt the president - particularly in the South.

Just this week in North Carolina, blacks voted two-to-one in favor of the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

North Carolina is a swing state where near-unanimous black support for Mr. Obama secured his 2008 victory.

So what if even some black voters in a state like North Carolina choose to sit this election out due to the president's support of same-sex marriage?

Groups on both sides of the issue like to compare gay marriage rights to the struggle for civil rights; but many blacks don't like that comparison. And black churches tend to see the issue in religious terms, with ministers playing a big role in the opposition to gay marriage."

read more

Again, NC was a fluke in 2008. If Romney is basing his whole strategy on NC< he's already lost.

Liberal California voted down gay marriage a" fluke"?...i think not. Of course some liberal judge struck it down, but the people are against it, I think thirty states or more have gay marriage bans


California votes down same-sex marriage
Voters in Florida and Arizona also approved similar bans in a setback for the gay rights movement
California votes down same-sex marriage - CSMonitor.com

 

[Mr.Nick]

I mean the NAALCP endorses Obama....Humm if Obama had not said what he said, do you think NAACP would have came out for gay marriage?

The nation's largest civil rights group, the NAACP, endorsed gay marriage on Saturday, giving a boost to the movement to legalize same-sex nuptials despite reservations expressed by some black ministers.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People passed the resolution at its board meeting in Miami "as a continuation of its historic commitment to equal protection under the law," the organization said.

"Civil marriage is a civil right and a matter of civil law. The NAACP's support for marriage equality is deeply rooted in the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and equal protection of all people," Benjamin Todd Jealous, President and CEO of the NAACP, said in a statement.

Civil rights group NAACP endorses gay marriage | Reuters

I suppose Obamafuck is wrongly betting that more than 50% of blacks support gay marriage?

Obamafuck isn't very intelligent.....75% of blacks are Baptists and they certainly do not support gay marriage.

I love how Obama embraces the fact he is half-black but is seriously delusional to black culture. Either that or he thinks blacks will just drop their religion to vote for him because he is back. Lets not forget about the Mexican Catholics....

Obama's endorsement of gay marriage was political suicide IMO...

He lost a few million (if not more) minority voters on his position.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I mean the NAALCP endorses Obama....Humm if Obama had not said what he said, do you think NAACP would have came out for gay marriage?

The nation's largest civil rights group, the NAACP, endorsed gay marriage on Saturday, giving a boost to the movement to legalize same-sex nuptials despite reservations expressed by some black ministers.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People passed the resolution at its board meeting in Miami "as a continuation of its historic commitment to equal protection under the law," the organization said.

"Civil marriage is a civil right and a matter of civil law. The NAACP's support for marriage equality is deeply rooted in the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and equal protection of all people," Benjamin Todd Jealous, President and CEO of the NAACP, said in a statement.

Civil rights group NAACP endorses gay marriage | Reuters

I suppose Obamafuck is wrongly betting that more than 50% of blacks support gay marriage?

Obamafuck isn't very intelligent.....75% of blacks are Baptists and they certainly do not support gay marriage.

I love how Obama embraces the fact he is half-black but is seriously delusional to black culture. Either that or he thinks blacks will just drop their religion to vote for him because he is back. Lets not forget about the Mexican Catholics....

Obama's endorsement of gay marriage was political suicide IMO...

He lost a few million (if not more) minority voters on his position.

But how many yuppy white voters did he pick up with the move? In the over-all numbers; this could even help Obama.

However, I think it was a kneejerk reaction and I don't think he truly calculated how this would affect the swing states. Ohio (and the election) went for Bush in 04 b/c they flocked to vote against a gay marriage initiative. Why would he think that 2012 would be different?

 

[JakeStarkey]

I think he carefully calculated that far right outrage to a black president only energizes the black base to oppose monolithic stupidity from the far right.

I wish you guys would stop and concentrate on working the economy angle to elect Mitt.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I think he carefully calculated that far right outrage to a black president only energizes the black base to oppose monolithic stupidity from the far right.

I wish you guys would stop and concentrate on working the economy angle to elect Mitt.

You would classify me as far right. Obama's race is not an issue for me. So wrong again Jake. But I'm sure you'll hold to your delusions.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I don't think you are a racist at all, TGG. Not a bit. But so many of the far right do like making stupid race comments, and black Americans generally as a whole (the Alan Wests are the exceptions that prove the rule) will not tolerate it.

 

[Gadawg73]

I remember when Bush decided not to speak at the NAACP when he ran the second time and there was an outrage about it.
I thought that was a good stance for him. They weren't going to vote for or even CONSIDER voting for him so why waste everyone's time?
That has been my opinion of the NAACP for a long time.
And the timing of this does also bother me. They only came out with their support AFTER Obama did.
However, there has been long time support here in Atlanta from SCLC leaders such as Joe Lowery and others for gay rights for a long time. And they have stood up to many challenges from other black leaders such as one of MLK's daughters who is anti gay. And we have Bishop Long here that is as anti gay as they come. Funny how he just settled a half dozen law suits where all the time he was preaching against gays and bashing him daily from his multi million dollar church with his 6 Rolls parked outside he was sucking cock every chance he could for many years.
Makes you wonder about why the hell these folks oppose it so passionately. Why does it upset them so much? They just hate gay folk wanting to get married.
Something ain't right with folk that are so passionate about an issue that affects them in NO WAY.

 

[Qball]

No, I'm referring to when the argument was tried in interracial marriage bans. Lawmakers argued that such bans we're not unconstitutional because the applied equally to men and women.

It is not the same thing. That was comparing apples to apples. Homosexual marriage compares apples to bananas.

No it's comparing discrimination to discrimination. Keeping gays and lesbians from legally marrying their consenting adult partner of choice is exactly the same as keeping heterosexuals from legally marrying their partner of choice.

You seem to be confusing religious marriage with legal, civil marriage. Those are truly two completely different fruits.

No, it's not discrimination to not want to change the definition of marriage. Not in and of itself.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I don't think you are a racist at all, TGG. Not a bit. But so many of the far right do like making stupid race comments, and black Americans generally as a whole (the Alan Wests are the exceptions that prove the rule) will not tolerate it.

Regardless, I don't think that traditional marriage advocates can be effectively swept under your far right rug.

 

[clevergirl]

No it's comparing discrimination to discrimination. Keeping gays and lesbians from legally marrying their consenting adult partner of choice is exactly the same as keeping heterosexuals from legally marrying their partner of choice.

You seem to be confusing religious marriage with legal, civil marriage. Those are truly two completely different fruits.

No, what you are discussing is a "special" new right. As the law stands now any person of consenting age can marry. Redefining what "marriage" is does not rise to the level of "discrimination" that proponents wish to create as fact, towards those who oppose such a move.

As a matter of religious belief, marriage is considered a rite- not a right. States do not even consider marriage a right, but legal standing.

You're looking at it from the inside. From the outside it looks like "Except you. YOU can't get married."

Again, no I am not! Any adult CAN marry. What homosexuals want is a special new right that is specific to their sexual desires. They already have the exact same right of marriage that I do- there is no discrimination.

 

[bodecea]

Based on chatter I think you are wrong.

"Fast forward four years: While polls suggest America on the whole is moving toward support of same-sex marriage, ABC/Washington Post polling shows 55% of black voters are still against it. That compares to 43% of whites.

And this opposition from blacks could hurt the president - particularly in the South.

Just this week in North Carolina, blacks voted two-to-one in favor of the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

North Carolina is a swing state where near-unanimous black support for Mr. Obama secured his 2008 victory.

So what if even some black voters in a state like North Carolina choose to sit this election out due to the president's support of same-sex marriage?

Groups on both sides of the issue like to compare gay marriage rights to the struggle for civil rights; but many blacks don't like that comparison. And black churches tend to see the issue in religious terms, with ministers playing a big role in the opposition to gay marriage."

read more

Again, NC was a fluke in 2008. If Romney is basing his whole strategy on NC< he's already lost.

Liberal California voted down gay marriage a" fluke"?...i think not. Of course some liberal judge struck it down, but the people are against it, I think thirty states or more have gay marriage bans


California votes down same-sex marriage
Voters in Florida and Arizona also approved similar bans in a setback for the gay rights movement
California votes down same-sex marriage - CSMonitor.com

Barely voted it down....wonder what will happen next vote.

 

[bodecea]

No, what you are discussing is a "special" new right. As the law stands now any person of consenting age can marry. Redefining what "marriage" is does not rise to the level of "discrimination" that proponents wish to create as fact, towards those who oppose such a move.

As a matter of religious belief, marriage is considered a rite- not a right. States do not even consider marriage a right, but legal standing.

You're looking at it from the inside. From the outside it looks like "Except you. YOU can't get married."

Again, no I am not! Any adult CAN marry. What homosexuals want is a special new right that is specific to their sexual desires. They already have the exact same right of marriage that I do- there is no discrimination.

Of course. So...that marrying people you are not attracted to is working out ok for you?

 

[Seawytch]

No, what you are discussing is a "special" new right. As the law stands now any person of consenting age can marry. Redefining what "marriage" is does not rise to the level of "discrimination" that proponents wish to create as fact, towards those who oppose such a move.

As a matter of religious belief, marriage is considered a rite- not a right. States do not even consider marriage a right, but legal standing.

You're looking at it from the inside. From the outside it looks like "Except you. YOU can't get married."

Again, no I am not! Any adult CAN marry. What homosexuals want is a special new right that is specific to their sexual desires. They already have the exact same right of marriage that I do- there is no discrimination.

It won't be special...you'd be able to do it too.

 

[BDBoop]

No, what you are discussing is a "special" new right. As the law stands now any person of consenting age can marry. Redefining what "marriage" is does not rise to the level of "discrimination" that proponents wish to create as fact, towards those who oppose such a move.

As a matter of religious belief, marriage is considered a rite- not a right. States do not even consider marriage a right, but legal standing.

You're looking at it from the inside. From the outside it looks like "Except you. YOU can't get married."

Again, no I am not! Any adult CAN marry. What homosexuals want is a special new right that is specific to their sexual desires. They already have the exact same right of marriage that I do- there is no discrimination.

Yes there is. As stated recently, you are expecting them to marry someone they are not attracted to, and with whom they have no basis for a relationship.

A bit naive, I feel.

 

[BDBoop]

No, what you are discussing is a "special" new right. As the law stands now any person of consenting age can marry. Redefining what "marriage" is does not rise to the level of "discrimination" that proponents wish to create as fact, towards those who oppose such a move.

As a matter of religious belief, marriage is considered a rite- not a right. States do not even consider marriage a right, but legal standing.

You're looking at it from the inside. From the outside it looks like "Except you. YOU can't get married."

Again, no I am not! Any adult CAN marry. What homosexuals want is a special new right that is specific to their sexual desires. They already have the exact same right of marriage that I do- there is no discrimination.

You're female? And you can't marry females. Any man can, any woman can't. I can marry a man, but Brian can't marry a man. There are people being shut out based on their sexual orientation, and that's Just Wrong.

And yes. That IS discrimination.

 

[clevergirl]

You're looking at it from the inside. From the outside it looks like "Except you. YOU can't get married."

Again, no I am not! Any adult CAN marry. What homosexuals want is a special new right that is specific to their sexual desires. They already have the exact same right of marriage that I do- there is no discrimination.

You're female? And you can't marry females. Any man can, any woman can't. I can marry a man, but Brian can't marry a man. There are people being shut out based on their sexual orientation, and that's Just Wrong.

And yes. That IS discrimination.

Nobody is being shut out- All can marry. Now, if what you want is for a new definition of what marriage is- then admit to it. You are asking for the government to bestow a special right unto someone because of their sexual preference. I may be persuaded to support something called penilmony or vaginamony that is specific to same sex unions.



As earlier stated, this creates an intrusion into religious protections and freedom of association. Already civil suits have been filed against business owners who refused service to homosexual couples because of their religious convictions. A mayor claimed he would fire any Justice of the Peace if they refused, in good conscious, to marry homosexuals- This IS a back door attack on religion by homosexuals.

 

[clevergirl]

You're looking at it from the inside. From the outside it looks like "Except you. YOU can't get married."

Again, no I am not! Any adult CAN marry. What homosexuals want is a special new right that is specific to their sexual desires. They already have the exact same right of marriage that I do- there is no discrimination.

Yes there is. As stated recently, you are expecting them to marry someone they are not attracted to, and with whom they have no basis for a relationship.

A bit naive, I feel.

No, I am not expecting them, to do anything. I am saying that they have the same rights as I do, with regards to marriage. I am further stating that what they want is a "special right".