North Carolina approves amendment banning gay marriage

[Duped]

Gay, and marriage don't belong in the same sentence - they are disperate! Marriage is between man, and women. You can call that abomination whatever you want, but it will never be marriage. Marriage is made in heaven. That perversion is man made; against creation!

 

[Wry Catcher]

Do you believe in States rights and the right to Vote? or do you not believe in the constitution.. which?

Two things Willow. First is that States shouldn’t be able to vote away individual rights and liberties. Secondly, my argument is mostly an ideological one.

As Americans, we vote. If we want, we can all vote that everyone needs to be inside by 9:00pm, purple T-shirts are not allowed, and 70% of your income needs to be sent to the State Government so that they can redistribute it to those in need.

I – personally - am against those sorts of things, as I believe the individual should be able to do whatever makes them happy, so long as what they’re doing is not infringing upon the rights of others within the community. Assault or rape - for instance, should obviously be prohibited.

Two same-sex couples being able to marry and receive the same legal rights as straight couples is NOT infringing on the rights of anyone. If you think it is, I’m all ears (anyone).

The problem with these Authoritarian Republicans is that they’re setting precedents that grow the size and reach of the government when it comes to the highly personal, social choices that we make.

Do you get where I'm coming from?

.

They are not voting away liberty,, anyone who disagress with the voters of North Carolina can move to some place more to their liking. It has nothing to do with "Authoritarian Republican" asswipe. do you know who brought down the gay marriage issue in California? the black vote.. so then of course the liberals pitched their fit said they had "NO right to vote" and had the whole thing overturned.. Now all the black people who voted were disenfranchised. That's what's unconstitutional.

Do you use drugs? If so quit, if not, start.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And yet still not ONE valid reason why homosexuals should not be able to marry. Not one. Shame on all of you.

What was the group that AIDS was found to have come from when it finally came to America?

And blacks are more prone to sickle cell anemia. Perhaps we should outlaw them too.

Difference is AIDS is a self inflected disease caused by a life style sickle cell anemia is not.

 

[RDD_1210]

Actually since you asked there is second hand gay. Have you heard of gay men who marry straight women? That's a good example of second hand gay,, the woman is forced to have gay sex and she doesn't even know it.

WTF? Is this serious?

If a woman has sex with a man, that is heterosexual sex.

For fucks sake, why do I even bother. I feel like I'm in the movie Idiocracy.

If she has sex with a gay man she's having gay sex.. think about it.. here,, I'll go you one better.. now just think before you explode,, do a little research if you like but the truth of the matter is that every single time you have sex with a person you're having sex with every person they've ever had sex with and likewise for him or her..

Oh I get it....it's the Kevin Bacon theory.

And what does that have to do with marriage?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Well get ready, because it's likely to happen in a lot of other states too.

This is why we vote...and Majority rules. And it's not discrimination...nobody said they can't live like they want, they just want to change something that should never be changed. Too bad, so sad...

Carol it's sad to read that you agree with the ability of the majority to vote away the rights of the minority.

It's basically the opposite of what this country was founded on.

But, i never said i agreed with voting away someone's rights.

Gays never had the right to marry so if i voted against this, i'm not taking away something they already had! They never had the right because our founding fathers never put it into the constitution...maybe believing it would never be an issue? I don't know....but now that it is, it's up to the people to decide, and that's what they're doing.

Just like Willow brought up....the issue of smokers. In michigan, the state decided there would be no smoking in public places. As a smoker...the state has taken away one of MY rights that i've had all of my life. So i've had a right taken away from me by the government. Gays never had the right to marry, so nothing was taken away from them...they just aren't getting what the "want".

You still have the right to smoke, and your ability to smoke in certain places wasn't taken away from you because of you being a minority.

Gays should be able to get married, churches who don't want to marry gays shouldn't be forced too. So essentially it'd be the same law as the smoking law you have to deal with. Still have the right to smoke, just not everywhere. Gays would have the right to get married, just not everywhere in terms of which facility to get married in.

 

[PredFan]

Our kids are gonna wonder why our generation hated gays for no reason. On the plus side though rational humans are at least making progress in this area, 10 years ago gays couldn't get married anywhere.

Soon enough gays will be able to get married almost everywhere and people on both sides will be wondering why this was made into such a big deal.

And as a side note the "sanctity of marriage" died with the popularity of divorce.

Recent voting seems to disagree with your prediction. Even in California, the most progressive state in the union, the people voted against gay marriage. not that it's correct, but it flies in the face of your predictions.

Half of Americans support legalizing gay marriage: Gallup | Reuters

Gallup's survey a year ago marked the first time in the poll's history that a majority of Americans - 53 percent - said they favored legalization of same-sex marriage. Gallup first asked the question in 1996, when only 27 percent of respondents supported it.

This might be true, but is it going to increase or decrease in the future? many people here have stated that the old ways of homophobia are going to go away. All of the recent voting seems to say otherwise.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Should something be forced on a large group of people who do not want it or have it a part of their state?

 

[WillowTree]

Two things Willow. First is that States shouldn’t be able to vote away individual rights and liberties. Secondly, my argument is mostly an ideological one.

As Americans, we vote. If we want, we can all vote that everyone needs to be inside by 9:00pm, purple T-shirts are not allowed, and 70% of your income needs to be sent to the State Government so that they can redistribute it to those in need.

I – personally - am against those sorts of things, as I believe the individual should be able to do whatever makes them happy, so long as what they’re doing is not infringing upon the rights of others within the community. Assault or rape - for instance, should obviously be prohibited.

Two same-sex couples being able to marry and receive the same legal rights as straight couples is NOT infringing on the rights of anyone. If you think it is, I’m all ears (anyone).

The problem with these Authoritarian Republicans is that they’re setting precedents that grow the size and reach of the government when it comes to the highly personal, social choices that we make.

Do you get where I'm coming from?

.

They are not voting away liberty,, anyone who disagress with the voters of North Carolina can move to some place more to their liking. It has nothing to do with "Authoritarian Republican" asswipe. do you know who brought down the gay marriage issue in California? the black vote.. so then of course the liberals pitched their fit said they had "NO right to vote" and had the whole thing overturned.. Now all the black people who voted were disenfranchised. That's what's unconstitutional.

Do you use drugs? If so quit, if not, start.

fuck ewe,, and then explain why NY and California make it illegal to have guns!

 

[RDD_1210]

What was the group that AIDS was found to have come from when it finally came to America?

And blacks are more prone to sickle cell anemia. Perhaps we should outlaw them too.

Difference is AIDS is a self inflected disease caused by a life style sickle cell anemia is not.

Ok if it's self inflicted than you have nothing to worry about, right? So why not let them get married to each other. Since you're straight (presumably) and AIDS is self inflicted, unless you decide to be gay or give yourself AIDS (by your definition) than you have nothing to fear.

 

[WillowTree]

Should something be forced on a large group of people who do not want it or have it a part of their state?

States Have Rights.

 

[Navy1960]

Okay my first question here about N.C. is why? you have DOMA, and a whole host of laws that already do that, So what? you don't have other legislative things to deal with, say like, creating jobs in your state rather than deal with issues like this? It seems like a lot of states, mine included have spent more time on social issues that have little to do with Government at the expense of it's citizens health and the welfare of it's economies, and more to do with what some deem is socially acceptable. Personally, when you allow Government to start passing Laws on defining what is clearly a social issue, then why stop there, why not pass laws for redheads, or blondes, or even for people who wear glasses on Sundays? See what I mean? there is a reason why the constitution thought some things were best left to "people" to decide for themselves and this is sure one of those things.

The difference myght be the 2nd part of the law that was passed in North Carolina. I'm not up to snuff on DOMA, but the NC law stops the legal privileges of all "other" forms of unions. That is the part that I have the most problem with. Apparently it wasn't enough for them to defend marriage, but they felt that they had to deny gays the ability to join in civil unions as well. Sad.

Well from my understanding, DOMA defines marriage as one man and one woman and goes futher to say that Federal benefits derived from that must meet that standard. I just see these laws as being not only a waste of time, but also paying attention to matters that are best left to individuals to decide for themselves, especially, when there are more pressing matters to attend to. Now having said that if this goes into the realm of denial of civil unions, then two things come to mind here, one is, go to another state and simply enjoy that privledge there, then come back to N.C. The other thing that comes to mind is this, Fort Bragg is in N.C. and last I checked there is a new policy as it applies to Military personnel. So then that begs the question, if say for example, a couple were to be joined in a civil union and then be stationed at Fort Bragg, what impact does this new law have on those people? If it does , does this then have some conflict with Federal issues?

One other thing, I have noticed some talk on here about " majority rules" last time I looked we were still a Republican form of Government much to the dismay of some. It might help for some to see what the author of the constitution had to say on the subject.

Federalist #51
Second. It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. There are but two methods of providing against this evil: the one by creating a will in the community independent of the majority -- that is, of the society itself; the other, by comprehending in the society so many separate descriptions of citizens as will render an unjust combination of a majority of the whole very improbable, if not impracticable. The first method prevails in all governments possessing an hereditary or self-appointed authority. James Madison

 

[WillowTree]

And blacks are more prone to sickle cell anemia. Perhaps we should outlaw them too.

Difference is AIDS is a self inflected disease caused by a life style sickle cell anemia is not.

Ok if it's self inflicted than you have nothing to worry about, right? So why not let them get married to each other. Since you're straight (presumably) and AIDS is self inflicted, unless you decide to be gay or give yourself AIDS (by your definition) than you have nothing to fear.

What if you're gay, get aids and then have sex with a woman?

 

[garyganu]

Yeah NC! Way to write discrimination into your Constitution. History will not treat you well...

Well get ready, because it's likely to happen in a lot of other states too.

This is why we vote...and Majority rules. And it's not discrimination...nobody said they can't live like they want, they just want to change something that should never be changed. Too bad, so sad...

I would agree with you if the NC law stopped at defining marriage. Too bad it went on to deny legal privileges to all other types of unions as well.

Mob rule (majority rues) was not intended by the founding fathers. they built this republic on the "Rule of Law" not the "Rule of Man".

Anyone in NC are still able to have legal contracts drawn up so they can share property as they wish.

 

[KevinWestern]

They are not voting away liberty,, anyone who disagress with the voters of North Carolina can move to some place more to their liking. It has nothing to do with "Authoritarian Republican" asswipe. do you know who brought down the gay marriage issue in California? the black vote.. so then of course the liberals pitched their fit said they had "NO right to vote" and had the whole thing overturned.. Now all the black people who voted were disenfranchised. That's what's unconstitutional.

Liberty is an individual’s right to govern themselves – it’s free choice.

And it’s my personal view that if an action in no way infringes on the rights of other individuals within that society – like wearing purple t-shirts, staying out past 9:00pm – it should not be governed. Because to govern it would only work to grow the power of the government unnecessarily, and would serve as a step towards the direction of “tyranny” where no personal liberties are allowed.

Willow, if you are in support of this this NC measure, you really need to re-examine yourself to determine where you fall on the political spectrum. This is a “left” piece of legislation, 100%.


.
.

 

[WillowTree]

WTF? Is this serious?

If a woman has sex with a man, that is heterosexual sex.

For fucks sake, why do I even bother. I feel like I'm in the movie Idiocracy.

If she has sex with a gay man she's having gay sex.. think about it.. here,, I'll go you one better.. now just think before you explode,, do a little research if you like but the truth of the matter is that every single time you have sex with a person you're having sex with every person they've ever had sex with and likewise for him or her..

Oh I get it....it's the Kevin Bacon theory.

And what does that have to do with marriage?

you asked if there was "second hand gay" I answered your question clitface.

 

[RDD_1210]

Difference is AIDS is a self inflected disease caused by a life style sickle cell anemia is not.

Ok if it's self inflicted than you have nothing to worry about, right? So why not let them get married to each other. Since you're straight (presumably) and AIDS is self inflicted, unless you decide to be gay or give yourself AIDS (by your definition) than you have nothing to fear.

What if you're gay, get aids and then have sex with a woman?

So are you trying to outlaw being gay or gays being allowed to marry? Because what does what you said have any relevance on gays being allowed to marry other gays.

 

[WillowTree]

They are not voting away liberty,, anyone who disagress with the voters of North Carolina can move to some place more to their liking. It has nothing to do with "Authoritarian Republican" asswipe. do you know who brought down the gay marriage issue in California? the black vote.. so then of course the liberals pitched their fit said they had "NO right to vote" and had the whole thing overturned.. Now all the black people who voted were disenfranchised. That's what's unconstitutional.

Liberty is an individual’s right to govern themselves – it’s free choice.

And it’s my personal view that if an action in no way infringes on the rights of other individuals within that society – NOT things like murder, stealing – it should not be governed. Because to govern it would only work to grow the power of the government unnecessarily, and would serve as a step towards the direction of “tyranny” where no personal liberties are allowed.

Willow, if you are in support of this this NC measure, you really need to re-examine yourself to determine where you fall on the political spectrum. This is a “left” piece of legislation, 100%.


.
.

explain why California and Ny are allowed to ban guns..

 

[Ravi]

Second hand smoke is an actual health concern. Is their second hand gay? How does two homosexuals getting married affect you or anyone else?

Actually since you asked there is second hand gay. Have you heard of gay men who marry straight women? That's a good example of second hand gay,, the woman is forced to have gay sex and she doesn't even know it.

Fuck you...fuck you for posting something this stupid.

Maybe that's what happened to her....lol. She can't even see that if gays were allowed to marry each other they wouldn't be marrying women without her knowledge.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Recent voting seems to disagree with your prediction. Even in California, the most progressive state in the union, the people voted against gay marriage. not that it's correct, but it flies in the face of your predictions.

Half of Americans support legalizing gay marriage: Gallup | Reuters

Gallup's survey a year ago marked the first time in the poll's history that a majority of Americans - 53 percent - said they favored legalization of same-sex marriage. Gallup first asked the question in 1996, when only 27 percent of respondents supported it.

This might be true, but is it going to increase or decrease in the future? many people here have stated that the old ways of homophobia are going to go away. All of the recent voting seems to say otherwise.

Good question, in the last 15 years homophobia has plummeted but in the last 2 years the numbers have stayed the same.

But in my real world experience, I'm 26, and in my circle me (I'm straight) and all my straight friends aren't scared of gays and we don't give a damn about gay marriage. And just about every weekend our hangout crew includes gay and bisexual people. So it seems like to me the older you are the more likely you are to be a homophobe, the younger you are the less likely.

Once you get enough real world experience you learn there's nothing scary about gays, and what other people do in the bedroom or who's hand they hold in public affects you in no tiny, marginal way whatsoever.

 

[RDD_1210]

If she has sex with a gay man she's having gay sex.. think about it.. here,, I'll go you one better.. now just think before you explode,, do a little research if you like but the truth of the matter is that every single time you have sex with a person you're having sex with every person they've ever had sex with and likewise for him or her..

Oh I get it....it's the Kevin Bacon theory.

And what does that have to do with marriage?

you asked if there was "second hand gay" I answered your question clitface.

Clitface? I wish. I'd never leave the house.