Opposition to Gay Marriage - Any Basis Other Than Intolerance and Bigotry?

[ScreamingEagle]

I am honored that you believe I have that much power over our country.



However, historically...hatred like yours has done more damage to our country than any expansion of civil rights and common decency has.

So...you might want to take the time to look in a mirror....

Is that all you have to argue with?.....the tired old "hatred" accusation?.....

I know hatred when I see it. You can play coy all you want. I'm not stupid....don't insult my intelligence...and that of others reading your posts.

i suppose just because i oppose gay marriage you think i am committing some sort of "hate" crime...

you think i should "love" you because you promote commie goals and degeneracy in our country?
commie goal #26: Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

liberalism is truly a mental disorder......and yes... i don't like mental disorders....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The blow-back that you're getting is LARGELY because you don't want the legal equality. You are DEMANDING the social equity that the mere change in law won't give you..

This argument as been used in virtually all civil rights cases dating back to Brown and Hernandez: that society is not ready, that it will be too disruptive, that same-sex couples will suffer some sort of ‘backlash.’ Those arguments failed then and they’ll fail now.

i suppose just because i oppose gay marriage you think i am committing some sort of "hate" crime...

You may oppose it all you want, for whatever reason: hate, fear, religion, all of the above – but none comport to Constitutional case law or justify preemption of one’s civil rights.

As the Lawrence Court noted and affirmed:

In Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), the Court reaffirmed the substantive force of the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause. The Casey decision again confirmed that our laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing, and education. Id., at 851. In explaining the respect the Constitution demands for the autonomy of the person in making these choices, we stated as follows:

“ These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life. Beliefs about these matters could not define the attributes of personhood were they formed under compulsion of the State.” Ibid.

Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do.

Whatever justifications or rationalizations those opposed to same-sex marriage may contrive, neither the law nor the Constitution are on their side.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I guess around half of all Americans (including democrats) are biggots

National (US) Poll * July 17, 2008 * American Voters Oppose Same-Se - Quinnipiac University – Hamden, Connecticut

CNN poll: Generations disagree on same-sex marriage - CNN

 

[Charles_Main]

Well, New York has done the right thing. Which brings to mind a question.

Can any person here who is "opposed to gay marriage" come forward and justify their position on the basis of anything other than intolerance and bigotry? Seriously.

Please don't start with "the Bible does not condone same sex marriage." Perhaps it doesn't. So WHAT? Let's say the Bible contained a passage which said: "Marriage is only between a man and a woman. If thou shalt marry one of the same sex as yourself, thou shalt burn in the fiery pits of HELL!" So what? Isn't invoking the Bible just another way of shoving religion down the throats of other people? Yup. In other words, intolerance and bigotry.

No, my friends - we all know what is really involved here, don't we? I am wondering if there is anyone here who has the stones to come right out and tell it like it is: "I am opposed to same sex marriage because I hate gays everything they stand for. No other reason."

Intolerance and bigotry. There really does not seem to be any other reason.

Only if you Oppose all Government Involvement in Marriage. I for Example would never deny anyone, Gay or not. The Right to marry, and live their life with anyone else. I how ever do have a constitutional Problem with the Federal Government Mandating Anything about marriage. I don't think the Fed Belongs in it.

So I would oppose a Federal law Mandating that the State Recognize Gay marriage, Based solely on it being a Violation of the Constitution, and an over stepping of Federal Authority. I similarly oppose the Defense of marriage act on the same grounds.

Now, I do support the Fed Suing any state that passes Laws Banning Gay Marriage, as these laws would themselves Violate the Constitution, and our Federal Constitution clearly states no State Constitution or Law can Violate the Rights assured us in the Fed Constitution.

So you see it is not as simple as. You support it, or you must be a bigot. One can support the rights of Gays to Marry, while not supporting a Federal Action to assure those rights, that violates the Constitution.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Well, New York has done the right thing. Which brings to mind a question.

Can any person here who is "opposed to gay marriage" come forward and justify their position on the basis of anything other than intolerance and bigotry? Seriously.

Please don't start with "the Bible does not condone same sex marriage." Perhaps it doesn't. So WHAT? Let's say the Bible contained a passage which said: "Marriage is only between a man and a woman. If thou shalt marry one of the same sex as yourself, thou shalt burn in the fiery pits of HELL!" So what? Isn't invoking the Bible just another way of shoving religion down the throats of other people? Yup. In other words, intolerance and bigotry.

No, my friends - we all know what is really involved here, don't we? I am wondering if there is anyone here who has the stones to come right out and tell it like it is: "I am opposed to same sex marriage because I hate gays everything they stand for. No other reason."

Intolerance and bigotry. There really does not seem to be any other reason.

You cannot discount religion and "invoking" the Bible is affirming one's religion, you can't ask nor expect people to forget their religious beliefs to suit a sinful minority.

 

[flacaltenn]

C. Clayton Lawyer type...

I noticed you skipped the EXAMPLEs that I gave on WHY calling gay unions something other "marraige" was important.. I don't propose calling it something different just for spite. Society is ready for legal equality. But we are not anxious to find all the legal unintended consequences AFTER we relent to calling it marraige.

 

[George Costanza]

Well, New York has done the right thing. Which brings to mind a question.

Can any person here who is "opposed to gay marriage" come forward and justify their position on the basis of anything other than intolerance and bigotry? Seriously.

Please don't start with "the Bible does not condone same sex marriage." Perhaps it doesn't. So WHAT? Let's say the Bible contained a passage which said: "Marriage is only between a man and a woman. If thou shalt marry one of the same sex as yourself, thou shalt burn in the fiery pits of HELL!" So what? Isn't invoking the Bible just another way of shoving religion down the throats of other people? Yup. In other words, intolerance and bigotry.

No, my friends - we all know what is really involved here, don't we? I am wondering if there is anyone here who has the stones to come right out and tell it like it is: "I am opposed to same sex marriage because I hate gays everything they stand for. No other reason."

Intolerance and bigotry. There really does not seem to be any other reason.

You cannot discount religion and "invoking" the Bible is affirming one's religion, you can't ask nor expect people to forget their religious beliefs to suit a sinful minority.

I recognize what you are saying. I don't discount religion. I recognize that, for an awful lot of folks, it is very, very important.

And I don't ask religious people to forget their religious beliefs - just keep them to themselves and don't try to trample on the rights of others merely because of a perceived differences.

 

[Charles_Main]

neither the law nor the Constitution are on their side.

Again it is not that simple. Clearly the US constitution would not support anyone attempting to Deny Gays the right to marry, But the US constitution also Includes a separation of powers between the Fed and the States. Any powers not clearly given to the Fed in the Constitution Fall to the states.

IMO it is a violation of the Constitution for the US government to mandate anything about marriage, or to Dictate to the States on the subject at all. Maybe you can point to the Provision in the US constitution that empowers the Fed to Dictate to the States how they will define marriage, Because I don't see it.

This does not mean the Fed is powerless. They can use the courts to fight any State laws that seek to Ban Gay marriage. They could also pass a Constitutional Amendment giving the Fed the Power to Define marriage. However until that day comes, and Federal Law Mandating that All the States Recognize A federal Definition of Marriage would be a clear Violation on the Constitution Separation of Powers. IMO anyways.

 

[Dr Grump]

I guess around half of all Americans (including democrats) are biggots

National (US) Poll * July 17, 2008 * American Voters Oppose Same-Se - Quinnipiac University – Hamden, Connecticut

CNN poll: Generations disagree on same-sex marriage - CNN

Now you're getting somewhere...

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Whats next, incest marriage, polygamous marriages, women should marry more than one man, swinger marriages, lets have some real marriage equality, what makes faggot marriage any greater or better than those others I mentioned? can a person not have "real love" for his sibling or relative? can a man not have real love for more than one woman? I say that because faggots like to make the love argument.

 

[George Costanza]

I guess around half of all Americans (including democrats) are biggots

National (US) Poll * July 17, 2008 * American Voters Oppose Same-Se - Quinnipiac University – Hamden, Connecticut

CNN poll: Generations disagree on same-sex marriage - CNN

Oh, I suspect the MAJORITY of Americans are bigots when it comes to this issue.

Thank God we live in a country whose laws and constitution protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority in matters of fundamental right.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Well, New York has done the right thing. Which brings to mind a question.

Can any person here who is "opposed to gay marriage" come forward and justify their position on the basis of anything other than intolerance and bigotry? Seriously.

Please don't start with "the Bible does not condone same sex marriage." Perhaps it doesn't. So WHAT? Let's say the Bible contained a passage which said: "Marriage is only between a man and a woman. If thou shalt marry one of the same sex as yourself, thou shalt burn in the fiery pits of HELL!" So what? Isn't invoking the Bible just another way of shoving religion down the throats of other people? Yup. In other words, intolerance and bigotry.

No, my friends - we all know what is really involved here, don't we? I am wondering if there is anyone here who has the stones to come right out and tell it like it is: "I am opposed to same sex marriage because I hate gays everything they stand for. No other reason."

Intolerance and bigotry. There really does not seem to be any other reason.

You cannot discount religion and "invoking" the Bible is affirming one's religion, you can't ask nor expect people to forget their religious beliefs to suit a sinful minority.

I recognize what you are saying. I don't discount religion. I recognize that, for an awful lot of folks, it is very, very important.

And I don't ask religious people to forget their religious beliefs - just keep them to themselves and don't try to trample on the rights of others merely because of a perceived differences.

You don't ask religious people to forget their beliefs or convictions just don't share them. How bout you abide by your own standards?
What is so wrong with civil unions? Marriage has been defined the same way for centuries. Now all the sudden because a minority want that classification we have to change it? By changing it to include what others deem immoral you will diminish the meaning for others. You don't have to have a specific title to be treated equally.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

I guess around half of all Americans (including democrats) are biggots

National (US) Poll * July 17, 2008 * American Voters Oppose Same-Se - Quinnipiac University – Hamden, Connecticut

CNN poll: Generations disagree on same-sex marriage - CNN

Oh, I suspect the MAJORITY of Americans are bigots when it comes to this issue.

Thank God we live in a country whose laws and constitution protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority in matters of fundamental right.

According to liberals, God and most Americans are bigots and intolerant. You dems make some of the worst hypocrites when it comes to the gay issue, you like to be seen as good by men and reap praise for so called gay rights movements and go home in private and say faggot and profess marriage is for heterosexuals only, now why bash the GOP for saying in the open what you Dems say in private?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Again it is not that simple. Clearly the US constitution would not support anyone attempting to Deny Gays the right to marry, But the US constitution also Includes a separation of powers between the Fed and the States. Any powers not clearly given to the Fed in the Constitution Fall to the states.

Which is fine provided no state enacts a law which violates the Federal Constitution. So it is actually that simple.

IMO it is a violation of the Constitution for the US government to mandate anything about marriage, or to Dictate to the States on the subject at all. Maybe you can point to the Provision in the US constitution that empowers the Fed to Dictate to the States how they will define marriage, Because I don't see it.

Here:

14th Amendment – US Constitution:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Denying same-sex couples equal access to marriage laws violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

This does not mean the Fed is powerless. They can use the courts to fight any State laws that seek to Ban Gay marriage. They could also pass a Constitutional Amendment giving the Fed the Power to Define marriage. However until that day comes, and Federal Law Mandating that All the States Recognize A federal Definition of Marriage would be a clear Violation on the Constitution Separation of Powers. IMO anyways.

This has nothing to do with the Federal government, the states are not being ‘dictated’ to or ‘forced’ to do anything. If the states enact laws that do not violate the Constitution, and allow equal access to the laws by their citizens, then there’s no need for any interaction between the states and the courts.

The Constitution protects individuals from governments violating their civil rights; not only the Federal government, but the state governments as well.

This is something conservatives should approve of: government restriction and the privacy rights of the individual protected.

 

[Political Junky]

I guess around half of all Americans (including democrats) are biggots

National (US) Poll * July 17, 2008 * American Voters Oppose Same-Se - Quinnipiac University – Hamden, Connecticut

CNN poll: Generations disagree on same-sex marriage - CNN

Oh, I suspect the MAJORITY of Americans are bigots when it comes to this issue.

Thank God we live in a country whose laws and constitution protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority in matters of fundamental right.

According to liberals, God and most Americans are bigots and intolerant. You dems make some of the worst hypocrites when it comes to the gay issue, you like to be seen as good by men and reap praise for so called gay rights movements and go home in private and say faggot and profess marriage is for heterosexuals only, now why bash the GOP for saying in the open what you Dems say in private?

Project much?

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Well, New York has done the right thing. Which brings to mind a question.

Can any person here who is "opposed to gay marriage" come forward and justify their position on the basis of anything other than intolerance and bigotry? Seriously.

Please don't start with "the Bible does not condone same sex marriage." Perhaps it doesn't. So WHAT? Let's say the Bible contained a passage which said: "Marriage is only between a man and a woman. If thou shalt marry one of the same sex as yourself, thou shalt burn in the fiery pits of HELL!" So what? Isn't invoking the Bible just another way of shoving religion down the throats of other people? Yup. In other words, intolerance and bigotry.

No, my friends - we all know what is really involved here, don't we? I am wondering if there is anyone here who has the stones to come right out and tell it like it is: "I am opposed to same sex marriage because I hate gays everything they stand for. No other reason."

Intolerance and bigotry. There really does not seem to be any other reason.

You cannot discount religion and "invoking" the Bible is affirming one's religion, you can't ask nor expect people to forget their religious beliefs to suit a sinful minority.

I recognize what you are saying. I don't discount religion. I recognize that, for an awful lot of folks, it is very, very important.

And I don't ask religious people to forget their religious beliefs - just keep them to themselves and don't try to trample on the rights of others merely because of a perceived differences.

I don't ask fags about their homosexuality and neither did the military, instead the fags were asked to keep their stuff to themselves and not trample on the religious beliefs of others.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Oh, I suspect the MAJORITY of Americans are bigots when it comes to this issue.

Thank God we live in a country whose laws and constitution protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority in matters of fundamental right.

According to liberals, God and most Americans are bigots and intolerant. You dems make some of the worst hypocrites when it comes to the gay issue, you like to be seen as good by men and reap praise for so called gay rights movements and go home in private and say faggot and profess marriage is for heterosexuals only, now why bash the GOP for saying in the open what you Dems say in private?

Project much?

Projection, nah, its reality, you Dems like barking on Republitards on the gay issue and for being homophobes but its strange that lots of Dems I talk to have the same beliefs about gays but never state them publicly, just ask Valerie Jarrett.

Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett declares being gay is a lifestyle choice (video), then apologizes - latimes.com

Now why did she apologize? Dems have to look like the guys and Republitards the bad homophobes.

 

[editec]

The enormity of the fuck I do not give about the issue of gays marrying each other is cosmic in its proportion.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

The enormity of the fuck I do not give about the issue of gays marrying each other is cosmic in its proportion.

I don't care about what gays do either which is why I don't want gay activism and the gay lifestyle rammed in my face by the media.

 

[NYcarbineer]

C. Clayton Lawyer type...

I noticed you skipped the EXAMPLEs that I gave on WHY calling gay unions something other "marraige" was important.. I don't propose calling it something different just for spite. Society is ready for legal equality. But we are not anxious to find all the legal unintended consequences AFTER we relent to calling it marraige.

And what do you suppose they are?