People who oppose Gay Rights, why do you oppose them?

[Seawytch]

Equal protection of the laws.

Gays have all the protections straight people do. Please cite a law that does not protect a gay person.

Social Security survivor benefits.

That was easy!

ANy gay person married to a member of the opposite sex collects social security survivor benefits. WHy would you thnk otherwise?

Any gay person married to a member of the same sex does not collect SS survivor benefits.

You are being your usual dishonest and obtuse self.

A hetorosexual person married to a member of the same sex does not collect ss survivor benefits either. ie equal.

Which is the exact same argument used to keep anti miscegenation laws in place.

Oh, and gays do get them now if they are legally married.

 

[mikegriffith1]

One problem with your OP is that you link opposing gay marriage to hating gays.

Why do I oppose gay marriage?

1. Society should not reward conduct that we know from a mountain of evidence is physically and emotionally unhealthy. (LINK)

2. Liberals are using gay marriage--and civil unions--to punish Christian vendors who do not want to be forced to service ceremonies that they find morally and spiritually offensive, contrary to the earlier repeated assurances that "if you're not gay, gay marriage won't affect you."

3. Placing children with gay couples exposes children to an unnatural, confusing example, because, for one thing, we know there is certain nurturing that only a mom can provide and other nurturing that only a dad can provide since men and women's brains are wired differently.

4. God has declared that marriage is only between a man and a woman, and that homosexuality is unnatural, sinful conduct.

One can respect gays as human beings and can treat them respectfully and considerately, just as one would do with any other persons. I've known, and gotten along just fine with, a number of gays.

I used to be for civil unions, but seeing the way that the gay rights lobby has used civil unions and gay marriage to try to punish any Christian business person who respectfully declines to service a gay ceremony has made me rethink that view.

Just on a basic human decency level, why would you want to force someone to attend, much less service, you wedding if you knew they didn't want to be there? Forget about alleged "rights" and "discrimination," what kind of people would force other people to attend their "wedding" against their will?

My wedding was a special, sacred day in my life, and I would not have wanted anyone there who did not want to be there, much less someone who was opposed to my very act of getting married. I would not have wanted negative, critical vibes at my wedding. Plus, if I knew that someone didn't want to attend, I would respect their wishes and not bother them about it, even if I thought their reasons for not wanting to attend were absurd.

 

[Conservative65]

Serious replies only!!
I do not want to offend anyone, so keep your rude comments to yourself. I just want to understand why someone would oppose gay marriage and such, so I figured this was the best way to go about it.
Why are gays hated in America?

So sad you assume those of us who oppose same sex marriage hate those wanting one. I don't like the fact that because someone made a choice to have kids they can't support I, as a taxpayer, am forced to support a choice I was told was none of my business when it was being made. However, that doesn't mean I hate the person that receives the handouts.

 

[Conservative65]

I'm opposed to special rights for any group. Currently gays have exactly the same rights as anyone else.

Nope. Married gays cannot collect all the same government cash and prizes protected by law for married straights.

I thought it was about two people that loved each other wanting to get married. Seems it's really about money.

 

[bodecea]

Yeah...but we know you're crazy.

Not at all. Crazy would be suggesting that different people's can live in harmony while promoting their own agendas. Can you truly say my plan would not solve the problem as Traditionalists see it?

You mean a Final Solution, eh?

 

[Anathema]

You mean a Final Solution, eh?

I mean a solution that ensures a single Social Order exists in this nation and thereby allows the Government to enforce proper Order and Discipline in that Society.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Serious replies only!!
I do not want to offend anyone, so keep your rude comments to yourself. I just want to understand why someone would oppose gay marriage and such, so I figured this was the best way to go about it.
Why are gays hated in America?

Nature defined: Marriage as the joining of one man and one woman.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

What rights are you talking about?

Equal protection of the laws.

ROFLMNAO!

There is nothing in recognizing and sustaining the laws of nature, which infringes upon the rights of anyone.

 

[Redfish]

Nope, using those terms you already won. I am too smart to take that foolish bet. I don't bet on three legged horses either.

Nice try, though.

I never changed my terms. That is the exact same thing I said from the get go. You thought you'd get a nullification loophole.

My marriage will be legal and recognized in all 50 states this summer, chickenshit.

Not if one or more states refuse to make it legal. The bet is that it would be legal in 50 states, you know that it won't be so you tried to change the terms. Typical of a liberal. chickenshit!

They can't refuse to follow Federal law. Currently the part of DOMA still in place says that my marriage license does not have to be recognized in Alabama. The SCOTUS is going to strike that down. Alabama playing their George Wallace game is not going to change the ruling. That was the terms as I stated them from the beginning. That you jumped before you read is not my problem. Are you reneging on the bet, Chickenfish?

there is no bet until both parties agree on all the terms and the meanings of all the words. The bet was not on how SCOTUS would rule, the bet was on whether your Ca marriage would become legal in all 50 states.

You then tried to change and terms and breached the contract. But I understand, its what libs do every day.

My wording has been the same from the beginning, Chickenfish and yes, my wording is that the SCOTUS is going to make my legal marriage legal and recognized in all 50 states. No nullification loopholes. You weren't careful and now you're weasleling. It's okay Chickenfish, I win either way.

No, you were and are a loser regardless of your failed attempt to lure me into a word game bet.

If you want to bet on how SC will rule, thats one thing, if you want to bet on whether gay marriage will be sanctioned by all 50 states, that is a completely different bet.

On the first I will not bet because SCOTUS has made many strange rulings recently. On the second I will bet, but you won't.

So lets move on to something important, like the fact that our country is 18 trillion dollars in debt and getting deeper every hour.

 

[bodecea]

I'm opposed to special rights for any group. Currently gays have exactly the same rights as anyone else.

Nope. Married gays cannot collect all the same government cash and prizes protected by law for married straights.

I thought it was about two people that loved each other wanting to get married. Seems it's really about money.

Yes...just like heteros.

 

[Redfish]

I'm opposed to special rights for any group. Currently gays have exactly the same rights as anyone else.

Nope. Married gays cannot collect all the same government cash and prizes protected by law for married straights.

I thought it was about two people that loved each other wanting to get married. Seems it's really about money.

Yes...just like heteros.

No, its not about money, gayness, heteros, marriage, or anything like that.

the current gay agenda is about using government to force societal acceptance of the gay lifestyle as normal and equally acceptable as normal biological human life. Thats whats going on here.

 

[bodecea]

I never changed my terms. That is the exact same thing I said from the get go. You thought you'd get a nullification loophole.

My marriage will be legal and recognized in all 50 states this summer, chickenshit.

Not if one or more states refuse to make it legal. The bet is that it would be legal in 50 states, you know that it won't be so you tried to change the terms. Typical of a liberal. chickenshit!

They can't refuse to follow Federal law. Currently the part of DOMA still in place says that my marriage license does not have to be recognized in Alabama. The SCOTUS is going to strike that down. Alabama playing their George Wallace game is not going to change the ruling. That was the terms as I stated them from the beginning. That you jumped before you read is not my problem. Are you reneging on the bet, Chickenfish?

there is no bet until both parties agree on all the terms and the meanings of all the words. The bet was not on how SCOTUS would rule, the bet was on whether your Ca marriage would become legal in all 50 states.

You then tried to change and terms and breached the contract. But I understand, its what libs do every day.

My wording has been the same from the beginning, Chickenfish and yes, my wording is that the SCOTUS is going to make my legal marriage legal and recognized in all 50 states. No nullification loopholes. You weren't careful and now you're weasleling. It's okay Chickenfish, I win either way.

No, you were and are a loser regardless of your failed attempt to lure me into a word game bet.

If you want to bet on how SC will rule, thats one thing, if you want to bet on whether gay marriage will be sanctioned by all 50 states, that is a completely different bet.

On the first I will not bet because SCOTUS has made many strange rulings recently. On the second I will bet, but you won't.

So lets move on to something important, like the fact that our country is 18 trillion dollars in debt and getting deeper every hour.

So...you are chicken.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

One problem with your OP is that you link opposing gay marriage to hating gays.

Why do I oppose gay marriage?

1. Society should not reward conduct that we know from a mountain of evidence is physically and emotionally unhealthy. (LINK)

2. Liberals are using gay marriage--and civil unions--to punish Christian vendors who do not want to be forced to service ceremonies that they find morally and spiritually offensive, contrary to the earlier repeated assurances that "if you're not gay, gay marriage won't affect you."

3. Placing children with gay couples exposes children to an unnatural, confusing example, because, for one thing, we know there is certain nurturing that only a mom can provide and other nurturing that only a dad can provide since men and women's brains are wired differently.

4. God has declared that marriage is only between a man and a woman, and that homosexuality is unnatural, sinful conduct.

One can respect gays as human beings and can treat them respectfully and considerately, just as one would do with any other persons. I've known, and gotten along just fine with, a number of gays.

I used to be for civil unions, but seeing the way that the gay rights lobby has used civil unions and gay marriage to try to punish any Christian business person who respectfully declines to service a gay ceremony has made me rethink that view.

Just on a basic human decency level, why would you want to force someone to attend, much less service, you wedding if you knew they didn't want to be there? Forget about alleged "rights" and "discrimination," what kind of people would force other people to attend their "wedding" against their will?

My wedding was a special, sacred day in my life, and I would not have wanted anyone there who did not want to be there, much less someone who was opposed to my very act of getting married. I would not have wanted negative, critical vibes at my wedding. Plus, if I knew that someone didn't want to attend, I would respect their wishes and not bother them about it, even if I thought their reasons for not wanting to attend were absurd.

And the above manifests as a hatred of gays, as none of these reasons are rationally based, none of these reasons are supported by objective, documented evidence, and none of these reasons pursue a proper legislative end, they seek only to disadvantage gay Americans based solely on who they are; which is why measures intended to deny gay Americans access to marriage law they're eligible to participate in are being struck down by the courts as un-Constitutional.

 

[bodecea]

One problem with your OP is that you link opposing gay marriage to hating gays.

Why do I oppose gay marriage?

1. Society should not reward conduct that we know from a mountain of evidence is physically and emotionally unhealthy. (LINK)

2. Liberals are using gay marriage--and civil unions--to punish Christian vendors who do not want to be forced to service ceremonies that they find morally and spiritually offensive, contrary to the earlier repeated assurances that "if you're not gay, gay marriage won't affect you."

3. Placing children with gay couples exposes children to an unnatural, confusing example, because, for one thing, we know there is certain nurturing that only a mom can provide and other nurturing that only a dad can provide since men and women's brains are wired differently.

4. God has declared that marriage is only between a man and a woman, and that homosexuality is unnatural, sinful conduct.

One can respect gays as human beings and can treat them respectfully and considerately, just as one would do with any other persons. I've known, and gotten along just fine with, a number of gays.

I used to be for civil unions, but seeing the way that the gay rights lobby has used civil unions and gay marriage to try to punish any Christian business person who respectfully declines to service a gay ceremony has made me rethink that view.

Just on a basic human decency level, why would you want to force someone to attend, much less service, you wedding if you knew they didn't want to be there? Forget about alleged "rights" and "discrimination," what kind of people would force other people to attend their "wedding" against their will?

My wedding was a special, sacred day in my life, and I would not have wanted anyone there who did not want to be there, much less someone who was opposed to my very act of getting married. I would not have wanted negative, critical vibes at my wedding. Plus, if I knew that someone didn't want to attend, I would respect their wishes and not bother them about it, even if I thought their reasons for not wanting to attend were absurd.

What makes you think that MY wedding was not a special sacred day in my life? Who are you to assume that only straights feel that way? Huh?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Serious replies only!!
I do not want to offend anyone, so keep your rude comments to yourself. I just want to understand why someone would oppose gay marriage and such, so I figured this was the best way to go about it.
Why are gays hated in America?

So sad you assume those of us who oppose same sex marriage hate those wanting one. I don't like the fact that because someone made a choice to have kids they can't support I, as a taxpayer, am forced to support a choice I was told was none of my business when it was being made. However, that doesn't mean I hate the person that receives the handouts.

Again, hate is the only motivating factor behind seeking to deny gay Americans their civil rights, as there is no rational, objective argument in support of doing so that pursues a legitimate legislative end.

Now, this isn't the 'hate' where you wish to physically harm a gay person, but the hate that manifest as a consequence of fear and ignorance, an animus that seeks to harm gay Americans by denying them their right to equal protection of the law.

 

[Silhouette]

There are two different issues here. The right of people to practice a deviant sexual lifestyle as long as it doesn't hurt anyone and

"Gay marriage". Same-sex marriage isn't the legal issue, it's actually the dismantling of the structure of the word marriage that is in question: should 9 in DC force it federally upon the states who will have to deal with the longterm repurcussions of the new experiment (that almost all LGBT practitioners themselves didn't have to undergo...they had mother/father marriage when they were a child). Everyone knows the dismantling of the word marriage will not just favor homosexuals. Equality means any person's lifestyle may marry under the dismantling, if there should be any federally-imposed upon the states without their permission.

But same-sex marriage does hurt people. Children. In a lesbian home, any son has no one to call Dad. In a gay male home, a daughter has no one to call Mom. That has been found to be harmful: A Child Can t Call 2 Women or 2 Men Mom Dad US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Children are not lab rats for the brand new social experiment. We have studies on what happens when a boy doesn't have a dad or a girl doesn't have a mom.. Rock bottom minimum is that if this is going to be a new social experiment, those most affected (the states dealing with any unforeseen or seen outfall) must be the ones who decide.

Premise alert: deviant sex lifestyles are not equal to race. That premise is not allowed in rebuttal to this post.

 

[bodecea]

Serious replies only!!
I do not want to offend anyone, so keep your rude comments to yourself. I just want to understand why someone would oppose gay marriage and such, so I figured this was the best way to go about it.
Why are gays hated in America?

Nature defined: Marriage as the joining of one man and one woman.

Your marriage, but not all...and Nature has nothing to do with marriage, it is a human construct.

 

[WorldWatcher]

A hetorosexual person married to a member of the same sex does not collect ss survivor benefits either. ie equal.

Sure they do.

Just like if a homosexual male marries a homossexual female and they were married prior to death and for the required amount of time.

>>>>

 

[Seawytch]

I never changed my terms. That is the exact same thing I said from the get go. You thought you'd get a nullification loophole.

My marriage will be legal and recognized in all 50 states this summer, chickenshit.

Not if one or more states refuse to make it legal. The bet is that it would be legal in 50 states, you know that it won't be so you tried to change the terms. Typical of a liberal. chickenshit!

They can't refuse to follow Federal law. Currently the part of DOMA still in place says that my marriage license does not have to be recognized in Alabama. The SCOTUS is going to strike that down. Alabama playing their George Wallace game is not going to change the ruling. That was the terms as I stated them from the beginning. That you jumped before you read is not my problem. Are you reneging on the bet, Chickenfish?

there is no bet until both parties agree on all the terms and the meanings of all the words. The bet was not on how SCOTUS would rule, the bet was on whether your Ca marriage would become legal in all 50 states.

You then tried to change and terms and breached the contract. But I understand, its what libs do every day.

My wording has been the same from the beginning, Chickenfish and yes, my wording is that the SCOTUS is going to make my legal marriage legal and recognized in all 50 states. No nullification loopholes. You weren't careful and now you're weasleling. It's okay Chickenfish, I win either way.

No, you were and are a loser regardless of your failed attempt to lure me into a word game bet.

If you want to bet on how SC will rule, thats one thing, if you want to bet on whether gay marriage will be sanctioned by all 50 states, that is a completely different bet.

On the first I will not bet because SCOTUS has made many strange rulings recently. On the second I will bet, but you won't.

So lets move on to something important, like the fact that our country is 18 trillion dollars in debt and getting deeper every hour.

There was never a "word game", Chickenfish. I was clear from the start. I said that when the SCOTUS rules, my civil marriage will be legally recognized in all 50 states. Alabama illegally ignoring Federal law in a Wallace way does not create a loophole for you.

 

[Conservative65]

Serious replies only!!
I do not want to offend anyone, so keep your rude comments to yourself. I just want to understand why someone would oppose gay marriage and such, so I figured this was the best way to go about it.
Why are gays hated in America?

So sad you assume those of us who oppose same sex marriage hate those wanting one. I don't like the fact that because someone made a choice to have kids they can't support I, as a taxpayer, am forced to support a choice I was told was none of my business when it was being made. However, that doesn't mean I hate the person that receives the handouts.

Again, hate is the only motivating factor behind seeking to deny gay Americans their civil rights, as there is no rational, objective argument in support of doing so that pursues a legitimate legislative end.

Now, this isn't the 'hate' where you wish to physically harm a gay person, but the hate that manifest as a consequence of fear and ignorance, an animus that seeks to harm gay Americans by denying them their right to equal protection of the law.

It can't be fear and ignorance. I'm very well aware of what homosexual means and damn sure aren't afraid of any faggot.