Rep Steve King: Same-Sex Marriage Is ‘A Purely Socialist Concept’

[Modbert]

I don't know if it's a socialist concept or not, but the voters should have been allowed to decide on this issue rather than the Iowa Supreme Court.

Forty-one percent say they would vote for a ban, and 40 percent say they would vote to continue gay marriage. The rest either would not vote or say they are not sure.

Iowa Poll: Iowans evenly divided on gay marriage ban | DesMoinesRegister.com | The Des Moines Register

What a great chance to use this quote from one of the Founding Fathers.

"Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." - Thomas Jefferson

 

[xsited1]

I don't know if it's a socialist concept or not, but the voters should have been allowed to decide on this issue rather than the Iowa Supreme Court.

Forty-one percent say they would vote for a ban, and 40 percent say they would vote to continue gay marriage. The rest either would not vote or say they are not sure.

Iowa Poll: Iowans evenly divided on gay marriage ban | DesMoinesRegister.com | The Des Moines Register

What a great chance to use this quote from one of the Founding Fathers.

"Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." - Thomas Jefferson

They were talking about the Republic. This is at the State level.

 

[Shogun]

indeed. We should probably go ahead and let Georgia vote to put ******* back in the fields too.


after all... Reagan ran his first campaign on STATES RIGHTS...

And after that, states can vote on the right to kill "Socialists."

sure thing! but, before you reach for your gun go ahead and take a look at that laser dot hovering over your sternum. Thanks to a super majority we might have to go ahead and pass the "Exterm-a-Conserv" bill before you even get to the '10 ballot box.

 

[Modbert]

sure thing! but, before you reach for your gun go ahead and take a look at that laser dot hovering over your sternum. Thanks to a super majority we might have to go ahead and pass the "Exterm-a-Conserv" bill before you even get to the '10 ballot box.

What I find amazing about Republicans is they're all for Federal Amendments to ban things like Gay Marriage but also all for taking away Federal Amendments making Abortion legal by saying it's unconstitutional.

Doublespeak and doublethink if they actually believe that bullshit.

 

[Article 15]

It's a perfectly good reason why there should be a national lifting of bans on same sex marriage.

If we left things like civil liberties up to the states the south would still be stuck in the year 1850.

 

[rdean]

Republicans - I hate those "in your face gays".

Everyman - Do you know any gays?

Republicans - No, and I don't want to either. Always "in your face".

Everyman - If you don't know any, then how are they "in your face".

Republicans - Oh man, you DEFEND them, you must BE one.

Everyman - No, I'm just trying to find out why you are so concerned with people you don't know.

Republicans - Because they want to destroy the institution of marriage. I won't let it happen. Marriage means a lot to me. I've been married five times.

Everyman - How would they destroy it?

Republicans - Hey, you sure you ain't gay?

Everyman - No, how would they destroy it?

Republicans - Because they would marry dogs. Rick Santorum told me so and Republicans would never lie. We're the party of God.

Everyman - you go to church?

Republicans - Damn right. We go to the "Facesitters" every Saturday Night and church every Sunday morning.

Everyman - What's "Facesitters"?

Republicans - It's a swingers club. A place where we swap wives for a night. Spices up our sex life.

Everyman - OOOO Kaaaay. So what is it about the gays you don't like?

Republicans - They have sex with each other. They entice our teens and our church pastor.

blah blah blah

 

[Lost Soul]

indeed. We should probably go ahead and let Georgia vote to put ******* back in the fields too.


after all... Reagan ran his first campaign on STATES RIGHTS...

Talk about racists.......

 

[blu]

I never stated those people had any party affiliation. stupidity knows no bounds and all I was saying is that his chant about socialism is just as logical as the posters in that sign.

 

[Shogun]

indeed. We should probably go ahead and let Georgia vote to put ******* back in the fields too.


after all... Reagan ran his first campaign on STATES RIGHTS...

Talk about racists.......

talk about clueless........

 

[xsited1]

It's a perfectly good reason why there should be a national lifting of bans on same sex marriage.

If we left things like civil liberties up to the states the south would still be stuck in the year 1850.

You're making the assumption that same sex marriage is a civil liberties issue. It's not that simple.

 

[Lost Soul]

indeed. We should probably go ahead and let Georgia vote to put ******* back in the fields too.


after all... Reagan ran his first campaign on STATES RIGHTS...

Talk about racists.......

talk about clueless........

I am not the one whining about racists in the 1950's while being a racist in the 2000's.

Using racist slurs only makes you look like the asshole you are.

 

[Shogun]

It's a perfectly good reason why there should be a national lifting of bans on same sex marriage.

If we left things like civil liberties up to the states the south would still be stuck in the year 1850.

You're making the assumption that same sex marriage is a civil liberties issue. It's not that simple.

sure it is. If the assumption is that individual liberty is a primary concern of our culture then there is a logical relationship between the civil rights of minorities and the civil rights of gays. Indeed, we see a lot of the same rhetoric regurgitated in the same arguments against both.

 

[Neser Boha]

It's a perfectly good reason why there should be a national lifting of bans on same sex marriage.

If we left things like civil liberties up to the states the south would still be stuck in the year 1850.

Exactly the same point I wanted to make. Thanks for doing it for me.

I'd just like to add.

What is it with people unwilling to extend the rights they are themselves enjoying to others? I will never understand that.

 

[Shogun]

Talk about racists.......

talk about clueless........

I am not the one whining about racists in the 1950's while being a racist in the 2000's.

Using racist slurs only makes you look like the asshole you are.

No, using exact vocabulary highlights the failure of your position. Clearly, you were able to grasp the sarcasm involved. <- being ironic like the quote above. <- Not being ironic. But, I have to say, it's pretty funny that you'd pretend that all the racist dems of yesteryear didn't hop ship to the grand ole party in a pretty infamous southern strategy. Don't blame me if your political ideology gets to play the role of the antagonist in Civil Rights Era drama.

 

[Neser Boha]

It's a perfectly good reason why there should be a national lifting of bans on same sex marriage.

If we left things like civil liberties up to the states the south would still be stuck in the year 1850.

You're making the assumption that same sex marriage is a civil liberties issue. It's not that simple.

sure it is. If the assumption is that individual liberty is a primary concern of our culture then there is a logical relationship between the civil rights of minorities and the civil rights of gays. Indeed, we see a lot of the same rhetoric regurgitated in the same arguments against both.

I agree with xsited. It really is not THAT simple. Why? Because some people take their imaginary buddies way too seriously.

 

[bodecea]

yea because a contract between two consenting adults always leads to incest. he reminds me of these idiots:

If you really want the truth, they were democrats standing on the capital protesting civil rights not republicans.

What do you want to guess their party affiliation is now?

 

[xsited1]

It's a perfectly good reason why there should be a national lifting of bans on same sex marriage.

If we left things like civil liberties up to the states the south would still be stuck in the year 1850.

You're making the assumption that same sex marriage is a civil liberties issue. It's not that simple.

sure it is. If the assumption is that individual liberty is a primary concern of our culture then there is a logical relationship between the civil rights of minorities and the civil rights of gays. Indeed, we see a lot of the same rhetoric regurgitated in the same arguments against both.

You may see it as black and white, but there are plenty of gray areas in this debate. There are many in the religious community, specifically Muslims, that view homosexuality as an abomination. And there are still many who believe that many gays are that way because of physical and/or sexual abuse. Scientists have discovered certain chemical imbalances which might lead to homosexual tendencies. Imagine if a treatment is devised to counter this imbalance. You can't stop science. No, this debate is far from over.

 

[xsited1]

You're making the assumption that same sex marriage is a civil liberties issue. It's not that simple.

sure it is. If the assumption is that individual liberty is a primary concern of our culture then there is a logical relationship between the civil rights of minorities and the civil rights of gays. Indeed, we see a lot of the same rhetoric regurgitated in the same arguments against both.

I agree with xsited. It really is not THAT simple. Why? Because some people take their imaginary buddies way too seriously.

I don't consider Science to be an 'imaginary buddy'.

 

[Shogun]

You're making the assumption that same sex marriage is a civil liberties issue. It's not that simple.

sure it is. If the assumption is that individual liberty is a primary concern of our culture then there is a logical relationship between the civil rights of minorities and the civil rights of gays. Indeed, we see a lot of the same rhetoric regurgitated in the same arguments against both.

I agree with xsited. It really is not THAT simple. Why? Because some people take their imaginary buddies way too seriously.

many people take their personal reasons way to seriously. But, again, if the assumption is that of individual liberty it really doesn't (shouldn't) matter.

 

[Shogun]

You're making the assumption that same sex marriage is a civil liberties issue. It's not that simple.

sure it is. If the assumption is that individual liberty is a primary concern of our culture then there is a logical relationship between the civil rights of minorities and the civil rights of gays. Indeed, we see a lot of the same rhetoric regurgitated in the same arguments against both.

You may see it as black and white, but there are plenty of gray areas in this debate. There are many in the religious community, specifically Muslims, that view homosexuality as an abomination. And there are still many who believe that many gays are that way because of physical and/or sexual abuse. Scientists have discovered certain chemical imbalances which might lead to homosexual tendencies. Imagine if a treatment is devised to counter this imbalance. You can't stop science. No, this debate is far from over.

One could argue that there are gray areas in ANY debate. But that doesn't minimize that you advocate the limitations of personal liberties based on unfounded concern or your own personal beliefs. I have beliefs too. should your liberty depend on the conformation to my beliefs? I don't care if christians, muslims, atheists, mormons, catholics, or whatever has an opinion about it. The personal decision for a man to suck another man's dick really has no repercussion for any of them. Your opinion of the root cause of homosexuality is a non-issue to personal liberty. If I diagnosed your genetic tendency to believe in a god down to a gene does that invalidate your faith? Should my opinion of the historic cultural downfalls of similar belief systems impede your prerogative to act how you will in expression of this faith?


But, we've seen what "science" you reference already. I invite you to post your evidence before i pounce so... Please, trade me the "Scientists have discovered" and "Many People who believe" for some links and actual names.