There are very few "in-your-face" gays. I realize that those are the ones you see on TV, and possibly the only ones you have any experience with, but most gay people are too ashamed (I guess, I couldn't really find the right word) to be open about it in fear of it changing people's opinion of them. I go to a liberal arts university, my room mate is gay, and most of my very best friends are gay... They are NOT the flaming, overtly-homosexual type. They simply want what everyone else has, and I don't see why they shouldn't get it. There is absolutely no law ANYWHERE that has EVER said who marriage should be between.
That is incorrect. There are laws in every single state that dictate the stipulations of the marriage contract: you may not marry a relative, you may not marry underage, and etc.
Let's not fill the thread with falsehoods. If you don't know, ask. If you think you know, research. If you're sure you do know, double check.
For someone who is for the government staying out of private life, you sure do have mixed views.... You advocate that the government can't tell you what to do with your guns, but turn around and say that they should be allowed to tell the people who can and can't get married? I don't see how that can work out...
What part of
Constitutionally protected right are you not getting? I have no right to get married. I do have a right to firearms. Do they not teach the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in school any more?
Regardless, marriage is a STATE issue, not a federal one. State law is and should be the will of the people that reside within that state. While that is still government
per se, it is not on the level of government that is firearms or any other Constitutional issue.
You say you wouldn't be so against it if they would shut up... But if they weren't vocal about their views, do you REALLY think they would be heard? Do you think slaves would have suddenly gained their freedom if they didn't say anything or try to do something about it? Do you think some Georgia Cracker would have just said "Ya know, I thank keepin' these here Negroes as slaves is jus' wrong! We oughta let 'em go free; treat 'em like real human bein's!"
I HIGHLY doubt it.
Good LORD, man! You need a refund for your tuition, brother.
It wasn't a Georgia cracker. It was a Kentucky cracker. His name was Abraham Lincoln. And before you call my ability to understand you into question - yes, of course the blacks were vocal about their equality. But it was a WHITE man -- many of them, actually -- that knew it was immoral; they didn't need someone to tell them it was, as all men being created equal wasn't lost on them.
But here you and they go again: comparing yourselves to blacks. I said before that you cannot prove that they are born that way, and you cannot. A black man cannot help being black. It is discrimination to deny a black man the same rights as a white man. Comparing that to a choice in sexual partner is as absurd as it is insulting.
You say that you don't care if they're gay and don't care if they are married... Then why argue so vehemently against it? Who are you arguing this with, me or yourself? Are you trying to prove to ME that you don't care about it? Or trying to fool yourself into thinking that you're right?
You say you don't want your money to go to their "sick" need to be legally married... What do you think is more costly, a marriage or a divorce? The choir director at a church we often collaborate choirs with is gay. He and his partner have been together for going on 25 years. A woman in my church choir has already had 2 husbands, and says that they deserve to be married before she does... Again.
How would gays being allowed to marry take from your tax dollars anyway?
I'm not going to sit here and list the tax laws associated with marriage to you. Educate yourself. They are numerous, and if you pay taxes then part of your money goes to the tax breaks of married individuals.
What I said was accurate: I do not care if they want to marry. I supported and still do support their legal union.
I object to their tactics and the slippery slope they constantly employ to override the will of the people.
Let me say that again:
it is the precedent it sets.
See, first they said, "Hey, all we want is to not be treated differently." Poof, the government makes hate laws protecting them.
Good enough? Nope. Read on, Macbeth!
Then they ran right back to the same legislature and said, "We demand that homosexuality be taught in schools as natural!" A heavy sigh was heard, as well as loud outcry from the people, but they were now considered "equal" and, therefore, had a right not to be discriminated against in school.
Done now, right? Think again.
"We want civil unions! That's all we want!" The government said NO - resoundingly. Marriage, they determined, was between one man and one woman of consenting age that were not related by blood. "Oh, no, we don't want marriage! We just want the legal rights. We'll never want marriage itself. Give us civil unions instead and we'll be happy."
So the government once again cowed to their pressure and reversed the decision. They were granted civil unions, as well as the current DA/DT policy in the military.
Guess where that led us? Now they want the very term "marriage" changed to include them! To HELL with over 200 years of American Christian values. I am special, hear me roar, gimme gimme gimme. And suddenly, DA/DT is also inadequate!
And this after they said they wouldn't! Does it ever end? What's next, a gay stimulus package to steal more of my money?
I am fed up with their crap. All of it. I have never discriminated against anyone just because they're gay. But because I respect the Judeo-Christian values the founders of our Constitution built this nation on, I am CONSTANTLY labeled a bigot and told I AM discriminatory. Iowa just said so, for crying out loud.
This is the slippery slope, the precedent, that I fear. It's never enough with them. Give them an inch and they want a mile, to borrow the adage. They pervade almost every aspect of daily life. They're plastered over the TV - the show isn't "hip" if it doesn't have flamers in it (and yes, I know most gays are not flamers, but that is the embellishment of Hollywood for you). Every day they are on the news screaming about their so-called oppression. They have even invaded the schools to proselytize their garbage to kids! KIDS! I don't want my kids learning about sexual preference in public school - what part of the three R's does THAT fall under?
More than that, though, is what they take away from the rest of us to get the special treatment they want. I refuse to allow them to take marriage away, too. Enough is freaking enough. When you're talking about changing the very foundation this nation was built on, I draw the line. The forefathers are spinning in their graves. Liberals are wrecking this REPUBLIC, and they are in cahoots with the gays to make us Europe, part deux. Well, I don't want to be Little Europe. I enjoy being rogue. It's why we seceded in the first place!
I'm all for gays being happy. Honestly. I never have and never will want anything to block their happiness, any more than I want barriers in the way of my own happiness.
But I am also for keeping the tenets that is the nation of the United States of America. Gay marriage is not in keeping with that foundation, in my humble opinion.
We've taken God out of everything. Whether you believe in Him or not, our founding fathers did. The laws they enacted and the rights they bestowed upon us are faith based.
And no, I don't believe that all gay people are going to hell. I'm not God, and it isn't my decision. I have no room to judge anyone, as I have enough sins of my own to contend with. And I do believe that SOME people are born gay, just like some people are born geniuses and some people are born alcoholics. But I say that the vast majority of them are making a decision. They are liberals that want America to change.
Between their whining and sniveling and moaning about how I oppress them, I am just fed up with it. Move to France. What's wrong with civil unions? Why attack the tradition of the definition that is "marriage?" There's one reason and one reason ONLY to want that change, and it isn't equality.
It's nothing against anyone that is honestly gay. It's the social changes I object to.
