Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/16/georgia.gay.marriage.ap/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05 /16/georgia.gay.marriage.ap/index.html</a> If nobody wants to ban this topic, then try and behave when posting in it.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy 78% of the people in Georgia voted against gay marriage. 78%!!! I know there is a debate about the legality of gay marriage. I personally as you know, don't think there is any way in the world you can argue that gay marriage is legal or that anyone is being discriminatied against. But that's not the main point. The main point is that the people of GA. put gay marriage on the ballot, they voted on it, and SEVENTY EIGHT percent of the people said no gay marriage. Then, along comes ONE judge who overrides the people. An activist judge. All this is going to do is make the conservatives push to amend the constitution so this BS will stop. If the libs want to wake the sleeping giant, keep pushing gay marriage in a place where 78% of the people VOTED against it. There, that was civil and to the point.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Senate majority leader bill frist is going to re-introduce the "Defense Of Marriage" constitutional amendment next month. He says ... >> "Right now marriage is under attack in this country," Frist said on CNN. "And we've seen activist judges overturning state by state law, where state legislatures have passed laws defining marriage between a man and a woman, and that's being overturned by a handful of activist judges around the country. And that is why we need an amendment to come to the floor of the United States Senate to define marriage as that union between one man and one woman." << And yet, one of these "activist judges" had this to say in STPs link ... >> "People who believe marriages between men and women should have a unique and privileged place in our society may also believe that same-sex relationships should have some place -- although not marriage," she wrote. The single-subject rule in the state constitution "protects the right of those people to hold both views and reflect both judgments by their vote," the judge said. << Now which of these statements seems more sensible and level-headed to you? And why do you suppose the republicans would dust off a non-starter like DOM and serve it up right before the upcoming mid-term elections? Could it be a crass attempt to appease GOP "values voters" at the expense of the rights of one class of the public? DOM is unconstitutional on it's own merits, and also would require ratification by two thirds of the states - never gonna happen and everyone including frist knows it. It's a ham-fisted political trick solely designed to manipulate dumb GOP voters. There's just no other reason for this maneuver. It worked before, will it work again? Hard to say. There are certainly plenty of dumb GOP voters, but there are also plenty who can see right through this ploy. These people would hopefully resent the GOP using our constitution to pander for cheap political points. It's possible that it could blow up in their face, and it deserves to. If this is the kind of "leadership" that the GOP is offering these days, they deserve whatever they get.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder The line that marriage is under attackis just so much bull excretement. I married a woman, but not for one millisecond do I feel my marriage is under attack because Fred wants to marry Ricky or Ethel wants to marry Lucy. Our marriage is still special to me because its OURS. What anyone else does is their business, and doesn't bother me in the slightest. If some feels their marriage is threatened, then they had problems with their marriage before this came along.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Every place gay marriage has been legalized, it has effected regular marriage in a negative way. Children born out of wedlock skyrockets and the family unit gets hurt. And that's only for starters. To say " I am married to my wife so what do I care " is being blind to the real social and cultural outcome. We have fought about this so many times I'm not going to get into it again. In fact, I need to pack for Vegas baby! I wish RC Collins, Eric Paddon, or Douglas would weigh in on this. They always framed the argument for traditional marriage very well. When 78% of the people in a state vote for something ( no gay marriage ), and they all get the middle finger from a single activist judge who uses flawed legal logic to change the meaning of marriage, you can expect the people to rise up like Frist is talking about. And rise up they will, especially in a state like Georgia. I hope they do bring it up again in congres. The country does not want to change the meaning of marriage... period.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <a href="http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmNlNWYxNmZjMjVjNjEzYjdhODAwYmFiYTUwMWQyMTM=" target="_blank">http://article.nationalreview. com/?q=NmNlNWYxNmZjMjVjNjEzYjdhODAwYmFiYTUwMWQyMTM=</a>
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By Beaumandy From the excellent link Douglas provided. "Does this mean same-sex partnerships did nothing to contribute to Swedish marital decline? Not on your life. In "The Marriage Mentality" I showed how same-sex partnerships are pushing Sweden toward recognition of triple and quadruple parenting. And in "Fanatical Swedish Feminists," I showed how Sweden's same-sex partnerships have opened the way for a drive to abolish marriage and recognize polyamory. Eskridge talks about "nordic bliss." Read "Fanatical Swedish Feminists" and you'll see a nordic nightmare. When it comes to "slippery slope" issues, the impact of same-sex partnerships on Sweden is quite strong." And STPH, let's keep this nice. You know the word " phobic " makes me want to leave "nice mode" because that word is a lame ploy to stop the discussion.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <--- Swedish and proud of it!! <<The main point is that the people of GA. put gay marriage on the ballot, they voted on it, and SEVENTY EIGHT percent of the people said no gay marriage.>> That is the most totally defenseless position a person can take towards outlawing gay marriage. So 78% oppose it. So effin what?? We have the Republic form of Democracy in the United States because the founding fathers were wise enough to know that the average citizen doesn't know diddly-squat. Would any of the following have passed a referendum? Giving women the right to vote? Giving Blacks the right to vote? Having America become involved in WWII? Allowing inter-racial marriage? Guaranteeing the rights of U.S. citizens without respect to age, race, sex, or country of origin? You know darned good and well that NONE of those things would have been approved. The public can't be trusted to vote on stinking stadium issues... how on earth could you trust them to vote on something more important than that? God save us from the tyranny of the majority. That is exactly what our founding fathers tried to do for us. Thank God for that.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder My marriage is strong enough to handle someone else's same sex marriage. It isn't even an issue. If yours isn't, have a heart to heart with your partner. It's obviously necessary.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Swedes.... Yeah, right.> Sure, let's ignore the one place where gay marriage has been allowed long enough to actually see how it affects society.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <You know darned good and well that NONE of those things would have been approved.> No, I don't know that. Time and education can change minds, if the idea is a good one.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <My marriage is strong enough to handle someone else's same sex marriage. It isn't even an issue. If yours isn't, have a heart to heart with your partner.> That's not the argument. It's not about individuals, it's about societies.
