it takes a man and a woman in some way to have children
sure there's alternatives like adoption, in vitro ....and others
but in the end it still takes a man and a woman to have a baby
without that formula extinction would occur at some point
so flip it around all you like...these are the facts
the dense guy
But some people are not attracted to the opposite sex and there is no reason to deny them marriage.
another problem created by the government that the government has to create more laws and regulations to fix ........
marriage should be a religious ceremony and no special rights, tax breaks, etc. should be based on anyone's marital status......
it's ridiculous that married folks, straight or gay, would have different tax rates, inheritance rules, etc. .....
Also it should be noted that opposing a govt law or regulation does not always equal opposing the stated intent of the law or regulation.
I think women should be paid the same for equal work and equal value. But some regulations with that stated intent may look more like affirmative action or quotas which I would oppose.
Marriage law is already here. The law voted on last Tuesday allows same-sex couples to marry, expands the list of people you can't marry, and states that religious bodies cannot face legal liability for refusing to perform a marriage. Actually, I believe the law actually simplifies the list of people you can't marry, as instead of separate lists for men and women, there is now one list.
Dieser Weg wird kein leichter sein; dieser Weg wird steinig und schwer.
Nicht mit vielen wirst du dir einig sein, doch dieses Leben bietet so viel mehr. --Xavier Naidoo
I just do not see any societal problems that legalizing same~sex marriage causes. Rather, I suspect it will actually strengthen the family unit in general.
I wonder what the divorce rate among gay couples will be in 25 years? Will it mirror the failure rate of heterosexual marriages, be worse, or be much better?
the use of the tax code by incumbents to take care of their interest and to impart their vision of what the world should look like is the primary source of their power and one of the biggest problems with this country today .......
the Fairtax is the way to go, a revenue neutral tax plan that leaves the social engineering to the churches ......
Diversity of thought is as critical as diversity in sexual, ethnic, racial and cultural aspects, right?
And of course, you do give a rats arse about what others think concerning gay marriage, because without that, your position would be irrelevant. It's certainly not gay people that got this passed, as your numbers are too low. For you, on this matter, it's the larger straight population that decided.
My point is that Smokey can think I'm not normal and it doesn't bug me. I didn't fight for the right to marry my partner so people like him could think I am normal, as he seems to think. As for the votes, I'll talk to people who are legitimately interested in having a conversation about why marriage equality is important. If someone shows themselves to be nothing but full of poorly thought out excuses for denying gays equality, then no, I dot care about their opinion or views.
like to put words in other peoples mouths do ya...I knew sooner or later you would do it. It's who you are....
one more time
a man and woman have a child (THE NORM).....without this equation extinction would occur....it's undeniable.
This is one last post from me on this thread to finalize what I tried to say. First of all I was attacked relentlessly on this thread by people who had a "knee jerk" reaction to what they thought I was saying. If they actually read and understood what I was saying they would have seen that I did not say one negative thing about homosexuals. What I opposed was the creep of "Newspeak" into our culture that is intended to change the way people think. I oppose any kind of insidious coercion on principle. I didn't oppose gays having all the rights of everyone else and support the concept of "civil unions". I do believe that a man and woman is different than a man and a man or a woman and a woman and that is why I believe there should be two different terms for the institution. But being different is not necessarily a negative thing. Most of you who took me to task on this thread never took the time to actually listen to what I was saying. I know my point was probably lost on most of you because you don't understand people who are as defiant as I am. Anyway I am done with this thread and in hindsight I probably should have left it alone and used another thread or started one of my own to make the points I was trying to make.
So yes, congratulations to bmoreteacher, Baltimatt and all the others who supported SSM. I would have preferred it be called a "civil union" but the people have spoken and that is the way it should be.
Last edited by Smokey 1; 11-13-2012 at 09:41 PM.
|Terms of Service | Search/Archive | Feedback | Contact Information | DC50tv |
Baltimore Sun | Chicago Tribune | Daily Press | Hartford Courant | LA Times | Orlando Sentinel | Sun Sentinel
The Morning Call | The Virginia Gazette
Baltimore Sun, 501 N. Calvert Street, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore, MD 21278