Originally posted by DeadDOG

Originally posted by upallnight

Originally posted by zchmrkenhoff

While many people seem to enjoy their little cult who believe that all change is good, giving supreme rights to the individual is always the right course of action, and that moving towards anarchy while refusing to call it anarchy is the best thing possible, there are still a silent majority of Americans who refuse to let a vocal few ruin everything. There are people who don't want to abandon their traditions, wish to stay true to their church and preserve the integrity of their society. I commend these people who wish to live in a society of order and decency.

While America is supposed to be the land of the free, I believe we're using that term to literally. It isn't supposed to be complete freedom and total chaos... stop before it is too late. Do we really need to descend even further into moral discourse before we look back at these American experiment and realize that people DO need to have structure and traditional values in their lives? 

The belief that all social constraints, moral barriers, and traditions is wrong is a belief that is intent on destroying civilization and everything associated with it. So while you liberal few seek to leave us all in anarchy with gay marriage, then incest marriage, and whatever other disgusting causes you wish to support, always know that the silent majority are opposed,.

Nice try.  Order and decency, huh?  So you're one of those people that claim you're for freedom and equality as long as it doesn't offend you?

Traditional values do change.  Like interracial marriages.  And thank God (yes, God) they do.  Because most of the time those changes mean that someone is coming out from under the thumb of someone else's oppressive ideas of what is "decent" or "traditional" or "right" or "wrong".

Like I've said before, my belief, my church, and my religion do not say that homosexuality is wrong.  Our churches tradition is to perform gay marriages and we believe they are done with the Lord's blessing.  How dare you think it is okay in America to use the federal government to promote one religion over another!  That IS in the Constitution.  And that is to be taken quite literally.  And the behavior of trying to squelch and diminish the beliefs of my church are illegal by Constitutional standards.

a few things if we use the right or wrong argument we are still eating of the tree of good and evil.

God wants us all to make our own choice in what to do.
Yes he wants us to love him. But more then that he wants that to be our choice.

How can you believe its ok to Force everyone to support your idea of what is right?
I support people in making there own choice. Just do not force us to support you in the choice you make if we do not agree with it.

And can you tell me what bible do you use in your church?

God told me to tell you that he's not talking to you, and you've got it all wrong.

Originally posted by Zindaihas

Originally posted by upallnight

Nice try.  Order and decency, huh?  So you're one of those people that claim you're for freedom and equality as long as it doesn't offend you?

Traditional values do change.  Like interracial marriages.  And thank God (yes, God) they do.  Because most of the time those changes mean that someone is coming out from under the thumb of someone else's oppressive ideas of what is "decent" or "traditional" or "right" or "wrong".

Like I've said before, my belief, my church, and my religion do not say that homosexuality is wrong.  Our churches tradition is to perform gay marriages and we believe they are done with the Lord's blessing.  How dare you think it is okay in America to use the federal government to promote one religion over another!  That IS in the Constitution.  And that is to be taken quite literally.  And the behavior of trying to squelch and diminish the beliefs of my church are illegal by Constitutional standards.

 

What's your faith?  It's not biblical Christianity, which unquestionably says that homosexuality is a sin.  Mind you, I'm not accusing you of not being a Christian, but you said that your belief, your church and your religion do not say that homosexuality is wrong.  So from where do you draw your belief?

Again, this is not a judgment either.  The primary tenet of Christianity is love.  God loves unconditionally regardless of who you are or what you do.  But His Word points out that there are clearly things which go against His nature.  And homosexuality is one of those things.

You talked about traditional values changing.  Perhaps they do.  But God's Word is immutable.  It has not changed from the time He gave it to man.  Those things which were sins back in ancient times are still sins to this day.  Interracial marraige was never a sin, it has just been regarded as wrong by many societies based mostly, I believe, on cultural attitudes that races should not be mixed.  Since America is a nation of immigrants from people all around the world, mixed marraiges were inevitable, eventually leading to the breakdown of that attitude.  It's possible to dilute ethnicity as the races mix.  It is impossible to dilute sexes.  There will always be only two, male and female.

You also mentioned your church.  Every church in the world can choose to take one of two positions with regard to church and scripture.  It can choose to place the church as preeminent over the scriptures, or it can make scripture preeminent.  Since the church is made up of human beings who are fallible and God's Word is not, a church which makes scripture preeminent is preferable, in my view.  It sounds to me like your church might place itself above scripture.

In the same book of the Bible where it says homosexuality is a sin, it also says Usury, charging interest is a  sin.

Yet the same "Christians" that are against homosexuality have no problem buying a house and paying interest, or owning a CD that pays interest.

It's nothing more than picking and choosing, based on what you like, and what you don't like.

Leviticus 25:35-38

"Thou shalt not give him thy money upon usury, nor lend him thy victuals for increase."

Originally posted by Vato26

 

No one is forcing you to pay for anything.  Same-sex marriage forces you to pay nothing more than heterosexual marriages.  So, based on your argument, no marriages should be allowed as they apparently cost the whole US taxpayers money.  I think the tinfoil from your hat is retarding your mental processes.

 

A marriage involves a contract between two people.

I'll say gay or straight they're responsible for the bill.

End of line.

Originally posted by Dekron

Originally posted by Gameloading 

It is for equality. It has always been about equality.

My point is merely whether this push for homo marriage would be so great if all benefits for hetero-marriage were taken away (tax breaks, etc.).

I don't think taking all tax breaks away etc is the best solution, but at the same time i'd rather have no benefits for anyone than the current rule of only giving benefits to certain types of marriages.

one way is that gay couples get the same benefits straigth couples get. Straigth couples would keep the current benefits and homosexuals would be treated as equals.

I personally think only couples who have children, doesn't matter if they are born or adopted, should receive financial benefits.

That's where the issue is today. Unfortunately, there are many people who don't want homosexuals to be treated as equals.

Originally posted by DeadDOG

or in your case 2 people of the same sex.

Well, my wife is going to be surprised at that one.

Originally posted by Dekron

Originally posted by DeadDOG

or in your case 2 people of the same sex.

Well, my wife is going to be surprised at that one.

 

A'ha!  I knew it!

sorry did not mean you as in you but as in you the Homosexuals.

but i take it you get what i mean.

Why should Homosexuals have more rights then the single heterosexuals
and forcing people to support a union that is against there religion destroying there 1st amendment rights.

Originally posted by DeadDOG

sorry did not mean you as in you but as in you the Homosexuals.

but i take it you get what i mean.

 

Why should Homosexuals have more rights then the single heterosexuals
and forcing people to support a union that is against there religion destroying there 1st amendment rights.

Equal protection. Look it up.

Originally posted by DeadDOG

sorry did not mean you as in you but as in you the Homosexuals.

but i take it you get what i mean.

 

Why should Homosexuals have more rights then the single heterosexuals
and forcing people to support a union that is against there religion destroying there 1st amendment rights.

1. Stop parroting what you have already said before.  It shows lack of originality when you keep cut and pasting the same things over and over and over again.
2. Same-sex couples will NOT have more rights than heterosexual couples when same-sex couples are allowed to marry.  Only your paranoia-infected brain thinks that.
3. And, again, stop the parroting of the "destruction of the 1st amendment" crap.  It's already been proven that you are wrong on this subject.  Yet, you keep on spouting the same fearmongering tactics with completely false information.  Wait...  you're starting to sound like good ol' GW Bush.

Marriage is a public acceptance of a union (of a man and woman.) or as some want 2 people of the same sex.
The problem is the public is not accepting the union.

And the minority is using the courts to Force the Public to accepted there union. (the people have voted against it.)

And Forcing the People to accepted something that is against our 1st amendment rights, and this is Just wrong.

Now if marriage was just a legal contract between two people. That did not offer any benefits paid by the Tax payer. Then the public would not have a voice or vote in this.
 

Vato26 why are you telling me what to do.

you seem to want to attack me because you do not like what i am telling you. are you going to plug your ears and scream lah lah lah i can't hear you??

now if you want to know why its against our 1st amendment rights, you might want to Read the 1st Amendment.

Originally posted by DeadDOG

Marriage is a public acceptance of a union (of a man and woman.) or as some want 2 people of the same sex.
The problem is the public is not accepting the union.

And the minority is using the courts to Force the Public to accepted there union. (the people have voted against it.)

And Forcing the People to accepted something that is against our 1st amendment rights, and this is Just wrong.

Now if marriage was just a legal contract between two people. That did not offer any benefits paid by the Tax payer. Then the public would not have a voice or vote in this.
 

 

Vato26 why are you telling me what to do.

you seem to want to attack me because you do not like what i am telling you. are you going to plug your ears and scream lah lah lah i can't hear you??

now if you want to know why its against our 1st amendment rights, you might want to Read the 1st Amendment.

The first ammendment right prohibit congress from making laws respecting an establishment of religion. The problem is that the current laws do only respect certain establishments of religions, the ones that says only a man and woman can get married.

As long as marriage is state supported it is not public acceptance.

Originally posted by Gameloading

Originally posted by DeadDOG

Marriage is a public acceptance of a union (of a man and woman.) or as some want 2 people of the same sex.
The problem is the public is not accepting the union.

And the minority is using the courts to Force the Public to accepted there union. (the people have voted against it.)

And Forcing the People to accepted something that is against our 1st amendment rights, and this is Just wrong.

Now if marriage was just a legal contract between two people. That did not offer any benefits paid by the Tax payer. Then the public would not have a voice or vote in this.
 

 

Vato26 why are you telling me what to do.

you seem to want to attack me because you do not like what i am telling you. are you going to plug your ears and scream lah lah lah i can't hear you??

now if you want to know why its against our 1st amendment rights, you might want to Read the 1st Amendment.

 

The first ammendment right prohibit congress from making laws respecting an establishment of religion. The problem is that the current laws do only respect certain establishments of religions, the ones that says only a man and woman can get married.

As long as marriage is state supported it is not public acceptance.

Thank You!!!  

How someone cannot see that what is happening is the government choosing which religion is right and wrong is just closing their eyes.  All they have to do is a quick search to find that there are MANY churches in America that perform gay marriages and see them as holy and blessed in the eyes of the Lord.

That is my religious beliefs.  That is many others as well.  And that is what is practiced in my religion. 

And like you said, as long as the state is recognizing benefits afforded to one religion it must continue that recognition on to the others as well.

WT, the State is the people of the State. how is the State not public?
we the people of the state. ok so a state is a plot of land. so are you saying that the plot of land is supporting marriage?
or is it the people of the state? Oh I get it its the government of the state.. but in the USA the Government is a servant of the people.
dam again its the PEOPLE that are the public. wow 1+1 does = 2
lol I hope you can get this.

Originally posted by DeadDOG

WT, the State is the people of the State. how is the State not public?
we the people of the state. ok so a state is a plot of land. so are you saying that the plot of land is supporting marriage?
or is it the people of the state? Oh I get it its the government of the state.. but in the USA the Government is a servant of the people.
dam again its the PEOPLE that are the public. wow 1+1 does = 2
lol I hope you can get this.

The state still has to respect basic rules, such as the one mentioned int he first amendment. The state should not do whatever the majority demands if it goes against the first amendment.

There curent rule is no religion shall be favored over others and there should be a seperation between church and state. Sadly they don't actually respect this anymore.

You keep talking about a majority but what is really happening is that the religious belief of a majority is being favored.

Originally posted by upallnight

Originally posted by Gameloading

Originally posted by DeadDOG

Marriage is a public acceptance of a union (of a man and woman.) or as some want 2 people of the same sex.
The problem is the public is not accepting the union.

And the minority is using the courts to Force the Public to accepted there union. (the people have voted against it.)

And Forcing the People to accepted something that is against our 1st amendment rights, and this is Just wrong.

Now if marriage was just a legal contract between two people. That did not offer any benefits paid by the Tax payer. Then the public would not have a voice or vote in this.
 

 

Vato26 why are you telling me what to do.

you seem to want to attack me because you do not like what i am telling you. are you going to plug your ears and scream lah lah lah i can't hear you??

now if you want to know why its against our 1st amendment rights, you might want to Read the 1st Amendment.

 

The first ammendment right prohibit congress from making laws respecting an establishment of religion. The problem is that the current laws do only respect certain establishments of religions, the ones that says only a man and woman can get married.

As long as marriage is state supported it is not public acceptance.

Thank You!!!  

How someone cannot see that what is happening is the government choosing which religion is right and wrong is just closing their eyes.  All they have to do is a quick search to find that there are MANY churches in America that perform gay marriages and see them as holy and blessed in the eyes of the Lord.

That is my religious beliefs.  That is many others as well.  And that is what is practiced in my religion. 

And like you said, as long as the state is recognizing benefits afforded to one religion it must continue that recognition on to the others as well.

you really do not get it. but i can see why you think this.

one its not the Government that is respecting a Religion.

But The People of the state that are religious and are Free to be of the religion they want to be of. And this right is protected by the 1st Amendment in the constitution.

So the Free people of the State do not want to support homosexual marriage.
And seeing by the democratic process the majority has voted not to, see they are the ones paying for most of it. Your only option is to cry we are a minority.

So Now your argument is that your “we are a group of minorities” and we are not giving you the same rights as someone of the same sex.
But you have the same rights as someone of the same sex. ( heterosexuals can not marry someone of the same sex either.)

So you have to make a new group of people so you are now trying to group people according to sexual preferences.

And now clam my sexual preference group is not getting the same rights as this other sexual preference group. (am I right so far?)

So far you have managed to make your self a minority by sexual preference.
And might I add worked vary hard at trying to get in the line at the “i'm a poor minority window” to get your way.

But how can one tell sexual preference?
Its not like you can look at someone and see there skin or hair is a different color?

So how can we tell if you a homosexual, or a polyamory, or a heterosexual?
Are you Homosexuals going to deny the rights of the Polyamory people from getting married?
Or are you going to stop a heterosexual from marring someone of there same sex to get the benefits?

 www.pjtv.com/video/Ask_Dr_Helen/Threesomes%2C_Foursomesor_More%21__Why_Multiple_Partners_Can_Be_Great/2312/

Originally posted by DeadDOG

Originally posted by upallnight

Originally posted by Gameloading

Originally posted by DeadDOG

Marriage is a public acceptance of a union (of a man and woman.) or as some want 2 people of the same sex.
The problem is the public is not accepting the union.

And the minority is using the courts to Force the Public to accepted there union. (the people have voted against it.)

And Forcing the People to accepted something that is against our 1st amendment rights, and this is Just wrong.

Now if marriage was just a legal contract between two people. That did not offer any benefits paid by the Tax payer. Then the public would not have a voice or vote in this.
 

 

Vato26 why are you telling me what to do.

you seem to want to attack me because you do not like what i am telling you. are you going to plug your ears and scream lah lah lah i can't hear you??

now if you want to know why its against our 1st amendment rights, you might want to Read the 1st Amendment.

 

The first ammendment right prohibit congress from making laws respecting an establishment of religion. The problem is that the current laws do only respect certain establishments of religions, the ones that says only a man and woman can get married.

As long as marriage is state supported it is not public acceptance.

Thank You!!!  

How someone cannot see that what is happening is the government choosing which religion is right and wrong is just closing their eyes.  All they have to do is a quick search to find that there are MANY churches in America that perform gay marriages and see them as holy and blessed in the eyes of the Lord.

That is my religious beliefs.  That is many others as well.  And that is what is practiced in my religion. 

And like you said, as long as the state is recognizing benefits afforded to one religion it must continue that recognition on to the others as well.

 

you really do not get it. but i can see why you think this.

one its not the Government that is respecting a Religion.

But The People of the state that are religious and are Free to be of the religion they want to be of. And this right is protected by the 1st Amendment in the constitution.

So the Free people of the State do not want to support homosexual marriage.
And seeing by the democratic process the majority has voted not to, see they are the ones paying for most of it. Your only option is to cry we are a minority.

So Now your argument is that your “we are a group of minorities” and we are not giving you the same rights as someone of the same sex.
But you have the same rights as someone of the same sex. ( heterosexuals can not marry someone of the same sex either.)

 

So you have to make a new group of people so you are now trying to group people according to sexual preferences.

And now clam my sexual preference group is not getting the same rights as this other sexual preference group. (am I right so far?)

 

So far you have managed to make your self a minority by sexual preference.
And might I add worked vary hard at trying to get in the line at the “i'm a poor minority window” to get your way.

But how can one tell sexual preference?
Its not like you can look at someone and see there skin or hair is a different color?

So how can we tell if you a homosexual, or a polyamory, or a heterosexual?
Are you Homosexuals going to deny the rights of the Polyamory people from getting married?
Or are you going to stop a heterosexual from marring someone of there same sex to get the benefits?

 www.pjtv.com/video/Ask_Dr_Helen/Threesomes%2C_Foursomesor_More%21__Why_Multiple_Partners_Can_Be_Great/2312/

"Blacks have the same rights as whites do, they have the right to marry someone of their own color, just like whites".

That argument does not make any sense at all.  It didn't during the civil rights era for blacks and it makes the same ill sense for gays marrying.

I want to marry the person I love.  And my religion says it is fine. 

I think what you're not getting is that we pay taxes too.  And our taxes are being levied at a higher rate than someone who is having their marriage recognized while ours is not.  That is not equality.

And besides that, we don't live in a democracy.  Our country is a country that has a founding document that protects everyone.  The majority and the minority as equals.  I don't think too many people in America would want to live under a mob rules type government.  I really do not care how the majority views my religion.  They can think whatever the hell they want to about us.  But under the law, I do care what happens.  And what is happening to us in un-Constitutional.

Originally posted by upallnight 

I want to marry the person I love.  And my religion says it is fine.

I've read nearly all your posts regarding this subject and I must say you're by far the best "model" spokesman for your cause. You seem to be just a normal individual wanting to do as you state above.

What has always left me neutral on the subject is (which I have said before) the awful, flamboyant, Bruno-esque type behavior. However, each one of your posts I read chips away and makes me think "What the hell, let them marry".

You seem a cool guy. I hope for you to have a happy life.

Originally posted by DeadDOG

Originally posted by upallnight

Originally posted by Gameloading

Originally posted by DeadDOG

Marriage is a public acceptance of a union (of a man and woman.) or as some want 2 people of the same sex.
The problem is the public is not accepting the union.

And the minority is using the courts to Force the Public to accepted there union. (the people have voted against it.)

And Forcing the People to accepted something that is against our 1st amendment rights, and this is Just wrong.

Now if marriage was just a legal contract between two people. That did not offer any benefits paid by the Tax payer. Then the public would not have a voice or vote in this.
 

 

Vato26 why are you telling me what to do.

you seem to want to attack me because you do not like what i am telling you. are you going to plug your ears and scream lah lah lah i can't hear you??

now if you want to know why its against our 1st amendment rights, you might want to Read the 1st Amendment.

 

The first ammendment right prohibit congress from making laws respecting an establishment of religion. The problem is that the current laws do only respect certain establishments of religions, the ones that says only a man and woman can get married.

As long as marriage is state supported it is not public acceptance.

Thank You!!!  

How someone cannot see that what is happening is the government choosing which religion is right and wrong is just closing their eyes.  All they have to do is a quick search to find that there are MANY churches in America that perform gay marriages and see them as holy and blessed in the eyes of the Lord.

That is my religious beliefs.  That is many others as well.  And that is what is practiced in my religion. 

And like you said, as long as the state is recognizing benefits afforded to one religion it must continue that recognition on to the others as well.

 

you really do not get it. but i can see why you think this.

one its not the Government that is respecting a Religion.

But The People of the state that are religious and are Free to be of the religion they want to be of. And this right is protected by the 1st Amendment in the constitution.

So the Free people of the State do not want to support homosexual marriage.
And seeing by the democratic process the majority has voted not to, see they are the ones paying for most of it. Your only option is to cry we are a minority.

Um, no.

America has never been that way, and was founded to get away from living under such a Tyranny of the Majority.

Are you not familiar with the phrase?

This is why the founding fathers wanted a Representative Republic, and not a simple democracy where all issues were voted on by the public. They were terribly afraid of such a society, the same society you think you live in.

Seriously, look up that link and read it.

The United States was founded on the principle of Majority Rule, with Minority Rights. That's what the Bill of Rights is all about.

We don't live in the society you are describing, never have, and America was never intended to be that way when the Founders wrote the constitution.

Originally posted by Dekron

Originally posted by upallnight 

I want to marry the person I love.  And my religion says it is fine.

I've read nearly all your posts regarding this subject and I must say you're by far the best "model" spokesman for your cause. You seem to be just a normal individual wanting to do as you state above.

What has always left me neutral on the subject is (which I have said before) the awful, flamboyant, Bruno-esque type behavior. However, each one of your posts I read chips away and makes me think "What the hell, let them marry".

You seem a cool guy. I hope for you to have a happy life.

 

 

 

Thank you.
 

And, truth be told, I too do not get the flamboyant type gays.  I have nothing against them as human beings, but I do not understand them.  I have had to chalk it up to just a difference of personalities.  And I don't know if you're around many gays, but there is a divide within our own community between the "normal" gays and the flamboyant types.  Especially the whole drag thing.  I have NO idea where that comes from.  I went to a pride parade and I did not feel at all like I fit in.  And mostly every single one of my gay friends feel the same way.  The media and the people who don't like us love to act like all of us are flamboyant about our sexuality, but the truth is we're not. 

I don't want to be anything but a part of society.  I really don't have any type of rebellious nature to me.  I grew up pretty much normal.  The only thing I want outside of the current norm is to get my rights as a citizen of this nation.  I love my country and I am absolutely convinced that us getting our rights could only help in the long run.  I would never stand for anything that I think would ever hurt America as a nation.

Originally posted by upallnight

Originally posted by Dekron

Originally posted by upallnight 

I want to marry the person I love.  And my religion says it is fine.

I've read nearly all your posts regarding this subject and I must say you're by far the best "model" spokesman for your cause. You seem to be just a normal individual wanting to do as you state above.

What has always left me neutral on the subject is (which I have said before) the awful, flamboyant, Bruno-esque type behavior. However, each one of your posts I read chips away and makes me think "What the hell, let them marry".

You seem a cool guy. I hope for you to have a happy life.

 

 

 

Thank you.
 

And, truth be told, I too do not get the flamboyant type gays.  I have nothing against them as human beings, but I do not understand them.  I have had to chalk it up to just a difference of personalities.  And I don't know if you're around many gays, but there is a divide within our own community between the "normal" gays and the flamboyant types.  Especially the whole drag thing.  I have NO idea where that comes from.  I went to a pride parade and I did not feel at all like I fit in.  And mostly every single one of my gay friends feel the same way.  The media and the people who don't like us love to act like all of us are flamboyant about our sexuality, but the truth is we're not. 

I don't want to be anything but a part of society.  I really don't have any type of rebellious nature to me.  I grew up pretty much normal.  The only thing I want outside of the current norm is to get my rights as a citizen of this nation.  I love my country and I am absolutely convinced that us getting our rights could only help in the long run.  I would never stand for anything that I think would ever hurt America as a nation.

I think that's the major issue with society not moving forward on the matter. It's always the negative instances that stand out. People might simply think that is what is going to come about. As you said, there is nothing against them as human beings, but their attitudes and personalities.

I think if people saw more individuals such as yourself, instead of a beast say like Rosie O'Donnell (bad example, I know) as spokespeople, then it might be easier for them to accept.

While I do understand the flamboyant behavior is not the norm, it is what sticks in people's minds because that is what is covered in the media.

I work with several gay individuals - you couldn't tell them apart from any other individual - except Jon - that man is a queen.