Federal Marriage Amendment

[Neil1 0]

The male G-spot can only be reached through the anus, I believe.

[Chickenman 9]

It's the prostate.

[GI_Admiral 2]

Really...=/ you learn something new every day....

[Neil1 0]

It's the prostate.

Yes, but it's not in the anus. It's above it... somewhere.

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

Google it

and two people of the same sex living together can get legal rights. it's called Power of Attorney. as for the abortion issue, the Women's movement is really too strong to even begin to tackle that one. i think what the government is trying to do is squash the gay marriage idea before the movement gets too strong to oppose. it's underhanded and sneaky, but that's the government for ya.

now then, you would all probably guess that i am for this amendment and you'd be right. traditional familes have been attacked and even blatantly discouraged for years now. divorce runs rampant, as does teenage pregnancy and deadbeat fathers running out on these girls that they knock up. and to add to the blow, now those who choose an alternative lifestyle want to be legally married? what is the world coming to? yes, this is a battle between the religious and the so-called "civil liberties." civil liberties are all well and good. however, i fear the consequences of ignoring religion. i know not all of you are Christian, or even religious at all. but i have heard our society described as worse that Soddom and Gamorrah--which is no complement. i do hope this passes. those of you who don't, have fun in Canada if it does.

all that being said, i don't have a problem with gay people. i know that sounds like i'm contradicting myself, but i'm really not. it's that whole "hate the sin, love the sinner" thing. it's homosexuality in and of itself that i disagree with, not the people who fall into that category.

[Neil1 0]

I did. Wanna see the pictures?

'as does teenage pregnancy and deadbeat fathers running out on these girls that they knock up. ' <- I thought this was partially accountable to the avoidance of the issue in education... Although I think this doesn't explain the high rates over here, in the UK - So I can safely blame this on Madonna partnering with MTV in a quest to sexualise childrens.

Kisa... If we all stood to what we're told the bible meant (I assume this is what you're referring to), you wouldn't have the right to decide if the vote passed or not.

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

i believe that God allows us both as individuals and as nations to make our own choices. however, we cannot choose the consequences of those actions. sure you can choose to eat candy for every meal and never exercise. but in that case, you can't choose to not get fat

and teen sexuality is another argument altogether, but hey, why not? yes, part of the problem is education or the lack thereof. another part of the problem is parents either unwilling or unable to teach their kids values.

[Tsl 7]

Ok. Analogy time. Slot A to Slot B. A does not meet A and B does not meet B. Now. Male and female. Thanks.

Wow, that's rich, considering...

It's the prostate.

Yes, but it's not in the anus. It's above it... somewhere.

If it couldn't be felt through the anus, you'd have to......nevermind. Yes, it can be palpated via the anus, lol.

Edited June 2, 2006 by The Tsl

[Neil1 0]

:O With a really tiny rod!

[Chickenman 9]

Google it

and two people of the same sex living together can get legal rights. it's called Power of Attorney. as for the abortion issue, the Women's movement is really too strong to even begin to tackle that one. i think what the government is trying to do is squash the gay marriage idea before the movement gets too strong to oppose. it's underhanded and sneaky, but that's the government for ya.

now then, you would all probably guess that i am for this amendment and you'd be right. traditional familes have been attacked and even blatantly discouraged for years now. divorce runs rampant, as does teenage pregnancy and deadbeat fathers running out on these girls that they knock up. and to add to the blow, now those who choose an alternative lifestyle want to be legally married? what is the world coming to? yes, this is a battle between the religious and the so-called "civil liberties." civil liberties are all well and good. however, i fear the consequences of ignoring religion. i know not all of you are Christian, or even religious at all. but i have heard our society described as worse that Soddom and Gamorrah--which is no complement. i do hope this passes. those of you who don't, have fun in Canada if it does.

all that being said, i don't have a problem with gay people. i know that sounds like i'm contradicting myself, but i'm really not. it's that whole "hate the sin, love the sinner" thing. it's homosexuality in and of itself that i disagree with, not the people who fall into that category.

1.Where have traditional families been attacked and discouraged? I can see how maybe the traditional family has been eroded a bit by society, but I'm not sure people are attacking it.

2. I believe teenage pregnancy is actually down the lowest it's been for years at the moment.

3. The consequences of ignoring religion? What about the consequences of letting religion play an active role in government? Look at history for a moment. What if one religion was in control of this country? Power corrupts. Look at history. Any nation that has allowed religion to play a prominent role, is a nation that persecuted people that didn't follow that belief. That's why we have Separation of Church and State. I'm all for people following their own religion. But keep it out of the politics that effect the entire nation.

4. You've heard us being described as worse than Soddom and Gamorrah. I've heard President Bush compared to Adolph Hitler. Just because you can make a comparison, doesn't mean that comparison is right. Bush is horrible, but nowhere near as horrible as Hitler. Our society may be bad, but who's to say that we are worse than Soddom and Gamorrah? Hell, Soddom and Gamorrah were thousands of years ago. We have no idea how bad they actually were!

5. Yes, I can see how it is a sin to love someone. Especially when it's genetics, not a choice. Definite sin, right there.

Religion doesn't have the right to make choices for all of society.

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

i'm not altogether convinced homosexuality isn't a choice. yes, i believe that a person can be born with those urges, and there are psychological disorders such as the "girl trapped in a boy's body" and vice versa. however, i believe it is a temptation and somewhere along the line, a person chooses--whether conciously or subconciously--to give in. and i don't think science will ever "prove" one way or the other. for every study that "proves" one way, there will be another "proving" it the other way.

and did you ever think that maybe Bush didn't lie to the nation, but was instead lied to by whomever was gathering intel on the WMDs? let's just pretend that's true for a minute and in that light, he did what he had to do. what would we as a people have done if we "knew" there were WMDs in Iraq and Bush did nothing? well, he did something about it and now he's in the doghouse. and what if he had done nothing about 9/11 and Osama? what would you think of him then? either way, you'd still hate him, so what is he supposed to do? darned if he did and darned if he didn't. now, do i agree with everything Bush does? of course not. i do not like the war, the phone taps, the deficit, No Child Left Behind, and a bunch of other things i can't think of right now. however, he was elected by the people as our leader. as much as i may dislike it, i still support him in his office. we don't have all the information he does, and perhaps he chose the lesser of two evils. or maybe he lied. we'll never know for sure. either way, he got delt a lousy hand. Americans are going to hate him no matter what he does mostly because the media usually focuses on the negatives instead of the positives. there are good things happening in Iraq, but you'll never hear about them on the news.

and no, religion shouldn't govern society, especially with so many different religions in our country. but many of our laws are based on the Christian 10 Commandments and other similiar religious laws. should we allow people to kill each other just because religion says it's bad? somewhere along the line, religion told us what is right and what is wrong. whether or not you believe in any particular religion, the law still stands.

[Princess 35]

Ok. Analogy time. Slot A to Slot B. A does not meet A and B does not meet B. Now. Male and female. Thanks.

I'm really amazed to hear that coming from you

[TheUnknown 39]

Okay, first of all, this ban will not protect families. All of the things JM mentioned (divorce, teen pregnancy) have nothing to do with homosexuality. If you want to prevent divorce, address the economic problems couples face, address the rush to get married, address comatiability issues. If you want to prevent teen pregnancy, address the problems of teen parents and make contraception available. Stop attacking gays for problems that have nothing to do with them.

Second, marriage is not solely a church issue. You can't get married without a marriage liscence issued BY THE STATE. One doesn't have to get married in a church. So, if the churches don't want to marry gay couples, they shouldn't have to. Let the county marry them.

[Chickenman 9]

i'm not altogether convinced homosexuality isn't a choice. yes, i believe that a person can be born with those urges, and there are psychological disorders such as the "girl trapped in a boy's body" and vice versa. however, i believe it is a temptation and somewhere along the line, a person chooses--whether conciously or subconciously--to give in. and i don't think science will ever "prove" one way or the other. for every study that "proves" one way, there will be another "proving" it the other way.

and did you ever think that maybe Bush didn't lie to the nation, but was instead lied to by whomever was gathering intel on the WMDs? let's just pretend that's true for a minute and in that light, he did what he had to do. what would we as a people have done if we "knew" there were WMDs in Iraq and Bush did nothing? well, he did something about it and now he's in the doghouse. and what if he had done nothing about 9/11 and Osama? what would you think of him then? either way, you'd still hate him, so what is he supposed to do? darned if he did and darned if he didn't. now, do i agree with everything Bush does? of course not. i do not like the war, the phone taps, the deficit, No Child Left Behind, and a bunch of other things i can't think of right now. however, he was elected by the people as our leader. as much as i may dislike it, i still support him in his office. we don't have all the information he does, and perhaps he chose the lesser of two evils. or maybe he lied. we'll never know for sure. either way, he got delt a lousy hand. Americans are going to hate him no matter what he does mostly because the media usually focuses on the negatives instead of the positives. there are good things happening in Iraq, but you'll never hear about them on the news.

and no, religion shouldn't govern society, especially with so many different religions in our country. but many of our laws are based on the Christian 10 Commandments and other similiar religious laws. should we allow people to kill each other just because religion says it's bad? somewhere along the line, religion told us what is right and what is wrong. whether or not you believe in any particular religion, the law still stands.

What the ewok is so sinly about loving someone? Honestly? I don't see why it's a sin. It seems to me like the main reason anyone is against gay rights is because of sodomy. Well, guess what. Not being able to be married isn't going to stop sodomy. Being married isn't going to start it. They're two separate issues. Isn't this what religion is supposed to be about? Love and acceptance? Yet the major Abrahamic religions don't tolerate an entire people, and won't allow those people to love each other in peace. That's bullsith.

You ask what if Bush didn't lie, what if the person giving Bush the intel lied? Bush got his intel from the entire American intelligence community. You're saying that the entire intelligence community lied to Bush? Bush wanted to go after Iraq from the very first day he stepped in the Oval Office. Saddam tried to kill his father, he almost definitly wanted revenge. The day after 9/11, and this has been confirmed by the 9/11 comission, he told his staff to find a link to Iraq. This was never about WMDs. This was never about freeing the Iraqi people.

What if he had done nothing about 9/11 and Osama? What has he done? He did a good job in Afghanistan, I'll give him that. He got rid of the Taliban and severely crippled Al Qaeda. But then he allowed Osama to slip through his fingers so he could go to Iraq. After 9/11, all of America, no, all of the world, was behind him, lending their support. And then he used that support to his advantage leading us into this mess in Iraq. Osama's still out there, because Bush doesn't care about him anymore. But he made homeland security safer, after 9/11, right? No, his policies made an allready incompetent all the more incompetent.

People will always hate him, not because of the way the media portrays him, but because of the irrepairable damage that he's done to this country, and the world.

And about the laws we have today being based on the Ten Commandments, who says they were? Thou shallt not kill isn't from religion, it's from common sense. Religion does provide people with a moral code to live by, but it doesn't mean modern laws are derived from that code.

Oh, btw, if Bush really cared about rogue states with weapons of mass destruction, he would have invaded North Korea, not Iraq.

[Link 3]

Even when I had my chick phase, I never agreed with same sex marriage. I don't have to defend myself, honestly. That's my opinion so take it or leave it.

[Chickenman 9]

Even when I had my chick phase, I never agreed with same sex marriage.

That makes perfect sense. Really, it does.

[Link 3]

it doesn't have to. as i said before, i don't need to defend any of my statements. it's an opinion and this is the last post I'll make in here.

[GI_Admiral 2]

Google it

and two people of the same sex living together can get legal rights. it's called Power of Attorney. as for the abortion issue, the Women's movement is really too strong to even begin to tackle that one. i think what the government is trying to do is squash the gay marriage idea before the movement gets too strong to oppose. it's underhanded and sneaky, but that's the government for ya.

now then, you would all probably guess that i am for this amendment and you'd be right. traditional familes have been attacked and even blatantly discouraged for years now. divorce runs rampant, as does teenage pregnancy and deadbeat fathers running out on these girls that they knock up. and to add to the blow, now those who choose an alternative lifestyle want to be legally married? what is the world coming to? yes, this is a battle between the religious and the so-called "civil liberties." civil liberties are all well and good. however, i fear the consequences of ignoring religion. i know not all of you are Christian, or even religious at all. but i have heard our society described as worse that Soddom and Gamorrah--which is no complement. i do hope this passes. those of you who don't, have fun in Canada if it does.

all that being said, i don't have a problem with gay people. i know that sounds like i'm contradicting myself, but i'm really not. it's that whole "hate the sin, love the sinner" thing. it's homosexuality in and of itself that i disagree with, not the people who fall into that category.

Traditional familes have been attacked and even blatantly discouraged for years now.

You're joking, I hope. The US is rampant with people saying "OMG THere are FAGS everywhere! Kill them! They ought to burn in hell!" Even our prsident is saying "I'll back anythign that bans gay marriages" How is that discouraging traditional families? I see it as discouraging homosexual couples.

divorce runs rampant, as does teenage pregnancy and deadbeat fathers running out on these girls that they knock up.

Yes, I will divorce my wife because there is a gay man living in the United States. I will knock up 50000 girls cause I hate those fags. I will leave all those girls because the US is tolerating those fudge packers...Yes...I see the connection JM. I don't see why there are even MORE divorces than there are. Damn homosexuals...(if you couldn't tell that was sarcasm...the fact is, those 2 have almost nothing to do with each other. The choice to divorce has nothing to do with having homosexuals marrying each other, unless you account for the fact that if we allow homosexuals to marry we add the homosexual divorces...which would be a valid point...but a useless point).

and to add to the blow, now those who choose an alternative lifestyle want to be legally married?

OMG! People choosing to live an alternative lifestyle?! BLASPHEMY!! DAMN YOU QUAKERS AND AMISH! Hell, Let's revoke our laws that allow amish children to only go up to the 8th grade. Why? Cause they have an aliternative lifestyle. Man...damn poor people who live int he street...lets just shoot them cause they don't live up to our lifestyle standards. Damn you Stephen Hawking for having an alternate lifestyle because you live in a wheel chair. Damn you Muslims for having an alternate lifestyle! We ought to kill you all.....oh wait. American, land of the free, why can we not choose to live how we want to? Don't we have the right to "happiness"? I know you'll say "Well having gays marry each other is a mental blow to society", yes well having a classmate that listens to [insert band] is a mental blow to me... I dont know if I want my child born in a world that allows people to listen to [insert band].

what is the world coming to?

Yes what is the world coming to. When people are allowed to choose how they want to live. I yearn for the days of Nazi Germany, Facist Italy, and tyrannical rulers...Off with their heads...ah the blessing of tyranny and facism. How I miss you so...

yes, this is a battle between the religious and the so-called "civil liberties."

So you're saying religion is against civil liberties. I'm glad you've accepted that. You're on your way to enlightenment

civil liberties are all well and good. however, i fear the consequences of ignoring religion.

Yes. Damn those blacks. I mean...we let the blacks and women vote...but WHAT DOES JESUS THINK!!!!!!!!!

i know not all of you are Christian, or even religious at all. but i have heard our society described as worse that Soddom and Gamorrah--which is no complement.

I've heard many things. Does that make them true? I sure do hope not.

i do hope this passes. those of you who don't, have fun in Canada if it does.

Yeah, "My way or the high way" Way to show that we're all open-minded people! Go religion!

all that being said, i don't have a problem with gay people. i know that sounds like i'm contradicting myself, but i'm really not. it's that whole "hate the sin, love the sinner" thing.

Yes...that's why we put criminals to death and to jail. We only hurt the ones we love...

it's homosexuality in and of itself that i disagree with, not the people who fall into that category.

Good. I disagree with mormonism. Does this mean we can ban mormonism?

i'm not altogether convinced homosexuality isn't a choice. yes, i believe that a person can be born with those urges, and there are psychological disorders such as the "girl trapped in a boy's body" and vice versa. however, i believe it is a temptation and somewhere along the line, a person chooses--whether conciously or subconciously--to give in. and i don't think science will ever "prove" one way or the other. for every study that "proves" one way, there will be another "proving" it the other way.

and did you ever think that maybe Bush didn't lie to the nation, but was instead lied to by whomever was gathering intel on the WMDs? let's just pretend that's true for a minute and in that light, he did what he had to do. what would we as a people have done if we "knew" there were WMDs in Iraq and Bush did nothing? well, he did something about it and now he's in the doghouse. and what if he had done nothing about 9/11 and Osama? what would you think of him then? either way, you'd still hate him, so what is he supposed to do? darned if he did and darned if he didn't. now, do i agree with everything Bush does? of course not. i do not like the war, the phone taps, the deficit, No Child Left Behind, and a bunch of other things i can't think of right now. however, he was elected by the people as our leader. as much as i may dislike it, i still support him in his office. we don't have all the information he does, and perhaps he chose the lesser of two evils. or maybe he lied. we'll never know for sure. either way, he got delt a lousy hand. Americans are going to hate him no matter what he does mostly because the media usually focuses on the negatives instead of the positives. there are good things happening in Iraq, but you'll never hear about them on the news.

and no, religion shouldn't govern society, especially with so many different religions in our country. but many of our laws are based on the Christian 10 Commandments and other similiar religious laws. should we allow people to kill each other just because religion says it's bad? somewhere along the line, religion told us what is right and what is wrong. whether or not you believe in any particular religion, the law still stands.

and did you ever think that maybe Bush didn't lie to the nation, but was instead lied to by whomever was gathering intel on the WMDs?

Uh oh. Here we go...

Even if Intel was wrong, there is evidence that they gave Bush a lot of info. Bush CHOSE to tell only half the tail. I think we call that "Lying by omission". "Mommy, Johnny punched me! (Though in reality I went and beat his family and then beat him to an inch of living, and as he was falling, his flailing fist hit me)"

let's just pretend that's true for a minute and in that light, he did what he had to do. what would we as a people have done if we "knew" there were WMDs in Iraq and Bush did nothing? well, he did something about it and now he's in the doghouse. and what if he had done nothing about 9/11 and Osama? what would you think of him then? either way, you'd still hate him, so what is he supposed to do? darned if he did and darned if he didn't.

lol, all presidents are. What gets me is Bush is so stubborn. "OMG Kerry changed his position when he got more intelligence...what a flip flopper!" Bush gathered more intelligence and realized that he was wrong. That there were no WMDs...but he just "stayed the course".

now, do i agree with everything Bush does? of course not. i do not like the war, the phone taps, the deficit, No Child Left Behind, and a bunch of other things i can't think of right now. however, he was elected by the people as our leader. as much as i may dislike it, i still support him in his office. we don't have all the information he does, and perhaps he chose the lesser of two evils. or maybe he lied. we'll never know for sure. either way, he got delt a lousy hand. Americans are going to hate him no matter what he does mostly

He asked for it when he decided to ran for President. All candidates do.

because the media usually focuses on the negatives instead of the positives. there are good things happening in Iraq, but you'll never hear about them on the news.

Yes...our damn liberal media. Why should they wrry about themselves... I mean, shouldn't they be censored to show only happy images. Capitalism, live by it, die by it.

Religion doesn't matter. People have to learn to accept that other people are different. That not everyone has Aryan features...Certain things, (JM says religion) prevent that from happening. That basically sums this up lol :p

[Tsl 7]

Banning gay marriage = denying equal rights to a group of people = discrimination

In my mind, it's the same as making black people go to separate schools as whites, making them use separate bathrooms, drinking fountains, and God forbid should they think themselves worthy to eat at the same crappy restaurants!

Is that what's next for homosexuals? Too bad it can be so hard to tell them apart just by looking, or it probably would already be in effect, at least in a de facto sort of way.

((um, that was all sarcasm, for those who like to twist words. I am supporting gay rights to marry here! ))

Or will we take the marriage = religion argument further and deny marriage to athiests, agnostics, Hindus, Bhuddists, Muslims, etc. because they too are not married with God's authority?

Edited June 5, 2006 by The Tsl

[Alexander 0]

Well the gay marriage issue has only been in the limelight for less than a decade, to think that it would extinguish the thousand or more year association of marriage and religion so quickly is a rash way of thinking. It will be legalized eventually in the US, as can be seen in other countries. These things do take time. Like the saying goes, Rome was not built in a day.

[TheUnknown 39]

Alright, let's keep the Iraq War debate in the Iraq War Debate Threat (imagine that! )

[Neil1 0]

Don't threaten I! :)

[TheUnknown 39]

I don't threaten. I modsmack. :twisted: :p

[Neil1 0]

-Cower-

mmmmm! oooooo!

[TheUnknown 39]

Was that a modified "moo"? :p