Bush wants a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages

I personally think anyone that wants to get married or have a civil union should be able to do so regardless if they are the same sex or not.

I myself am a libertarian/independent and a bi-sexual woman. I married my husband because I wanted to, for my own reasons. And I plan to live the rest of my life with him. It is however our desire to leave the option open that if we ever found another woman that we loved, that we could bring her into our lives. I doubt we would want any legal benefits for it, but just to have it acceptable (at least in general, as I know many religions would never accept it) would be a wonderful thing. We may never find another person we want to share our lives with like this. But we like to hope that the world will evolve enough in our lifetimes that if we did, it would not be so greatly frowned upon.

Of course, we live in Georgia, one of the bible belt states. So I find that I hide who I am from the majority of people that I know in order to keep the peace. Very few people know the true me with regards to this topic, and the ones that do all seem to be people I've met in online games. The online world to me is our key to the next big evolution step for mankind. But that is for another topic.

Anyway, I'm rambling. I just mainly wanted to state that I am opposed to this possible Constitutional Amendment. Thankfully I also believe it would never come to pass. Boortz said my feelings in a nutshell: "I believe that this move by George Bush is purely political. He hopes that the additional votes he will get from some Americans for his support of a Constitutional amendment will surpass the votes he will lose from conservative gays and lesbians." http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html


So much for my motto of staying out of political discussions on the boards.

People bring up children in this argument, but it's a falacious dodge. Their objections are religious, and the reasons they think it would be a poor environment for the child are also religious. If you want to make the world a better place for children, ban religion, not gay marriage. That religious people are so completely blind to their own hypocrisy is frightening to me. Gay couples want to join their fates in bonds of love and commitment which is precisely the soft of thing religion pays lip service to, at the same time encouraging people to discriminate and be bigots. Christian Scientists can let their children die slow and horrible deaths because they believe in leaving their medical care in god's hands, and they don't get arrested for child abuse, and no one protests against them, but if gays want to marry and raise children it's horrible for children? Someone please explain that to me. It's insane.

Like it really matters, once the first gay man gets half his stuff taken away by the courts and he spends the next 10 years paying alimony to another fat man who sets around eating bon bon's all day, he will be the first in line to ban same sex marriages again.

Actually anyone who knows me is about to spew whatever beverage they are drinking out there nose, but I fully support same sex marriages. Any couple who devotes themselves to one another deserves the legal protection under the law in the event of loosing one another. It makes no sense for the family of a same sex partner to be able to take what a couple has spent in some cases a lifetime building together just because they were unable to be legally married.

What I find so completely baffling about this is that it is based purely and solely on a completely ethnocentric view of marriage. Marriage is simply not the same in all cultures! In many Islamic cultures, for instance, men can still marry more than one woman, and that is completely based on religious doctrine. In other cultures, women marry more than one man (in some African cultures, for instance). Marriage has never truly been a religious mandate as much as it has been a way to control property! Yes, it does exist in every culture in the world, but every culture does not limit it to "one" form (i.e. one man, one woman). The argument that it's some kind of "fundamental" human necessity that marriage be only between a man and a woman is just, well, ridiculous, if you know anything at all about anthropology. And I mean, even someone who has taken Intro to Cultural Anthropology can know this.

Bush's support of this amendment is based on a religious ideal that hasn't even been around that long and was intended not to "sanctify" anything but instead to *control the sexuality of women*! Even early Christians married for property more than love or anything else. So what Bush is really saying is that two adults can only share property if they are different genders. Which really makes no sense.

Bah.

Zana

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH FRIGGIN BLAH!


I am married. Happily I might add.

I will say this ONCE and you can fight amongst yourselves....

THERE IS ZERO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST GAYS GETTING MARRIED! PERIOD!

You wanna get married? Marry the opposite sex.
Sheesh!

There are prerequisite conditions for lots of things in life and marriage is one of them.
If you were BORN male and desire to marry a female... have at it! If you were BORN female and desire to marry a male... go for it! Thats the prerequisite! No one is discriminating against gays getting married!

If you want to be a friggin puppy... you cant just DEEM yourself puppy.
You would have to be born a dog.
End of story kids.

I will direct this question (which I found and think is a good one) to you first Christopher, since your opinions have been started. I'm also curious to hear anyone else's opinion on this question if you are opposed to gay marriages:

"Explain just how [your] marriage will be adversely affected by the presence of "married" gays and lesbians in [your] community"?

If your answer is "it won't be". Then why exactly are you opposed to gay marriages?

Civil rights is one of those things I guess, eh? Like in order to deserve them you have to be born white, male, christian, and republican? A hundred years ago would you have used the same argument to justify not allowing women to vote and keeping blacks in slavery?

You should try visiting the 21st century sometime. It's not that scary.

Reason 107.384.091 to have an extreme distaste for Christopher Nomad.

You can say those things easily because you have the luxury of not having the government violate your rights, it's very easy when it doesn't hurt you, or take away your privilages as a human....

but just because of the kind of hate-ridden, nasty and disagreeable person you, should you be that way in real life too... it will catch up to you Christopher, I guarantee it.

I'm happily married also, so now the only thingthis does is allot you the opportunity to rub that in the gay community's face.

I'm ill.

Xav! I know how you have stood on the gay issue in the past & didnt spew my coffee out my nose. I am pleasantly surprised tho

People also need to remember that its not just about rights, its also about obligations. Now that more and more gays are entering into parenthood, marriage is what is best for the kids. It creates a situation where the children legally have two parents (adults for those of you who will argue that same sex couples cant both be parents ) who are responsible for their ongoing well being.

For this to happen in a gay relationship there is a very lengthy, invasive and costly process to get the legal protections through the adoptive process. Thankfully we were able to employ this here in California. Many states don't allow it, which is crazy considering the arguement about what is best for kids.

Christopher Nomad,

"If you want to be a friggin puppy... you cant just DEEM yourself puppy.
You would have to be born a dog."

Gay people do not choose to live a hard life of bashing, abuse and discrimination. Being gay isnt a choice. Your argument is flawed. Other than that, I just feel sorry for you that you were fed this rhetoric and believe it.

Christopher,

On what basis do you deem marriage to be only between a woman and a man?

And don't supply that 'cuz it says so' crap... give me a answer that you actually had to *think* about.

One of the reasons that Paul and I have my son - who is entering the Naval Academy next fall - is that my ex's parents totally flipped out when she got into her Wiccan thing - won't have a thing to do with her anymore; it's just NOT the kind of thing that decent people from Louisville DO - and convinced her that as a Christians we would provide a better home than she would.

After reading the posts on here, I was initially pleasantly surprised at the overall (minus Christophers comment) enlightened views on gay marriage and marriage in general.

However, I'm sure there are others lurking out there who share opposing views and are just keeping silent as to appear to be non-hateful or neutral on this issue.

I also found alot of great comments in the threads, which make me happy to be part of the human race:




I just *knew* there was a reason i liked you!!

There are many others I could quote, but those are some of my favs.

With that, I should also point out that I have some non-traditional views of relationships. I feel that you should be able to marry another consenting adult, or two, regardless of gender. Yes, I do believe that people should be able to marry more than one person if they want. It doesn't affect me, so who am I to judge them? Nobody, that's who.

Human sexuality and relationships are rarely, if ever, clear cut. I think it is completely plausible to have successful relatioinships in an array of configurations, as long as there are 2 key ingredients: love and truth. As long as you are truthful, anything is possible.

Oh ya, and Christopher.. would you want to only be allowed to marry a man? No? Well, I'm sure that the gay women and men out there don't want to be dictated to either.

"The president has thrown his support behind an attempt to write discrimination into the Constitution and to deny protections for LGBT [Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered] families." Fernandes


Repellant, just repellant. It's certainly a political move, i really would doubt Bush would support LGBT marriages, but to amend the Constitution in order keep it illegal is profoundly disturbing.

The Bible's condemnation of homosexuality is as clear and plain as the Bible's condemnation of murder, adultery, premarital sex, kidnapping, lying and idolatry. Further, for me to openly condemn homosexuality theologically makes me no more a "gay basher" than I am an "adultery basher", "premarital sex basher", "kidnapper basher" or a "murderer basher". If you disagree, your argument is with God's Bible.

________________________________________________
Leviticus 18

22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
________________________________________________

1 Corinthians 6
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
________________________________________________

Romans 1
25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
________________________________________________


How can ANY ONE of you be a BELIEVER and yet condone homosexuality?
If you are not a beliver, then I have no quarrel with you... you too, as has been stated by some whiny carebear elsewhere in this thread, will get what is coming to you in the end.

And let me head this next group off at the pass...
"But I thought Christians arent supposed to 'JUDGE' people!"

God most certainly has granted me the right to disapprove of unGodly actions. Homosexuality is in that category right along with many other things. Disapprove of them? YES! Judging them? Nope... thats Gods Job.

And I dont want them dragging down any further the institution of Marriage. In fact I am against these so called Civil Unions! In NO WAY should ANY form of Government in this country condone homosexuality with an offer of compromise like a Civil Union.

In this overly whiny, politically correct, left leaning society its no wonder the Gays are after marriage licenses.
I'll tell you this much... you can twist that flag in any direction you want, you can mangle the constitution with all of your supreme court challenges, but the day one of you whiny assed card carrying liberals show up to take my gun....
Hell To Pay, Pal... HELL to PAY!

And this years SL award for Bigotry and Narrow-minded Right Wing Rants goes to .........

I am by no means a liberal, nor am I often "politically correct". See some past discussion involving the U.S., Gun Control, etc... hehe..

But Christopher, your argument is a religious one, NOT a government one. Government should have no right to control the religious beliefs of any person. Nor should they have any right to tell a person who they can or cannot marry based on some Religious beliefs. That is mixing Religion and Government, and that's a no-no in my book.

By your relgion, you are free to not like the fact that homosexuals want to marry, but you have no right to make the government speak for just your religion. Nor do you have the right to force someone else to adhere to your religion's laws. To follow that religion is your personal choice to make.

Be thankful you live in a country where you have that right. Be thankful when that same country does not pass an amendment based on religious morals. Because you never know when one day that next ammendment passed just may go completly against your own beliefs.

you bet yer backside Ill take that award and display it proudly alongside my other awards and commendations for Bravery& Gallantry which are sandwiched between BOTH Purple Hearts.
All of which I got in the process of defending YOUR right to be whatever it is you DEEM yourself to be.
What God deems however, apparently doesnt apply to many of you.

Darn it. And here I was just about to suggest that, based upon the holy writ of God's Bible, we start up some constitutional amendments banning premarital sex, drunkenness, planting two different types of seed in one field, interracial marriage, and cotton/poly clothing.

I just so love it when people who stand up for themselves or for others have all kinds of labels thrust upon them.

The one that annoys me the most is "whiner". Since when is standing up for rights, whining?

I can't really think of anything to say to that rant except that I feel sorry for you Christopher. It must suck to be afraid all the time.

His post reminds me of this well written letter to Dr Laura:

------------------

Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not Canadians. Can you clarify?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 10:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

------------
Edit: Here is another:

Dear Dr. Laura (An Open Letter),

Inasmuch as countless others are contacting you daily regarding God's law and family matters, I felt that I should do so as well.

My teenage son became rebellious, disobedient, and drank and ate too much. I knew that the Old Testament(OT) required me to gather my neighbors together and take my unruly son to the edge of the city and stone him to death(Deut. 21:21). Should I have obeyed the OT?

My neighbor suspects his young vivacious wife with infidelity. He is consumed with jealously just thinking about this. His wife denies his accusations. The OT(Numbers 5:11-31) provides a way to reconcile this dilemma for the couple. What it allows, is, for the husband to take his wife to the priests, or rabbis, and have her fed poison. If she is innocent she will not be harmed. If she is guilty she will get what she deserves; her insides will bloat and her thighs will rot away and she won't be able to have any more children (they already have five). My question to you is: "Do you believe this a failsafe way for my neighbor to handle this problem?"

I recently heard of someone who has come down with leprosy, of all things. According to the OT(Leviticus 14:1-, the first step in cleansing leprosy is to have the priests or rabbis to kill a dove and spill its blood into an earthen bowl. Then the priest or rabbi is to take a live dove and, dip it in the bowl of the blood of the first dove. Then the live bird is to be loosed in the fields. If this doesn't work one can take a larger more expensive animal, such as sheep, and do a similar exercise(the priest gets to eat the meat). Would you advise that this person, diagnosed with leprosy, seek this kind of help from one of your Rabbi friends--perhaps the one with whom you co-authored your book?

My spouse, --"the wife of my bosom"-- for some 57 years, has, in recent years, sought comfort and solace in some aspects of the "New Age" religions. She has talked repeatedly and glowingly, to me, other members of our family, and people generally, about the joy and contentment she finds in some aspects of this. Sometimes I fear she may be becoming a later-day pagan. She has definitely turned away after other gods. I am told(Deut.13:6-11), in no uncertain terms, that I must personally kill her, lest she contaminates me and others with these gentler, un-God like, non-biblical beliefs. I really don't want to stone her to death. Our children and our grandchildren love their mother and grandmother very much, and are opposed to my killing her, refuseing to help me as they are required to do. After all she is her children's mom. Is there any way out of this for me?

I have two brothers who pre-deceased their wives. One of these women was childless. I understand that it was my duty as the husband's brother(Deut. 25:5-10), to go in unto this childless sister-in-law, and bed her, and take her as my wife and bring up an heir for my poor dead brother. Dr. Laura, did it matter that I was already married? Did it matter that my wife took a dim view of my actually doing this? Was letting my sister-in-law publicly spit in my face the only alternative I had to doing this? That was pretty damn humiliating, I can tell you! Even so, that is much better than what happened to poor pitiful Onan(Gen. 38:9-10)! Now that was a sad business. Not only God killing Onan was sad, but also extrapolating from this that male masturbation is a capital offense, is a real downer for a lot of men and boys--this includes a good many deeply religious folks.

Dr. Laura, I know that you have not long been a convert to the God of the OT. But you do speak as one of the anointed ones, with the most certainty I have ever heard. Certainty is not uncommon in new converts but yours is exceptional. You say that you are knowledgeable in all the world religions. You can see why I have turned to you. My personal problems are rather pressing. Even though I have several biblical reasons for stoning my wife to death(she may have also been guilty of using perfume and body oil intended for priests and rabbis, Exodus 30:22-3--I wouldn't put it past her--I just can't bring myself to throw the first stone. Like me, my wife is 75 years old, and if I put off killing her indefinitely she may die of old age, or I may die, and then I would not be able to kill her. What am I to do?

Oh by the way, do these commands of God apply only to Orthodox Jews? Are Reformed Jews, Christians, Muslims, Mormons, or others, who worship the OT God, bound by these laws as well? If you are an Orthodox Jew and your wife becomes a Christian, are you required to kill her, or is that OK? Is it all right for wives who believe in the OT God to kill their husbands if they turn to other gods, like football, say? These are just a few of the questions I have when I hear you singing the praise of your newfound fundamentalist faith.

Not YOUR god no, none of that nonsense applies to me. But hey, I guess that's ok, I read fiction too.

And as far as all the medals and purple hearts and all ... Gee thanks for defending us all. Now back to the middle ages you go. I'll send a suitably right-wing postcard filled with intolerance around the holidays.

Now back to the 21st century discussion of human rights ....

Christopher apparently has forgotten about the separation between chuch and state.

The church (any of them) should not be writing the laws in this country. Period.

Christopher, I, personally, could give a rat's ass about what your 'god' deems to be appropriate. I do not follow such a religion. You, however, are free to practice whatever religion you wish. I will gleefully defend that to the day I die.

I will not allow you or anyone else to use your religion as a means of denying others in this country what they rightfully and fairly deserve: equality.