Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests Voters in 11 states reject gay marriage

Originally posted by daenku32:

---

Laws are based on knee-jerk opinions? Whatever the majority wants goes? No matter how illogical and destructive it might be?

---

Originally posted by CHF_Slapaho:

---

Originally posted by DESIGN:

---

It is extemely ingorant to assume that because I am not directly affected by a law that it doesn't concern me. I am concerned about laws that affect my country.

---

On the list of the issues that affect your country... outsourcing, the economy, Iraq, terror, wide open borders, education, social security... gays getting married is so insignificant that for anyone to pay any more attention than 5 minutes is unecessary. Everyone should have equal rights, there are no 2nd class citizens. Done.

---

Originally posted by daenku32:

---

Originally posted by DESIGN:

---

Originally posted by CHF_Slapaho:

---

On the list of the issues that affect your country... outsourcing, the economy, Iraq, terror, wide open borders, education, social security... gays getting married is so insignificant that for anyone to pay any more attention than 5 minutes is unecessary. Everyone should have equal rights, there are no 2nd class citizens. Done.

---

If it were really insignificant the debate across our country wouldn't be the way it is. I beleive that the foundation of the family is a CORE issue in America and honestly it is more important than any of those other things.

---

Gay marriage will not prohibit a single traditional marriage from taking place.

---

Originally posted by zgendron:

---

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

---

Gay marriage has nothing to do with polygamy but something to do with polygamists getting married. It will open a door to them (and possibly other weird things).

---

Ok, you've brought this up in nearly EVERY REPLY TO THIS THREAD!

Can you prove to me in one other instance where extending CIVIL RIGHTS to a minority has lead to other "wierd things"

Let me provide you with a few examples of the courts providing Civil Rights to Minorities. See if you can find one instance!

1840s - Movevement for Women to Vote is started, 19th Amendment in 1920 protects their right.

1915 - Restrictive voting laws that were enacted by state governments were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court

1954 - Supreme Court unanimously agreeing that segregation in public schools is unconstitutional (Brown vs. BOE)

1965 - Congress passed the Voting Rights Act, provided additional voter protection (especially blacks)

1967 - A Virginia law against interracial marriages was struck down, with the Supreme Court declaring that marriage is a "fundamental civil right" and that decisions in this arena are not those with which the State can interfere unless they have good cause.

1970 - 26th Amendment Ratified to allow people 18 and older to vote

In this BRIEF timeline regarding Civil Rights, we see one common tie. Historically the Supreme Court has UPHELD Civil Rights when a majority is against it. I can only hope that this will continue. It is truly one of the fundamental strenghts of the United States.

---

Originally posted by neelnug:

---

People are scared about what they don't understand. They hide behind things (bible) or use them as crutches (religion) to protect themselves from the unknown or things that they cannot understand. Its human nature.

As for being a gateway for further changes... thats America...
I welcome open thinking and questioning of our current policy and ideas. Because of this women can vote, segregation is illegal etc. How is this different. If this were 50 years ago we would be talking about minorities rights. Wake up people, you cannot stop reality you cannot stop change.

---

Originally posted by Derk2000:

---

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

---

I think separation of church and state are being misunderstood. This does not mean you can't use your religion as a basis for how you vote. It means, govn't can not support one religion and not all others, and can not place any one religion over another.

---

Very very very good point.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

---

but as this country was formed on Christianity, I believe it should remain that way. Laws are based on morals. For many of us, religion is a major part of our morals. It's our right for it to be a deciding part of our lives.

---

Ok, but...

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

---

Whatever someone else bases their morals on is their right as well.

---

But, if the majority are Christian and their votes are cast with a Christain basis/idea in mind, anyone who isn't Christian is SOL?

---

Originally posted by CHF_Slapaho:

---

Originally posted by Andy W.:

---

I have no problems with the gay union movement. I'm not gay, so it doesn't effect me. I have no problem with homosexuals bind themselves legally to each other just like opposite sex couples do. My problem is with the tearing down of every institution that has been in place since the founding of this country. I.E Women demanding to be let into all male military schools, woman wanting to be get into all male golf course clubs. We don't demand to be apart of girl scouts or the red hat club.

That being said my argument is pretty much over the connotation/denoation of the word "marriage." For centuries it has stood for the union of a man and woman with the idea of build a family. I admit it's petty but can't this institution be left alone. Homosexuals are different so why not use a different word. Biologically they cannot produce offspring without external aid.

The whole idea of inclusion drives me nuts. While I don't believe anyone should be made fun of or discriminated against for being different. The fact is they are and situations have to handled differently. This has more to do with schooling than homosexuals.

-Andy

---

I like the way you said that point of view.

Why does a person's sexual orientation have such a factor in making them different? Honestly, we're all different, even if your neighbor shares the same creed, color, culture, heritage, background... you're still different. Nothing makes you a carbon copy of the guy next to you. So you like hip-hop, does that make you more different? You dress preppy, does that make you more different? You could be the greatest baseball player in the world, but as soon as you taste the salami that's all the world seems to remember you for. As a country, we should be making strides to be inclusive, not exclusive. Are we going to hide our eyes to the fact that within a matter of years minorities will be the majority in this country? I see a scared nation unwilling to change, and change is what the constitution is all about. A living document that amends itself according to time.

---

Originally posted by CHF_Slapaho:

---

... and then after the gays it's the latinos, and the blacks, and the jews, and the muslims, and where does it end?

One big happy Christian Aryan race in the US. How wonderful.

---

Now who is using the slippery slope argument?

Originally posted by CHF_Slapaho:

---

Furthermore... your blanket statement that a dick belongs only in a [censored] stems from your belief that sex is a vessel meant only for procreation. So that means that every time you've had sex with someone and did not make the effort to have a child you went against your own rules on what sex is for.

Sex is not just a means of reproduction. It is a way of showing a partner that you care for them in the utmost level a human can show. It can also be a way someone degrades another human being by raping them or extorting them into the act. Before you point at another human and criticize them about how and why they have sex, take a look at yourself and the people around you and see if they're living up to your own standards.

---

Originally posted by ExDelayed:

---

Originally posted by zgendron:

---

This is still too broad. You don't cover 1 night stands. Sex is another form of social interaction and personal pleasure.

---

You can also add masturbation into this since it isnt for procration. That now brings in 'Spilling your seed upon the Earth'

This is turning into a religious debate so we need to try to sway it back onto the subject. In my attempt to gently nudge this back to where it was supposed to be Ill add this.

Most parents (and would be parents) have/will have unconditional love for their children. There is very little that a child (even if they are grown) could do that would take that love away. Now, God loves all of his children and has told us to love thy neighbor. If man was created in God's image, we must take on some of his traits, like loving our children. Even though he might not completely approve of his childs choice, he will stand behind them. I would think that God, or any parent, would be happy that their child has found someone (even if they do not approve of the relationship) that they love and care about and are willing to devote the rest of their life to.

So its amazing how quickly that love for thy neighbor is forgotten because there are fags out there and they are going to get us.

---