Bush calls for a ban..

[F-ck Casey]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Reaction to President Bush's call Tuesday for a constitutional amendment that would effectively ban gay marriage fell largely along party and ideological lines.

Bush said such an amendment would "prevent the meaning of marriage from being changed forever." (Full story)

Top Democrats and a gay civil rights group said Bush's support of an amendment was designed to draw attention from his record as president. Republican leaders said an amendment was needed to protect the foundation of American society.

The Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in each house of Congress to pass an amendment. Then it must be ratified by three-fourths, or 38, of the 50 states. (Challenges in passing an amendment)

A spokesman for Speaker Dennis Hastert said that while it would be difficult for such an amendment to get the 291 votes necessary to pass the House, the issue would still serve to define the choice available for voters come November.

"Sometimes you win for losing," said Hastert spokesman John Feehery, noting the issue would draw a clear line between Bush and Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Democrats accused Bush of using the issue for political gain and trying to draw attention away from his record.

"President Bush came to the White House pledging to unite us and is now seeking to divide the country for his own political gain," Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe said in a statement.

Kerry campaign spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said Bush's support for such an amendment makes it clear that his re-election strategy is to "use wedge issues and the politics of fear to divide the nation."

The four-term senator has said he supports civil unions and equal protection for gays and lesbians but that he opposes marriage for them. He also said he believes the matter should be decided on the state level.

Civil unions grant couples most of the rights of state civil marriages, except the name, but provide none of the federal benefits of marriage, such as Social Security benefits.

"All Americans should be concerned when a president who is in political trouble tries to tamper with the Constitution of the United States at the start of his re-election campaign," Kerry said in a statement.

Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina said he opposes such an amendment and believes the issue should be left up to the states.

"If [Bush] really wants to help married couples, what he should be doing is helping them with their economic problems, their health care problems," Edwards told reporters during a campaign stop in Georgia.

Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts issued a statement saying Bush would "go down in history as the first president to try to write discrimination back into the Constitution."

"We have amended the Constitution only 17 times. ... [It] has often been amended to expand and protect people's rights, never to take away or restrict their rights," Kennedy said.

As top Democrats slammed Bush's announcement, several top Republicans supported the move, describing it as necessary for the foundation of American society.

"We're in the process right now of judges and vigilantes -- people taking justice into their own hands and deciding to change the law without either the courts or the legislature acting," said Republican Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania.

He was referring a ruling by Massachusetts' highest court directing the state Legislature to allow same-sex marriages and the decision by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Santorum said that allowing the issuance of same-sex marriage licenses "devalues what marriage is."

Gary Bauer, a former Republican presidential candidate, said an amendment that would disallow same-sex marriage would not be discriminatory.

"Every culture in the world, every civilization in the world for over 3,000 years, has defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The constitutional amendment merely states that again," he said on CNN Tuesday.

The leader of the nation's largest gay and lesbian political organization said Bush's call was a "desperate" attempt to help his re-election bid.

Cheryl Jacques, president of Human Rights Campaign, accused Bush of wanting to "bash gay and lesbian families."

"These are the desperate acts of a desperate president who is going to try and drag this country through a cultural war to jump-start a failing campaign," Jacques said.

But Bush also said state legislatures should be left to define "legal arrangements other than marriage," suggesting that such an amendment would allow states to establish civil unions.

That position did not sit well with some social conservatives, who want an amendment that would prevent states from recognizing same-sex marriages and civil unions alike.

If an amendment "authorizes state legislatures to confer the entire legal substance of marriage, without the name of marriage, upon persons who are not married, then it takes away with one hand what it gives with the other," said a statement by Michael Schwartz, a spokesman for Concerned Women for America.

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colorado, has submitted a proposed marriage amendment enthusiastically supported by many social conservatives.

Other conservatives oppose revising the Constitution and many moderate Republicans oppose a ban on same-sex marriage.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, who co-sponsored the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, considers that law sufficient to address the issue and thinks a constitutional amendment is "awfully strong medicine," an aide said.

The Defense of Marriage Act, signed into law in 1996 by President Clinton, defines marriage only as the legal union of a man and a woman and allows states to ignore same-sex licenses issued outside their borders if they so choose.

Incase you don't want to read all that, it's basically saying this..


President Bush's call for a constitutional amendment that would effectively ban same-sex marriage prompted strong reactions Tuesday. Some top Democrats and a gay civil rights group criticized the President's statement, but Republican leaders said an amendment would protect the foundation of American society.


Uh, is it just me, or has America literally gone insane? Banning gay marriage? Come on. Marriage is about commitment & love, not religion, race, gender, etc.

I hate Bush.

[Will]

Bush sucks.

[Ander]

Keep fighting or move to Canada.

[Kæton]

That's really screwed up. I think it's really wrong to exclude homosexuals the same rights as any other would normally have...

[Ander]

Originally posted by Keaton@Feb 25 2004, 05:24 PM
That's really screwed up. I think it's really wrong to exclude homosexuals the same rights as any other would normally have...
As long as we think of them as different, they will remain different.

[Aaron]

Natalie, Brintey Spears, and Bush. Three people on my death wish.

[LornVourkolakas]

Bush keeps contradicting himself. He says we are all equal and yet denies gays the right to marriage. Nice one, Bush.

[erasethepain]

What I don't get is that if we are free to practice any religion, then why should the gay laws follow the religion practiced by George W. Bush? Seriously, that's not only immature and stubborn, but he's putting a lot of people through pain because he doesn't agree with something. That isn't who I want running my country.

[withnoapologies]

Originally posted by superxero88@Feb 26 2004, 01:22 AM
Keep fighting or move to Canada.
just Ontario and British Colombia, same sex marriage is only legal there....



and to Will, i'm glad that your views on Bush have changed since January.... it makes me happy :)

[Will]

Originally posted by withnoapologies@Feb 25 2004, 08:44 PM
and to Will, i'm glad that your views on Bush have changed since January.... it makes me happy :)
I've always been for gay marriage. They're people too, and I love is beautiful no matter what.

[RockdOutChic116]

I actually liked Bush a while back. And now. . . :mellow:

[Alacrity]

Originally posted by LornVourkolakas@Feb 25 2004, 08:29 PM
Bush keeps contradicting himself. He says we are all equal and yet denies gays the right to marriage. Nice one, Bush.
Bush isn't the only president to contradict himself. Aberham Lincoln said that too but owned slaves. People will never be equal. I really don't know what to believe right now. In my one view I say :Marriage is between a man and women, that's how it should stay, and another part of me says, but homosexuals should get the same rights as everybody else. I'm torn :unsure:

[User Name]

Don't come to BC. Our health care and economy sucks. Go to Alberta. Everything's cheaper there.

[withnoapologies]

Originally posted by Will+Feb 26 2004, 01:50 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Will @ Feb 26 2004, 01:50 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--withnoapologies@Feb 25 2004, 08:44 PM
and to Will, i&#39;m glad that your views on Bush have changed since January.... it makes me happy :)
I&#39;ve always been for gay marriage. They&#39;re people too, and I love is beautiful no matter what. [/b][/quote]
well, your views on him for the war changed.... thats good. :)




and i didnt comment on the topic yet, im just too pissed about it.... id probably get banned if i said what was on my mind, so i&#39;ll cool off before i make a statement.

[LornVourkolakas]

Originally posted by Alacrity622+Feb 26 2004, 01:54 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alacrity622 @ Feb 26 2004, 01:54 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--LornVourkolakas@Feb 25 2004, 08:29 PM
Bush keeps contradicting himself. He says we are all equal and yet denies gays the right to marriage. Nice one, Bush.
Bush isn&#39;t the only president to contradict himself. Aberham Lincoln said that too but owned slaves. People will never be equal. I really don&#39;t know what to believe right now. In my one view I say :Marriage is between a man and women, that&#39;s how it should stay, and another part of me says, but homosexuals should get the same rights as everybody else. I&#39;m torn :unsure: [/b][/quote]
Never said he was the only president to contradict himself. I simply just stated that he does.

I don&#39;t care that he says no to gay marriage. I mean, at least he is being honest about something. It&#39;s the fact that he can say he thinks we are equal and yet doesn&#39;t want gays to marry.

[Ander]

Is it true that muslims kill gays (in the middle east)?

Do gays have any hatred for heterosexuals?

[LornVourkolakas]

Probably some do. The same as some whites are against blacks, some blacks are against whites, and so on.

I, though, am not.

I don&#39;t know anything about muslims killing gays.

[Leslie]

Originally posted by RockdOutChic116@Feb 25 2004, 06:51 PM
I actually liked Bush a while back. And now. . . :mellow:
Same here... wtf is his problem? I mean, I know he&#39;s hardcore religious and stuff, but banning any type of marriage is a bunch of crap. I think he&#39;s going to loose a bunch of votes because of this move... including mine.

[Derek The Infamous]

Sorry, don&#39;t look down on me but I really thought about it. I believe that homosexual and lesbian people are asking for too many SPECIAL rights above people who chose to be heterosexual. Just because they choose to have sex with the same gender, doesn&#39;t mean they should have any special rights above people who are straight, I&#39;m sorry to anyone this offends but I&#39;ve been hiding this inside for too long. NO I do not hate or have a problem with people of that sexuality, but I do think that asking for special rights only because of that reason is being purely ludicrous.

Yes, sure, they should get the same benefits as married couples. That I do agree. I agree that they should be entitled to insurance benefits etc. because they are the same as straight people except for their sexual preference, but asking for special rights above straight people is just taking it too far. I see absolutely no reason why homosexual/lesbian people should be treated any more special than straight people are, and to anyone who thinks I&#39;m the biggest d*ck in the world for saying that, well I&#39;m sorry but it&#39;s true.

You may argue that homosexual/lesbian does not mean having sex with someone of the same gender but the proof lies in the word itself. Homosexuality has the word SEX in it and it is about having sex with another male. Lesbian in the dictionary means "to have sexual intercourse with another female".

Think of it this way...should someone who&#39;s heavily into BDSM, get special rights just because they choose to tie up their lovers and do all types of kinky crap to them? no. So why should someone with a sexual preference just as different from being straight, be treated higher than someone who is into well...being straight?

I dont care if people lost respect for me in this rant, I am just sick and tired of people acting like they are "special" just because they are into the same gender.

It&#39;s like me going around saying I should have more rights then anyone because I only love women. Pretty lame reason to be treated higher if you ask me.

[LornVourkolakas]

Originally posted by The Derek@Feb 26 2004, 02:46 AM
Sorry, don&#39;t look down on me but I really thought about it. I believe that homosexual and lesbian people are asking for too many SPECIAL rights above people who chose to be heterosexual. Just because they choose to have sex with the same gender, doesn&#39;t mean they should have any special rights above people who are straight, I&#39;m sorry to anyone this offends but I&#39;ve been hiding this inside for too long. NO I do not hate or have a problem with people of that sexuality, but I do think that asking for special rights only because of that reason is being purely ludicrous.

Yes, sure, they should get the same benefits as married couples. That I do agree. I agree that they should be entitled to insurance benefits etc. because they are the same as straight people except for their sexual preference, but asking for special rights above straight people is just taking it too far. I see absolutely no reason why homosexual/lesbian people should be treated any more special than straight people are, and to anyone who thinks I&#39;m the biggest d*ck in the world for saying that, well I&#39;m sorry but it&#39;s true.

You may argue that homosexual/lesbian does not mean having sex with someone of the same gender but the proof lies in the word itself. Homosexuality has the word SEX in it and it is about having sex with another male. Lesbian in the dictionary means "to have sexual intercourse with another female".

Think of it this way...should someone who&#39;s heavily into BDSM, get special rights just because they choose to tie up their lovers and do all types of kinky crap to them? no. So why should someone with a sexual preference just as different from being straight, be treated higher than someone who is into well...being straight?

I dont care if people lost respect for me in this rant, I am just sick and tired of people acting like they are "special" just because they are into the same gender.

It&#39;s like me going around saying I should have more rights then anyone because I only love women. Pretty lame reason to be treated higher if you ask me.
Actually, Derek, I do agree with you.

I mean, if gays want to be considered to be the same as others, than they should just have the same laws and such as straights. Gays shouldn&#39;t expect to have extra special treatment.

People automatically assume when a gay gets beat up that it is a predujice attack and that the person who did the beating should go more years and such. That&#39;s bullshit.

If someone gets beat up. It&#39;s not a gay or straight getting beat up. It&#39;s not a black or white getting beat up. It&#39;s a ####### human.

I mean, you see no laws that go for women but not for men, do you?

I think if one group of people have to follow a certain law, that than everyone should follow that law.

Being gay is not a disease, therefore, being gay shouldn&#39;t mean getting more rights than a straight. It&#39;s just stupid.

I just think that gays and straights should have the same rights - Not one having more than the other. Just the same.

[Ander]

I have another random question about homosexuality. What drew gays to San Fransisco (before it became the unofficial gay capitol of the states)?

[Derek The Infamous]

Originally posted by LornVourkolakas+Feb 25 2004, 10:08 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (LornVourkolakas @ Feb 25 2004, 10:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--The Derek@Feb 26 2004, 02:46 AM
Sorry, don&#39;t look down on me but I really thought about it. I believe that homosexual and lesbian people are asking for too many SPECIAL rights above people who chose to be heterosexual. Just because they choose to have sex with the same gender, doesn&#39;t mean they should have any special rights above people who are straight, I&#39;m sorry to anyone this offends but I&#39;ve been hiding this inside for too long. NO I do not hate or have a problem with people of that sexuality, but I do think that asking for special rights only because of that reason is being purely ludicrous.

Yes, sure, they should get the same benefits as married couples. That I do agree. I agree that they should be entitled to insurance benefits etc. because they are the same as straight people except for their sexual preference, but asking for special rights above straight people is just taking it too far. I see absolutely no reason why homosexual/lesbian people should be treated any more special than straight people are, and to anyone who thinks I&#39;m the biggest d*ck in the world for saying that, well I&#39;m sorry but it&#39;s true.

You may argue that homosexual/lesbian does not mean having sex with someone of the same gender but the proof lies in the word itself. Homosexuality has the word SEX in it and it is about having sex with another male. Lesbian in the dictionary means "to have sexual intercourse with another female".

Think of it this way...should someone who&#39;s heavily into BDSM, get special rights just because they choose to tie up their lovers and do all types of kinky crap to them? no. So why should someone with a sexual preference just as different from being straight, be treated higher than someone who is into well...being straight?

I dont care if people lost respect for me in this rant, I am just sick and tired of people acting like they are "special" just because they are into the same gender.

It&#39;s like me going around saying I should have more rights then anyone because I only love women. Pretty lame reason to be treated higher if you ask me.
Actually, Derek, I do agree with you.

I mean, if gays want to be considered to be the same as others, than they should just have the same laws and such as straights. Gays shouldn&#39;t expect to have extra special treatment.

People automatically assume when a gay gets beat up that it is a predujice attack and that the person who did the beating should go more years and such. That&#39;s bullshit.

If someone gets beat up. It&#39;s not a gay or straight getting beat up. It&#39;s not a black or white getting beat up. It&#39;s a ####### human.

I mean, you see no laws that go for women but not for men, do you?

I think if one group of people have to follow a certain law, that than everyone should follow that law.

Being gay is not a disease, therefore, being gay shouldn&#39;t mean getting more rights than a straight. It&#39;s just stupid.

I just think that gays and straights should have the same rights - Not one having more than the other. Just the same. [/b][/quote]
Thank you for agreeing. Like I said, I dont hate homosexual/lesbian people.

[Aaron]

Originally posted by The Derek@Feb 26 2004, 12:16 AM
Sorry, don&#39;t look down on me but I really thought about it. I believe that homosexual and lesbian people are asking for too many SPECIAL rights above people who chose to be heterosexual. Just because they choose to have sex with the same gender, doesn&#39;t mean they should have any special rights above people who are straight, I&#39;m sorry to anyone this offends but I&#39;ve been hiding this inside for too long. NO I do not hate or have a problem with people of that sexuality, but I do think that asking for special rights only because of that reason is being purely ludicrous.

Yes, sure, they should get the same benefits as married couples. That I do agree. I agree that they should be entitled to insurance benefits etc. because they are the same as straight people except for their sexual preference, but asking for special rights above straight people is just taking it too far. I see absolutely no reason why homosexual/lesbian people should be treated any more special than straight people are, and to anyone who thinks I&#39;m the biggest d*ck in the world for saying that, well I&#39;m sorry but it&#39;s true.

You may argue that homosexual/lesbian does not mean having sex with someone of the same gender but the proof lies in the word itself. Homosexuality has the word SEX in it and it is about having sex with another male. Lesbian in the dictionary means "to have sexual intercourse with another female".

Think of it this way...should someone who&#39;s heavily into BDSM, get special rights just because they choose to tie up their lovers and do all types of kinky crap to them? no. So why should someone with a sexual preference just as different from being straight, be treated higher than someone who is into well...being straight?

I dont care if people lost respect for me in this rant, I am just sick and tired of people acting like they are "special" just because they are into the same gender.

It&#39;s like me going around saying I should have more rights then anyone because I only love women. Pretty lame reason to be treated higher if you ask me.
I get what your saying, and I also agree with you.

One Canadian politic said &#39;Go get married and shut up about it&#33;&#39;. I thought it was kind of a rough way to say it.

But yeah, they don&#39;t exactly deserve anymore rights than the next straight man/woman.

(To lazy to figure anything else out right now so meh.)

[Leslie]

Did you all hear about Rosie O&#39;Donnell getting married today? She said something on Good Morning America about how people need to take things into their own hands, and if civil disobedience is what is needed to get homosexual marriage sanctioned, then so be it.

here&#39;s a link to an article about it (http://www.nydailynews.com/front/breaking_news/story/168166p-146969c.html)

[LinkinTheory]

This is my point of view: If you love someone, it doesn&#39;t matter if you are married. Marriage doesn&#39;t make or strengthen love. It&#39;s just a way of saying: we love each other. I&#39;m not homophobic, but I still believe that homosexuals are giving up some rights by being the way they are. Homosexuality is against nature. I don&#39;t care if you are Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Atheist, whatever, homosexuality has been frowned upon since. . .well, a quick inspection of Levictus will say that it has been frowned upon for a HELL of a long time. Let&#39;s just make a quick check of the Bible, a book accepted by millions of Christians and Catholics, Jews, and some Muslims. Levictus 19:22 states "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman, such a thing is an abomination." I&#39;m just gonna say that the Bible was written by men, so you obviously have to change male to female if you are a woman. If you want to be gay, go ahead. But if you are really a patriot for your country, you would be wise not to change the foundations that so many people have fought for since the founding of this nation just so you can get married. I mean, damnit, what next?

[Mark]

Originally posted by LinkinTheory@Feb 26 2004, 07:17 PM
This is my point of view: If you love someone, it doesn&#39;t matter if you are married. Marriage doesn&#39;t make or strengthen love. It&#39;s just a way of saying: we love each other. I&#39;m not homophobic, but I still believe that homosexuals are giving up some rights by being the way they are. Homosexuality is against nature. I don&#39;t care if you are Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Atheist, whatever, homosexuality has been frowned upon since. . .well, a quick inspection of Levictus will say that it has been frowned upon for a HELL of a long time. Let&#39;s just make a quick check of the Bible, a book accepted by millions of Christians and Catholics, Jews, and some Muslims. Levictus 19:22 states "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman, such a thing is an abomination." I&#39;m just gonna say that the Bible was written by men, so you obviously have to change male to female if you are a woman. If you want to be gay, go ahead. But if you are really a patriot for your country, you would be wise not to change the foundations that so many people have fought for since the founding of this nation just so you can get married. I mean, damnit, what next?
It&#39;s really beautiful how America is also built upon the foundation that "all men are created equal", yet you won&#39;t let everyone have equal rights. Also, the government should have ABSOLUTELY NO association with the bible or any religious thing when making their choice about whether homosexuals should be allowed the same rights as non-homosexuals. That is an abomination. It&#39;s pure descrimination. It&#39;s whole-heartedly evil and unfair to anyone who has the courage to make a choice on their behalf on whether they want to be gay or not, and they should not be chastized for making their decision. The world has become so putrid that a man is beaten to a pulp or a woman is refused the rights of any basic human being because they love someone from their own sexual orientation.

Also, not being married does not mean that two people do not completely love each other, it&#39;s just the ultimate profession of love to your significant other. It&#39;s a spiritual bond between two people until "death do we part". That is important to very many people and they should not be refused that right.

I&#39;m not a homosexual, but I am pretty sick of this discriminating world using the church as their scapegoat to disallow human beings with different sexual preferences to have basic rights. This is not about special treatment, it&#39;s about equality.

[Jila]

Originally posted by Mark+Feb 26 2004, 03:20 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mark @ Feb 26 2004, 03:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--LinkinTheory@Feb 26 2004, 07:17 PM
This is my point of view: If you love someone, it doesn&#39;t matter if you are married. Marriage doesn&#39;t make or strengthen love. It&#39;s just a way of saying: we love each other. I&#39;m not homophobic, but I still believe that homosexuals are giving up some rights by being the way they are. Homosexuality is against nature. I don&#39;t care if you are Catholic, Jewish,* Muslim, Atheist, whatever, homosexuality has been frowned upon since. . .well, a quick inspection of Levictus will say that it has been frowned upon for a HELL of a long time. Let&#39;s just make a quick check of the Bible, a book accepted by millions of Christians and Catholics, Jews, and some Muslims. Levictus 19:22 states "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman, such a thing is an abomination." I&#39;m just gonna say that the Bible was written by men, so you obviously have to change male to female if you are a woman. If you want to be gay, go ahead. But if you are really a patriot for your country, you would be wise not to change the foundations that so many people have fought for since the founding of this nation just so you can get married. I mean, damnit, what next?
It&#39;s really beautiful how America is also built upon the foundation that "all men are created equal", yet you won&#39;t let everyone have equal rights. Also, the government should have ABSOLUTELY NO association with the bible or any religious thing when making their choice about whether homosexuals should be allowed the same rights as non-homosexuals. That is an abomination. It&#39;s pure descrimination. It&#39;s whole-heartedly evil and unfair to anyone who has the courage to make a choice on their behalf on whether they want to be gay or not, and they should not be chastized for making their decision. The world has become so putrid that a man is beaten to a pulp or a woman is refused the rights of any basic human being because they love someone from their own sexual orientation.

Also, not being married does not mean that two people do not completely love each other, it&#39;s just the ultimate profession of love to your significant other. It&#39;s a spiritual bond between two people until "death do we part". That is important to very many people and they should not be refused that right.

I&#39;m not a homosexual, but I am pretty sick of this discriminating world using the church as their scapegoat to disallow human beings with different sexual preferences to have basic rights. This is not about special treatment, it&#39;s about equality. [/b][/quote]
woah, that was really well said. but yeah, if you say being homosexual is a sin, then whats the point in banning gay marriages? it isnt going to change the fact that there are still going to be homosexuals around or anything. and i see people going around saying marriage is sacred, if you come here to las vegas, people get married in drive-thrus. if thats sacred then im seriously confused.

[Radical Dreamer]

Originally posted by RockdOutChic116@Feb 26 2004, 01:51 AM
I actually liked Bush a while back. And now. . . :mellow:
It&#39;s sad that all humans are supposedly equal yet gays are denied such a basic right as marriage.

I can&#39;t remember who said this but it&#39;s very true in the world we live in today: "Everyone is equal, but some are just more equal than others."

[Mark]

Originally posted by Radical Dreamer+Feb 26 2004, 09:58 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Radical Dreamer @ Feb 26 2004, 09:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--RockdOutChic116@Feb 26 2004, 01:51 AM
I actually liked Bush a while back. And now. . . :mellow:
It&#39;s sad that all humans are supposedly equal yet gays are denied such a basic right as marriage.

I can&#39;t remember who said this but it&#39;s very true in the world we live in today: "Everyone is equal, but some are just more equal than others." [/b][/quote]
George Orwell, "Animal Farm". We had to study that novel a few years ago.

[Radical Dreamer]

Originally posted by The Derek@Feb 26 2004, 02:46 AM
Sorry, don&#39;t look down on me but I really thought about it. I believe that homosexual and lesbian people are asking for too many SPECIAL rights above people who chose to be heterosexual. Just because they choose to have sex with the same gender, doesn&#39;t mean they should have any special rights above people who are straight, I&#39;m sorry to anyone this offends but I&#39;ve been hiding this inside for too long. NO I do not hate or have a problem with people of that sexuality, but I do think that asking for special rights only because of that reason is being purely ludicrous.

Yes, sure, they should get the same benefits as married couples. That I do agree. I agree that they should be entitled to insurance benefits etc. because they are the same as straight people except for their sexual preference, but asking for special rights above straight people is just taking it too far. I see absolutely no reason why homosexual/lesbian people should be treated any more special than straight people are, and to anyone who thinks I&#39;m the biggest d*ck in the world for saying that, well I&#39;m sorry but it&#39;s true.

You may argue that homosexual/lesbian does not mean having sex with someone of the same gender but the proof lies in the word itself. Homosexuality has the word SEX in it and it is about having sex with another male. Lesbian in the dictionary means "to have sexual intercourse with another female".

Think of it this way...should someone who&#39;s heavily into BDSM, get special rights just because they choose to tie up their lovers and do all types of kinky crap to them? no. So why should someone with a sexual preference just as different from being straight, be treated higher than someone who is into well...being straight?

I dont care if people lost respect for me in this rant, I am just sick and tired of people acting like they are "special" just because they are into the same gender.

It&#39;s like me going around saying I should have more rights then anyone because I only love women. Pretty lame reason to be treated higher if you ask me.

What special rights are we talking about here?* I thought marriage was a basic right. :mellow:

[Jila]

Originally posted by Radical Dreamer+Feb 26 2004, 05:49 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Radical Dreamer @ Feb 26 2004, 05:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--The Derek@Feb 26 2004, 02:46 AM
Sorry, don&#39;t look down on me but I really thought about it. I believe that homosexual and lesbian people are asking for too many SPECIAL rights above people who chose to be heterosexual. Just because they choose to have sex with the same gender, doesn&#39;t mean they should have any special rights above people who are straight, I&#39;m sorry to anyone this offends but I&#39;ve been hiding this inside for too long. NO I do not hate or have a problem with people of that sexuality, but I do think that asking for special rights only because of that reason is being purely ludicrous.

Yes, sure, they should get the same benefits as married couples. That I do agree. I agree that they should be entitled to insurance benefits etc. because they are the same as straight people except for their sexual preference, but asking for special rights above straight people is just taking it too far. I see absolutely no reason why homosexual/lesbian people should be treated any more special than straight people are, and to anyone who thinks I&#39;m the biggest d*ck in the world for saying that, well I&#39;m sorry but it&#39;s true.

You may argue that homosexual/lesbian does not mean having sex with someone of the same gender but the proof lies in the word itself. Homosexuality has the word SEX in it and it is about having sex with another male. Lesbian in the dictionary means "to have sexual intercourse with another female".

Think of it this way...should someone who&#39;s heavily into BDSM, get special rights just because they choose to tie up their lovers and do all types of kinky crap to them? no. So why should someone with* a sexual preference just as different from being straight, be treated higher than someone who is into well...being straight?

I dont care if people lost respect for me in this rant, I am just sick and tired of people acting like they are "special" just because they are into the same gender.

It&#39;s like me going around saying I should have more rights then anyone because I only love women. Pretty lame reason to be treated higher if you ask me.

What special rights are we talking about here?* I thought marriage was a basic right. :mellow: [/b][/quote]
yeah, thats what i was thinking


homosexual/lesbian people

lesbians would be considered homosexuals

[ass_kicker]

QUOTE (Radical Dreamer @ Feb 26 2004, 05:49 PM)
QUOTE (The Derek @ Feb 26 2004, 02:46 AM)
Sorry, don&#39;t look down on me but I really thought about it. I believe that homosexual and lesbian people are asking for too many SPECIAL rights above people who chose to be heterosexual. Just because they choose to have sex with the same gender, doesn&#39;t mean they should have any special rights above people who are straight, I&#39;m sorry to anyone this offends but I&#39;ve been hiding this inside for too long. NO I do not hate or have a problem with people of that sexuality, but I do think that asking for special rights only because of that reason is being purely ludicrous.

Yes, sure, they should get the same benefits as married couples. That I do agree. I agree that they should be entitled to insurance benefits etc. because they are the same as straight people except for their sexual preference, but asking for special rights above straight people is just taking it too far. I see absolutely no reason why homosexual/lesbian people should be treated any more special than straight people are, and to anyone who thinks I&#39;m the biggest d*ck in the world for saying that, well I&#39;m sorry but it&#39;s true.

You may argue that homosexual/lesbian does not mean having sex with someone of the same gender but the proof lies in the word itself. Homosexuality has the word SEX in it and it is about having sex with another male. Lesbian in the dictionary means "to have sexual intercourse with another female".

Think of it this way...should someone who&#39;s heavily into BDSM, get special rights just because they choose to tie up their lovers and do all types of kinky crap to them? no. So why should someone with a sexual preference just as different from being straight, be treated higher than someone who is into well...being straight?

I dont care if people lost respect for me in this rant, I am just sick and tired of people acting like they are "special" just because they are into the same gender.

It&#39;s like me going around saying I should have more rights then anyone because I only love women. Pretty lame reason to be treated higher if you ask me.


What special rights are we talking about here? I thought marriage was a basic right.

yeah, thats what i was thinking
im wandering too... like radical said, asking for marriage isnt wanting special rights.

[Radical Dreamer]

Originally posted by ass_kicker@Feb 27 2004, 08:38 AM
im wandering too... like radical said, asking for marriage isnt wanting special rights.
Gay people have never asked for any special rights or any privileges to which heterosexuals haven&#39;t already been entitled. They just want the same rights as straight couples and equal treatment.

[Slipping Away]

I agree with Bush, as much as all of you think love is love which bullshit. Gays have no reason to be married, marriage is a sacred sacrament that should be preserved for a man and a women. Because men and women can make children. Unlike gays who are just in it for the pure sex and no creation. And gays can be gays, but give me a break you dont need to be married to make it official if your love is that strong you shouldnt need a piece of paper telling you that your married.

[Todd]

Originally posted by Slipping Away@Feb 27 2004, 05:38 PM
I agree with Bush, as much as all of you think love is love which bullshit. Gays have no reason to be married, marriage is a sacred sacrament that should be preserved for a man and a women. Because men and women can make children. Unlike gays who are just in it for the pure sex and no creation. And gays can be gays, but give me a break you dont need to be married to make it official if your love is that strong you shouldnt need a piece of paper telling you that your married.
Why the hell do you care if 2 gay people marry? Why does it bother people so much? If some 2 gay guys on the other side of the country, or right next door to your house decide to marry, how will it have any effect on you whatsoever. I fail to see what the big deal is at all. It doesn&#39;t hurt anyone else.

[Jila]

Originally posted by Slipping Away@Feb 27 2004, 03:38 PM
I agree with Bush, as much as all of you think love is love which bullshit. Gays have no reason to be married, marriage is a sacred sacrament that should be preserved for a man and a women. Because men and women can make children. Unlike gays who are just in it for the pure sex and no creation. And gays can be gays, but give me a break you dont need to be married to make it official if your love is that strong you shouldnt need a piece of paper telling you that your married.
first of all, you know there are a lot of married heterosexual people that dont have kids so just because you are married doesnt mean you should. besides, humans are overpopulationg the earth. second, if someone is homosexual it doesnt mean they are in it for pure sex. like if youre a heterosexual it doesnt mean you have sex, it just means thats who you are attracted to.

[Nowhere Kid]

I think putting a ban on gay marriages is stupid. Two people of the same sex want to get married, what&#39;s so wrong with that? Sure, it&#39;s not a man + woman pairing, but the couple loves eachother so what matters? How is it hurting anyone else&#39;s life? I really don&#39;t understand that.

[Radical Dreamer]

Originally posted by Slipping Away@Feb 27 2004, 11:38 PM
I agree with Bush, as much as all of you think love is love which bullshit. Gays have no reason to be married, marriage is a sacred sacrament that should be preserved for a man and a women. Because men and women can make children. Unlike gays who are just in it for the pure sex and no creation. And gays can be gays, but give me a break you dont need to be married to make it official if your love is that strong you shouldnt need a piece of paper telling you that your married.
Marriage is a social institution - it doesn&#39;t have to be sacred. It isn&#39;t a &#39;sacrament&#39; either because it is not exclusive to Christianity. Anyway your argument is invalid. Gay couples have as much reason as straight couples to get married. Are you saying that every time a straight couple has sexual intercourse they aren&#39;t in it for the &#39;pure sex&#39; but for &#39;creation&#39;? Does a boy want to impregnate a girl and does a girl want to conceive a child every time they have sex? No. So straight couples do it for &#39;pure sex&#39; too. Marriage is a union, a sign of love and commitment. If gays want to get married then why the hell not? They&#39;ll be happy and it isn&#39;t like their union will affect you or violate your rights.

[Hybrid Theory]

Originally posted by The Derek@Feb 26 2004, 02:46 AM
Sorry, don&#39;t look down on me but I really thought about it. I believe that homosexual and lesbian people are asking for too many SPECIAL rights above people who chose to be heterosexual. Just because they choose to have sex with the same gender, doesn&#39;t mean they should have any special rights above people who are straight, I&#39;m sorry to anyone this offends but I&#39;ve been hiding this inside for too long. NO I do not hate or have a problem with people of that sexuality, but I do think that asking for special rights only because of that reason is being purely ludicrous.

Yes, sure, they should get the same benefits as married couples. That I do agree. I agree that they should be entitled to insurance benefits etc. because they are the same as straight people except for their sexual preference, but asking for special rights above straight people is just taking it too far. I see absolutely no reason why homosexual/lesbian people should be treated any more special than straight people are, and to anyone who thinks I&#39;m the biggest d*ck in the world for saying that, well I&#39;m sorry but it&#39;s true.

You may argue that homosexual/lesbian does not mean having sex with someone of the same gender but the proof lies in the word itself. Homosexuality has the word SEX in it and it is about having sex with another male. Lesbian in the dictionary means "to have sexual intercourse with another female".

Think of it this way...should someone who&#39;s heavily into BDSM, get special rights just because they choose to tie up their lovers and do all types of kinky crap to them? no. So why should someone with a sexual preference just as different from being straight, be treated higher than someone who is into well...being straight?

I dont care if people lost respect for me in this rant, I am just sick and tired of people acting like they are "special" just because they are into the same gender.

It&#39;s like me going around saying I should have more rights then anyone because I only love women. Pretty lame reason to be treated higher if you ask me.
What special rights? I don&#39;t follow. :unsure:

[Will]

I have no idea where some of you people get the idea that homosexuals are trying to get "special" rights. The only right they want is that they want to be able to be married without people talking down on them just because they&#39;re different. Homosexuals are people just like the rest of us, and if them getting married bothers you so damn much, then you should just go to your own little island where everything is perfect and you get your own way. Love is beautiful no matter who it&#39;s between, and marriage symbolizes eternal committment (most of the time).

I don&#39;t see why they shouldn&#39;t be married, either. Why is it so wrong for them to get married? There are hundreds of couples who get married for decades and never have any children. You don&#39;t see anyone complaining about them. Oh, that&#39;s right; it&#39;s because they&#39;re not a factor in the population. My bad. I guess homosexuals are going to have a huge impact on the population and it&#39;s going to drop by the thousands every day just because they aren&#39;t having sex to make kids. Get one thing through your head: Not everyone has sex to make a kid. Plus, there&#39;s this little thing called a "surrogate mother." Yeah, that&#39;s right. One of the parents can donate sperm and have it placed in the mother. Look at that. They have a kid. For women who are gay, they usually just find a male friend who is really close to the family to have sperm planted in one of them. She gets pregnant. Look at that. Another kid.

Homosexuals are people too and they should be allowed to get married. It&#39;s no big deal. You don&#39;t see people getting their panties bunched up (besides the racists) just because two black people get married, do you? No, it&#39;s because they&#39;re people too. Two Chinese people getting married? No big deal. Two homosexuals getting married? HOLY ####, STOP THE PRESSES. THE WORLD IS ENDING. Get over it and let them get married. The more you female dog about it, the more they&#39;re going to keep fighting it until they&#39;re allowed. Once they&#39;re allowed, then there won&#39;t be anything to worry about.

[Derek The Infamous]

*Steps down* Can&#39;t disagree with that post because it&#39;s true. We&#39;re more discrimatory towards homosexuals than any other type of person on this earth. I&#39;m not against homosexuality, but I will admit for the sake of the discussion that I haven&#39;t always agreed with it...does that make me a horrible person just because I used to not be able to understand it? No way.

I understand it and accept it now because I have friends that are homosexual and they are just like any other person I talk to on the face of this earth.