Bowdiddley Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I didn't generalize all conservatives as homophobes. I don't even think **** Cheney is a homophobe' date=' but I think he has often presented himself as being against anything that would give homosexuals all the rights of heterosexuals whether it's marriage or insurance coverage or employment. He's a hypocrite. He wants to stand on the anti-gay Republican platform and still "love" his lesbian daughter without publicly acknowledging that she is just as human & just as "American" as any heterosexual. [/quote'] He came out for legalized gay unions, just not marriage. He thinks thats between a man and a woman. Same views as MOST Americans including our President and Secretary of State. The gay unions would afford them the same rights as others such as co-insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 He came out for legalized gay unions' date=' just not marriage. He thinks thats between a man and a woman. Same views as MOST Americans including our President and Secretary of State. The gay unions would afford them the same rights as others such as co-insurance.[/quote'] Don't be hateful! Gay Marriage is a civil rights issue! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicked1 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 He came out for legalized gay unions' date=' just not marriage. He thinks thats between a man and a woman. Same views as MOST Americans including our President and Secretary of State. The gay unions would afford them the same rights as others such as co-insurance.[/quote'] And this is my problem with that stance..... Marriage is a contract, in essence. Homz & I have a civil union in the eyes of the church. Arguing over whether you call it marriage or not is silly. It's pulling in a religious idea to an issue that doesn't need it. I'd like to hear someone explain how a "civil union" is different from "marriage." I'd also like to know how someone else's choice to marry affects my own marriage or my child's life. Obama & Clinton are just trying to straddle the fence. It ticks off the religious right to say you're in favor of homosexuals marrying so call it a "civil union." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 And this is my problem with that stance..... Marriage is a contract' date=' in essence. Homz & I have a civil union in the eyes of the church. Arguing over whether you call it marriage or not is silly. It's pulling in a religious idea to an issue that doesn't need it. I'd like to hear someone explain how a "civil union" is different from "marriage." I'd also like to know how someone else's choice to marry affects my own marriage or my child's life. Obama & Clinton are just trying to straddle the fence. It ticks off the religious right to say you're in favor of homosexuals marrying so call it a "civil union."[/quote'] SO correct me if I misunderstand. It seems that gays are fighting over semantics, if they are afforded the same rights via a civil union as with a marriage. Is the fight this little? Whats next, will they next want to be called heterosexuals also? I agree it is silly. they have won the war but want to continue the battle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 There is a lot still for them to fight for the same right as Hetro's They aren't immediate family so the can't see them in the hospital under certain circumstances. Or make treatment calls as Eye could do for my wife if she was on life support or such.Thing that we take for granted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Real smart' date=' do you really think thats how our LEADERS should conduct their jobs?[/quote'] Sort of. Can we add a few lashes with a riding crop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 There is a lot still for them to fight for the same right as Hetro's They aren't immediate family so the can't see them in the hospital under certain circumstances. Or make treatment calls as Eye could do for my wife if she was on life support or such.Thing that we take for granted. If they have gone through the civil union they would have those rights. I think if they were willing to accept the contract labeled "civil union" most Americans would be fine with it. But they demand the label "marriage" knowing full well it will cause resentment, which is what they thrive on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicked1 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 SO correct me if I misunderstand. It seems that gays are fighting over semantics' date=' if they are afforded the same rights via a civil union as with a marriage. Is the fight this little? Whats next, will they next want to be called heterosexuals also? I agree it is silly. they have won the war but want to continue the battle?[/quote'] But they *haven't* won the war. There are only a handful of states where they can get married and contrary to every *other* contract, it is not recognized in many states. I don't see a whole lot of gays out there fighting over semantics. The ones I know are more interested in having the right to create a formal, nationally recognized partnership. It seems that it's the rest of us who are having difficulty with the word marriage. And it's not a little thing. It's a matter of establishing yourself as a family. It's truly the simple things that we take for granted. If I am in a hospital in a coma or whatever, then Homz is my next of kin and has a right to make a decision for me. If my gay male friend is in the same situation, his partner has no rights at all. ' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Sort of. Can we add a few lashes with a riding crop? So since you are a fair person, when the GOP is in power you think it would be right to discriminate against gays right. Your statement says volumes about you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicked1 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 If they have gone through the civil union they would have those rights. I think if they were willing to accept the contract labeled "civil union" most Americans would be fine with it. But they demand the label "marriage" knowing full well it will cause resentment' date=' which is what they thrive on.[/quote'] Most of us consider spouses as "married" not "civilly united." If you don't even have the right to a civil union, then why would be insisting it be called marriage? I'd bet most homosexuals would be satisfied with a civil union as long as it was an option and recognized in all states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 If they have gone through the civil union they would have those rights. I think if they were willing to accept the contract labeled "civil union" most Americans would be fine with it. But they demand the label "marriage" knowing full well it will cause resentment' date=' which is what they thrive on.[/quote'] And why shouldn't they have the label ? Maybe it's the other side who wont budge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicked1 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 And why shouldn't they have the label ? Maybe it's the other side who wont budge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djroge1 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 The news media is biased? huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 But they *haven't* won the war. There are only a handful of states where they can get married and contrary to every *other* contract' date=' it is not recognized in many states. I don't see a whole lot of gays out there fighting over semantics. The ones I know are more interested in having the right to create a formal, nationally recognized partnership. It seems that it's the rest of us who are having difficulty with the word marriage. And it's not a little thing. It's a matter of establishing yourself as a family. It's truly the simple things that we take for granted. If I am in a hospital in a coma or whatever, then Homz is my next of kin and has a right to make a decision for me. If my gay male friend is in the same situation, his partner has no rights at all. ' [/quote'] I think you missed my point, I'm saying if they were to come out (no pun intended) and accept the label "civil union" they could have those rights. Hell even in SC they are willing to recognize civil unions, and SC is the heart of the bible belt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 So since you are a fair person' date=' when the GOP is in power you think it would be right to discriminate against gays right. Your statement says volumes about you.[/quote'] Who put sand in your panties? If you don't see the humor in this situation then I can't help you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I think you missed my point' date=' I'm saying if they were to come out (no pun intended) and accept the label "civil union" they could have those rights. Hell even in SC they are willing to recognize civil unions, and SC is the heart of the bible belt.[/quote'] But why only offer them that ? Oh right The Bible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 And why shouldn't they have the label ? Maybe it's the other side who wont budge. Thats the point. They can have what they want, ie legal rights, if they would accept civil unions. The religious right will never willingly go along with "gay marriages". So why not get all the rights and forget about the label? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Who put sand in your panties? If you don't see the humor in this situation then I can't help you. No sand in my panties brother. I am simply having a serious debate and if your statement isn't how you feel, why post it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Thats the point. They can have what they want' date=' ie legal rights, if they would accept civil unions. The religious right will never willingly go along with "gay marriages". So why not get all the rights and forget about the label?[/quote'] Because it's wrong to not give them the label. It shows that they are not seen as equals in society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 But why only offer them that ? Oh right The Bible Well it is a country based on judaeo-christen values. Like it or not most of us believe in the bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Well it is a country based on judaeo-christen values. Like it or not most of us believe in the bible. ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. Guess that don't count if your different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. Guess that don't count if your different. Yeah thats was before affirmative action. It means all men are created equal in Gods eyes. Don't kid yourself into thinking all men are equal among men and women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mick Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Yeah thats was before affirmative action. It means all men are created equal in Gods eyes. Don't kid yourself into thinking all men are equal among men and women. Constitution of the United States of America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 No sand in my panties brother. I am simply having a serious debate and if your statement isn't how you feel' date=' why post it?[/quote'] I was making a joke of a not that light situation. I hope you didn't think I actually wanted anyone to lick the Secretary of State's boots. Do I think the situation is unfair? Yes and he should be removed from the list. Do I feel sorry for Mr. Savage? Not in the least. People in glass houses should not throw stones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I was making a joke of a not that light situation. I hope you didn't think I actually wanted anyone to lick the Secretary of State's boots. Do I think the situation is unfair? Yes and he should be removed from the list. Do I feel sorry for Mr. Savage? Not in the least. People in glass houses should not throw stones. That we agree on completely! Sorry I didn't catch the joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.