"this is not what we voted for..." campaign ad:
http://www.youtube.com/...mbedded&v=Oye4rhUa2Fk


mitt romney having a chat with a gay veteran:
http://www.youtube.com/...mbedded&v=GRN9Y5Nvdqk

Yeah! fluff those gays! They are less than human and don't deserve all the rights us normal folk have!

/s

gay marriage itself is on the ballot in a few states, three of them i think.

yes yes.. outlaw gay marriage. DO IT!!
That just means that they have to come up here to get married. And that means more $$ for us! MUAHAHAHAHAHAH
:P

Wow.. the acting is so bad in that ad I was trying really hard not to laugh at it.
The target demographic is kind of funny too lol.

Hold on a second. Most of those conservative fluffs are against gay marriage because they don't like the idea of a guy ramming another guy in the ass. They don't like idea of gay sex. So, shouldn't they be all for gay marriage then? If it's anything like normal marriage, then sex will cease to exist. There ya go, problem solved!

If gay marriage is illegal because 'OMG SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE', then divorce should be illegal as well.

OBAMA IS GONNA FORCE ME TO MARRY A DUDE?

Well as long as that dude is Detmer, that's ok with me!

I'd marry andy_flag. Or if I was a chick, I'd totally gay marry Alana.. because cats.

lol this made me laugh

I dont find a problem with gay marriage. If you would like to marry the same sex go a head its your life live it like you want.

Dont tell me guys you dont get turned on when 2 ladies are playing with each other. Its the same thing as 2 guys playing with each other. I dont see a problem with it.

I agree, i can care less on what people want to fk with, just keep your fluff in your pants out in public.

i kinda view it as they're required to have kids to be married and a shotgun has to be present at the ceremony.

otherwise, you're just gay and are seeking attention.

Just ban homos kissing in Public. Gross

it shouldnt be called "marriage", civil union is fine in my book. the word marriage is reserved for man and women. however, something should be instated legally so everyone gets the same benefits, such as civil unions, but not call it marriage.

Trife, my one true love <3

until we find out trife is a woman, of course. then it's just not right. not right.

Sodom and Gomorah. God's wrath is coming you homos.

rapture 2012? or will it be delayed?

now that gays can marry, what's to stop two people with unconventional and completely different backgrounds from marrying? where will it stop?

like

THE WORD ITSELF IS MEANINGLESS. IF IT WERE "FLARG" OR "fluff" INSTEAD OF "MARRIAGE" WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? I WAS ABLE TO HAPPILY VOTE FOR THE WASHINGTON STATE REFERENDUM BECAUSE IT DOES NOT INFRINGE ON MY LIBERTY IN ANY WAY, AND IT EXPLICITLY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT NO CHURCH OR CLERGY ETC MAY BE REQUIRED TO RECOGNIZE OR PERFORM THE RITE OF MARRIAGE FOR A SAME-SEX COUPLE. MAYBE EVENTUALLY WE'LL SEPARATE CHURCH FROM STATE ENTIRELY ON THIS ISSUE AND GET THE STATE OUT OF CHURCH BUSINESS.

There's a vast difference between the Christian concept of Marriage and the legally recognized concept also called Marriage. The government should have nothing to do with the religious definition, and the church should have nothing to do with the government definition....

Uhm, everyone has the right to marry a member of the opposite sex. Not sure where this idea people don't have the same rights came from.

and most proponents of gay marriage are for restricting the definition of marriage. You don't hear much support for polyamarous marriage, or polygamists. Why? I thought we all deserved the same "rights"

UGGH. I'D TOLD MYSELF I WASN'T GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN POLITICS HERE ANY MORE, SINCE IT SEEMS UTTERLY POINTLESS, BUT...



I JUST HAD THIS SAME ARGUMENT WITH MY FATHER YESTERDAY. THERE IS NO REASON THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE TELLING THOSE GROUPS THAT THEY CAN'T LIVE THE WAY THEY WANT EITHER. IT IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB TO ENFORCE MORALITY. AND IF YOU MAKE THAT THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB, THEN YOU'D BETTER HOPE THAT YOUR VIEW OF "MORALITY" DOESN'T BECOME THE MINORITY VIEW SOME DAY DOWN THE ROAD.... SINCE WE NO LONGER RECOGNIZE ANY OF THE RESTRICTIONS WHICH THE CONSTITUTION PUTS ON THE FEDERAL GOVT'S POWER.

Sidebar: Typing in all caps is really funny when you are making your funny AT posts. It's a bit hard to read when making serious posts tho.

I'm still very confused on this issue. I'm pro gay marriage, but it's because I don't really have a moral problem with it. I do have a moral problem with polygamists and polyamarous relationships. You say the government should not enforce morality, I'm a bit less sure.

To be honest, I'm not sure why the gov't needs to define marriage at all. And why do gays act like they can't get married. They can get married. They just don't have it recognized by the state currently. Boo-hoo, really they just don't get a few tax breaks straights do. I mean, yes that is unjust, but it's not the persecution people make it out to be. (As for visitation rights and stuff, say a widower wants his brother to be the person with visitation rights...makes sense to me, no idea why visitation rights are tied to marital status at all...) Outside of visitation rights and tax breaks what are the benefits of marriage I'm missing...?

Also I DO think the government has the right to enforce some amount of science-based morality when it comes to adoption policy. My guess, unconfirmed, is that growing up in a polygamist or polyamarous household is very bad for a child. If that's true, I have no problem with the gov't restricting adoptions to such "couples" on the basis of science-based morality.

FWIW, there is science-based proof that having a mother and father is best. I'm not anti-gay marriage or adoption b/c of that, but I hope gay couples do try to reach out to have a close adult influence of the opposite gender in their child's live. But in a world where so many kids are raised by a single parent, this isn't a huge concern of mine.

hellrush is around run !!

Despicable me,

Sodom and Gamorrah have nothing to do with being gay.

It's a story on the importance of being hospitable to guests.

Isreal as a country was surrounded by much larger empires, and had 2 very lucrative trade routes (think toll roads) that it could collect taxes off of.

One of the ways Isreal survived as long as it did, as small as it was, was the people openly accepted and welcomed travelling strangers into their homes, fed them, and sent them on their way. This genereated a lot of good will, and was even codified into the scripures on taking care of the Orphan, widow, poor, and the alien/stranger in the land.


THe same story takes place, in Judges, when a visitor is killed, and all of Ireal goes and destroys the town....again same story, (no gay references either.)

The one time the prophets mention Sodom and Gamorrah later in scripture they also say that the reason for the destructions was for its treatment of visitors.

Sodom and Gamorrah, was a story of a gentile community, who treated visitors poorly, and and its destuction serves as a warning/commentary of what will happen if the Hebrews treat the strangers in the same way.

so, that pretty much means that Israeli's have to accept gay behaviour from foreignors, or be punished by God? oh, and they're required to enjoy it? or just be hospitable about it?

As for me we must let people marry 10 year old babes, corpses and excrements. Pedophiles, necrophiles and coprophiles are also people and deserve their part of love and happiness. All those gays are so selfish and rude - they think only about themselves. :(

I can't decide whether or not to take Elihaar seriously. Are you equating a gay person to a corpse, excrement, pedophile, necrophile, or coprophile? If so, you should give your head a shake.

Sodom/Gomorrah were not Isrealte towns, they were Canannite towns.

The Jewish Law, applied to Jewish families only. They never tried to enforce their religious beiefs onto other groups,

on the contrariety they tried to keep other groups out and made it almost impossible to become jewish.

Bah ... let them do what they want. Why shouldn't gay people have to suffer just like the rest of us?

Love it when the slippery slope arguments come out :)

If it's a "civil union" and not a "marriage" by law (not any religion) then all couples should be labeled civil union only. Straight or gay.

well, one argument that the government COULD have (but simply have not used) is that married people (in general) pay less in taxes. If all gays and lesbians were allowed to marry their partners, unless they are really poor, they would pay less in taxes than if they were two single people.

SO, by keeping gay marriage illegit, they get more revenue from TEH GEHYS!

well the argument that married people pay less tax is about them having kids to support , unless they bring children into their relationship , homosexuals cant lobby for that .

This is truly a STUPID argument.

Firstly, the institution of "Marriage" is in the purview of the churches, not the state.

Secondly, making a purely secular institution would most assuredly change the definition of what constitutes a marriage and thus you can make it anything you want it to be.

Thirdly, gays are inherently promiscuous and have only desired to become "married" because of the debasement of marriage by the recently instituted "no fault divorce" laws that have been passed in virtually every state.

It's a mindless argument.

man... gays want to marry just let them marry. Who the fluff are you telling people what to do with their life

After reading this thread a little more closely, I have the following observation.

GOD HELP US if the government gets seriously into legislating morality. Look at the "morality" of our elected representatives for a preview of what could happen.

Situational Ethics, anyone!

just issue them handicap stickers so they can get better parking spaces. that should make them happy.

yes, they are handicapped since their seual preference won't result in any children being born from their um, whatever it is that they do.

*sighs*