 |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Ban them or not? | |||
| Ban Them |
  
|
9 | 47.37% |
| Don't ban them |
  
|
10 | 52.63% |
| wtf are you talking about? |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-25-2004, 12:04 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Prez Bush to Ban gay Marrages
What do you think Marriages?
And is it really nessary to change the Consitution? Or should it just be local/state lead. Last edited by jeremy96gase : 02-25-2004 at 12:06 AM.     
|
|
02-25-2004, 12:30 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
well im behind bush 100 percent... i mean marriage is basically a RELIGIOUS thing.... i mean yea its got that centimental crap but seriously why would you get married with a religion THAT IS AGAINST GHEYS.... im completley against it.... i think it shouldnt happen
|
|
02-25-2004, 12:44 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I think they should let gay/lesbians do it. its not hurting me, probably stimulate the economey alittle with the added weddings ever year. Plus I see no down side to it, so whats the big deal?
__________________
|
|
02-25-2004, 01:12 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
(I'm not for gay marriage) But bleh, who the fuck cares what the government wants... America is getting pretty fucked up everyday over stupid things... Still love to live here though... Religion is also pretty screwy (they do have good morals to live by)... Hate me, but whutever...
__________________
 1995 Grand Am GT |3400 V6| |4T60-E| Version 2.5 is Available! www.3400swap.com
|
|
02-25-2004, 02:17 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm against it, but not because I have anything against gays.
Thus far, they have been unable to get sexual orientation recognised as a discrimination issue. They are protected by hate crime laws, but most anti-discrimination policies regarding sexual orientaion are voluntary. I believe that officially recognizing gay marriages is a (big) step toward sanctioning their lifestyle as a right, and that's a slippery slope I dont' want to start down. If the homosexual lifestyle becomes a protected RIGHT, 50 years from now will pedophiles want to be protected too? After all, they were "born that way".... Like I said, nothing against gays, but it's a choice, and choices have consequences. One of those is that you're not going to have a legally recognised marriage in our society. Changing that opens a Pandora's box I don't want to mess with - thus far the only legally protected LIFESTYLE choice in our constitution is religion. The gay lobby groups still say it's genetic, but that has never been proven, and I don't believe it ever will be - homosexuality has no place in evolution OR Gods plan, so they're screwed from both sides of that fence, lol. Until it's shown that sexual orientation is just as predetermined as race or gender, I say no way.
__________________
Only person I know of to get a stock LD9 Grand Am into the 15's, and that was on crap tires at 2200 ft. :) The GA is gone. The SCX is gone. The Redline project is about to start...
|
|
02-25-2004, 05:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Married couples get tax breaks. I dont think it gets any clearer than that for government on this issue. If marriage was religion only, the atheists should be allowed to get married either.
__________________
Ben WOT-Tech.com 60DegreeV6.com
|
|
02-25-2004, 10:22 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
tax breaks for no one, but recognize the marriage from a legal standpoint. from the religious end, it should be up to the church.
__________________
"I like to believe that people in the long run are going to do more to promote peace than our governments. Indeed, I think that people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better get out of the way and let them have it." -Dwight D. Eisenhower
|
|
02-25-2004, 03:43 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
02-25-2004, 03:51 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
don't you think that happens as is? room mates or friends getting married for a tax break, as long as they're of the opposite sex. that's one reason why there should be no tax breaks at all.
__________________
"I like to believe that people in the long run are going to do more to promote peace than our governments. Indeed, I think that people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better get out of the way and let them have it." -Dwight D. Eisenhower
|
|
02-28-2004, 12:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Personally, I could careless what a person wants to do with his or her life...........as long as it doesn't effect mine. I have a real hard time telling someone what he or she can or can not do......beings that we live in the country that we do.
I think people that don't want homosexuals getting married, are, well, scared. They simple do not want to do deal with the fact that another man wants to get it in the ass by another man. And really, how are any of the anti-gay laws different from segragation? You really don't choose your sexual orientation. I mean, I didn't wake up one morning saying, "I am going to be heterosexual." I fail to see how its different for anyone else. I'm surprised Bush is pushing such a hot topic this close to November. Maybe he thinks he'll gain supporters from people that don't want this sort of thing going on.......and by the looks of things, he has.
__________________
 -1996 Beretta LA1 / 4T60-E 15.293 @ 90.38 mph, 2.222 60', 140 mph -1991 Grand Prix SE LQ1 / HM-284 15.779 @ 89.95 mph
|
|
03-01-2004, 03:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think that Marriage as a word should be banned from all government issues period....its a religious word. And, NO, I do not think that Gays should be considered Married......I would like to know which church (besides the episcapalians) married them, because it is against religious law that states, in all religous forums across the world, that marriage is between a man and a woman.
But, I don't think its right to restrict these people from government benifits...which here again is a mistake, the government shouldn't be involved. I think that the 'civil unions' should have every right and tax break:rolleyes: that married couples have, but I refuse to call them married. 'Married' couples have 400 state breaks and 1000 federal breaks, currently 'civil unions' only are allowed to reak on the 400 state benifits because you have to be considered legally married to be allowed to use the federal benifits. So, if we took marriage out of the government, and civilized religious christians (or whatever your religion is) can be married in the traditional ceremony of uniting 2 spiritual entities under god. Let the queers do what they want, but don't call yourselves married!:mad:
|
|
03-01-2004, 05:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
That confused the hell outta me, lol.
Canada - if it is ever conclusively provan that homosexuality is anything other than a lifestyle choice - i.e., that it's genetics - I'll be fine with it. It's hasn't so I'm not. :shrug:
__________________
Only person I know of to get a stock LD9 Grand Am into the 15's, and that was on crap tires at 2200 ft. :) The GA is gone. The SCX is gone. The Redline project is about to start...
|
|
03-01-2004, 06:32 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I just wrote a paper on it, and that was the just of it.
This whole debate, to me, is the invasion of gays using the word marriage to define their love for each other, when marriage is a religious term that is defined as the union as a man and a woman. The government turned it into a generic term.
|
|
03-02-2004, 02:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Im for it, let people do what they want to do, thats what makes this a free country. Ill start supporting bush when cinnemax starts putting male gay porn on at 2 in the morning.
__________________
|
|
03-03-2004, 12:15 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
Linear Mode
