Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   I still want a different word for 'gay marriage'
rgb
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 243 (319061)
06-08-2006 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by New Cat's Eye
06-08-2006 10:56 AM


There is one thing you missed. Everytime one of these legislations come up, they always include a section like "and congress shall never recognize any other institution that even remotely resemble what we now know as marriage..."
In other words, these proposed legislations not only once and for all define that marriage is between and man and a woman, it also blocks any possibility of a union between same sex couples. This is one hypocrisy in Bush that for some reason or other people fail to see. During the 2004 election debate, he repeatedly said that he supported same sex "civil union", yet this is the 3rd time he's tried to push through something that will ban all such union.
Support "garriage" or not, you should be able to see through the hypocrisy involved. But then again, some are just too busy hanging on to their hate that they don't mind being used as pawns.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2006 10:56 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2006 1:59 PM rgb has replied

  
rgb
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 243 (319137)
06-08-2006 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by New Cat's Eye
06-08-2006 1:59 PM


Catholic Scientist writes
quote:
This line makes me not want to reply.
While I agree that the words I used were a little harsh, I still maintain that it portrays the truth of the matter. The gay marriage issue comes up during every election time, let it be local or federal. It is nothing more than to draw out the religious right to the voting booths. "Vote for us or them gays are going to take over... Don't pay attention to any other issue, just vote for us or them gays..." The bill has absolutely no chance of getting through. And even if it gets through, it is still a bullshit issue.
The facts that the politicians are using this for political gain and the religious right don't seem to catch on that they're being used by their own representatives justify why I referred to them as pawns.
But seriously, if the gay marriage issue is such a valid and important issue, why not push for the amendment more? Why only bring it up during election months? Why present a bill that has no chance to make it into the constitution? Why not make it more presentable so that it could actually have a chance?
I don't have to support gay rights to see through all the bullshit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2006 1:59 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2006 3:11 PM rgb has replied

  
rgb
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 243 (319157)
06-08-2006 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by New Cat's Eye
06-08-2006 3:11 PM


CS writes
quote:
Allow me to point out to you that I don't consider myself a part of the religious right.
I know. Unlike other people here (ahem), I make sure to know people's views before I nose in.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2006 3:11 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-08-2006 3:35 PM rgb has not replied

  
rgb
Inactive Member


Message 103 of 243 (321941)
06-15-2006 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by iano
06-15-2006 2:15 PM


Re: Male bride
iano writes
quote:
In this case, a male-order bride
Forbidden

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by iano, posted 06-15-2006 2:15 PM iano has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024