I want to know how ANYONE could say that two people of the same sex should be permitted to get married!?
First off being gay is WRONG. It is NOT right. A man and a woman were designed to be together by design, however when people have crossed wires in their brain, they start finding people of the same sex attractive. This kind of behavior is wrong on every level, but more and more states are allowing this kind of thing to become legal.
While I find it totally WRONG that two men or women could get married in the first place, it totally chaps my ass that they are permitted to take advantage of tax breaks that are afforded to hetrosexual partners.
I myself do not want to see two men, or women kissing in public. Additionally I think that allowing them to do so is giving younger impressionable people the false impression that being a homo is okay. IT'S NOT.
Being a homo is not a natural thing. I don't care how many homo's say otherwise. I do not want my kids being exposed to people of this mindset and should they ever see someone in public being openly gay I would be the first to say to my kids "Them guys are fagget's and likley had a poor father figure".
There is NOTHING right about being gay. I have every right to say so! While this is America and people can do what they want, there has to be boundries otherwise this nation is going to perish. It's impossible for two homo's to have kids naturally, and thus there should be no leagal union for these people to solidify how fucked up they are in the head. They are poor examples to our young, and often times they have poor attitudes to go along with their illness.
The more and more states that allow this kind of behavior, the more and more people will turn into fags because they think it's okay. What is next? People getting married to farm animals?
I sit here totally discusted at the law makers who have made this SIN legal. If people want to be gay they should do it in private. There is no need to allow them to be married given the fact they can not reproduce. There can be no "Family", and certianly any child who would be adopted by gay parents at a young age would be influnced by adults whom have yet to grow up themselfs. I honestly think these gays just want attention. They like the fact that people disagree with them and they thrive on the drama.
These are my thoughts, you may or may not agree.
-- Edited by SELLC on Saturday 14th of August 2010 03:37:29 AM
__________________
What is to give light must endure burning -- Viktor Frankl
How am I a biggoted fuck? Because I don't find pleasure in another mans hairy ass?
I just dont understand what benefit two gay people are to society? They can not reproduce and they are setting a bad example.
If the entire world turned into fags the human race would come to an end. Does that sound natural to you? HELL NO IT ISNT! I don't have to pray for these people, they will burn in hell no matter how much I pray to god they go straight.
Bottom line here is that I don't want two fags living next to me. Nor do I want a fag teaching my children that it's okay to be a homo. I do pray that my children do not turn out that way and god forbid it ever happens. If however it did, I would tell them the same thing I am telling you.
So how exactly am I biggoted? Are you a fag PowerStroker?
__________________
What is to give light must endure burning -- Viktor Frankl
It's only a delay. The 9th circuit is the most liberal of all federal courts, I already know how this is going to turn out Rex, and you're not going to like it.
This issue needs to goto the SCOTUS so that all other states that have allowed gays to get married can be stopped. It's not natural, and if the parents of these gay children were gay, they would not exist. That would be fine by me.
Why should to fags be permitted to get the tax breaks that hetrosexual couples get? Gays can not reproduce and thus should not be rewarded in the same way. There should be some other kind of union for gay people, one that diffrers from the natual union of a man and a woman. Dont you think? I mean what is the point of gay people getting married? What kind of family can they possibly have outside their gay friends? God forbid any child be raised by gay people and be subjected to such a poor example. I worry more about the message it will send to the young and impressionable than anything else.
__________________
What is to give light must endure burning -- Viktor Frankl
This issue needs to goto the SCOTUS so that all other states that have allowed gays to get married can be stopped. It's not natural, and if the parents of these gay children were gay, they would not exist. That would be fine by me.
Why should to fags be permitted to get the tax breaks that heterosexual couples get? Gays can not reproduce and thus should not be rewarded in the same way. There should be some other kind of union for gay people, one that differers from the natual union of a man and a woman. Dont you think? I mean what is the point of gay people getting married? What kind of family can they possibly have outside their gay friends? God forbid any child be raised by gay people and be subjected to such a poor example. I worry more about the message it will send to the young and impressionable than anything else.
I'm going to ignore the blatant bigotry for a second and ask you a few legal and policy questions mkay?
First of all, Our court system, from the lowliest local arbiter, all the way to the Supreme court has Constitutionally limited power. The courts can NOT make law, they can only interpret law in order to settle disputes.
Federal law can only be made through a joint effort of the legislative and executive branches. Both houses of congress must vote on IDENTICAL legislation, and then have it signed in to law by the President of the United States. There are some ways to bypass Executive consent. The most common way is through a veto override... But another way is through a Constitutional Amendment which can be done one of 2 ways... A super majority of states must ratify it, or 3/4 of congress must ratify it.
The reason I bring up all this procedural mumbojumbo, is because, to the best of my knowledge, there is nothing currently in federal law that would prohibit a gay marriage. Even a right wing supreme court can't invent such a law, nor would they. You see, conservative judges, like the 5 that currently make up the majority on the SCOTUS are what is called "Strict Constructionists." What that means, is they do not view the Constitution as a "living document" like Liberals often do. Strict Constructionists are known for literal interpretations of the Constitution, and giving ENORMOUS deference to the states, rather than imposing any kind of federal precedent if they can help it at all. They are also members of the "Federalist Society" which believes anything not specifically spelled out in the Constitution as a federal power, is therefore the prerogative of the states to decide for themselves.
Herein lies your dilemma. Even if you could find language in the Constitution that supports your bigotry toward homosexuals - which I challenge you to do, the 5 Supreme Court justices upon which you have placed all of your hopes would not likely touch such language with a 10 foot pole for fear of taking away states rights... Even if doing so would satisfy their own bigotry.
As a matter of strategy, if you are really serious about preventing gays from getting married, really your only hope is to amend the Constitution, which , as I said - can't be done through the court system.
By the way, why the fuck should people get any kind of tax benefit for being straight of having babies anyway?
You have got to be kidding right? Reproducing is what ensures the governement future tax dollars and soldiers! What kind of nation would this be if everyone was gay?
Then there is the fact that homosexuality is not natural! What's next? People getting married to animals, trees and objects? It's a joke!
Yes I realize that to ban homosexuality or the right to be gay is not going to happen, however marraige is a sacred oath for unions of a man and a woman. Let the fags come up with a new name for their union!
1830 Right of married woman to own property in her own name (instead of all property being owned exclusively by the husband) in Mississippi.
1848 Right of married women to own property in her own name in New York.
1854 The Republican party referred in its platform to polygamy as one of the "twin relics of barbarism" (in addition to slavery). At the time, polygamy was a practice of some Mormons. See Polygamy and the Latter Day Saint movement.
1862 The United States Congress enacted the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act, signed by Abraham Lincoln, which made bigamy a felony in the territories punishable by $500 or five years in prison.
1873 Supreme Court rules that a state has the right to exclude a married woman from practicing law.
1874 Congress passed the Poland Act, which transferred jurisdiction over Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act cases to federal prosecutors and courts in Utah, which were not controlled by Mormons.
1879 The Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act was upheld by the United States Supreme Court in the case of Reynolds v. United States
1882 Congress passed the Edmunds Act, which prohibited not just bigamy, which remained a felony, but also bigamous cohabitation, which was prosecuted as a misdemeanor, and did not require proof an actual marriage ceremony had taken place. The law also allowed polygamists to be held indefinitely without a trial.
1887 Congress passed the Edmunds-Tucker Act, which allowed prosecutors to force polygamist wives to testify against their husbands, and abolished the right of women in Utah to vote.
1890 Mormons in Utah officially renounce polygamy through the 1890 Manifesto.
1900 All states now grant married women the right to own property in their own name.
1904 Mormons in Utah officially renounce polygamy again, excommunicating anyone who participates in future polygamy.
1907 All women acquired their husband's nationality upon any marriage occurring after that date.
1933 Married women granted right to citizenship independent of their husbands.
1948 California Supreme Court overturns interracial marriage ban. [1]
1965 Supreme Court overturns laws prohibiting married couples from using contraception.
1967 Supreme Court overturns laws prohibiting interracial couples from marrying (Loving v. Virginia).[2]1969 The first no fault divorce law is adopted in California [2]
1971 Supreme Court upholds an Alabama law that automatically changed a woman's legal surname to that of her husband upon marriage.
1971 Supreme Court refuses to hear challenge to Minnesota Supreme Court ruling allowing prohibition of same-sex marriages (Baker v. Nelson).
1973 Maryland became to first state in the US to define marriage as between a man and a woman in statute.
1975 Married women allowed to have credit in their own name. 3 states outlaw same-sex marriage by statutes.
1976 Supreme Court overturns laws prohibiting abortions for married women without the consent of the husband.
1993 All fifty states have revised laws to include marital rape. [2]
1994 40 out of the 50 states amend their marriage statutes to outlaw same-sex marriage.
1996 President Clinton signs the Defense of Marriage Act into law, which outlaws both same-sex marriage and polygamy through a statute under the federal Government.
1998 2 states (Alaska and Hawaii) for the first time outlaw same-sex marriage and polygamy by their state Constitutions, because of fear from Courts striking down statutes. South Carolina was the penultimate state in the US to remove the ban on interracial marriage in its state Constitution.
2000 Nebraska amends its state constitution to outlaw same-sex marriage and polygamy, while Alabama became the last state in the US to remove the ban on interracial marriage in its state Constitution.
2002 Nevada amends its state constitution to outlaw same-sex marriage and polygamy.
2004 Massachusetts grants and recognizes same-sex marriages, while 14 states rushed to outlaw same-sex marriage and polygamy through their state Constitutions in response.
2005 Texas amends its state constitution to outlaw same-sex marriage and polygamy.
2006 26 states outlaw same-sex marriage and polygamy through their state Constitutions.
2008 Since March New York recognizes same-sex marriages performed in other places but do not grant such marriages. Since November Connecticut grants and recognizes same-sex marriages. Briefly from June 2008 California grants same-sex marriage until the passage of Proposition 8 later in the year, but continues recognizing marriages entered into prior to the proposition's passage. 29 states outlaw same-sex marriage and polygamy through their state Constitutions.
2009 Iowa and Vermont grant and recognize same-sex marriages; Since July the District of Columbia recognizes same-sex marriages performed in other places but does not grant such marriages. Maine rescinds planned legalization of same-sex marriage with 53 percent of a popular vote on November 3, 2009. 2010 New Hampshire (from 1 January) and the District of Columbia (from 3 March) grants and recognizes same-sex marriages. Maryland (from 24 February) recognizes same-sex marriages.
There has been a lot of changes to the laws regarding this issue. Same sex unions need to be classified as something diffrent. If anything same sex unions should be taxed MORE! Why clog up our legal system with more divorces of same sex unions?
-- Edited by SELLC on Tuesday 17th of August 2010 01:08:22 AM
__________________
What is to give light must endure burning -- Viktor Frankl
2010 Federal judge overturns proposition 8 for being unconstitutional. Appeal process to begin in the 9th circuit court of appeals (the 2nd highest court in the land) and the most liberal federal circuit court in the country.
Jealous of my Mercedes or something PowerStroker? Next time you see a dumpster full of Mercedes parts please give me a call.... In return, whenever I see 15 homos in a dumpster Ill give YOU a call.
-- Edited by SELLC on Wednesday 18th of August 2010 11:06:24 PM
__________________
What is to give light must endure burning -- Viktor Frankl
I been raw-dog'n them since the 1990's and if Fauci has a problem with that I'll raw-dog throat fuck the little midget too!
But seriously, you really should wear three masks PowerStroker! Not because I think it will help, but because the reality is you'll lose more brain cells quicker this way and honestly I know you can't have many left!
__________________
What is to give light must endure burning -- Viktor Frankl