Superfluous question.  As soon as SFP #4 collapses we will all be the same sex.

People who find Gay Sex abhorrant should cheer Gay Marriage.  Marriage ALWAYS kills sex between a couple.

It’s so much better than marrying someone while seeing members of the same sex on the side in secret in bath houses and the like (like our president has allegedly done).

There are many married politicians who are really gay.  

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/05/13/same-sex-marriage-supporters-opponents-gear-up-for-november-ballot/ Of course, I suppose one could find more local Black Ministers to give explanations….

Why can’t paralegals identify themselves as lawyers?

This “issue” is a common language problem, collateralized by the insecurity of retribution bent bullies (PC tyranny); who recklessly & simultaneously trample the sanctity of tradition (upon which definitions are based), while ignoring the Constitutional equity of civil unions, rights to contract & associate (willful ignorance undermining claims of “inequality”).  

Just watch the gay activist community scream ‘foul’ when employers in states with legally-sanctioned gay marriage stop offering domestic partner coverage. It will happen and it should!

I’m convinced most of them are narcissits, psychopaths, sociopaths, and unindicted criminals, Sam…..and some of them are closeted homosexuals on top of it all.

A scant few politicians are decent.

Scooter,

You want to reward these “civil unions” with government spousal benefits for welfare, food stamps, social security and survivor benefits, federal/state dependent tax exceptions, veteran GI Bill benefits  such as free college education & health benefits etc….?????

And you think we need affirmative action for gay people in hiring, promotion, and awarding government contracts?

Pascal,

I’m with the majority on this one.

I find the demands of gay activists unreasonable, and I believe their tactics will back fire on them for over reaching.

 I’m not talking about ‘rewards’.

I’m talking about equality under law, with reciprocity across all State lines.  Possible re-introduction of the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment), that would simply state that (to the State);

There is no difference between male/female
There is no difference between gay/lesbian
There is no difference between black/white/yellow/red
There is no distinction between various religions/or lack there of.

All persons above the age of majority carry the same burdens, shoulder the same responsibilities, have the same rights, including contracts for unions.  That is a government thing.  (Marriage is a spiritual union & a religion thing.)

Hate crimes would be the same, be it black on white, white on black, etc. No distinction. Equal across the board in charges as well as reparations & punishment.

Sexual harassment would go both all 5 ways… male, female, lesbian, gay or TG.

Responsibilities would be the same across the board… yes ladies…. combat positions are open to you, but you also have to register for Selective Service.  Same for divorces. Best parent keeps the kids & the other pays the larger burden of child support.

Since we are talking about responsibilities as well as rights, is everyone here ready to accept the changes in their responsibilities?  Hmmmm?

Wonder what Phil Hinkle thinks about this issue ?

….caught in a gay?? Can’t a good spray with a garden hose fix that?

Two caring, loving, consenting heterosexual adults also can join in marriage—a legal union recognized by the State—out of love and to stand before loved ones and friends and vow their love. My wife and I are atheists. We are married—not partners in a civil union—under the laws of the State of Indiana and, as such, by the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution in the other 49 states, Guam, the Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico. Indiana’s statute on marriage makes no mention of a supreme being. What “god” would it be? The Christian “god”? If a majority of some other religion—Hindu, Islam, whatever—occupies a jurisdiction, would their “god” (or “gods” since Hinduism is pantheistic) govern the matter?

Some companies in Indiana are saying they’ll be legally banned from offering domestic partner benefits due to the ambiguity of the proposed amendment’s second sentence. 

It is ironic when supposed small govt advocates use big govt to force private companies to stop doing a legal activity. 

Is there something wrong with providing the same benefits to same-sex couples that heterosexual couples receive?

That’s why I mention the ERA….

Sometimes doing something right means a bit more effort.

I certainly agree, but politics is the art of the possible. Overhauling the marriage benefits and changing all of that into civil union and then finding a way of either nullifying current marriages or grandfathering them into the system AND making sure civil unions get the same benefits….well, is a lot more work than just expanding marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

 Politics is the art of kissing a baby while stealing it’s binkie.

I do not see the difficulty…. add a series of ‘definitions’ to existing laws, such as the following;

MARRIAGE – Defined as a religion-based ceremony which also enters the couple into a contract also recognized by the state known as a Civil Union…. blah-blah-blah.

Civil Union – A contract entered into by two consenting adults…. blah-blah-blah.

As of this date xx/xx/20xx, the State of Blah-Blah recognizes these two,’ MARRIAGE’ and ‘CIVIL UNION’ to be equal under all laws, regulations & definitions utilized in the State of Blah-Blah.  Those entered into MARRIAGE or CIVIL UNIONS are hear-with grandfathers, with an effecive date stated on their original license.

But for reciprocity, it needs to be done on a national level… when it’s something from our Constitution there should be no ‘picking’ it apart or debate over what the meaning of ‘is’, is.

Just my little Scooter perfect world viewpoint…. 8-)

Abdul; You don’t see the problem with gay marriage because you’re not a real Republican. You probably also believe in evolution, global warming & the Earth being more than 10,000 years old.

Marriage is the combining of 2 or more things to make one. It always has meant that. No one is trying to change anything, rather make it mean, what it means.
Has anyone ever made homemade chili? Ever notice how it always tastes better the next day? Ever wonder why? Its because the flavors have had time to…. Marry.
Have you ever had a co-worker bring you a solution to a problem when you already had your own solution and found that creating a Marriage of ideas works better than either idea alone?
In the restaurant business, at the end of the shift, waiters collect all the ketchup bottles off the tables and pour the partial bottles into one bottle. You guessed it.. This process is called Marrying the ketchup.
If marriage is good enough for flavors, ideas and condiments, its good enough for me.
Zach

No, water like tears only make for quick and dirty substitute. 

There’s a magazine called “Science.” I see you are unfamiliar with it. Hope it helps.

 There are limits to having a open mind, otherwise it is just an empty mind.