Arkansas judge strikes down same sex marriage ban.

[sportage]

The republicans that control state legislators will never give up on this. Never!
For example, I'd suggest watching Iowa closely come this November.
SS marriage has been legal in Iowa for what, some 5 full years now? 2009?
Thats a lot of marriage and a lot of water under the bridge.
Republicans would LOVE to take control of the Iowa senate come November.
And I'd bet my ISP that if republicans succeed, that on day one republicans in Iowa will launch every known attack on not only Iowa SS marriage law, but re-introduce the very same anti-gay legislation vetoed in Arizona's by the AZ governor.
Actually, Iowa house republicans were one of the very first in the nation to try passing such denial of service laws against Gays. The republican house wanted it, the republican governor of Iowa said he would sign it, but the Iowa senate controlled by democrats never allow such nonsense to see the light of day. And the same with banning Iowa's SS marriage, where the democrat controlled Iowa senate stop every single effort, of which there were many, from the republican house. The Iowa senate stopped them cold, every single attempt.

So if the Iowa senate goes republican come November, and the house has long been gerrymandered to remain republican FOR EVER MORE, if republicans take the senate as well then no question about it republicans will immediately focus on nothing else beyond banning SS marriage in Iowa, and passing every denial of service laws republicans can stir up.
All this despite the huge cost to Iowa tax payers in the courts with the state legally defending their WE HATE GAYS bug up their collective republican asses.

Iowa has barely held place on the plus side as far as employment and the states financial stability, especially compared to other midwestern states. I figure it will take just one termed republican controlled senate legislature to destroy everything, financially turning Iowa into just another typical midwestern third world farmland slum.

 

[dawp]

snip

your best bet is just to put this idiot on ignore. he's just trolling you.

 

[waggy]

Bingo. When the people lead, the leaders will follow.

I give it two more years.

/This

 

[Vaux]

I simply don't understand the opposition to allowing gay marriage. How does it hurt you to allow same-sex marriage?

If something hurts me or not is not the be all end all judgement if something is right or not. It doesn't have anything to do with hurting me so you can just throw that argument out of the window.

Gay couples can already do almost everything a heterosexual couple can.

Yeah, they sure can. But apparently that isn't good enough. They want to bring normalcy to abnormal and unhealthy behavior by legitimizing it and calling it a marriage.

That said, gay couples are denied at least one extremely important privilege, the right to visit their loved one in the hospital in those situations where only immediate family is allowed.

Legalizing gay marriage because of this is cutting off your arm when only your finger is broken. If there is a problem with rights that married couples have as opposed to non-married couples, then those benefits should be changed or perhaps not exist at all.

There is no legitimate reason why same-sex marriage should not be allowed.

There are many legitimate reasons why they should not be allowed. The biggest one would be that only man and woman are made to come together as one. That is the way the human body is made and that is the way it is supposed to be. If you want to be gay and be with your same sex partner, you should do as you wish and nobody can stop you. But it shouldn't get a seal of approval and be recognized by society as something to celebrate, because it is fundamentally wrong.

 

[DrDoug]

...

But it shouldn't get a seal of approval...

Where do I get this seal of approval for my marriage? What organization hands this thing out?

... because it is fundamentally wrong.

Only if you are an fundamentalist.

 

[thraashman]

Yeah, they sure can. But apparently that isn't good enough. They want to bring normalcy to abnormal and unhealthy behavior by legitimizing it and calling it a marriage.

There are many legitimate reasons why they should not be allowed. The biggest one would be that only man and woman are made to come together as one. That is the way the human body is made and that is the way it is supposed to be. If you want to be gay and be with your same sex partner, you should do as you wish and nobody can stop you. But it shouldn't get a seal of approval and be recognized by society as something to celebrate, because it is fundamentally wrong.

It is only YOUR OPINION that homosexuality is wrong. It naturally occurs in hundreds of species, including humanity. However, being conservative is not natural and is fundamentally wrong in my opinion, you think it should be ok that I push to ban rights and privileges to those who are conservative? Just because you don't like something doesn't make it abnormal or wrong, it makes you close-minded.

 

[waggy]

It is only YOUR OPINION that homosexuality is wrong. It naturally occurs in hundreds of species, including humanity. However, being conservative is not natural and is fundamentally wrong in my opinion, you think it should be ok that I push to ban rights and privileges to those who are conservative? Just because you don't like something doesn't make it abnormal or wrong, it makes you close-minded.

i think it's disgusting. but immoral? wrong? nope.

i just don't care about it. it has nothing to do with me. I don't care if they move in next door. I don't care if they merry.

I do care that as a nation we are trying to legally discriminate against a class of people. that i do not agree with.

 

[K1052]

There are many legitimate reasons why they should not be allowed. The biggest one would be that only man and woman are made to come together as one. That is the way the human body is made and that is the way it is supposed to be. If you want to be gay and be with your same sex partner, you should do as you wish and nobody can stop you. But it shouldn't get a seal of approval and be recognized by society as something to celebrate, because it is fundamentally wrong.

It is unnatural to fly miles above the earth in an aluminum tube traveling several hundred miles an hour. If man was meant to fly god would have given us wings.

 

[thraashman]

i think it's disgusting. but immoral? wrong? nope.

i just don't care about it. it has nothing to do with me. I don't care if they move in next door. I don't care if they merry.

I do care that as a nation we are trying to legally discriminate against a class of people. that i do not agree with.

There you go. This is a very reasonable stance to take. You're not letting your distaste of something effect your view of whether or not the state should disallow it. This is being open-minded.

 

[Retro Rob]

i think it's disgusting. but immoral? wrong? nope.

I think it's all those above, personally, but I don't advocate banning it.

i just don't care about it. it has nothing to do with me. I don't care if they move in next door. I don't care if they merry.

Totally agree.

What the gay community doesn't seem to realize, and what they need to realize, is that everyone doesn't like them and isn't going to.

Tolerance goes both ways.

 

[thraashman]

I think it's all those above, personally, but I don't advocate banning it.



Totally agree.

What the gay community doesn't seem to realize, and what they need to realize, is that everyone doesn't like them and isn't going to.

Tolerance goes both ways.

And for the most part homosexuals don't expect everyone to agree with them and like them, but they do expect to be treated equally by everyone. I know you're pretty religious so I respect that you go against a popular position amongst religious conservatives to ban gay marriage.

 

[crownjules]

There are many legitimate reasons why they should not be allowed. The biggest one would be that only man and woman are made to come together as one. That is the way the human body is made and that is the way it is supposed to be. If you want to be gay and be with your same sex partner, you should do as you wish and nobody can stop you. But it shouldn't get a seal of approval and be recognized by society as something to celebrate, because it is fundamentally wrong.

The reason you think "only man and woman are made to come together..." is because you subscribe to a belief set that dictates that to you. That is fine and your prerogative to believe that way. It is not your prerogative to force everyone around you to live by those same beliefs.

 

[Retro Rob]

And for the most part homosexuals don't expect everyone to agree with them and like them, but they do expect to be treated equally by everyone. I know you're pretty religious so I respect that you go against a popular position amongst religious conservatives to ban gay marriage.

To be honest, voting to ban gay marriage is bigoted, IMO. I just think religion (Christianity, in this country) has its place in society, but not in law-making.

History has proven, and even current world events show, that the worst places to live are religiously-ran countries.

 

[waggy]

To be honest, voting to ban gay marriage is bigoted, IMO. I just think religion (Christianity, in this country) has its place in society, but not in law-making.

History has proven, and even current world events show, that the worst places to live are religiously-ran countries.

agreed. I have no hatred of religion (though i do dislike the instition of religion. but that's another thread). I think it has done good for many people.


I don't think it has any place in law.

 

[K1052]

What the gay community doesn't seem to realize, and what they need to realize, is that everyone doesn't like them and isn't going to.

Tolerance goes both ways.

I don't require people to like me. I do require religious nut bags who want to use my government against me to impose their particular belief structure to keep their grubby hands off of it.

 

[Retro Rob]

agreed. I have no hatred of religion (though i do dislike the instition of religion. but that's another thread). I think it has done good for many people.


I don't think it has any place in law.

To address this point, people who just want to remove religion from Government is kind ignoring why we have this problem. We'd have to change our from of Governing to achieve this.

I try to keep in mind that from around the 4th Century C.E till now, Christianity was given social responsibility and made the office State religion of Rome. Throughout the centuries, this marriage remained in tact and still does to some degree.

 

[Retro Rob]

I don't require people to like me. I do require religious nut bags who want to use my government against me to impose their particular belief structure to keep their grubby hands off of it.

"Nut bags"? And you wonder why religious people are resistant to changing their viewpoints -- you're alienating them, just as they've done to gays for so long.

If you're going to act like your opponents, then don't expect a thing to change.

 

[alzan]

To address this point, people who just want to remove religion from Government is kind ignoring why we have this problem. We'd have to change our from of Governing to achieve this.

I try to keep in mind that from around the 4th Century C.E till now, Christianity was given social responsibility and made the office State religion of Rome. Throughout the centuries, this marriage remained in tact and still does to some degree.

For the most part our government is already set up to keep religion and it's traditions separate; what really needs to change is that government at all levels needs to view and legislate issues free from religious bias, both their own and those of their constituents.

"Nut bags"? And you wonder why religious people are resistant to changing their viewpoints -- you're alienating them, just as they've done to gays for so long.

If you're going to act like your opponents, then don't expect a thing to change.

All sides do need to cease name calling.

 

[K1052]

"Nut bags"? And you wonder why religious people are resistant to changing their viewpoints -- you're alienating them, just as they've done to gays for so long.

If you're going to act like your opponents, then don't expect a thing to change.

Many religious people are resistant to changing their views because they are closed minded, not exclusive to the gay issue. Some people will grow and some will not. I'm not interested in censoring my opinion to accommodate the sensitivities of small minded people who are now threatened by the slow yet inexorable social change that is upon us.

 

[Retro Rob]

Many religious people are resistant to changing their views because they are closed minded, not exclusive to the gay issue. Some people will grow and some will not. I'm not interested in censoring my opinion to accommodate the sensitivities of small minded people who are now threatened by the slow yet inexorable social change that is upon us.

Huh?

Who said that you can't say what you want to say? I simply said acting as your opponents act won't net positive results.

 

[Retro Rob]

All sides do need to cease name calling.

The truth of this statement lies in the fact that ostracism is the main reason why gays and atheists remained in the closet. You'd imagine that a group of people who knows what that is like would be more sensitive to those who also hold views that may as unwelcome as theirs once were.

If you remember how you felt when people treated you like crap for holding views out of step with mainstream society, and now you do the same to those who views are out of step with the majority.

 

[K1052]

The truth of this statement lies in the fact that ostracism is the main reason why gays and atheists remained in the closet. You'd imagine that a group of people who knows what that is like would be more sensitive to those who also hold views that may as unwelcome as theirs once were.

If you remember how you felt when people treated you like crap for holding views out of step with mainstream society, and now you do the same to those who views are not out of step with the majority.

I was more worried about getting beaten or killed by some ignorant person. But I guess that is pretty much the same as receiving a little harsh language or someone challenging your actions in the political/legal sphere.

This new victimhood mentality that the religious are embracing is a most interesting phenomenon.

 

[Newell Steamer]

I don't understand how these types of bans, coming from a religion that is lead by Someone, who never spoke against homosexuality.

What a spiteful waste.

 

[Retro Rob]

I was more worried about getting beaten or killed by some ignorant person. But I guess that is pretty much the same as receiving a little harsh language or someone challenging your actions in the political/legal sphere.

Uh.., ok. Sorry you had to go through that. But are you saying that the "ignorant person" is reflective of the actions of most people not supportive of gay marriage?

 

[alzan]

I was more worried about getting beaten or killed by some ignorant person. But I guess that is pretty much the same as receiving a little harsh language or someone challenging your actions in the political/legal sphere.

This new victimhood mentality that the religious are embracing is a most interesting phenomenon.

The mentality of victimhood crosses into any group. It has more to do with an individuals' self esteem than anything else.

"A person is not defined by what happens to them, a person is defined by what they do with what happens to them." - Unknown