• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bush To Push For Constitutional Ban On Gay Marriage

E

Encryptic

Diamond Member
Can we vote for impeachment, please?

Nice to see that this issue is such a hot potato that Bush feels it deserves a fvcking Constitutional amendment.

rolleye.gif
 
Bush is a uniter. That means he is compelled to tear the country apart. He sees votes from bigots here and that is all that matters. Let gay people rot in hell. They are only filthy tools anyway, right. Get it, Filthy tools. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 
Anyone have any idea on how bush plays to word the amendment because it it is as simple as saying gays can't "married" or have the same benifits as marriage won't that in effect outlaw marriage in the states with court cases requiring gays to have the same rights?
 
Thank God us Republicans haven't run out of people to hate. We lost the Soviets and Blacks, but now we got gays. Hallelujah hallelujah, stoke those fires. We'll burn them at the stake.

It's amazing to see how easy it is not to see who we are.

But but but, people of the same sex can't marry. Why who ever heard of such a thing. Next thing you know and we'll all be acting like Bonobo chimps.
 
Regretfully he will not be around in any case to receive the backlash.

Took how long it took the ERA to get shot down.

Congress has to get involved and a large majority of states.
The states will probably wait and see how a US Supreme Court challenge plays out before doing anything.
 
Originally posted by: TheGameIs21
Originally posted by: Encryptic
Can we vote for impeachment, please?

Nice to see that this issue is such a hot potato that Bush feels it deserves a fvcking Constitutional amendment.

rolleye.gif
Click to expand...
And what law has Bush broken that would call for impeachment hearings in this case? I think what you are wanting to call for is called a Recall.
Click to expand...

The idea of one man and one woman is a religious belief, not legal.
 
Originally posted by: Strk
Originally posted by: TheGameIs21
Originally posted by: Encryptic
Can we vote for impeachment, please?

Nice to see that this issue is such a hot potato that Bush feels it deserves a fvcking Constitutional amendment.

rolleye.gif
Click to expand...
And what law has Bush broken that would call for impeachment hearings in this case? I think what you are wanting to call for is called a Recall.
Click to expand...

The idea of one man and one woman is a religious belief, not legal.
Click to expand...

Actually it is the law of the land - not just some religious belief.

CkG
 
Man you'd think the Dub would be more occupied with ridding Pro Sports of Steriods to have time to be bothered with this
 
This is not the appropriate realm of government authority, other than to authorize civil unions. The marriage covenant as described by Judeo-Christian belief is a religious affair, and should not be subject to the intrusion of government.
 
Originally posted by: Orsorum
This is not the appropriate realm of government authority, other than to authorize civil unions. The marriage covenant as described by Judeo-Christian belief is a religious affair, and should not be subject to the intrusion of government.
Click to expand...
SO you have to be a Jew or a Christian to be officially married?

 
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Orsorum
This is not the appropriate realm of government authority, other than to authorize civil unions. The marriage covenant as described by Judeo-Christian belief is a religious affair, and should not be subject to the intrusion of government.
Click to expand...
SO you have to be a Jew or a Christian to be officially married?
Click to expand...

I only mentioned the Judeo-Christian "version" of marriage because that is the custom with which I am acquainted; my point is that the marriage act should not be controlled or defined by the United States government, as it is a purely religious designation and choice. As such, it should be under the control of religious institutions.

Civil unions, however, are another matter. I support the secular government's introducing a "civil union" status and conferring upon it the appropriate legal rights and duties.
 
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Strk
Originally posted by: TheGameIs21
Originally posted by: Encryptic
Can we vote for impeachment, please?

Nice to see that this issue is such a hot potato that Bush feels it deserves a fvcking Constitutional amendment.

rolleye.gif
Click to expand...
And what law has Bush broken that would call for impeachment hearings in this case? I think what you are wanting to call for is called a Recall.
Click to expand...

The idea of one man and one woman is a religious belief, not legal.
Click to expand...

Actually it is the law of the land - not just some religious belief.

CkG
Click to expand...

And where does the law derive itself from? Religion! Honestly, there is no legal reason to go against, only religious beliefs against it.

 
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
So they want to write a law that discriminates
into a Constitution that forbids discrimination ?
Click to expand...

Maybe in amendments to the constitution, but not in the constitution. And amendments don't mention sexual orientation.
 
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
So they want to write a law that discriminates
into a Constitution that forbids discrimination ?
Click to expand...

Well...duh! Makes sense doesn't it? The sanctity of marriage is at stake!!! We must act NOW!!

rolleye.gif
 
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
So they want to write a law that discriminates
into a Constitution that forbids discrimination ?
Click to expand...

Maybe in amendments to the constitution, but not in the constitution. And amendments don't mention sexual orientation.
Click to expand...

WTF? If you amend the consitution, you are including it in the constitution. Any way you want to dance around the issue, it still boils down to discrimination.
 
Originally posted by: Insane3D
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
So they want to write a law that discriminates
into a Constitution that forbids discrimination ?
Click to expand...

Maybe in amendments to the constitution, but not in the constitution. And amendments don't mention sexual orientation.
Click to expand...

WTF? If you amend the consitution, you are including it in the constitution. Any way you want to dance around the issue, it still boils down to discrimination.
Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with dancing around the issue. Just stating facts. Which you have trouble with.

And again, the amendment on discrimination says nothing about sexual orientation. By inclusion, other forms of discrimination are constitutional.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top