New York State Senate passes same sex marriage bill.e

[classy]

In short I am tired of that argument Craig. Find something else.

 

[zsdersw]

"Black" is not a choice.

Neither is homosexuality.

 

[Craig234]

The KKK used our skin color against us to promote their agenda and you do the exact same thing. You are the same POS bigot just like they are. Your only argument is based on someone's skin color to support your agenda. What's laughable is you think you are on some higher plane, but you are not. You are exactly the same, just in different clothes.

PS: Should I use only male pics to make you feel more comfortable.

You are just frothing irrationally. I guess you don't like the truth of your bigotry being pointed out, so you throw the word around against supporting equality.

'You bigot, you support equal rights regardless of race or sexual orientation!'

Ya, makes sense.

Well, not all blacks are anti-gay, are they? Just for you:

 

[1prophet]

They made it illegal for churches to refuse marriage services for instance if a interracial couple are getting married.

It was like that awhile ago but how long until a similar law works it's way for gay marriage is my question?

Obviously over time they will allow it since the church will accept it like they have done for other stuff but I doubt it would become a common practice in our lifetime sadly, especially how some are always very slow to accept the norm of life.

Where have you seen religious organizations, (that includes churches, mosques, synagogues, etc.) being told by the government who they can or cannot marry (two consenting adults) since that would be a violation of the separation of state and religion?

 

[classy]

You are just frothing irrationally. I guess you don't like the truth of your bigotry being pointed out, so you throw the word around against supporting equality.

'You bigot, you support equal rights regardless of race or sexual orientation!'

Ya, makes sense.

Well, not all blacks are anti-gay, are they? Just for you:

Still digusting even if they are black. You can put lipstick on a pig, its still a pig.

 

[Aegeon]

NY didn't pass a bill acknowledging homosexual marriage full on . It passed a bill saying homosexuals can get married - but not in churches - and not in a way that constricts anyones religious morals. Basically, NY passed a cryptic civil union bill with a Fcuk-you religious provision built it.

To clear up any remaining confusion on this subject, this claim is flat out wrong.

In fact, such a provision would almost certainly be unconstitutional as it would infringe on the First Amendment and specifically the religious liberties of churches and synagogues that do perform gay marriages already. This applies to a number of churches as well as particularly in New York, synagogues that are members of the Reform and Conservative denominations.

Its also true that a gay marriage measure clearly can't compel any church to perform a gay marriage ceremony when it doesn't want to do so without infringing upon the First Amendment. This part of the provision added into the law is therefore clearly unnecessary legally, (it merely says religious organization don't have to perform gay marriage ceremonies if they don't want to) but probably was politically necessary to address concerns some people in New York would have had in legalizing gay marriage otherwise.

There is a more controversial amendment also added to the law which limits in what ways religious or religiously affiliated organizations have to acknowledge gay marriage, (i.e. they don't have to rent out any of their facilities to someone wanting to have a gay marriage ceremony there) but this clearly still does not do anything remotely like you are claiming. I am still researching exactly how far this provision applies, but it clearly does not alter the big picture that gay marriages are now considered legal (and in no way simply a civil union) in New York State. (Technically you need to wait 30 days for the new law to be implemented but you get my point.)

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Marriage is a religious and/or a civil union of one man and one woman.

They can say they are "married" but they are not. They can say they are pilots, but they are not. They can say they are brain surgeons, but they are not. Words have meaning.

I have no problem with a State sanctioned civil union that has as a legal function the same rights and privileges of a real marriage but please don't insult us by calling it a marriage. It is not.

Words have meaning.

Gee and here I thought marriage was about love and commitment to one person. I am not with any random woman because they are a woman. I am with my wife because of that commitment I have made to her based on the love I feel for her. I committed to being with her for the rest of my life because of that.

Words have definitions, actions have meaning. I can put any man and any woman together but that doesn't make them married. That doesn't preserve the sanctity of the institution. There is no justification to oppose it other than personal or religious beliefs. What gives you or anyone else the right to tell me what I can do with MY life just because it conflicts with your own personal view points?

And what have heterosexuals done for marriage to protect it and preserve it? Ifidelity. Divorce rates at 50%. Lawmakers telling us that gays can't marry only for being gay while they are cheating, divorcing and remarrying at rapid pace (I'm looking at you Newt).

The argument is about hate plain and simple. You people get up in arms if the state tries to infringe any of your perceived rights yet discriminate agains millions of others. It's disgusting.

 

[Craig234]

Still digusting even if they are black. You can put lipstick on a pig, its still a pig. Oink, oink.

Yes, you are.

 

[Craig234]

In short I am tired of that argument Craig. Find something else.

No.

It's your problem you don't like the truth being told.

 

[Craig234]

They made it illegal for churches to refuse marriage services for instance if a interracial couple are getting married.

Link?

I don't recall any laws telling churches who they have to marry.

There are laws who they CAN'T marry - a church can't marry a child to an adult or two children, or today they can't marry same-sex couples most places.

 

[zsdersw]

Still digusting

I know you like to talk about yourself, but really... change the subject once in a while.

 

[Craig234]

I know you like to talk about yourself, but really... change the subject once in a while.

Really, it's ok classy finds homosexual sex 'disgusting'. That's a normal reaction for straight men IMO. The problem is his bigotry against them making him think it's ok to deny rights.

He has the same mentality as white racists who were 'disgusted' by contact with blacks - and denied them rights. It's the same bigotry whether it's no marriage - or sodomy laws.

It's the same bigotry as people for whom it wasn't enough not to get married to a black - they had to vote for laws to say no one could, because it was disgusting to them.

 

[Aegeon]

There are laws who they CAN'T marry - a church can't marry a child to an adult or two children, or today they can't marry same-sex couples most places.

The second one is wrong regarding anywhere in the US at least. There are churches and synagogues etc. who perform gay marriage ceremonies, they simply are not recognized as legal marriages in many states right now. A law baring such ceremonies from being performed would certainly end up being ruled unconstitutional.

 

[fskimospy]

Marriage is a religious and/or a civil union of one man and one woman.

They can say they are "married" but they are not. They can say they are pilots, but they are not. They can say they are brain surgeons, but they are not. Words have meaning.

I have no problem with a State sanctioned civil union that has as a legal function the same rights and privileges of a real marriage but please don't insult us by calling it a marriage. It is not.

Words have meaning.

They sure do. Like say, the definition of marriage from the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>

Words definitely do have meaning, and those meanings often change over time.

The world has left you behind. You can rage about it all you want, you can claim insult, illegitimacy, or whatever else. Know what's going to happen though? Tons of gay people are going to get married, and they will completely ignore your shrieking and frothing from wherever you live.

They are going to be happy (well, at least as happy as married people get, haha), and you're going to sit at home being bitter about it. You've already lost, you just haven't come around to admitting it yet.

 

[Craig234]

The second one is wrong regarding anywhere in the US at least. There are churches and synagogues etc. who perform gay marriage ceremonies, they simply are not recognized as legal marriages in many states right now. A law baring such ceremonies from being performed would certainly end up being ruled unconstitutional.

I'm referring to legally recognized marriages.

 

[a777pilot]

Neither is "Asshole" apparently...

Have a Nice Day

Thank you. You have a nice day too.

 

[a777pilot]

Neither is homosexuality.

Yes it is or it would have been evolved out of existence a long time ago.

 

[charrison]

Neither is homosexuality.

Not so sure about that. there do were gay, then were not gay and vice versa. It is without a doubt an interesting topic, but there appear to be no absolutes on that.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Yes it is or it would have been evolved out of existence a long time ago.

Nonsense. Same sex pair bonding/sex is prolific throughout the animal kingdom as well. Nice try though.

 

[fskimospy]

Yes it is or it would have been evolved out of existence a long time ago.

On what pathetic understanding of biology are you basing this idea on? Are you claiming that all traits that reduce (or eliminate) the possibility of reproducing have been eliminated by evolution?

 

[nageov3t]

I don't really see how it matters if being gay is a choice or not.

why limit the rights of two consenting adults whose actions cause no harm?

 

[MotF Bane]

"Black" is not a choice.

Neither is homosexuality.

Try again.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Yes it is or it would have been evolved out of existence a long time ago.

So, animals in the wild choose if they want to be homosexual or not?

Are you retarded, trolling or a retarded troll?

Threads like these are always good for weeding out the ignorant and uneducated.

 

[a777pilot]

Neither is homosexuality.

Try again.

Ok.

Gay is a choice.

That's OK. Choice is a good thing in a free society. Now that New York has made the union of two men or two women legal, would they still be legal if they moved to, say, Texas?

 

[Gooberlx2]

Link?

I don't recall any laws telling churches who they have to marry.

There are laws who they CAN'T marry - a church can't marry a child to an adult or two children, or today they can't marry same-sex couples most places.

Yeah, that's why I was asking for link to the actual bill last night. Some of the assertions being made regarding religious institutions didn't make any sense.