Same Sex Marriage

[21st Amendment]

Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard

That's a copout. For the first two years of his administration the Democrats controlled the House and the Senate, and the only thing he was able to pass was a gutted healthcare law that was a hollow shell of what he really wanted.

That's my biggest gripe with Obama -- his lack of leadership skills, and his inability to not only reach across the aisle but also deal with ego-driven members of his own party is frustrating, to say the least. He doesn't act; he reacts. The Benghazi debacle was the most recent example of that.

While I'm frustrated myself with his leadership, I think you are underestimating the division in today's congress. There are very few moderates. Look the Republicans in Indiana kicked Dick Lugar to the curb because he wasn't conservative enough, and I don't think anyone really considers him a moderate. Now they are stuck with the new rape guy. The same thing happened countless times the last 3 years, in Delaware, Alaska, Colorado. Because of it the Republicans have zero change to win back the Senate.


Off topic. Booker vs. Christie 2013? Apparently Booker will announce a decision before the New Year.

[Bonhomme Richard]

Originally Posted by 21st Amendment

While I'm frustrated myself with his leadership, I think you are underestimating the division in today's congress. There are very few moderates. Look the Republicans in Indiana kicked Dick Lugar to the curb because he wasn't conservative enough, and I don't think anyone really considers him a moderate. Now they are stuck with the new rape guy. The same thing happened countless times the last 3 years, in Delaware, Alaska, Colorado. Because of it the Republicans have zero change to win back the Senate.

It has become very difficult since the 2010 elections, but before that even happened Obama couldn't even get Pelosi on board with his initiatives.

And yes, it's difficult now, but it's not impossible. The onus should be on Obama as much as the Republicans to make some concessions and try to work together. From what I've seen, Obama is just as stubborn as the most hardcore tea-party congressman. Again, that's a failure to lead.

Off topic. Booker vs. Christie 2013? Apparently Booker will announce a decision before the New Year.

I have no idea, I can't read Booker at all. I have a hard time seeing him run against Christie since they've been so chummy.

[WestCoastOffensive]

Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard

Could have just been politics then too.

Anyway, my "excuse" is that it's a shame the civil union laws never achieved what they were intended to do. I don't consider marriage as just a piece of paper you get from a judge, I still consider it a Holy Sacrament.

That's because of the separation of Church and State; am I missing something?

If any man is a beliver in any religion, he can still back away from the marriage. It's your intent going in, your actual act of considering your end in a marriage as sacred assignment (if you will).

The Founding Fathers figured that out long ago; there is no Law that can order a man to feel a deep sense of responsibility.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard

That legal limitation already exists. Whether I support it or not is irrelevant.

Really?

Thats funny. I'm non-faithful, and I was able to get the "Holy Sacriment" of marriage no questions asked.

Can you cite your source on this claimed "legal limitation" that bans non-faithful from getting married? Thanks.

[HessStation]

Oh you guys. Lets all just high 5 a gay person and move on.

[Bonhomme Richard]

Originally Posted by WestCoastOffensive

That's because of the separation of Church and State; am I missing something?

If any man is a beliver in any religion, he can still back away from the marriage. It's your intent going in, your actual act of considering your end in a marriage as sacred assignment (if you will).

The Founding Fathers figured that out long ago; there is no Law that can order a man to feel a deep sense of responsibility.

You're absolutely right. It's a difficult issue.

[Bonhomme Richard]

Originally Posted by Warfish

Really?

Thats funny. I'm non-faithful, and I was able to get the "Holy Sacriment" of marriage no questions asked.

Can you cite your source on this claimed "legal limitation" that bans non-faithful from getting married? Thanks.

Ohhh, never mind, I misunderstood what you said. Were you married in a Christian ceremony? If so, why?

[doggin94it]

Originally Posted by Warfish

You have an opinion on the merits of Paganism?

Seriosuly my friend, that you HAVE to share.

I'm a religious jew; I believe Paganism is an utterly wrong view of the world and harmful to its adherents. Sort of comes with the territory

[doggin94it]

Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard

Could have just been politics then too.

Anyway, my "excuse" is that it's a shame the civil union laws never achieved what they were intended to do. I don't consider marriage as just a piece of paper you get from a judge, I still consider it a Holy Sacrament.

And you're free to continue to do so as long as you want, regardless of the fact that the federal and state government also consider marriage a piece of paper you get from the judge, regardless of whether it involves a Christian priest.

And that will be true regardless of whether people of the same sex are entitled to that piece of paper from the judge.

[sg3]

Two people who love each other should be allowed to marry.

Period

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by sg3

Two people who love each other should be allowed to marry.

Period

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

So when r u and RonPaulstiltskin jumpin' the broomstick?

You can use your spreadsheet as the guest list

[sg3]

Why the personal attack???

not my fault that the GOP rejected a candidate with principles and chose a flipflopping empty suit instead handing a second term to Obama

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

[Bonhomme Richard]

Originally Posted by doggin94it

And you're free to continue to do so as long as you want, regardless of the fact that the federal and state government also consider marriage a piece of paper you get from the judge, regardless of whether it involves a Christian priest.

And that will be true regardless of whether people of the same sex are entitled to that piece of paper from the judge.

That's also true.

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by sg3

Why the personal attack???

not my fault that the GOP rejected a candidate with principles and chose a flipflopping empty suit instead handing a second term to Obama

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

a) is the election over yet?

b) if YOU or anyone thinking like you vote for anyone but Romney YOU are handing a second term to B. Hussein. Can't make it any simpler or clearer for ya, regrets

c) everytime a paulbot or one of his unrealistic "principled" ilk posts the identical message included above ^^^^ it gets an auto-reply debunking its infinite idiocy.

Lexicon keyword triggers include but are not limited to, "Ron", "Paul", "Ron Paul", "Dr.", "gold", "Federal Reserve", "Johnson", "Goode", "(D) = (R)", "3rd party", "Fox News", "Bob Barr", "Zionist", "America's fault", "creating more terrorists", "Patriot Act", "legalize dope", "victimless crime", "no religion in the public square" etc. -

there is a spreadsheet link around somewhere

[sg3]

a) yes - an opportunity sadly thrown down the toilet by nominating the Mormon empty suit



Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

[Axil]

Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet

a) is the election over yet?

b) if YOU or anyone thinking like you vote for anyone but Romney YOU are handing a second term to B. Hussein. Can't make it any simpler or clearer for ya, regrets

c) everytime a paulbot or one of his unrealistic "principled" ilk posts the identical message included above ^^^^ it gets an auto-reply debunking its infinite idiocy.

Lexicon keyword triggers include but are not limited to, "Ron", "Paul", "Ron Paul", "Dr.", "gold", "Federal Reserve", "Johnson", "Goode", "(D) = (R)", "3rd party", "Fox News", "Bob Barr", "Zionist", "America's fault", "creating more terrorists", "Patriot Act", "legalize dope", "victimless crime", "no religion in the public square" etc.

Debunking:

[MnJetFan]

It is all about forcing their way of life on anyone who disagrees with them. They don't want us to use the court to define marriage but they will use the court to get their way. Hypocritical I would think!

[palmetto defender]

Gay marriage? Hey, no problem.
While we're at it polygamy should be okayed. Two men-one woman. Two women-one man. All the various permutations and combinations.
"I have 4 wives. I want (demand) ALL of them covered under my benefit plan, Mr. Employer".
And how about age? Why not 6 year old girls eligible. And the same for boys. To those of similar age or 60 year old adults?
And of course, why should we discriminate against those who prefer marriage to ssomething in the animal kingdom - say a dog, horse or sheep.

Let's not be shortsighted on limiting depravity. Let's go all out. It's everyone's RIGHT.

[HessStation]

Originally Posted by palmetto defender

Gay marriage? Hey, no problem.
While we're at it polygamy should be okayed. Two men-one woman. Two women-one man. All the various permutations and combinations.
"I have 4 wives. I want (demand) ALL of them covered under my benefit plan, Mr. Employer".
And how about age? Why not 6 year old girls eligible. And the same for boys. To those of similar age or 60 year old adults?
And of course, why should we discriminate against those who prefer marriage to ssomething in the animal kingdom - say a dog, horse or sheep.

Let's not be shortsighted on limiting depravity. Let's go all out. It's everyone's RIGHT.

CALIGULAAAaaaaaaa!!!!

[palmetto defender]

Originally Posted by HessStation

CALIGULAAAaaaaaaa!!!!

That guy was a major league party animal.
Some of his "events" were classic.