Homo Marriage in Massachusetts ?!
- 02-11-2004, 07:23 PM
Homo Marriage in Massachusetts ?!
I have to say that at times, it absolutely SHAMES me to say I live in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I cannot believe some of the BS that occurs here pollitically, and this issue has to be the biggest stinker YET.
Before any gay members start in with brandishing me as a discriminating "homophobe", just don't even start that nonsense. I've never advocated violence against gay people, NEVER. And anyone who commits violence against ANYBODY ELSE deserves to receive the full weight of penalty under the law. I've worked with gay people in and around the Boston area, I have no problem whatsoever with them, and they'd tell you that I've treated them kindly, respectfully, etc. One of them is among the funniest and most enjoyable people I've ever had the pleasure to be around.
The gay community has for years been preaching the message of "tolerance". I for one, have been tolerant. While there are exceptions, I think most people are tolerant and considerate of others. If two men or two women want to spend time together in whatever fashion they please, more power to you. I couldn't care LESS about what 2 consenting adults do together, that's their business.
I have no problem whatsoever with communities like Provincetown, or Northampton, which have either predominant or statistically higher % of gay couples. One knows in advance what to expect if they choose to visit that town, and so if I do, I don't make waves. Neither should anyone else.
But I REALLY have a problem, as I think most people do, with the concept of gay marriage. The term "discrimination" against gay marriage really shouldn't even apply?! It's another semantics game. Discrimination applys to race, creed, color, etc. It is equally disturbing to me to be accused of "discriminating" against gay marriage, as if someone were to tell me I shouldn't be "discriminating" against child molesters. Both are examples of BEHAVIOR. It is our absolute RIGHT to discriminate either against or for people based on their BEHAVIOR...... "Joe is a great guy" ..... "Sarah is like a sister to me"...... "Sam is a first class Ass hole". etc.
Gays seeking marriage rights means they want governmental and societal stamp of approval of their "behavior". That behavior, for nearly 5,000 years now, has been considered SIN in the eyes of people of Judeo-Christian, Muslim, and other faiths. And at least here in the U.S., while the 2nd amendment to our constitution states that "congress shall pass no law RESPECTING "A" religion .......", it DOESN"T say they shall pass no law RESPECTING RELIGION. Big difference.
I don't appreciate the damned UNELECTED Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court forcing this decision down my throat, 4 votes to 3. That's bull****. I don't appreciate the damned legislators in Massachusetts sitting on their fat litle asses on this issue when they could have and SHOULD have had the balls to deal with it 2 years ago, rather than letting it come to this, the self-serving, power hungry lazy ASSES didn't have the conviction to act.
Am I a bigot? I don't think so. Gay marriage is an assault on the values of the majority in favor of a minority that many feel is granting acceptance to immoral behavior. It would dilute and diminishes the value of marriage society places on the family unit headed by my wife and I, and between all husbands and wives. I'm live and let live. Go enjoy your life with your gay partner, I couldn't care less. But don't tell me that the gay lifestyle is an equally acceptable alternative lifestyle. And don't you dare teach my children that in school, that's my job not anyone elses.
And don't let gay propaganda say this has anything to do with equal rights. There already exists legal avenues for 2 people to share property rights, and address all those other concerns. They are only seeking social acceptance and legitimacy, the government's stamp of approval.
If you think this doesn't concern you because you don't live in Massachusetts, think again. It's called the full faith and credit provision of the constitution wherein different states honor licenses with other states, e.g. drivers licenses. This is entirely unchartered territory if we go here folks.
I just can't wait until May to turn on my tv to see the nightly news featuring today's "marriage" between husband and husband, and wife and wife.
Just ****ing beautiful.
- 02-11-2004, 07:33 PM
***DO NOT TURN THIS THREAD INTO A FIGHT***
PC1....I agree. I think the judges involved have an agenda, unfortunately.
Being tolerant(a preaching of gay activists) should also mean that one has to tolerate those who are not tolerant. However, activists do not see it this way, but rather if you are against them, then you are intolerant or homophobic or etc.
02-11-2004, 07:37 PM
I could care less.....but my boyfriend might.
Seriously though, whatever floats there boats, just don't let it effect me....
02-11-2004, 09:07 PM
Originally Posted by PC1
the only thing i would point out here, is that the attitudes and beliefs about marriage and the family unit in this country are, at this point, laughable. whether or not you agree with gay marriage in principle is one thing, but i'm not sure it's valid to think that accepting gay marriage will somehow further tarnish this country's gilded views and strict adherence to the sanctity of what the ceremony is supposed to be about from a morally related approach.
i personally place more value on people making a lifelong commitment to eachother (regarless of gender), than to seeing people "marry" four or five times and completely demolish whatever significance the thing had to begin with, along with whatever beginnings of a family they were able to create every time they went through it.
so to reiterate, the only thing that makes me uncomfortable here is any kind of assumption that allowing gay marriage would somehow negatively impact the institution as a whole, because even with only heterosexual people involved, it's a complete and utter mess.
02-11-2004, 09:38 PM
It's all political agenda, not personal feelings. You can't sit here and tell me that every single democrat running for office is for gay marriage any more than you can convince me that George Bush is for Mexican immigration. It's all about getting the votes.
02-11-2004, 10:02 PM
Bingo!Originally Posted by BingeAndPurge
I just think it's sad this is the hot topic right now. I'm completely against it but I can think of a 100 other issues that are more important.
02-11-2004, 10:40 PM
02-11-2004, 11:30 PM
I agree. Our government has made it too easy for couples to divorce by offering welfare, insurance, food stamps, etc. [not withstanding abusive situations] Allowing gay couples to "marry" would only further deteriorate the institution.Originally Posted by Biggs
02-11-2004, 11:37 PM
I'm not disagreeing with your statement. But personal feelings ARE what is driving this HIGHLY polarized issue. I haven't framed my discussion as Democrat v Republican, although it will be a contentious issue by November. Tom Finneran (D) the House Speaker and Mitt Romney (R) governor are both opposed to gay marriage. This issue transcends Dems v Rep.Originally Posted by BingeAndPurge
02-11-2004, 11:44 PM
Ya know I love you NPursuit, but I gotta disagree with you here bro. The economy is important, the war against terrorism & Iraq are important. Education, health care and our standing in the world are all important. But equally so is this issue, because it's part of the very fabric of our society that makes us what we are.Originally Posted by NPursuit
02-12-2004, 12:28 AM
Hey, I'm not discounting that a few folks out there might maintain some level of integrity, but explain to me why every single dem that is/was running for president decided that gay marriage was going to be an important issue and every single one of them was all for it. Seriously, they have comletely exploited this issue and are only doing it for votes. I guarantee that after November, regardless of the outcome, it will be four years until this is debated on the same level. It's a dog and pony show for votes and nothing else.Originally Posted by PC1
02-12-2004, 12:39 AM
Originally Posted by PC1
There is know way in hell that you can rationalize to me that core factors such as education, health care, the current war, and, as NP said, 100's of other issues should be not only on the same level as, but overshadowed by whether gays should marry. If people are too ignorant to see that this is just a political tactic for gaining an advantage of a voter demographic then I am a very very worried man. Just wait until Big Al drops out of th race. These guys are going to be sucking his dick for his endorsement so that they can gain the black vote, and like I said before with Bush, a man who came out of the gate his first year fighting terrorism and screaming to close the borders all of the sudden decides that Mexican illegals are OK by him. This is nothing but a strategy of gaining Latin votes and after this election you will never hear of this again.
02-12-2004, 01:07 AM
Binge.....You are going a little off topic. Of course, there are many other issues that are important to the United States as a country. However, homosexual marriage addresses the spirituality/faith of many citizens. Consequently, religious individuals feel this issue is more important than anything else, as many will choose faith over life.
Marriage is a holy and religious rite. Marriage is a religious act of the very highest kind, one of the seven sacraments. Challenging this sacrement is challenging the very essence of ones faith.
02-12-2004, 01:17 AM
Marriage is a 50/50 shot in this country. Marriage is a coinflip. Marriage is so sacred that divorce is a way of life.Originally Posted by size
Not everyone has strong religious beliefs. I could be wrong here too, but I thought the Seven Sacraments was a Catholic thing, a religion that this country has a strong history of despising.
02-12-2004, 01:23 AM
Divorce is unfortunate and part of a slippery slope that has evolved in this country. The next slip will be homosexual marriage, and afterwards the slope will become a cliff.
I ask you this. Let us assume homosexual marriage becomes accepted. What comes next? Why not polygamy or polyandry? Why not incest marriages? etc.
02-12-2004, 01:31 AM
02-12-2004, 01:36 AM
Yes but that is not in tune with the rationale of the question. Gay marriages certainly go on in parts of the USA under the same sort of cloud.Originally Posted by sifu
02-12-2004, 01:43 AM
I know, but truely I avoid that type of thing. It is a no win situation for both sides of the fence.
02-12-2004, 02:44 AM
if the concept of marriage was so important to the religious people of america the american "family" would not be so radically different now than it was even a generation ago. already mentioned the divorce rates etc, so no need to rehash that.
on the other side, we've got how it's being used as a hot button issue. i cannot watch the news and feel this is not the case, to a large degree. it has become an "accepted" issue of which to debate every nook and cranny, if at least only to kill time and add meat to the pseudo debates, hoopla, and bull****. abortion is a much more important and relevant topic, but nobody will touch that one with any kind of depth. it comes election time, so let's all run to the middle, and see how closely we can sit without quite touching, as we take only marginally different stances on various unimportant issues (that will nonetheless draw viewers). the american people should NOT be given credit for being smarter than we think they are, because on the whole they are NOT educated, and they are NOT significantly religious, in the real sense of the word. they are NOT accepting of their fellow man/woman, they are NOT polite, generous, or caring except selectively to those closest to them, they are NOT tolerant. america is a land of bigotry and ignorance, especially about issues like this (observe its history). in fact, those who claim to be the most religious are often the most backward in their thinking (anyone who has lived or spent any real time in the bible belt with an open eye to the hypocrisy will understand). so, the issues become whatever is on television at the time.
now i am not "america bashing", as there are many unique qualities that this country possesses in abundance, that set it far ahead of any other in the world. but, the distortion of the political process by the media absolutely disgusts me.
02-12-2004, 02:53 AM
02-12-2004, 07:28 AM
I agree with you 100% PC1. I live in MA my self and am also pretty upset about this. There are several issues that I would like to address. I am going to keep the religious argument out for a few reasons. The main reason is because the far left uses it to dismiss peoples concerns about it by trying to label some one as a religious zealot and also to take out the moral issue of out of homosexuality for a minute. Which brings me to my first point which I will pose as a question. Is homosexuality normal? The answer is no. Before people label me with the various words ending in ism's and phobia's let me explain. What would happen if tomorrow every one on the planet turned gay? If that happened the whole human population would be wiped out in about a 100 years. A man and man can not have a baby together and neither can a woman and a woman. We were designed for men and woman to be together. Therefore homosexuality can not be normal. It has to be a genetic or mental problem. I personally believe it can be both.Either way it is not normal.
The second issue is a health issue that applies more to gay men than lesbians. Does anyone know the average life expectancy for a gay man. I don't know the exact number but it's pretty low around 35 years old or so. Another statistic you might want to look up is what percentage of the population is gay and what percentage of sexually transmitted diseases they have are and you might want to look up is how many sexual partners a average gay male has.(which is quite high and almost unbelievable. After seeing that you will probably ask the question why they want to get married in the first place). It's pretty safe to say a gay life style isn't the healthiest one. So why legitimize a life style that is not normal or healthy?
In all the talk shows on TV, I have never heard a homosexual activist answer this question. If the state passes a law giving homosexuals the same rights married couples have why do you need to be married? The answer is because it's not about equal rights. It's about socially approving homosexuality and its about deconstructing the culture. I am sorry but you can not force me to approve of your life style and as much as you might want it to be true, a person can not have two dads or moms.
Another issue that the media has ignored is in the judges decision there is a disturbing line. They say something to the effect of in most cases alternative marriages are between homosexual couples. The question is what else is there? Me to marry the hot twins across the street or three men instead of two or brother and sister? What is this opening the floodgates to?
The judicial activism is another issue that PC1 addressed. I don't think many people understand what has been happening here in Massachusetts or why people are getting so upset. There was a scandal here a few years ago called "fist gate". What happened was children were bussed in from all over the state to what parents were told was a kind of health seminar. What it ended up being was gay activist promoting their life style. They were also teaching and talking about graphic sex acts such as fisting. This kind of thing is constantly going on in the schools here.In most schools they have clubs called gay straight alliances. They state their goals are to teach tolerance. It turns out that tolerance includes encouraging kids to experiment with a gay life style. In one case they gave out the addresses of gay clubs to under age kids. So they should be able to come into schools and promote their lifestyle and if you disagree with that you are a homophobic racist hateful person. Gay marriage is just the tip of the ice berg.
02-12-2004, 07:42 AM
02-12-2004, 07:48 AM
Biggs..... Gay marrage is not just a religious issue. It is a social and culteral one.What do you mean. I am assuming you are "pro chioce". IMO abortion is a non issue. People having accesess to abortions is not going to go away. Every presidental election they act like a "womans right to choose" is going to be taken away if a republican is elected. There was a repulican in the white house from 1980-1992 and they are still available.abortion is a much more important and relevant topic, but nobody will touch that one with any kind of depth.
In america we have the RIGHT to discriminate as long is we aren't hurting any one. I have the right to give selectivily to my family and close friends and with over 30% of thier money being taken away from them they have a hard time doing even that.What do you want to do force people to be tolerent? Force people to car for other people? They are allready doing that with 50% of thier pay check is going to taxes. If you force people do do these thing you loose what makes this country better than most. You loose FREEDOM.they are NOT accepting of their fellow man/woman, they are NOT polite, generous, or caring except selectively to those closest to them, they are NOT tolerant. america is a land of bigotry and ignorance, especially about issues like this
02-12-2004, 10:04 AM
02-12-2004, 10:12 AM
Let me rephrase. I was in the middle of 3 different conversations at the time I was reading this thread.Originally Posted by PC1
What I meant to say is I can't believe this is even being discussed in the legislature. Why politicians are worrying about giving homos marriage rights is beyond me. Whether people are for or against it the country has enough problems to deal with right now, and they should be focusing on those problems. Not whether or not Darryl gets to throw the bouquet.
Very nice post VG. You made some great points. I'm trying not to really get involved in this discussion, but the topic of gay rights/marriage is one that irritates me to no end. This country and it's politically correct attitude towards everything is getting this country into more and more trouble everyday. Not everything should be excepted. Not everyone has to be excepted. Being gay is abnormal and whether they chose to be or not is not the point. They are gay. They are the ones that have to accept that not me. I will never understand why this country feels that no matter how different or how screwed up you are it's OK. They are the rejects of the human race, and all this country is doing about it is embracing them.
02-12-2004, 10:24 AM
Binge......Originally Posted by BingeAndPurge
(1) I think we have many people of integrity. I think most folks TRY to do the right thing most of the time, but we're all human, we all have our weaknesses, and we all stumble. I think it boils down to whether or not one feels people are basicly good or bad. I think most are basicly good.
(2) I make this point as one of the 16 or 17 registered Republicans here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts ...... I think the Democrats overall, are in the majority who would have preferred to "quietly" court the gay constituency. I say quietly because they know the issue will make big pollitical waves. If ANYTHING, I think my REPUBLICAN party is the one who sees this issue as a wedge issue, and a lifeline. Nationally, Bush is on the ropes right now. The lack of WMD in Iraq is a huge embarrassment no matter how we cut it, and we still have troops dieing in Iraq every week, if not every day. And to my disappointment and amazement, Bush seemed very unprepared in his appearance last weekend on Press the Meat with Tim Russert. It was such a risky endeavor, I can't for the life of me understand why he wasn't better prepared. One of his lifelines here is to appeal to the 2/3'ds majority of Americans who according to recent polls, are AGAINST gay marriage. Rather than the democrats driving this issue, I think we'll see the Republicans advertising this until we're all ready to puke. Maybe we all need to puke before we overcome our apathy.
(3) The ONLY reason this is such a HOT issue today is because our elected politicians FAILED to act on this issue. While some states (37, I think) have enacted their own version of the Defense of Marriage Act, our federal legislators have passed the buck. It is this decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that has driven this to the forefront. No elected politician wants to take a stand on this. They only have to because their arm is being twisted WAY the hell up their back and they're screaming out in pain. That's what they deserve, the weems.
02-12-2004, 10:33 AM
Bro, this is the ROOT of this problem. Our government is supposed to be OF the people, BY the people and FOR the people. If gay marriage is approved by our government, YOU and I and everyone else ARE being forced to accept their behahavior and their union as LEGITIMATE, and EQUAL in every sense as marriage between men and women..... whether we want to or not.Originally Posted by NPursuit
02-12-2004, 10:49 AM
All I know is if the founders of this nation knew their statements in The Constitution would someday be interpreted in the way they are nowadays they probably would have been a little less vague.
02-12-2004, 10:52 AM
I agree with all your points here Binge save for 1........ while issues are indeed used for political gain by politicians, there exists a core of American citizens who are very concerned with how today's matters and issues are handled relative to historical, traditional values. We want to see consistent application from a historical perspective so as to NOT dilute or taint the values and ideals that have so far, made this country the best country in the world in which to live. We don't believe it's being idealistic, we believe it's being true to ourselves.Originally Posted by BingeAndPurge
The reason this is such a HOT issue is because from that perspective, it's a grave assault on who we are and have been. And it comes from a 4-3 decision by a state supreme court....... 1 stinking, unelected judges vote. It couldn't be more outrageous.
02-12-2004, 11:03 AM
AMEN! Imagine for a minute sitting in chamber when several of our founding fathers were debating provisions of our Constitution. One man takes the floor and asks if the Constitution in it's finished form, specifies whether any specific rights such as the right of marriage, is conveyed to homosexuals.Originally Posted by NPursuit
The place would be filled with guffaws of wild laughter such that no further business would be transacted that day...... save for continuing the "joke" over beers at the local tavern.
Similar Forum Threads
- By WILL DA BEAST in forum Training ForumReplies: 27Last Post: 06-29-2010, 01:33 AM
- By windwords7 in forum PicsReplies: 40Last Post: 05-08-2006, 08:44 PM
- By Brock Landers in forum AnabolicsReplies: 24Last Post: 12-14-2004, 02:31 PM
- By hamper19 in forum General ChatReplies: 9Last Post: 11-04-2002, 01:24 AM
- By Lifeguard in forum General ChatReplies: 1Last Post: 10-31-2002, 05:57 PM