"The institution of marriage has been preserved..."

DamnYankee

DamnYankee

Loyal to the end
"The institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine and across the nation," said Frank Schubert, the chief organizer for Stand for Marriage Maine, which lobbied for the repeal.

For the gay rights movement, which has gained a foothold in New England, it was a stinging defeat. Gay marriage has now lost in every state — 31 in all — in which it has been put to a popular vote. Gay-rights activists had hoped to buck that trend in Maine, framing same-sex marriage as a matter of equality for all families in a campaign that used 8,000 volunteers to get out the message.

Five states have legalized gay marriage — Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Connecticut — but all did so through legislation or court rulings, not by popular vote.
Click to expand...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gay_marriage_maine#bd

The people have spoken, and will work to remove the elitist politicians and judges that force immoral laws on us against our will.
 
Southern Man said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gay_marriage_maine#bd

The people have spoken, and will work to remove the elitist politicians and judges that force immoral laws on us against our will.
Click to expand...

I have always maintained that despite the media hype and the dollars thrown at it, people will vote their deeply held beliefs behind the curtain and in privacy.

The people have spoken, but this isn't the end as has been so aptly demonstrated in California.
 
The only problem with this is that a popular vote cannot always override the courts or legislators.

When the Civil Rights Movement started in the south, it was overwhelmingly disliked. The majority disagreed with it. But it became law anyway.

The majority would rule in a true democracy. But that is not what we have.
 
WinterBorn said:
The only problem with this is that a popular vote cannot always override the courts or legislators.

When the Civil Rights Movement started in the south, it was overwhelmingly disliked. The majority disagreed with it. But it became law anyway.

The majority would rule in a true democracy. But that is not what we have.
Click to expand...

A lousy and typically screwy fact that overrides the voice of the people, but que sera, sera.

It was Prop 8 here in California. The local message boards are still rife with whining and hand-wringing that somehow government, more specifically the Evil RightWingnuts, put the keebosh on gay marriage. They cannot and will not accept it was simply the voice of the people and when all was said and done, the majority don't want or accept gay marriage. That has not stopped the barrage of appeals and outrage at the resounding defeat.

I have no doubt they will work tirelessly to shove it down our throats. None whatsoever.

Word up? I am not going to for one second entertain the idea of talking, debating, or discussing the pros or the cons of gay marriage with you.

Suffice to say, I have read your opinion and it's one that we aren't in agreement over.

Save your attacking for the ones that care enough to put a dog in the fight.
 
usaloyal2theend said:
A lousy and typically screwy fact that overrides the voice of the people, but que sera, sera.

It was Prop 8 here in California. The local message boards are still rife with whining and hand-wringing that somehow government, more specifically the Evil RightWingnuts, put the keebosh on gay marriage. They cannot and will not accept it was simply the voice of the people and when all was said and done, the majority don't want or accept gay marriage. That has not stopped the barrage of appeals and outrage at the resounding defeat.

I have no doubt they will work tirelessly to shove it down our throats. None whatsoever.

Word up? I am not going to for one second entertain the idea of talking, debating, or discussing the pros or the cons of gay marriage with you.

Suffice to say, I have read your opinion and it's one that we aren't in agreement over.

Save your attacking for the ones that care enough to put a dog in the fight.
Click to expand...

Ok, we won't debate the issue of gay marriage.

And any "attacks" you saw were not out of the blue but responses to either personal attacks or stupidity. I have a low tolerance for ignorance.

We can agree to disagree.
 
WinterBorn said:
Ok, we won't debate the issue of gay marriage.

And any "attacks" you saw were not out of the blue but responses to either personal attacks or stupidity. I have a low tolerance for ignorance.

We can agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

Translation:

You have a low tolerance for people who don't espouse your views.
 
usaloyal2theend said:
Translation:

You have a low tolerance for people who don't espouse your views.
Click to expand...

Not at all. I had a long debate with PMP and it did not digress into insults. I can respect his opinion, even if I disagree with it.

There are numerous debates on these forums in which I did not insult anyone. They argued the facts and their opinions, and I argued the facts and my opinion.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
lol.....yet you have no problem describing those who oppose gay marriage as ignorant?
Click to expand...

No, that is not the case. You and I argued and we did not resort to insults. We have different viewpoints. I don't recall saying you were ignorant.

I did say your side was wrong, but that is the nature of debate.
 
usaloyal2theend said:
I have always maintained that despite the media hype and the dollars thrown at it, people will vote their deeply held beliefs behind the curtain and in privacy.

The people have spoken, but this isn't the end as has been so aptly demonstrated in California.
Click to expand...

Very true. I've never experienced more vehemence against me than when arguing against queer, and from such a large proportion of posters. For me that's like adding fuel to my fire, but most folks can't handle it. I'd be willing to bet, in fact, that some folks defend queer because they think that it will earn them respect of the majority, but would then vote against queer in a secret ballot.
 
You are all right. I shall work tirelessly to shove it down your worthless throats. I don't care what some stupid referendum says. This is a republic, not a democracy, as you often like to say.
 
WinterBorn said:
No, that is not the case. You and I argued and we did not resort to insults. We have different viewpoints. I don't recall saying you were ignorant.

I did say your side was wrong, but that is the nature of debate.
Click to expand...

in the post I just quoted you decided to add "I have a low tolerance for ignorance".......you had just finished a sentence talking about how personal comments were in retaliation.....I think the average person would take your comment as a personal comment, thus inviting retaliation......
 
Jngreznex said:
You are all right. I shall work tirelessly to shove it down your worthless throats. I don't care what some stupid referendum says. This is a republic, not a democracy, as you often like to say.
Click to expand...
Keep trying asshole, please, and as hard as possible. Don't wuss out on us now. You and your ilk will soon be out of power, in the unemployment line. :cof1:
 
PostmodernProphet said:
in the post I just quoted you decided to add "I have a low tolerance for ignorance".......you had just finished a sentence talking about how personal comments were in retaliation.....I think the average person would take your comment as a personal comment, thus inviting retaliation......
Click to expand...

Then those people would not have read the debates I was referring to, and be wrong.

In our debates, you presented your side. I argued, but didn't call names.

However, when the debate changes and someone decides to add "why don't you try being gay with your neighbor" or something similar, I call it ignorant and respond accordingly.

There were two main proponents of the view you espoused. One presented a clear argument without personal rancor. The other could not manage this. I treated you with respect and debated the topic.
 
i'm sure the racists were happy when legislatures and lower courts upheld anti interracial statutes, in fact, they probably proclaimed:

the institution of marriage has been preserved
 
Jngreznex said:
You are all right. I shall work tirelessly to shove it down your worthless throats. I don't care what some stupid referendum says. This is a republic, not a democracy, as you often like to say.
Click to expand...

We, the people run the government....we are not run BY the government....
EVERY state that the question has been put to the voters...gay marriage FAILS.....God Bless America....:good4u:

PS...Its have nothing to do with morality or religion.
 
Yurt said:
i'm sure the racists were happy when legislatures and lower courts upheld anti interracial statutes, in fact, they probably proclaimed:

the institution of marriage has been preserved
Click to expand...

Makes you wonder what would have happened to the Civil Rights Movement if it had been put to a popular vote.
 
bravo said:
We, the people run the government....we are not run BY the government....
EVERY state that the question has been put to the voters...gay marriage FAILS.....God Bless America....:good4u:

PS...Its have nothing to do with morality or religion.
Click to expand...

Except that the US Constitution did not set this nation up as a democracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top