Homosexual Militancy

[MercuryAndy]

Yet another example of people being stupid.

 

[christalee4]

Washington Initiative Would Force Married Couples To Have Kids Or Have Their Marriage Annulled

Olympia, Washington

I could see quite a few very very conservative rightwing religionists being for this. After all, isn't the purpose of marriage is to be fruitful and multiply? Using the evil birth control is against God's wishes, no?

 

[thaumaturgy]

Interestingly, the initiative, if passed, would permanently ban homosexual marriages. That goes along with what you are saying and is "cutting off your nose to spite your face".

The initiative would never pass but the most vocal among its critics will likely be the very people who are against gay marriage. That will be the best part. It will point out the real hypocrisy.

Besides, if most gay people feel they can't get a good shot at legalized marriages in most states, it costs them nothing to make everyone examine what is really meant by a marriage.

My wife and I have no kids, nor do we want any. Many of our friends who are in committed gay relationships would be better parents that we would. I never once questioned the validity of my marriage even though we both didn't want kids.

So in the end the brilliance of this proposal is to make people really ask the question "What do _I_ get from my marriage and why can't OTHERS have that?" I doubt there is are many couples out there who detest each other but simply want to make more christian babies. If there is, they should be locked up and kept out of the gene pool.

No one enters into marriage for the experess purposes of making more babies. They can do that without marriage. Marriage obviously means a lot more than just making kids.

So gay people can then ask "Why can't we have a committed relationship with appropriate recognition?" The only answer the right has been able to come up with is "Because you can't make babies" to disguise their hatred of homosexuals.

I've had enough with this "love the sinner but hate the sin" garbage. They hate the sinner.

Bravo for anyone who can make the rest of society actually think about why they reject gay marriage. Because ultimately they will accept it if they know why they are married.

 

[MercuryAndy]

The initiative would never pass but the most vocal among its critics will likely be the very people who are against gay marriage. That will be the best part. It will point out the real hypocrisy.

Besides, if most gay people feel they can't get a good shot at legalized marriages in most states, it costs them nothing to make everyone examine what is really meant by a marriage.

My wife and I have no kids, nor do we want any. Many of our friends who are in committed gay relationships would be better parents that we would. I never once questioned the validity of my marriage even though we both didn't want kids.

So in the end the brilliance of this proposal is to make people really ask the question "What do _I_ get from my marriage and why can't OTHERS have that?" I doubt there is are many couples out there who detest each other but simply want to make more christian babies. If there is, they should be locked up and kept out of the gene pool.

No one enters into marriage for the experess purposes of making more babies. They can do that without marriage. Marriage obviously means a lot more than just making kids.

So gay people can then ask "Why can't we have a committed relationship with appropriate recognition?" The only answer the right has been able to come up with is "Because you can't make babies" to disguise their hatred of homosexuals.

I've had enough with this "love the sinner but hate the sin" garbage. They hate the sinner.

Bravo for anyone who can make the rest of society actually think about why they reject gay marriage. Because ultimately they will accept it if they know why they are married.

all people should have babies. If little gay people have babies then people wont have a reason to not let them get married.

 

[HannahBanana]

all people should have babies. If little gay people have babies then people wont have a reason to not let them get married.

So you think that even those people who are suicidal, drug-addicts, and/or physically abusive to others, should have babies? Boy I wish I lived in the right-wing land of candy and sunshine sometimes, rather than in the left-wing real world, where not every person is good.

 

[theeyesoftammyfaye]

yes, the homosexual militancy is getting ratcheted up a notch.

pretty soon i'll be marching down YOUR street in pink pumps and gold daisy dukes leading families out of their homes like a fruity pied paper down the yellow brick road towards the emerald city disco.

 

[MachZer0]

yes, the homosexual militancy is getting ratcheted up a notch.

pretty soon i'll be marching down YOUR street in pink pumps and gold daisy dukes leading families out of their homes like a fruity pied paper down the yellow brick road towards the emerald city disco.

But you'll be single!!

 

[JustOneWay]

But you'll be single!!

but not alone

 

[ImmortalTechnique]

To the contrary, a Constitutional amendment is sought because state courts are overruling the will of the people by throwing out perfectly legal laws against homosexual marriage. The courts are making the laws in other words.

clearly false. if such laws are Constitutional, then no Constitutional change is needed. If judges somehow have the authority to make laws outside of the Constitution (which you've shown no evidence of) than changing the Constitution to say what you claim it already says is useless anyways.

The clear evidence shows that laws banning gay marriage are unconstitutional as they stand, and so Constitutions are being changed since people won't give up their bigotry along with the laws

 

[MachZer0]

but not alone

But it won't be on my street, guaranteed!!

 

[ImmortalTechnique]

But it won't be on my street, guaranteed!!

why is that?

 

[JustOneWay]

But it won't be on my street, guaranteed!!

So, you have the whole street to yourself, or do you speak for others?

 

[JoshuaW]

Joshua wrote

I think this is a great idea, but to be fair it should be extended to heterosexual couples. No children for three years = anullment. You wouldn't have a problem with that, would you?

Joshua didn't read the OP carefully enough and assumed this was another anti-gay bill. Forgive his ignorance.

 

[JustOneWay]

I think this is a great idea, but to be fair it should be extended to heterosexual couples. No children for three years = anullment. You wouldn't have a problem with that, would you?

[sarcasm] How dare you question what goes on inside a couple's bedroom and home! People should have the right to decide the manner in which they define their marriage, with or without children![/sarcasm]

 

[Guttermouth]

clearly false. if such laws are Constitutional, then no Constitutional change is needed. If judges somehow have the authority to make laws outside of the Constitution (which you've shown no evidence of) than changing the Constitution to say what you claim it already says is useless anyways.

The clear evidence shows that laws banning gay marriage are unconstitutional as they stand, and so Constitutions are being changed since people won't give up their bigotry along with the laws

I'm not so sure I agree with you. As it stands now, many states are passing their own constitutional amendments banning gay marriage, and it seems the Supreme Court is, at least for now, leaving it as a state's rights issue.

In my opinion, the right wants to pass the national constitutional amendment in order to impose their morals on states that choose to allow gay marriages or civil unions. I also think they have a preoccupation with putting a big exclamation point on their moral-superiority complex.

 

[MachZer0]

why is that?

So, you have the whole street to yourself, or do you speak for others?

It's a private street protected by the trespassing laws in a conservative community

 

[MachZer0]

I think this is a great idea, but to be fair it should be extended to heterosexual couples. No children for three years = anullment. You wouldn't have a problem with that, would you?

It doesn't need to be extended to heterosexual couples because it ONLY applies to heterosexual couples.

 

[Ringo84]

Washington Initiative Would Force Married Couples To Have Kids Or Have Their Marriage Annulled

Olympia, Washington

Well, I actually agree with this. So many people are trying to use "marriage is only for children" defense against homosexual marriage. So if it's all-fired important to have kids, maybe those who believe that should put their money where their mouth is. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Ringo

 

[MercuryAndy]

So you think that even those people who are suicidal, drug-addicts, and/or physically abusive to others, should have babies? Boy I wish I lived in the right-wing land of candy and sunshine sometimes, rather than in the left-wing real world, where not every person is good.

but all the bad people will be in prison when i come to power.

 

[Jacey]

yes, the homosexual militancy is getting ratcheted up a notch.

pretty soon i'll be marching down YOUR street in pink pumps and gold daisy dukes leading families out of their homes like a fruity pied paper down the yellow brick road towards the emerald city disco.

burn baby burn

the disco inferno

burn baby burn