Democrats Likely to Make Same-Sex Marriage Part of Their Platform

gurneyhalleck1 said:

Click to expand...

(Reaching for his wallet...)
"And it's going to be me!"

LOL! I never liked Schwarzennegger. I didn't like him in many movies except Terminator and Predator (yes, I'm unsophisticated and like such flicks! LOL), but overall movies like Commando and his governorship of California made me nauseated! ahhhhh-nold.

I used to have my location on CF as "Kuh-lee-foh-nya"

rusmeister said:

(Reaching for his wallet...)
"And it's going to be me!"

Click to expand...

Crawdad said:

I still say we bring back capitalism.

Click to expand...

An odd thing to say, imo. It is evident that there is plenty of capitalism. Wall Street is still functioning. Forbes magazine is still publishing. The lower class in America is larger than probably at any point in American history.

To quote the fat jolly man (GKC), "Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists."

I suppose a forum of Christian - like socialism is what you folks are advocating.

Can't say I would support that... the Christian part of it.

Having a Christian government is in no way more humane... it just means they get to use the Bible to justify in-humane things.

Look at Glen Beck... he uses the Bible. Does he have a Christian platform?

You do realize that if America was a Christian Nation that just means Pat Robbinson gets to pick and choose our Nations morality laws. And you know who he'd side with?
Riiiiiiiight
Because they'd pay him to be on their side.

Christian Nation just means now we have fascist churches instead of fascist government...

oh and it give the Government to ability to make up and delcare new mandates delivered by God Himself; ergo you question a politician you're questioning God.

No, no, no.

I won't have it.

Even in Egypt there are Muslims who are secularists because they've figured out that a so-called "Islamic" state is a state that still just bows to US and Israeli interests...except now it uses the Koran to justify it's positions.... which will be all the same positions as before.

It kind of reminds me of the outcries and protestations of Republicans in the last four years about how Obama has turned the United States into a communist worker's paradise anti-capitalist cesspool and weakened our military positions with cowardice and innaction/apologies when in reality he has

* Kept the Bush tax cuts
* Liquidated Osama
* Tortured more terrorists than Bush did in 8 years
* Kicked butt with drone airstrikes continually
* TARP bailed-out big corporations pandering to big business
* Never followed up on Wall Street "reform" regulation
* has continued payroll tax cuts
* has pretty much given Republicans everything they want.


At our union meetings, our president was showing us the $$$ figures for lobbying in Washington. For every $3.00 the Workers' Unions spend in lobbying Capital Hill, the Corporations spend $30. I think your point that gross capitalism at the expense of the middle and lowers classes is a good one. Exhibit A!

Unions are all but destroyed in America, "Right to Work" states are on the rise, pensions are under more scrutiny than ever and being abolished or curtailed in big ways, wealthy top 1% tax rates are the lowest since the 1940's, the rich are capitalizing on just about everyone and everyone here and abroad. I think it's safe to say capitalism is doing just fine! :o

rusmeister said:

An odd thing to say, imo. It is evident that there is plenty of capitalism. Wall Street is still functioning. Forbes magazine is still publishing. The lower class in America is larger than probably at any point in American history.

To quote the fat jolly man (GKC), "Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists."

Click to expand...

Well this is a problem indeed. You go to a Catholic forum, they predictably say, we should have a monarchy with a Catholic king and Catholic government because "Catholicism is the Truth." The Protestants tend to want hardcore capitalism with the Bible belt running the show, the way you describe. God, guns, and $$$$. The Orthodox....well, they're a motley crew. Various opinions. I personally do want a separation of Church and State, but not a separation FROM Church for the State. I think the Founding Fathers were clear in the Establishment Clause that they didn't want to eliminate religion and faith from the public sphere, but rather didn't want the establishment of a State Religion, like England had done with Hank VIII and his contemporaries. No more Church of England model and none of the goings-on of Continental Reformed Christian state ecclesiastical bodies. They wanted to respect all forms of faith but not wholly remove the Judeo-Christian heritage from our public eye and traditions and institutions.

I think the Democrats downplay faith too much, while the Republicans overplay it and try to make Deists like Thomas Jefferson out to be hardcore Evangelists who lived and died by the Scriptures and their churches. History is complex and not the overly-simplified junk we have been fed by both sides.

127.0.0.1 said:

I suppose a forum of Christian - like socialism is what you folks are advocating.

Can't say I would support that... the Christian part of it.

Having a Christian government is in no way more humane... it just means they get to use the Bible to justify in-humane things.

Look at Glen Beck... he uses the Bible. Does he have a Christian platform?

You do realize that if America was a Christian Nation that just means Pat Robbinson gets to pick and choose our Nations morality laws. And you know who he'd side with?
Riiiiiiiight
Because they'd pay him to be on their side.

Christian Nation just means now we have fascist churches instead of fascist government...

oh and it give the Government to ability to make up and delcare new mandates delivered by God Himself; ergo you question a politician you're questioning God.

No, no, no.

I won't have it.

Even in Egypt there are Muslims who are secularists because they've figured out that a so-called "Islamic" state is a state that still just bows to US and Israeli interests...except now it uses the Koran to justify it's positions.... which will be all the same positions as before.

Click to expand...

I understand the rationalization of the abortion legalization. But it is absurd. Murdering your baby in a back alley and getting injured from a coat hanger doesn't justify our corporate state sanction of said practice. I'm sure lots of people want to torture animals and get hurt in the process...doesn't mean animal cruelty should be sanctioned or aided...or murder of another human being...sometimes serial killers get injured while brutalizing a victim. They shouldn't have tried it to begin with. I can't sanction their crime just because I care about their personal safety in an immoral act. That's how I feel about it.

Regarding homosexuality, it's evil, sinful, and vile...pure and simple. There is no Christian argument in favor of it that holds water, period. It's absurd.
No culture in human history, including the Greeks and Romans, where homosexual and bisexual paramors abounded in a very open way, has justified MARRIAGE of gays. I think we've really lost sight of what marriage means. It's more than love or affection or appreciation of another person, it is essentially a union of a man and woman and the real underlying no-brainer is childbirth and procreation. Now I know the gay argument is always "what about infertile couples? Are they forbidden to marry then?" Hardly. At least an infertile couples has the biological purpose to procreate even though it doesn't function properly. Two men or two women never had such a biological intention or purpose.

We need to take a step back and look at Adam and Eve and God's original creation of Mankind. Taking into account the Garden, thousands of years of precedent, the obvious natural law (as the Catholics would call it), the Old Testament, Paul's statements on the matter, the Fathers' positions on this, and the position of the Orthodox Church, there is no argument for gay "marriage."

And if you're for it, prepare for inappropriate behavior with animals, marrying inanimate objects, polygamy, and every other absurdity. Depart from the great Judeo-Christian model and you have chaos, which we're witnessing.

One of the GOOD aspects of the Republican Party is their stance on gays, which I laud. If only the Democrats had a dose of the same common sense when it comes to such a vile lifestyle.

127.0.0.1 said:

One of the reasons Roe v. Wade came about was because women were already getting abortions...and not necessarily from doctors. If you were to overturn that law, while it is an evil practice... you'd be back at square 1 again. What do we do about random individuals who claim to be abortion doctors with or without certification, and what do we do about women desperate enough to give themselves abortions with or without doctors?




And can I... just make a prediction here... a laughable one... on gay marriage.

Over half the country now supports gay marriage. Lots of people are gay...not just a specific subset out of SF but again, lots of people are gay.

One day the Republican Party is going to wake up an realize that... in a nation where the majority of voters support gay marriage...a lot of those voters will be Republicans. In fact there already are gay Republican groups.

The Republican Party will shift gears so fast... and they'll say "Yeah! Rainbow conservatism" "Look we have a gay R candidate!" And they'll have gay R Fox commentators...etc.

And then analysts will get on Fox News and say,
"Oh, will you look at that! Turns out it was Democrats, who fought tooth and nail to prevent gay marriage. Honestly, have they no shame! And can you believe they accuse us of opposing gay marriage.
What? Us? We would never, not after we realized that rich gay Republicans what to give tax cuts to the rich, and gut Social Security just like other neo-cons! VOTE REPUBLICAN!"

And to all the gay R voters, born without an irony gene, it'll make perfect sense.

Click to expand...

if more than half the population supports gay marriage, why is it that the 32 states that allowed the people to vote for or against gay marriage, did all 32 vote against gay marriage? and proportionately, not a lot of people are gay. it's a very small percentage of the population.

rusmeister said:

An odd thing to say, imo. It is evident that there is plenty of capitalism. Wall Street is still functioning. Forbes magazine is still publishing. The lower class in America is larger than probably at any point in American history.

To quote the fat jolly man (GKC), "Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists."

Click to expand...

Thats not evidence of capitalism.

gurneyhalleck1 said:

Careful. If we go to a pure capitalist system, we won't have unions, won't have the ability as workers to collectively bargain, won't have social security or medicare or social safety nets for people, we won't have weekends/bereavement leave/sick time/maternity leave, we won't have income taxes (sounds great, but think of the implication of dropping them), and the top 1% will have ALL of the power with nothing to check their gross dominance over the middle and lower classes. There is a tension between the concepts of democracy and pure capitalism. I think the best option is a mix between the socialism that we see in Europe in some, emphasis on some, parts of their societies, and capitalism in others. Ideally, Chesterton's distributism would be the best model and the most Christian. Both communism and capitalism have the potential to do such damage!

Click to expand...

None of those, save social security and medicare, is mutually exclusive with pure capitalism.

Also, socialism has just as much, probably more, potential to cause damage than capitalism.

ArmyMatt said:

if more than half the population supports gay marriage, why is it that the 32 states that allowed the people to vote for or against gay marriage, did all 32 vote against gay marriage? and proportionately, not a lot of people are gay. it's a very small percentage of the population.

Click to expand...

It could possibly be because more than half the U.S. population resides in fewer than half the states. For example, if 51% of the population lived in 10 states, then it is very possible that a minority of states could vote against gay marriage rights while the majority of the actual population still supported it. It seems kind of similar to how, due to the electoral college, it is possible for a presidential candidate to be elected without being the candidate with the most votes, which has happened twice in U.S. history.

truthseeker32 said:

It could possibly be because more than half the U.S. population resides in fewer than half the states. For example, if 51% of the population lived in 10 states, then it is very possible that a minority of states could vote against gay marriage rights while the majority of the actual population still supported it. It seems kind of similar to how, due to the electoral college, it is possible for a presidential candidate to be elected without being the candidate with the most votes, which has happened twice in U.S. history.

Click to expand...

possibly, but even in states like Maine and California, which are very liberal, when the people voted, they voted against it. so I think if it were a clear majority, as was implied, they would not be 0 for 32.

Crawdad said:

Thats not evidence of capitalism.

Click to expand...

And Auschwitz is not evidence of the Holocaust, I suppose. Any person can establish criteria so as to exclude evidence, by denying that it IS evidence. Hardcore unbelievers do it all the time.

I still think the percentage that supports gay marriage to be small and greatly exaggerated by the media. But it will grow, because children are still going to public schools, where they are being indoctrinated (subtly) daily that it is normal, and getting the message reinforced by the media when they come home. The older folks don't know how to respond, though they know it to be wrong, and the younger ones are being taught, quite literally, foolishness.

California always gets branded as uber liberal, but it's not totally the case. California has more red areas than blue. The thing is, the blue areas are large urban powerhouses like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Oakland. All three are fairly liberal. But then you have Orange County (which is huge), Tulare County (my area), Fresno County, Kern County, and a host of other more rural areas or super affluent southern california counties that are super conservative. Our courts and big cities are liberal, much of the state is not.

ArmyMatt said:

possibly, but even in states like Maine and California, which are very liberal, when the people voted, they voted against it. so I think if it were a clear majority, as was implied, they would not be 0 for 32.

Click to expand...

gurneyhalleck1 said:

California always gets branded as uber liberal, but it's not totally the case. California has more red areas than blue. The thing is, the blue areas are large urban powerhouses like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Oakland. All three are fairly liberal. But then you have Orange County (which is huge), Tulare County (my area), Fresno County, Kern County, and a host of other more rural areas or super affluent southern california counties that are super conservative. Our courts and big cities are liberal, much of the state is not.

Click to expand...

Then who is to blame for California being the pinnacle welfare state?

I loathe the democrats in NY. Problem comes, just increase the tax!

Did you not read my post? LOL...the big cities, bro. If you look at my area and many large parts of California, tax increases regularly are voted down in special elections. The big cities, which have enormous populations, tend to vote for tax increases. Personally, I'm ok with some revenue increases in CA right now with sales tax or income tax BUT they must accompany massive cuts to CHP, prisons, and ESPECIALLY----the welfare state. You are correct that California is the gold standard for hand-outs and food stamps. But in recent years, our democratically-led state senate and assembly refuses to cut much of the welfare infrastructure while the Republicans refuse to raise taxes. Under Arnie we had DMV cuts that were tremendous. A lot of people were super pumped when they saw their DMV tags go from $200 a year to $130 a year. But then, when the school systems lost millions and the caltrans guys and county employees and other agencies had to lay off people or give furloughs to offset the loss, it didn't seem so grand.

California has a pension crisis. I'm a pension man as I'm a teacher and union guy. That being said, we need to reform the system. It's out of control. California is a mess in many ways. But both parties' refusal to budge causes the problems, not just the liberals.

Brooklyn Knight said:

Then who is to blame for California being the pinnacle welfare state?

I loathe the democrats in NY. Problem comes, just increase the tax!

Click to expand...

gurneyhalleck1 said:

Did you not read my post? LOL...the big cities, bro. If you look at my area and many large parts of California, tax increases regularly are voted down in special elections. The big cities, which have enormous populations, tend to vote for tax increases. Personally, I'm ok with some revenue increases in CA right now with sales tax or income tax BUT they must accompany massive cuts to CHP, prisons, and ESPECIALLY----the welfare state. You are correct that California is the gold standard for hand-outs and food stamps. But in recent years, our democratically-led state senate and assembly refuses to cut much of the welfare infrastructure while the Republicans refuse to raise taxes. Under Arnie we had DMV cuts that were tremendous. A lot of people were super pumped when they saw their DMV tags go from $200 a year to $130 a year. But then, when the school systems lost millions and the caltrans guys and county employees and other agencies had to lay off people or give furloughs to offset the loss, it didn't seem so grand.

California has a pension crisis. I'm a pension man as I'm a teacher and union guy. That being said, we need to reform the system. It's out of control. California is a mess in many ways. But both parties' refusal to budge causes the problems, not just the liberals.

Click to expand...

So, they're both warranted in receiving blame.

I wasn't sure because you guys give away welfare so freely whilst allowing illegal immigrants to attend colleges for free, so I thought it was an all hands on deck approach similar to what's going on here in NY. Politicians aren't so black & white over here (Staunchly liberal - staunchly conservative). What we keep getting is increases in taxes...and cuts to benefits/welfare.

I don't know how it is in California but there definitely is a big migration to get out of NY.

We have no shortage of disfunction, trust me. Yes, pandering to illegal immigrants is, sadly, our specialty. We also kick all the other states' butts in incarceration. We breed gangs in California like the common cold. Our prisons are overflowing and out of control. It's so bad that Calif. has actually subcontracted inmates out to other states! Lame.

We have the death penalty but never use it either.

We need some serious deportation, serious hardcore Medical and foodstamp reform, pension reform, raise income taxes a touch temporarily, cut back on social services, cut back on environmental restrictions a little to attract business, and start nuking hardned criminals! This state's a mess. I haven't had a raise since 2006. I've gone six years with pay cuts, pay freezes and watched my insurance co-pays go up and up and deductibles go up and up while we get furloughed and work harder than ever YET the California Highway Patrol got tremendous raises each year. My buddy is a CHP. He makes around $90,000 and has only been a chippie for around 4 years. I'm taught 14 years and I make barely $60,000. In California, that isn't a lot! LOL Gas prices are $4.05 a gallon, house payments average around here about $1,500 a month, our electric bills, even when frugal are around $250-$300 a month in my area....pathetic.

Brooklyn Knight said:

So, they're both warranted in receiving blame.

I wasn't sure because you guys give away welfare so freely whilst allowing illegal immigrants to attend colleges for free, so I thought it was an all hands on deck approach similar to what's going on here in NY. Politicians aren't so black & white over here (Staunchly liberal - staunchly conservative). What we keep getting is increases in taxes...and cuts to benefits/welfare.

I don't know how it is in California but there definitely is a big migration to get out of NY.

Click to expand...

gurneyhalleck1 said:

California always gets branded as uber liberal, but it's not totally the case. California has more red areas than blue. The thing is, the blue areas are large urban powerhouses like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Oakland. All three are fairly liberal. But then you have Orange County (which is huge), Tulare County (my area), Fresno County, Kern County, and a host of other more rural areas or super affluent southern california counties that are super conservative. Our courts and big cities are liberal, much of the state is not.

Click to expand...

it's the same in PA. red except for the areas around Philly and Pittsburgh. my home county at least was the reddest in the country, with our neighbor to the west at number two. it's been moderating recently though.