My point is that why would anyone who supports freedom would care if two guys, two women or 50 people all want to get married? Why would they care if gays are in the military? Why would they care if people wanted to do drugs? Why would they care about prostitution between consenting adults? Why would they care about gambling?

The conservatives seem very concerned about morality but are fine with deregulating businesses like Enron that run a muck.

As far as everyone suing companies that do wrong. Most little people can't fight big corporations in court. They can tie things up for decades. Remember Exxon? 20 years later and those people were fighting. Most individuals can't fund such fights.

As for waterways...I can pollute my part but it is likely to spread. Come on. You can't put a price on everything. Once damaged some things never come back.

 

Because marriage is between 1 woman and 1 man. It's as simple as that.

No one is saying people can't be gay. Just don't defile marriage.

 

Throwing more money into an already failing system is not going to work....this is what the 4th time a "stimulus" has been proposed?

With the US owing over a trillion dollars to China. I think it's time to bring some new ideas to the table then just throwing more money into the deficit and at the problem. Clearly something is not working right.

 

Says the bible. Seperation of church from state. You can't ignore all parts that don't fit into your scheme.

 

No...says the definition of marriage. The union of two people of opposite sexes to live as husband and wife under legal commitments. And, more importantly, because the Bible says that only a man and woman can become one after marriage. Never any mention about two of the same sex.

What the gays don't realize it that it offends me and violates my rights to keep marriage a holy union between a man and a woman. Allowing gay marriage dillutes the meaning of marriage to me. It offends me that they want to hold themselves to the same level as me by marrying someone of the same sex.

So they're encroaching on my rights and feelings, just as they claim that the opposers of gay marriage are encroaching on their rights and feelings.

Also, what is so wrong with banning gay marriage? Isn't the natural flow of life to be one man and one woman, dedicated to each other, and having kids? What's so wrong with this wild and crazy idea? Children need to be brought up with one man and one woman; not two of the same kind.

You can twist and turn it all you want, change definitions, twist and turn evidence, studies, statistics all you want, the world was meant for man and woman to be together, and the best chance a child has in his or her upbringing is to be raised their mother and father.


...but thats just my radical-conservative-Methodist-****-terrorist perspective...

 

Frank,

You claim to want less government but care what private people do. We have a separation of church and state. How does gay marriage impact YOUR freedoms?

I am not saying that tossing money at everything is going to work but we have let our infrastructure crumble. Things need done to make us more competitive anyway.

The Minn bridge collapsed due to poor repair. They did a study and found many more to be just as bad. The levies in New Orleans were not up to task. If they were maybe Katrina wouldn't have been as deadly.

Fixing these things could make a big improvement in the economy and our safety.

I don't think the idea of sending everyone a couple hundred bucks on Uncle Sam will fix things. It takes real investment and change in thinking to turn things around. It also takes time. We don't give things time to correct themselves.

 

Your intitled to your opinion and I agree with the bolded part, but two same sex people getting married does not affect you in any way. Not allowing them to get married violates their rights. The state cannot show that one kind of citizen is more important than another, so equal rights must be given to all (unless they are a felon/enemy of the state/etc.)

 

It affects me in a big way. I would rather not live in a society that condones gay marriage. I would rather raise my kids one day in a society that accepts the 'one man one woman' theroy rather than 'well it doesnt matter its all about what feels good.' It also affects me because it is MY RIGHT to uphold the definion of marriage as between one man and one woman, and it is OFFENSIVE to me for 2 men or 2 women to be held on the same platform as I will one day when I get married. Yes, it does affect me.

If you say that it doesnt affect me, then I say that this nations opposition of allowing gay marriage is perfectly justified because it doesnt affect them. Argue that!

I would rather not live in a society where our morals, values, and ethics are constantly being challenged by a few radicals, and people like me are supposed to feel guilty for not allowing people to marry gay, legalize pot, allow illegal residents the same rights that I have, etc etc etc.

When a nation starts losing it's moral and ethical backbone and doesn't say no to these radical ideas, it is bound to move toward failure rather than progress. History is riddled with examples.

 

Entitled.

Seperation of chuch and state? Really? http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/l...102387499.html

 

And who is was in charge of inspecting the MN bridge? Answer: Gov't

And who was in charge of the levies in New Orleans? The Army Corp of Engineers = Gov't

What do we learn from this? We learn that when the Gov't is in control, people die.

 

Respectfully Frank, I disagree on this. I am actually with 4.6 and K-Mac on this one (lord help me ).

Marriage is defiled everyday in this country. Just look at reality TV shows. Who Wants to Marry a Midget, Who wants to Marry a Millionaire, The Bachelor, The Bachlorette (let's get engaged because you were the last one standing) etc... What a joke. Not only that, what about all the foreigners who marry for citizenship?

With an over 50% divorce rate in this country, it is evident that there is a majority that don't take marriage seriously. That means over half of the people who were married at one point who posted in thread are divorced (statistically speaking). Marriage takes work, how can you tell a man and a woman they can marry and if it doesn't work out, they can walk away, but not extend that same option to the gays (yes, I said "the" gays)? Chances are after all the **** and hoops that gays have to jump through and endure to get married, I'd be willing to bet their divorce rate would fail in comparison to today's divorce rate between a man and a woman. If marriage is so sacred between a man and a woman, why not outlaw divorce, or better yet, not allow them to marry ever again? Sure, abusive spouses is one thing and I wouldn't encourage anyone to stay in a marriage that could be potentially harmful, but it's usually "irreconcilable differences" listed on the paperwork as the most common cause for divorce. If 2 gays want to give it a shot, who cares? I don't hear anyone calling out anyone who is divorced on here (especially the Catholics). Why not, haven't they disrupted the sanctity of marriage? Regardless of the reason... My wife's Grandmother is on her 5th husband, there is no way you can convince me that her being allowed to marry 5 times is acceptable while 2 gays who plan on spending eternity together can't legally have their marriage recognized strictly because of their lifestyle. That's a tough agrument to make in my mind.

 

I agree that marriage is defiled everyday on TV, but calling homosexuality a "lifestyle" is doing the word "lifestyle" injustice.

The human anus is for exit only, by design.

Like I stated above, no one is telling gays they can't be gay.

Even Elton John has stated the whole "gay rights" issue has been blown out of proportion for political purposes.

 

I think we have a fairly fundamental issue here. The primary responsibility of government is to “protect the people.” That’s kind of tough to disagree with right? But what does the government need to protect the people from? That’s where it gets interesting. And, if what the government is protecting people from is dumb decisions, can we assume that a government bureaucrat / politician will make better decisions than whomever is making them now? That’s where I have a problem.

The liberal assumption is that the government will always better decisions. The conservative assumption is that the free market will make better decisions. The truth is probably somewhere in between. But, if you look at where the current administration is heading, it’s clearly in the “government makes all decisions” direction. I just cannot agree with that direction.

Let’s look at a specific example; the housing mess / crash. Why did this happen? Well, the free market said that home ownership was not something everybody could participate in because not everybody could afford it. The government stepped in (subtly) and “suggested” that home ownership was indeed the American dream and everybody should be able to own one. How do you allow somebody to buy a home that really cannot afford it? You pretty much force somebody (Fannie May, Freddie Mac, banks, etc.) to loan money to folks you wouldn’t otherwise think of loaning it to.

So what would the free market say is going to happen when you loan money to folks not likely to pay it back? They’re not all going to pay it back and somebody is going to take a loss. But the government would say that nobody should take a loss. I’m sorry, but I’m a realist and somebody is going to take a loss. There is no free lunch and you simply cannot legislate / regulate the fact the losses (on risky investments) will not happen. The same goes for many other things the liberals say wouldn’t happen if we had more government regulation, but don’t get me started there.

 

The government never said banks have to give $500,000 loans to people making $7.50 an hour. The government never said banks had to make stupid loans. It isn't just ghetto areas being plagued with foreclosures.

The government said banks had to make loans available to all races and couldn't discriminate because of the person's demographics.

Greed and the thought of invincibility lead to the housing bubble. Prices were skyrocketing and people had mortgages that were impossible for them to pay.

Marriage and relations have already been cheapened. The sanctity of marriage, please. This isn't 1940. People get married and divorced like trading cars.

Frank...let's gets some laws on the books like Sharia Law to help you. Maybe those that get divorced or cheat can be stoned to death. Bring back morality.

I am fine with limited government but it can't be just one way.

 

I don't like it either, but that is a matter of opinion.

Agreed. But then you are also saying a married couple (man and woman) can't practice sodomy if they wanted to in the privacy of their own home. I'm sure in some states they probably can't legally, but I don't recall this ever being an issue discussed by anyone (politicians or us regular folk).

Morgan Freeman also stated that "Black History Month" should be done away with. Not likely to happen. Every group has someone that is going to go "against the grain" of what the majority of their group believes in. I'm not a fan of the gay "lifestyle" by any means, nor am I fan of many other liberal viewpoints, but in the case of gay marriage, I don't see the harm based on how the majority of "straights" don't take it that seriously to begin with (50% divorce rate and the other reasons I listed previously). Just my .02...